Archive for September 2012
Swirling Circles of Influence among Networked Nonprofits (Tend to have a Single Vortex)
It’s definitely no fun conversing with a linear-based blog platform (minus an enforceable stylesheet) to whoever swings by here– on things, Let’s Get Honest, I’m reasonably angry and distressed about, and which I know to be driving the future downhill while calling it uphill.For example, how much more individual family prosperity might be around if these “change agents” were actually themselves open to outside input (like feedback) to the collective impact on the coverage gaps in their collective models?
Or from those who do not think the entire problems of the world actually fit into human neuroscience-based motivational paradigm, nor should they be crammed into that paradigm just because the giant contractor called the USA prioritizes that research. Are you NUTS??? We’d better stay on top of what THAT’s all about (what’s the endgame…..).
There has to be a truth meter, and there has to be a balancing of this power. And I’ll tell you what — it’s real hard to negotiate with someone who’s in control of the media, the money, to an extent the courts, and has their collective expert mouths open 24/7 (through the internet, conferencing, etc.).
In truth, this gets down to basically an economic model — and that is the best way to understand it. Cut the crap — show me the funding, and I’ll tell you what the group’s about, truthfully… and how those who are constantly teaching and programming do not, by and large, walk in the same shoes (or paths) as their clients or the people on the radar to be socially changed… Actually, as most groups don’t talk about their tax returns, it’s up to use to talk about them. UNBELIEVABLE what you can learn by reading these (assuming they exist…).
But if these weren’t the latest experts (God’s gift to humanity)– then they wouldn’t be “change agents” in the true meaning of the word, would they? Because to force change implies to use of collective (networked) force and driving public opinion towards a certain solution to a certain problem, as framed by (the change agent).
Unfortunately, they are copying each other’s models, and starting to clatter and clang to the same general beat. those who don’t, don’t get grants next year. Besides, what’s the point of access to all that wealth, if not becoming a change agent?
But what about the human spirit?
And what about meeting and talking with others with the intent to actually hear from and listen to them — and not an ulterior motive of behavior modification.
I hear people’s stories EVERY day (by virtue of being accessible) and many are hair-raising and involve an interaction with the court system, abuse by other family members…
Wikipedia illustration of “Vortex”
“Vortex created by the passage of an aircraft wing, revealed by colored smoke”
The Miami Child Well-Being Court Model Concept,** though, has GEARS… doesn’t sound or look as exciting — it has three interlocking labeled gears and is designed to be replicable. (Link is from LAW.Harvard.EDU, CAP (Child Advocacy Programs) but apparently this model is spreading rapidly)
(Just dropping the reference; it’ll get posted eventually….)
Link Updates — that’s now a generic link to Harvard’s CAP news. However, here’s a 2015 link to what it appears this post was referencing, with the gears: http://cap.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/22_miami-child-well-being-court-model.pdf
That is a 3-pager link explaining the model. Notice the participants in fine print at bottom of first page (I just transcribed, as it’s impossible to copy from website, or website as pdf, or to upload the same pdf, it seems to a blog for public discussion of the trademarked plan to alter the focus and form (nationally) of public institutions….
“The MCWBC Training & Evaluation Team is led by Judge Cindy Lederman, Miami-Dade Juvenile Court (11th Judicial Circuit, FL) and Dr. Lynne Ktaz, University of Miamia Linda Ray Intervention Center, in collaboration with researchers at RTI International, Dr. Jenifer Goldman Fraser and Dr. Cecilia Casanueva. This effort is currently being funded by a generous grant from the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control (No. R18 CE001714). The model began as an innovative collaboration between the judiciary and infant mental health, led by Judge Lederman in partnership with trauma expert, Dr. Joy Osofsky, of the Lousiana State University Health Sciences Center, and Dr. (Lynette) Katz.” [quote added to post 12/2015]
I took some time (just now — on this major holiday weekend) to look at the participants here, in some detail. Interesting affiliations and in what fields the various “Drs.” above, all women as it turns out, actually hold doctorates. (Hint: Apparently none are M.D.s)… This is becoming a separate post — it ties into major, systemic changes to the courts already set in place, and how they are occurring. As far as representative government f the people by the people, with citizenship being tied in the USA to specific states and people being subject primarily to laws (and taxation) in those states, this process is NOT good news.
This model was developed — excuse me — “evolved” and by 2013 was trademarked. See (later than this post — added during an update) http://www.floridaschildrenfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/MiamiChildHandbook.pdf I’m saving this to Media — click for image. Apparently, despite the public funds (federal grants, juvenile court) — we’re not supposed to as general public, actually discuss the material on a public blog — see encryption of the text to prevent quotation under Fair Copyright Law):
!”#␣!”#$”␣%&”‘(␣)*”␣+*”,-␣%./012␣$%&#’␣()␣*␣+(%,##-(,.␣/%0-1␣(,(1(*1#&␣)2)1#$)␣(,1#.-*1(%,␣*++-%*/”␣1%␣ +-%$%1#␣”#*'(,.␣*,&␣-#/%3#-2␣4-%$␣1-*0$*␣(,␣$*’1-#*1#&␣2%0,.␣/”(‘&-#,␣*,&␣1%␣5-#*6␣1″#␣(,1#-.#,#-*1(%,*’␣ 1-*,)$())(%,␣%4␣/”(‘&␣*50)#␣*,&␣,#.’#/17␣8,␣1″()␣$%&#’9␣1″#␣&#+#,&#,/2␣/%0-1␣()␣*␣+’*14%-$␣4%-␣(,/-#*)(,.␣1″#␣-#*/”␣ *,&␣#44#/1(3#,#))␣%4␣1″#-*+#01(/␣#3(&#,/#␣5*)#&␣(,1#-3#,1(%,)␣4%-␣$*’1-#*1#&␣/”(‘&-#,␣*,&␣1″#(-␣/*-#.(3#-)7␣!”#␣ $%&#’␣4%/0)#)␣%,␣:;<␣/#,1#-(,.␣1″#␣*11#,1(%,␣%4␣1″#␣/%0-1␣%,␣1″#␣#’%+$#,1*’9␣#$%1(%,*’9␣-#’*1(%,*’9␣*,&␣$#,1*’␣ “#*’1″␣,##&)␣%4␣1″#␣2%0,.␣/”(‘&␣(,␣=0&(/(*’␣&#/()(%,␣$*6(,.9␣/*)#␣+’*,,(,.9␣*,&␣+#-$*,#,/2␣#-$(,*1(%,>␣:?<␣ 1($#’2␣-#4#–*’␣1%␣*,&␣=0&(/(*’␣$%,(1%-(,.␣%4␣)#-3(/#)␣4%-␣*&=0&(/*1#&␣/”(‘&-#,␣*,&␣1″#(-␣+*-#,1)9␣*,&␣:@<␣/-%))␣ &()/(+'(,*-29␣)0)1*(,*5’#␣+-*/1(/#␣/”*,.#␣*1␣1″#␣/*)#␣’#3#’7␣!”#␣$%&#’␣”*)␣.#,#-*1#&␣*␣.-%0,&)A#”␣%4␣(,1#-#)19␣A(1″␣ /%$$0,(1(#)␣*/-%))␣1″#␣/%0,1-2␣*,&␣(,1#-,*1(%,*”2␣)##6(,.␣1#/”,(/*’␣*))()1*,/#␣1%␣#B+’%-#␣*&%+1(%,␣*,&␣*))()1␣A(1″␣ ($+’#$#,1*1(%,␣%4␣1″#␣$%&#’7␣C)␣1″#␣%-(.(,*’␣#’%+#-)␣%4␣1″#␣$%&#’9␣1″#␣D(*$(␣1#*$␣”*)␣/%,1(,0#&␣%,␣*␣)1#*&2␣ /%0-)#␣1%␣50(‘&␣1″#␣1-*(,(,.␣-#)%0-/#)␣1″*1␣A(”␣.0(&#␣#44#/1(3#␣*,&␣)0)1*(,*5’#␣($+’#$#,1*1(%,␣%4␣1″#(-␣/%$+’#B␣ $%&#’7␣
30#”,”,-4␣5’#,,”,-␣#,(␣67#’/#1″.,␣8␣9::.$;'”<&$*,1<␣1.␣=#1*>␣
SHARE THIS POST on...
Circles are for Girls, Councils are for Boys, and Trademarked Trainings are for . . . . .
[ONGOING post establishes that the heart
of “The Circle Foundation” and its trademarked training is for behavioral modification
and again point out that behind this is the generous hand of the OJJDP
and its GIRLS STUDY GROUP . Also, incidentally, the model’s frames of reference are sexist (Circles for Girls, Councils for Boys AND Young Men).
And etc…
Apparently, It takes a Village of Nonprofits to Raise Train A Child An Adolescent… not to steal, bully, etc
It’s also helpful if the originating nonprofit has people with connections to the juvenile, probation, or LMFT decisionmakers (and OJJDP grants as of 2004):
http://www.onecirclefoundation.org/
The USA is (too) full of programs that start and are disseminated in exactly this manner. Many of them have built-in biases which are not confronted because of the distribution network, and because of the connections with the founders of the program material. While
private resources (i.e., here, from a major progressive nonprofit social change foundation in San Francisco) are involved — so are almost ALWAYS, public (federal, state, county) funds; this is an economic matter and a degradation of representative government.
So many of our public issues relate precisely to the income tax and the caste system created by the for-profit/non-profit power differentials. ALL social and societal relationships are affected by this, with the favor and advantage going to those whose social connections and/or background are willing to take advantage of wage-earners by themselves operating under nonprofits. I hope this post sheds some light on the situation through a single example.
I am not going to track the funding on this — but note the founders, who jumpstarted it, and the content. It’s a pattern. For example, while this may sound like a great idea (support youth, stop bullying, etc.) — there are almost NO solutions which don’t have some inherent bias. This is not a true “circle” program as the indigenous groups it’s modeled after, or allegedly modeled after — because of the technological advantage of the replicated curricula, and the uniformity of purpose in the founders. The same inherent bias is built into ALL the models executed in this manner.
Conversational style with examples & narrative, as ever; this is not designed for power-point digestion. See if it make sense, please also retweet.
Please read — aloud, preferably — this 3-page (including references) description of “GIRLS CIRCLE” called “Is Girls Circle an Evidence-based Program?,” written when this was still under the umbrella of The Tides Center; notice the behavioral-health language, and also the Title II funding. Just pay attention, and ask, who — really — should be in charge of behavioral modification for our youth. Notice also, how the model began as aimed at risky populations (delinquent, etc.) but was intended to expand to “low-risk” populations, i.e., everyone. Why should Girls be put in Circles (and boys & young men in “Councils”) to modify their behavior, rather than the institutions who failed to protect them from abuse, or in general eroded their meaningful connections with caring adults (systemically) be put into circles by the public and see if we can get a “behavioral modification” on whatever it was failed to protect them (for the most part) from abusive environments?
Found on-line at http://www.girlscircle.com/docs/EB-Principles-GC.pdf
“Is Girls Circle an Evidence-based Program?”
…Nationally recognized as a promising approach by the OJJDP,** the Girls Circle program was implemented in a three year Title II grant-funded program through the Sonoma County Probation Department and community based organizations in Sonoma County, CA. Named “Circles Across Sonoma,” the program was highly praised by facilitators, probation officers, girls and families. While evaluation is underwayi, the program has been renewedii by the Sonoma County Probation Department for the 2010-2011 year. To date, over 900 girls have completed the program with a strong completion success rate. Data thus far indicate significance in body image, self-efficacy/esteem, and communication to adults. Completed analysis is expected at year end 2010. Previous national studies on the model have seen significant increases in girls’ social support, perception of body image, self-efficacy, attachment to school and communication with adults. Importantly, significant decreases have been seen in girls’ self-harm and drinking behaviors.iii
It has two co-founders (see photos below). One of them had prior (I think) connections as a consultant with the OJJDP, a major grants funder . (Giovanna Taormina). This description of Girls Circles(r) program course doesn’t mention that, making the OJJDP recommendation look more impartial than it is. Other than this reference, per LinkedIn (St Martin of Tours (?which one?), i.e., Catholic upbringing looks like, Santa Clara University (no major shown) and 1993-1995, USF in “organizational training and development. Apparently about this time she got involved in running some classes for girls in the justice system…).
Ms. Taormina is the only non-doctoral participant (citing Executive Director of “Girls Circles Association” as her title, i.e., she heads this nonprofit) in “The Girls Study Group, Understanding and Responding to Girls’ Delinquency” which is an OJJDP-convened project which is contracted out to someone working at RTI International out of “Research Triangle Park” (“Turning knowledge into practice“) North Carolina. The fields RTI International (see WHERE…)… (and the US Government) is into are described as:
RTI is home to experts across the social, engineering, and laboratory sciences—including health**, drug discovery and development, education and training,** surveys and statistics, international development, economic and social policy, advanced technology, energy and the environment, and laboratory and chemistry services.
**while RTI have 4 “experts” under Educ & Training, there are about three or four dozen under “Health Research,” many of which overlap with crime prevention (i.e., behavioral modification, criminology, behavioral neuroscience, etc.)
.
What we are talking about in OJJDP is a major office of the US Department of Justice authorized by Act of Congress in 1974, and reauthorized in 2002. It has national scope, major resources, and directs those resources according to its goals. It is NOT an office of our USA government to be ignorant of — but I was, until in the last year or so, as I began researching grants! For reference of the scope:
OJJDP Infrastructure and Funding
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is authorized by the Juvenile Justice and Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974 and subsequent amendments (reauthorized in 2002) to administer Federal programs and to provide national leadership, coordination, and resources to prevent and respond to juvenile delinquency and victimization.
OJJDP provides block grants and discretionary funding to States, territories, localities, and private organizations, including nonprofits. The block grant funding is disbursed to States and territories through Formula Grants and Prevention money. A Juvenile Justice Specialist is selected for each State to administer the funding to units of local government and private organizations through subgrant awards.
OJJDP’s discretionary funding is awarded through a competitive grant application process. Each year, OJJDP publishes a proposed program plan seeking public comment about proposed discretionary funding opportunities for activities covered under parts D and E of the JJDP Act. The proposed plan is published in the Federal Register and posted online. Once the public comments are evaluated, the program plan is finalized and published in the Federal Register. Program announcements for discretionary funding opportunities are disseminated to potential applicants and posted on OJJDP’s Web site. The funding levels, eligibility requirements, and application deadlines are detailed in the announcements. In an effort to expedite and streamline the receipt, review, and processing of funding requests, OJJDP requires that applications for funding be submitted through the Internet using the Office of Justice Programs online Grants Management System.
—-The NTTAC is trying to produce a One-Stop Shop for Practitioners to know What works. The Circle Foundation (which began with “Girls Circle Association” as a project of The Tides Center) is part of this.
Girls Study Group
About the Study:
The goal of the Girls Study Group project was to develop a research foundation to enable communities to make sound decisions about how best to prevent and reduce delinquency and violence by girls. The Girls Study Group was responsible for developing and providing scientifically sound and useful guidance on program development and implementation to policymakers, practitioners, and the researchers.
About the Group:
The Girls Study Group, an interdisciplinary group of scholars and practitioners convened by OJJDP, came together to develop a comprehensive research foundation for understanding and responding to girls’ involvement in delinquency. The Study Group members brought with them complementary and multidisciplinary backgrounds and experiences that encompassed the range of knowledge needed to understand and explain female delinquency. The group included sociologists, psychologists, criminologists, and gender studies experts, as well as researchers and practitioners with legal and girls’ program development experience. The group was supported by RTI staff working under the leadership of Dr. Stephanie R. Hawkins, a research clinical psychologist.
The research behind Girls Circle is clinically sound and based on solid approaches endorsed by the behavioral health sciences field. Like its parent Motivational Interviewing and Strengths- Based approaches, Girls Circle does have the versatility to be applied to low risk populations such as schools, camp and after school programs, job training programs, mentoring, and it is now being demonstrated as a valuable program that makes sense in correctional and rehabilitative settings as well.
The strengths-based, motivational interviewing Girls Circle program: (1) enhances treatment readiness and client responsivity, and (2) develops and fosters a positive culture of self directed change. In the behavioral health sciences field, it has been demonstrated that program outcomes are substantially improved when the treatment readiness and client responsivity is enhanced. Clinically, this makes sense – if the client is not receptive to the program, or if the client has not resolved the ambivalence to change, it would be a struggle for that client to meet program goals.
The value of Girls Circle is as follows: this structured program addresses girls’ inherent needs and strengths to connect with others.
Further lookups show in a 2008 publication at “NCJRS.gov” that this Girls Study Group was convened in 2004, headed up by a Margaret A. Zahn (professor at NC State) (doesn’t say in what) and at this time also contained as the only NON-Doctor in the list, Ms. Taormina in her capacity as heading up Girls Circle Association (the Tides Connection wasn’t referenced, although at this time GCA was not independent of Tides, I’m pretty sure):
The Girls Study Group, Charting the Way to Delinquency Prevention for Girls
Girls Study Group Members ” J. Robert Flores, Administrator”**
J. Robt Flores is Administrator presumably because at this time he headed up OJJDP since 2002 (Bush appointee) at this time, which is relevant — as there was a scandal regarding grants-steering (esp. to faith-based orgs) that, thanks to an investigative reporter at Youth Today, resulted in a House Oversight Committee Hearings (waxman) on cronyism!
I may have blogged, more info here:
- Dr. Margaret A. Zahn, Principal Investigator, Girls Study Group (2004–March 2008) Senior Research Scientist, RTI International; Professor, North Carolina State University
Again, this GIRLS STUDY GROUP was convened in 2004. Dr. Zahn came to RTI from the USDOJ per July 2003 RTI announcement, please read the RTI bio. Seems very well qualified, but no question she is a sociologist, not just criminologist.
“RTI established a dedicated Crime, Justice Policy, and Behavior Program in 2000. The program currently has more than 25 staff with professional backgrounds in criminology, economics, psychology, public health, and sociology.
Research Triangle Park, NC — Dr. Margaret Zahn has joined RTI as the director of RTI International’s Crime, Justice Policy, and Behavior Program. Dr. Zahn is a nationally renowned criminologist whose research focuses on violence and homicide in the United States.
Dr. Zahn comes to RTI from the U.S. Department of Justice, where she was director of the Violence and Victimization Division. In this role, she co-led the Task Force on Social Science Studies of Terrorism and directed a $35 million portfolio on studies of violence.
Prior to her service with the Department of Justice, Dr. Zahn was the Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences and a professor of sociology at N.C. State University for six years. She continues to serve as an N.C. State professor of sociology and will facilitate partnerships between RTI and the social sciences at the university. …
- Dr. Stephanie r. Hawkins, Principal Investigator, Girls Study Group (April 2008–Present) Research Clinical Psychologist, RTI International {{NOTE: current director of Girls Study Group}}
- Dr. robert Agnew, Professor, Department of Sociology, Emory University
- Dr. elizabeth cauffman, Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California–Irvine
- Dr. Meda chesney-Lind, Professor, Women’s Studies Program, University of Hawaii–Manoa
- Dr. Gayle Dakof, Associate Research Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Miami
- Dr. Del elliott, Director, Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, University of Colorado
- Dr. barry Feld, Professor, School of Law, University of Minnesota
- Dr. Diana Fishbein, Director, Transdisciplinary Behavioral Science Program, RTI International
- Dr. Peggy Giordano, Professor of Sociology, Center for Family and Demographic Research, Bowling Green State University
- Dr. candace Kruttschnitt, Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota
- Dr. Jody Miller, Associate Professor, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Missouri–St. Louis
- Dr. Merry Morash, Professor, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University
- Dr. Darrell Steffensmeier, Professor, Depart ment of Sociology, Pennsylvania State University
- Ms. Giovanna Taormina, Executive Director, Girls Circle Association
- Dr. Donna-Marie Winn, Senior Research Scientist, Center for Social Demography and Ethnography, Duke University
back to ‘THE GIRLS’ STUDY”
The question comes up — with all there Doctors and Professors, what is it about Ms. Taormina’s background (although it’s clear she’s run groups for juveniles (girls) in the justice system, it says, since the 1995) that makes her (out of the entire nation of potential applications) appropriate to be in this study group? Was it her connection to Beth Hossfeld, LMFT who obviously has connections to many educational, school, and other nonprofits, and “388 connections” on her LinkedIN, being also from the Northern California (SFBay Area in general) community, esp. “Bay Area Community Resources” which provides all kind of treatments, and is getting funding for this from an HHS department
| 2011 | 942346815 | Bay Area Community Resources | CA | 1980 | 03 | 27,885,322 | 7,468,924 | 990 |
?One look at a tax return (I looked at 2004) shows it is primarily (though not only) targeted at the school, afterschool, and justice systems — and in 2004 had nearly $8 million of program service revenue; in short, it has a huge scope of activity, not just limited to one county or one field. BUT much of this activity is in the school systems ,and supported by government grants and contracts.
GCA (Taormina / Hossfeld) have been panelists at a BCCEWH in Canada (British Columbia Center for Excellence in Women’s Health). I wish they’d been down here doing something to investigate and STOP marriage/fatherhood funding so we could put a stop to this abuse of children and women within the institution of marriage. However this doesn’t seem to be their emphasis.
Trademarked trainings are for visionaries who believe the world should look a certain way, AND know where to find captive audiences// institutionalized youth, and collaborate in marketing with other nonprofits of similar inclination.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Love it (pictorial of economic system….) “Quantative Easing Made Simple.”
Quantitative Easing Made Simple
The Burning Platform | 10 September 2012
SHARE THIS POST on...
Where the Pyramid meets the Circle ..meets the Trademarked(r) Train-the-Trainers Program – Pt. 1
[Updated and edited — a lot — during Apr. 2016 extension/completion of blog Table of Contents. Some of this information I added, I now see, was covered in a Sept. 17, 2012 blog ” Faith-Based Incorporations (HHS grantees) often Don’t Stand Up under Scrutiny].
[Word count ca. 6,110; (UPDATED, closer to 10,000); topic: Basically bellyachin’ about collectivism in government. Point in Case “The Circle Foundation” //through Kent County MD “Local Management Board, which turns out to be under the state-level Governors Office of Children.]
Raise your hand if you think that group therapy, group counseling, and group-decisionmaking actually is better and more equitable than pyramid schemes and the traditional caste-based hierarchies.
And of these two, say which is a better economic model or government model.
FYI, it’s also being marketed globally. USA justice system is no longer uniquely “Constitutional” at all — but based on collectivism and is being aligned through nonprofits and transformation (mostly at the Executive Level of gov’t) align with NO INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS — JUST VALUE SYSTEMS ESTABLISHED IN PEER GROUPS, with a CERTIFIED FACILITATOR.
(From lower down, what inspired this post — it takes a while to get there, about some programs being recommended through a “Local Management Board” (LMB) in Kent County, Maryland:
…AND — why are Girls in Circles, and (if so) Boys in Councils — is that because Boys are leaders and Girls need group endorsement (i.e., Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, or the [even more] religious version, “Men are from Dirt, Women are from Men” ?? (Search this blog for source & relationship to federal grants trail).
[and]
Does it sound to you like our state and local (including county-level) governments are looking more and more like corporations, with boards, executive chairs, fund-raisers, and roundtables?? Or Councils? Or Circles? this basically changes the distribution networks, so at the ground (local) level, one can either reach UP the tentacle, or just simply start at the federal level and see if you can trace the influence and service organizations all the way down to one’s own neighborhood. If along the way, several nonprofits are formed to take fundings and then are dissolved WHO CARES? (who’s to know?
Where I’m going with this is that a state, MARYLAND (east coast, obviously, near the nation’s capital), is using a model based in CALIFORNIA (San Rafael) for some of its diversionary services for youth, or assistance to them.
I LIVE in Northern California, and have been unable to get protection from ongoing abuse, child support enforcement, court order enforcement, and in short, as the calendar years go on and on, have watched all kinds of nonprofits deliberately ignore HOW people are put, and kept, on welfare and because of this, unable to speedily rebuild lives after violence without having those lives dismantled again.
The CFCC/AFCC Court Law School Center (Collaborations) factor:
It’s also known that Baltimore University School of Law has a “CFCC” outfit based on what appears to be the California Judicial Council/Administrative Office of the Courts/”CFCC” basis — and from that UB power basis, promoting “unified family courts” model nationwide, to provide as many therapeutic jurisprudence services to as many people as possible before the US goes bankrupt.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Faith-Based Incorporations (HHS grantees) often Don’t Stand Up under Scrutiny (Publ. Sep. 17, 2012, Format update May 2, 2018).
This short intro added May, 2018, for the purposes of a basic FamilyCourtMatters.org (blog) search of “faith-based” which I wish to link to in Twitter, after further explaining (again) on Twitter some of this and especially the earlier “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative.”
Far be it from ME to say “kickback” — but I feel it’s a reasonable question to say, “Whassup?”
How hard is it to file an annual tax return, and why do so many of these grantees “forget” to — like this one? Maryland Dept of Assessments and Taxation says it was formed in 2004 and is now status “Forfeited” [{{as it turned out. by 2006}}]
and,
I suppose they are all doing great things for the community. In looking up (naturally) Vita T. Pickrum, I found minutes of a Commissioners Meeting (Mr. Pickrum, presiding) and that she represents (under a CCA they are trying to raise money for, the “Kent Family Center.”
In other words, your (USA-specific) tax funds helped both set up of expand (93009) , then facilitate among many of the same grantees, the practice of taking money originally intended to reduce poverty for sponsoring for-profit and not-for-profit organizations of the mentality that what the poor really need is a good “talking to” (being preached at) (through 93086).
This includes people whose marriages have been violent and may for that reason be reluctant to engage in serial marriage behaviors (I am in that category), but would appreciate NOT being targeted and categorized as a social scourge when it’s also known that domestic violence can also be economically devastating and corrosive.
As few people can discuss either domestic violence or religion in a sane (or logical) manner, in this blog I document federal grants and look at the grantees — many of which “coincidentally” have the word “faith-based” in their actual names, particularly after January 2001 when a U.S. President inaugurated with his first (two, actually) Executive Orders, an “Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives” (continued by Pres. Obama under slightly different name, and copied, I learned at the state (typically “Governor’s Office of…”) and even some City (“Mayor’s Office of..”) levels. Naturally, these also promote fatherhood and target single mothers for the lectures and (behind their backs, in third person) as the problems.
Post title and shortlink: Faith-Based Incorporations (HHS grantees) often Don’t Stand Up under Scrutiny (Publ. Sep. 17, 2012, Format update May 2, 2018)
Update affects borders, font type and size, background color, not CONTENT, except my habit adopted later of including full title with convenient “case-sensitive short-link ending” phrase (here, it ends “-17w”) and word-count (about 7,500). The post has many tables whose formats may be affected; I did not go through and correct them all. PURPOSE: I did a blog search on “faith-based”. This came up, and I wanted it more readable. NOTE: Currently, my tables of contents only go back to Sept. 24, 2012, so this post will not be on it. As I recall. ALSO: contains a word-search of “faith-based” on TAGGS.HHS.gov/SearchAdv (current link; the database has changed since 2012) and follow up on them. One of the entities checked tracked back to a government official, and the nonprofit “took the money and ran” while the public servant and his wife then participated in creating another local “Authority” and sat with others on its board. The amount “disappeared” possibly, only around $100K, but still…
The Republicans were up in arms again, declaring (hypocritically) that the best way out of poverty was a job, while diverting money into starting new professions for (cronies), who then buy up real estate and practice franchise marriage/fatherhood/parenting educational marketing on the poor. The profits are going, apparently, into whoever was in on this early enough to have a trademarked curriculum (downloadable of course) AND close connections to Washington, D.C. and the Department of HHS. The Democrats bought into this just as heavily and in my opinion are no better.
Not all “faith-based” groups actually have the word “faith-based” in their corporations, but it’s probably a good call that they are aware of that 2001 Executive Order by the POTUS with the agenda of helping streamline grants to “faith-based” organizations.
Pray tell, what have “COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY GRANTS BUILT — AFTER THE FAITH-BASED CORPORATIONS GOT THE THESE FUNDS?
AND WHY CAN’T THESE “SPECIAL INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS” (many of them) STAY INCORPORATED AFTER THEY GOT THE GOODS? THE GRANTS ARE NEW, DISCRETIONARY, AND “DEMONSTRATION.” I’VE BEEN LOOKING AT WHAT THEY DEMONSTRATED, AND LEARNED THAT, AS WITH THE THEOLOGY, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO “TAKE IT ON FAITH,” THAT THE PUBLIC INVESTMENT WAS AN HONEST ONE.
Category of Federal Domestic Assistance 93009
ANYHOW — I just now (again) looked up HHS grants to a certain series, the “90IJ” series, which are Federal “CFDA” (Category of Federal Domestic Assistance) 93009, “Compassion Capital.” I also plugged in the word “faith” under Grantee name, chose a few fields, and here are 14 of them; it’s higher than “11” because there is more than one entry for a few of them. I notice one is a welfare department. How can a government grantee called “faith-based” be a welfare department?
Below this, I looked at a single group in Maryland. It was chosen at random, however, as I saw within 10 minutes that (1) as soon as it got its second grant, it stopped filing for corporate status as a nonprofit (and I haven’t even checked the “Nonprofit” part yet…) and that the person listed on the corporation was a County Commissioner. This is how government works in the US of A….
As such, they can keep their lectures about work ethics, theories about what causes poverty and TANF to themselves, and give me back all the tax money I spent over the years, so far as I’m concerned. Or, cut me in on some of the asset acquisitions & public real estate paid for with missing money!
Again, I’m speaking as a mother who sought government intervention to keep my family alive via a domestic violence restraining order with kickout, and when I say “family” like many, I include Dad, too. I then went back to work, and found myself repeatedly OUT of work through the removal of same restraining order (the DV agency just did triage, and didn’t see fit to give its clients a road map of the family law system. So I’m writing one here (and elsewhere!).
FYI (because otherwise the chart is too wide), ALL of these were “Demonstration” “Discretionary” and “NEW” grants. I searched “Grant Number “90IJ” (only) and typed the word “faith” into “Grantee Institution.” That’s all. If I took out the word “faith” (for in the grantee institution name) there would be 39 total, including at least one with the word “abstinence” in the name.
Based on a sampling of several of these (LOTS of lookups), I’d say that statistically speaking, the chance that the word “faith” in these CCF grants (especially if it’s “faith-based” in the name) means a higher probability that the organization doesn’t stay incorporated, and might be a scam.
|
Results 1 to 14 of 14 matches.
|
 |
|
Page 1 of 1
|
1 |
| Grantee Name | Grantee Address | City | Sta | Award Number | Award Title | Action Issue Date | Principal Investig. | DUNS # | Sum of Actions |
| ALL FAITH COUNSELING CENTER OF ATCHISON, INC. | 1225 NORTH 2ND STREET | ATCHISON | KS | 90IJ0869 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM/RURAL | 08/07/2007 | JANELLE MAES | 164390783 | $ 45,005 |
| Alta Vista Faith-Based Initiative Corporation | 421 Cross Timbers Dr. | Double Oak | TX | 90IJ0624 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE | 09/23/2006 | ROBERT CHAVEZ | 361452084 | $ 50,000 |
| Arkansas Faith in Action State Coalition, Inc. | 8223 East Elm Street | BENTON | AR | 90IJ0848 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND PROGRAM – RURAL | 08/04/2007 | CAROL H SMITH | 796366990 | $ 50,000 |
| Arkansas Faith in Action State Coalition, Inc. | 8223 East Elm Street | BENTON | AR | 90IJ0848 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND PROGRAM – RURAL | 03/04/2011 | Carol Smith | 796366990 | $- 4,070 |
| BRADFORD COUNTY FAITH COMMUNITY CENTER, INC. | P.O. BOX 101 | STARKE | FL | 90IJ0867 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM/ RURAL | 08/04/2007 | ELAINE SLOCUM | 168089188 | $ 28,419 |
| FAITH`S HOPE FOUNDATION | 2271 W. MALVERN AVENUE | FULLERTON | CA | 90IJ0891 | CCF-TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – YOUTH | 08/30/2007 | MOLLY STICKLER | 176309040 | $ 50,000 |
| Faith Strength and Power, Inc. | 24840 Lambs Meadow Rd | Worton | MD | 90IJ0265 | THE COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM ? RURAL | 09/22/2005 | VITA T PICKRUM | 193326381 | $ 49,950 |
| Faith Strength and Power, Inc. | 24840 Lambs Meadow Rd | Worton | MD | 90IJ0659 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – YOUTH | 09/22/2006 | VITA T PICKRUM | 193326381 | $ 49,998 |
| Faith Temple Christian Center | 836 Ferndale Avenue | ROCK-LEDGE | FL | 90IJ0872 | CCF-TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING – YOUTH | 09/08/2007 | PAMELA R LYONS | 829655927 | $ 50,000 |
| Faith Unlimited Institute | 229 Bristol Street | SPFLD | MA | 90IJ0591 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE | 09/20/2006 | JOSEPH NICHOLSON | 093133895 | $ 50,000 |
| Hands of Faith, Inc. | 737 Bluff Street | BELOIT | WI | 90IJ0195 | COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – HOMELESS | 09/17/2005 | JEFF HOYT | $ 33,334 | |
| Inter-Faith Ministries Wichita, Inc. | 829 N Market | WICHITA | KS | 90IJ0280 | THE COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – RURAL | 09/21/2005 | KAREN DOBBIN | 113265607 | $ 50,000 |
| Inter-Faith Ministries Wichita, Inc. | 829 N Market | WICHITA | KS | 90IJ0561 | THE COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – HOMELESS | 09/14/2006 | SAMUEL L MUYSKENS | 113265607 | $ 50,000 |
| Iowa Center for Faith Based & Community Initiatives | 1725 S. 50th St. | W DES MOINES | IA | 90IJ0859 | THE COMPASSION CAPITAL (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM-RURAL | 08/04/2007 | DR DARYL VANDER-WILT | 189950996 | $ 50,000 |
|
All discretionary, all demonstration. Notice how all the amounts are fairly small. Some will go on to receive much nicer amounts (over $1 million), others will be content with their $50K or $99K and then evaporate. Do the math — how often does this happen, really? See below for another chart minus the word “faith” in the same grant series…
|
Some of these may be legitimate. Others need maybe a little more “compassion” from me, after I have finished looking at their “Compassion Capital” grants, then their Corporate status records, then — in general, begun to wonder, seriously — why HHS keeps giving Compassion Capital Grants (which are like free capital – something most of us don’t get easily) — to Corporations that don’t stay incorporated? And how many of the CEO’s are already employed in local government? How many are also related to prior HUD grants or Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)?
Far be it from ME to say “kickback” — but I feel it’s a reasonable question to say, “Whassup?”
How hard is it to file an annual tax return, and why do so many of these grantees “forget” to — like this one? Maryland Dept of Assessments and Taxation says it was formed in 2004 and is now status “Forfeited”
Charter Search Results for: FAITH STRENGTH POWER
Page 1 of 1
| (Dept. ID) | Entity Name | Entity Detail | Status | ||
| (D10229490) | FAITH, STRENGTH AND POWER, INC. | General Info. | Amendments | Personal Property | FORFEITED |
Dept ID #: D10229490
| General Information |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Are these people incorporating and then suddenly losing their incorporating just well-meaning, low-income, church folk who don’t understand business? I don’t know, but here’s William R. Pickrum — County Commissioner and Local Management Board of Children and Family Services (long enough to get this grant, apparently!) — so where’d THAT $100K go??? Probably this is the same person, right?
KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
![[photo, William W. Pickrum, Board of County Commissioners, Kent County]](https://i0.wp.com/www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/36loc/ke/leg/images/1198-1-2265b.jpg)
WILLIAM W. PICKRUM, Member, Board of County Commissioners (Democrat) County Government Center, 400 High St., Chestertown, MD 21620 (410) 778-7435; fax: (410) 778-7482 e-mail: kentcounty@kentgov.org
Member, Board of County Commissioners, Kent County, since December 2002 (president, 2002-06).
*(*(Member, Airport Advisory Committee, Kent County, 2002-06; Central Communications Commission, Kent County, 2002-06; Local Emergency Planning Committee, Kent County, 2002-06; Local Management Board for Children and Family Services, Kent County, 2002-06; Board of Health, Kent County,, 2002-; Maryland Rural Broadband Coordination Board, 2006-10; Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Kent County, 2006-. Board of Directors, Upper Shore Aging, 2006-. Member, Service Academy Selection Committee, 2009-. Chair, Upper Shore Regional Council, 2011- (member, 2002-; chair, 2006; 3rd vice-chair, 2009; 2nd vice-chair, 2010; 1st vice-chair, 2010-11).
Served in U.S. Coast Guard. Member, Legislative Committee, Maryland Association of Counties, 2011- (tax subcommittee, 2011-). Founding member and treasurer, Democratic Club of Kent County. Married; two children, three grandchildren.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Republicans, Quit Blaming the Poor for their Poverty! (House Ways’n Means/Camp statement re: TANF)
[wordcount approx. 5,000]
My blog just hit 100,000 visits!
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/
The HOUSE is who appropriates money for various legislation. One way to stay up on it is simply to subscribe to email announcements. See four-day committee hearings 9/11-12-13-14th 2012…
TANF, as I noted last post, frees up more and more ways for states (those in power in state HHS branches in particular) to divert money collected from all originally intended as “AID to FAMILIES with DEPENDENT CHILDREN” (AFDC) to ‘TEMPORARY AID for NEEDY FAMILIES” (of federally-connected contractors and social-engineering-minded professionals..)
Someone else needs to start posing (framing) the questions. I just showed how, amazingly, some people’s work entails spending welfare diversions from kids and their parents who need it to eat, in order to promote evangelical world views that marriage is the way. And somehow these proponents are rarely lacking in real estate assets, which only a spelunker could trace –and who has the time and will for that?
WORK ETHICS indeed! Hypocrites!
How much “work” is involved in going to conferences, attending a training seminar in how to push marriage or fatherhood curricula on xyz population, write off the conference as a deductible for one’s nonprofit formed precisely to take advantage of TANF’s diversionary magic qualities, set up (or buy) a website and then take referrals from your church, child support offices, or prisons?
What this is really about is making sure that more people are working wages, which = more centralized control for those who are close to government (in it, getting grants from it, or contracting from it).
See last post. Block Grants to States.
 |
| Opening Statement |
| Opening Statement Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) Markup of H.J.Res. 118, “Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Administration’s July 12, 2012 Waiver of Welfare Work Requirements” September 13, 2012 (Remarks as Prepared) |
| Good morning. We are meeting today to consider H.J.Res. 118, a resolution to block the Obama Administration from waiving work requirements in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) welfare program.Americans strongly believe that those who are able should work in exchange for receiving federal benefits. A recent survey revealed that 83 percent support a work requirement as a condition for receiving welfare. The best way out of poverty is a job, and it is critical that our laws both foster job creation as well as ensure that welfare is always a pathway to work.
Work requirements were central to the success of the bipartisan 1996 welfare reforms. Those reforms led to more work, more earnings, less welfare dependence, and less poverty among low-income Americans. And the reforms were unmistakably successful. For example, employment of single mothers increased by 15 percent from 1996 to 2000, and it remains higher today than in 1996, even after two recessions. At the same time, welfare caseloads have declined by 57 percent. However, with their July 12 announcement, the Administration moved to undo the success of the last decade and a half and allow States to waive the welfare work requirements that are at the heart of the TANF program. To make matters worse, the Administration’s proposal to waive these important work requirements is illegal. The 1996 legislation, signed into law by President Clinton, does permit an administration to waive certain requirements in the welfare program, which we will hear more about today. But the work requirement is not among those provisions. And this was intentional. |
In orange, one lie and one irrelevancy. Who’s on-line to counter this propaganda? Notice how he went RIGHT to “single mothers” when in fact, now there are single fathers (or remarried fathers) extracting children from working single mothers’ homes, so some of these mothers are now instead simply paying for the privilege of having been robbed of contact with their kids. Some of these are also paying men who battered them or abused their kids (I am NOT saying it’s all).
It could be that for SOME types of jobs, the way out of poverty was a job — but then again some of the people (in the family court system at least) who are helping put one or BOTH parents out of jobs are either judges or psychologists, or both. The Wall Street Journal did a study a while back of the highest-paid per hour professions — and guess which two came out near the top? Judges and Psychologists (at the PhD level). Guess how THAT came to pass? Off mainstreaming mental health.
The fact is that the better way out of poverty is owning a prosperous business (suggestion: Become a federal contractor), making it to retirement on a federal pension, wise investments that put off enough to live on (NOTE: Not recommended to invest only in the United States, as IT doesn’t….) – — and then, there’s also the immoral, unethical, and illegal way out of poverty called dealing in drugs. I don’t recommend it (risk levels including getting caught and jailed, or dying, and plus, it makes for a worse globe). That said, our own government is one of the biggest drug-dealers around (including Pharma, and Narco) which I think is no longer up for debate. We just don’t like to think about it much.
ANOTHER way out of poverty is to form a shell nonprofit situation (i.e. sell out) for the HHS and take grants to then take more funds from the poor, which is primarily what the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative set the standard for. I have WATCHED this and BLOGGED this herein.
yet ANOTHER way out of poverty, apparently, is to become a “FAITH BASED” (or “FAITH-BASED”) something or other, and submit an application to the US Department of Health and Human Services. There are 11 without the hyphen, and 39 (including some individuals with the name “Faith”) without:
Recipient = Faith based
Showing: 1 – 11 of 11 Recipients
Note: One EIN can be associated with several different organizations. Also, one DUNS number can be associated with multiple EINs. This occurs in cases where Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) has assigned more than one EIN to a recipient organization.
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alta Vista Faith-Based Initiative Corporation | Double Oak | TX | 75077-8450 | DENTON | 361452084 | $ 50,000 |
| Faith Based Community Development Corp. | OCEANSIDE | CA | 92054 | SAN DIEGO | $ 75,000 | |
| Faith-Based Solutions, LLC
(= BIGggg FRAUD. I blogged) |
RENO | NV | 89502-3709 | WASHOE | 145755851 | $ 1,000,000 |
| Governor`s Ofc of Faith-Based & Community Initiatives | MONTGOMERY | AL | 36104 | MONTGOMERY | 124325460 | $ 0 |
| Governors Office of Community & Faith Based Initiatives | DETROIT | MI | 48202 | WAYNE | 805340163 | $ 250,000 |
| Iowa Center for Faith Based & Community Initiatives | W DES MOINES | IA | 50265-5489 | POLK | 189950996 | $ 1,050,000 |
| National Center for Faith Based Initiative | WEST PALM BEACH | FL | 33407 | PALM BEACH | $ 1,750,000 | |
| New Jersey State Office of Faith Based Initiative | TRENTON | NJ | 08625 | MERCER | 361857998 | $ 0 |
| OH St Governor`s Office of Faith Based & Comm Initiativ
(Took the money & ran, next Admin (2007) got to do the audit and pick up the pieces. This office is still in place. Search “Krista Sisterhen.”) |
COLUMBUS | OH | 43215 | FRANKLIN | 809031776 | $ 3,444,539 |
| OH St Governor`s Office of Faith Based & Comm Initiativ (Interesting, got two DUNSs.) | COLUMBUS | OH | 43215 | FRANKLIN | 809376072 | $ 1,534,186 |
| PLEASANT CITY FAITH-BASED COMMUNITY DEV. INITIATIVES | WEST PALM BEACH | FL | 33407 | PALM BEACH | $ 75,000 |
(the next 39 will include this subset, I believe, so let’s approximate maybe 28 more. Want an eyeopener? Do follow-up!)
SHARE THIS POST on...
Planned Economic Dissonance of TANF. Teaching point: Maximus & the Marriage-Mongers
TANF is up for reauthorization by the end of this month (and might already have been voted on). It was only reauthorized last December 2011 through Sept. 30, 2012. This is a BIG DEAL….and an election year opportunity to get other voices heard on this one:
House Passes Bill Extending Aid for Families – But Blocking Access
12/16/2011Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed House Resolution H.R. 3659 by voice vote that extends the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program through September 30, 2012. The state’s TANF block grant is used to fund the California Work Incentives and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, which provides basic needs grants and work-training for very poor families with children. {{will be different in every state what it funds}}
TANF = Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. = 1996 Welfare Reform signed by then President Clinton. These are Federal Payments to the States and all the incentives, strings-attached, and conditions for receiving some the following year, attached. What most of us have failed to assess (being conditioned not to fully investigate our government — too big a task, which is kind of like not paying attention to a plugged up sink, an invasive species of fish (or vegetation), or an epidemic, calling itself “largesse,” as monarchs and others tend to do…
For reference, Congress may pass legislation with an expiration date unless “reauthorized.” Scroll down to what’s to be reauthorized in 2012.
While “TANF” is many things, from a practical point of view, three points of reference (examples only, but key ones) will serve well, which is today’s post.
- OKLAHOMA MARRIAGE INITIATIVE (PREP, Inc.)
- SMARTMARRIAGES.com (and trademarked product set)
- MAXIMUS.
Understood as symptoms and symbols — in their basics, I think it communicates.
None of these could have prospered without someone rewriting the welfare laws from AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) into “TANF.” That’s a major umbrella (cover) under which they operate.
If I can summarize — of course it’s not complete, it’s an outline as I now understand it (that is, after years of experience with the system, and over three years of studying it on-line and through networking.)
1. TANF = Rewrite Welfare Laws to “Block Grants to States”
2. Block Grants to States = Privatizing Welfare.
3. Privatizing Welfare = Private Profits, Public Loss.
Literally, stealing (diverting direct aid) from Children and their caretaking parents to provide More Real Estate for (very religious) Marriage Mongers (and social science engineers). Besides what people (with time) could figure out on their own, others such as the Center for Policy and Budget Priorities also have identified — less aid going TO the families, and more catering to federal favor (i.e., diversions)
4. Centralized Control, whether fascist or socialist leads to: hungry people, landless (rentals) & homeless people whose kids have been ripped out of their lives, or (male AND female) are in prison for contempt of child support they can’t pay.
5. Why should the public be supporting electronic, franchised information marketing to captive (literally) audiences themed around training, conditioning, behavioral science, and test-runs of how to get a certain relationship outcome? Half this is propaganda, the other half simply thinly-disguised evangelism, and some of it just greed and egotism on the part of the social engineers.
6. IF “the love of money is the root of all evil” (and it is), you’re in it.
At LEAST don’t drink so much Kool Aid so voluntarily; who knows what may happen if enough people (at once) say: “I’m not buying it!”
As we speak, the Chicago Teachers are on their first strike in 25 years, which set parents’ work life and other businesses scrambling to keep going as parents scrambled to keep their kids safe, which reveals clearly that school and most parents’ work lives are codependent.
So, who says collective action has no impact? But the larger the collective cause is, the less detail and dynamic response to (real, changing) situations it has — the more conformist. Like a very large truck going high-speed, with less than sensitive steering…
What we need most is TRUTH, and a simple, accurate way of figuring out which it is. This is my attempt to outline (and demonstrate) some overlooked connections to the myth of “welfare.” Read it before the end of September please, and also before the first Tuesday in November, 2012.
How States Have Spent TANF and MOE Funds
{{“MOE” just = “Maintenance of Effort.” I’m simply putting this here for the visual and as a reminder of the 4 purposes of TANF. Oklahoma Marriage Initiative began with the bright idea that purpose #4 (and not purpose #1) was the most important, based on some economist studies in 1998.}}
- assisting needy families so children can be cared for in their own homes or the home of relatives;
- reducing the dependency of needy parents by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage;
- preventing out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and
- encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
States may also spend funds on activities that they supported with Emergency Assistance funds prior to 1996 even if the activities do not fall under one of these four TANF purposes. Spending under this grandfathered authority is reported as “Authorized Under Prior Law” (AUPL).
Over time, states have shifted much of their TANF and MOE spending from basic assistance to other activities (see Figure 3). This section examines some of those shifts, with particular emphasis on five key areas of spending: 1) basic assistance; 2) work activities and supports; 3) child care; 4) spending that is AUPL or “Other Nonassistance” spending; and 5) pregnancy prevention and support and maintenance of two-parent families.
Follow the pretty colors, especially the consistently declining blue, ‘BASIC ASSISTANCE.” Basically assisting families makes no money for marriage educators, social science theorists, and very little for attorneys. It simply helps the families, absent the moralizing. Also understand that the religious groups, in particular, are very interested in TANF purposes 2c, 3 (abstinence education) and 4.
1. OKLAHOMA MARRIAGE INITIATIVE, test run of a forced statewide marriage education project .
- (also see “Curriculum: PREP, Inc.=Colorado from 2 Univ of Denver profs.) ca 1998
2. SMARTMARRIAGES(r) aka Diane Sollee’s Washington, D.C. CMFCE,LLC & 2000-2010 conference series. (more below)
- 2000 collaboration (below) Conference with David Blankenhorn’s “INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES” & a Div school, plan to start a marriage movement. The name David Blankenhorn should remind one of “National Fatherhood Initiative“(nonprofit, 1994) and the IAV (1980s). Mississippi, Harvard, Liberal, this man is even about my age — but being Harvard, and having cultivated HHS (i.e., White House) connections, he expects to be heard. Moral of the story — what’s called “Marriage” is in effect “fatherhood” centric. TAGGS.hhs.gov, the database of federal grants by location, purpose (CFDA), etc. — the CFDA “93.086” did not even distinguish between “marriage” and “fatherhood.” While some undereducated AND educated women my age meaning we have some life experience — and have been mothers — were being slapped around the home with someone of similar ideas (if not pedigree) (in part for speaking or showing up as a person), Blankenhorn was in WDC or cementing connections with it, or doing fatherhood tours. So the question comes up of who has the national megaphone and is smart enough to grab it. the IAV link is to an August 2012 article, by the way.
- README: “NATIONAL PLAN FOR THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE” (while Blankenhorn isn’t a signer, at least one of his marriage cronies did, which should be frightening (see content): it has Mike McManus, Patrick Fagan of Family Research Council, Michael Schwartz Chief of Staff (2008) for an Oklahoma Senator (Tom Coburn), a JD who is council for the Vatican. This letter is addressed to the Pope. It lists 50 prominent “Shepherds of the Church” with a high presence of Knights of Columbus. And yes, Blankenhorn associates with McManus. Follow the money also. You need to read this.
- Also, for how these groups like to act? #1. using public funds #2. Behind closed doors #3. In the Executive branch of any particular government; #4. Calling upon Religious Terms, the warlike ones** — whether the USA, Oklahoma (see above) and/or here Kansas. In Kansas, they were caught using public funds to have a secret meeting with Marriage-Mongers….McManus, Wade Horn, Blankenhorn (this secret meeting was heavily IAV) etc. (See article). I want us to see the religious background, the intent (eliminate no-fault divorce), and the high-level of leadership involved. This 2008 letter is self-explanatory. To say “Defending our Father’s House” is a reference to Jesus cleansing the Temple of the money-changers. Literally, they (by insisting on public funding and attempting to control legislation) are saying, we want to rule America from the Vatican; and this land might as well be “our Father’s House.” They’re connected, funded, and extremely well organized. Often they are people who have access to decision-making on TANF funds, got it? (**appropriate to, say, Bush, “The Family” etc. The theme is POWER and the intent to grab it, however it’s phrased for the public — such as “welfare.”)
3. MAXIMUS and it’s “windfall” profits. (see below for timeline).
- Following Ross Perot’s wildly prosperous EDS model? SOMEONE has to process all that data… (and see below)
-
MMS – MAXIMUS, Inc. (NYSE)
56.79 -0.21 (-0.37%)Sep 11 4:06pm ET – Disclaimer
Open: 57.00 High: 57.35 Low: 56.70 Volume: 88,661 Avg Vol: 141,000 Mkt Cap: 1.93B
OK – –
WEALTH TRANSFER TO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS & OTHER PROFITS
ALL of these are creating more high-income, rich people at the expense of the poor, wo are sold off into social engineering demonstration projects — WHICH I assure you, is the truth. Contact me if you want links. I was STUNNED. This is BUSINESS and to do BUSINESS, the profit comes from a better deal for one side than the other — or collaborations such that someone else (like middle and low-income America, honest working people) get stiffed and the two collaborating sides win. That’s simple economics.
SHARE THIS POST on...
When the USA has perfected Economic Conflict as a Shock Tactic on Its Citizens..
Then what?
~I’ve talked about Who is the USA (and who am I //are you // is there a we?) in relationship to that..
~I’ve also talked about how the nonprofit system creates a class system, and about how the family courts are not broken (but exist to mainstream mental health and behavior modification through the court system).
~I’ve been talking about why the OCSE (child support system) should be eliminated (ideally, so would the family court system, but hey, I’m a realist!) for the primary reason is its operations are corrupt, it invites corruption, it’s not possible to monitor properly (given all the privateering) and as a matter of fact, is getting too many innocent families killed, when killing someone is simply easier than swallowing pride and paying up.
Eventually, one comes to the conclusion that almost any words (or labels) of any government program being advertised can be easily interpreted:
Whatever they are, the exact OPPOSITE is much closer to the truth. And I can prove this in category after category, starting, if need be, with “child support enforcement.” The fact is, it’s resoundingly most successful when cases are never closed.
We just didn’t fully understand the paradigm that this government is not here to help us, but to extort AND plunder the ethical. And the next thing is, what to do about it (which I seriously doubt a collective consensus could be had on — in part because who controls the media, and who controls the wealth, not to mention the education systems, and who’s also in control of the most wealth?
I like life — and I don’t like charging windmills (Don Quixote reference). This is not about the drama for me, it never has been. It’s about how to live with my own conscience if I do NOT report and attempt to change things; given that trying to ‘live and let live” and exhort anyone else to respect the law (in our case, or statewide) isn’t going to work –and that’s already been proved as well.
I was planning to blog from Maximus’ (Child support Medicare, etc. agency) own History Page, admitting that they are getting rich off privatized government and key turning points for this. Guess it liked the Ross Perot Get Rich QUICK through government contracting scheme. Maximus founder also (I should note) had an Air Force/Pentagon background and then went to the (former) US Dept. of Health Education and Welfare and tried to instill some military precision:
MAXIMUS, Inc. – Company Profile, Information, Business Description, History, Background…
(from “referenceforbusiness.com” — like an encyclopedia)
Turning to the Private Sector: Government in the 1960s
The concept of a private company supporting a government agency was pioneered by Ross Perot and his Electronic Data Systems Corporation (EDS), which was originally created to take over the data processing operations of private businesses
. {{Perot had tried IBM salesman, but it wasn’t a personality fit..}}
When Congress passed Medicare legislation in 1965, resulting in an enormous amount of paperwork that needed to be processed, the concept was applied to the federal government
Medicare and Medicaid processing proved so lucrative for EDS that within three years it accounted for nearly 25 percent of the company’s revenues. By 1977 that amount grew to nearly 40 percent. As a result, Perot would become immensely wealthy and famous enough to twice run for the presidency of the United States.The founder of MAXIMUS, David V. Mastran, earned an undergraduate degree from West Point in 1965, followed a year later by a master’s degree in industrial engineering from Stanford University
CAN WE REVIEW THIS PLEASE? Medicaid and Medicare is supposed to help the vulnerable, elderly, and poor. I guess it still does. BUT, not only is it rife with fraud at all ranks, often defrauding kids in foster care with false billings, and resulting in multi-million$$ settlements (which WHO gets?) — but being so gargantuan, it made a single man wealthy enough to run twice for President. David V. Mastran perhaps thought this would be a great line of work to get in, too. If the federal government is going into MASSIVE expansion, why not be a visionary and join?
To review again — these are truly service industries? that’s the real purpose, and since it’s such a great service — and there are definitely going to be lawsuits for fraud with anything that large — why shouldn’t the CEO get $565K/year AND stock options, and the rest of the directors, similar?? And, the children whose child support is stuck in the District Attorneys’ office as “undistributable” (when it isn’t) — $130 a month? And the honest fathers, screwed/extorted? And the poor (not by indigence) fathers, incarcerated — and mothers? And the shareholders, — like those of the CCA — a nice profit?
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Silva v. Garcetti shows the downsides of Applying for Welfare (to both parents)
Abstract: This post has ca. 5,500 words, and four major cites. Most of it is quotation, the largest part is the first part. Basically:
- the actual 1999 Silva v. Garcia case summary from Johnnypumphandle—
- Also a short reference to “Maximus” which is still doing business in California, and nationwide. This should tell us something; they keep getting major contracts even though they’re thought of and have been caught in major fraud around welfare matters!
- Note: (there are entire blogs and ripoff reports and a forum dedicated to complaints about Maximus which among other things collects child support. See it under topix.com
- While Ms. Silva (below was getting $130 a month out of the money garnished of her husband, how much were child support officials (or any privatized contractors making?) Maximus disclosure for 3/5/2004– in California only, shows their salaries and stock options: (dba in Calif as “Virginia Maximus) (search site):
- a Joseph Zernik article reporting the falsification of records on the arrest of Richard Fine and obstruction of attempts by others to get their hands on the actual records (his arrest was in 2009)
- “Understanding the Contractual Relationship” from realitybloger.wordpress.com
- A post (from same blogger)referencing Obamacare and the Supreme Court & elections, but it actually reviews the implications and meanings of “Supreme Court” “United States” and “Constitution” among other things. (same blogger)
[I added for reference, recent disclosures (in California) on publicly-traded companies, showing Maximus Director salaries (and stocks/options owned — notice most are in options, not stocks) for 2006 & 2004. Context: they are a child support enforcement private contractor (DNK if currently in California in this capacity, but they have offices where AFCC does – US, Australia, UK, Canada….)]. Once a public traded company starts doing business for gov’t — it gets very interesting. For one — they are sued for fraud, say, and pay multi-million$$ settlements (as Maximus has) — where does that go, then — what does gov’t do with the fund? Does it help the common man, or (case in point), children? Maximus was sued among other things for submitting false claims to have provided Medicaid coverage for foster kids — talk about a vulnerable population!]]
It’s noticeable that these are low-traffic sites, particularly the Zernik one is very disturbing it’s been ignored by mainstream. I used to judge sites as “creditable” by the format and appearance of their sites; do they look respectable? I learned the hard way that that often works in reverse, particularly with a lot of the funding for some of these sites coming directly to fake corporations via HHS, which is to say, from the public they should be serving better and more honest to!
SILVA v. GARCETTI
raises a few more questions for me (general ones) but basically established how these agencies and that particular District Attorney’s office (then responsible for collecting welfare) was handling a law-abiding citizen.
http://www.johnnypumphandle.com/cc/silva1.htm
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Independence Entails Investigation (links-only version of last post)
leave a comment »
Well, ALMOST only . . . .
This should be a more useful format:
PEOPLE/BLOGGERS I QUOTED. Some are notables, others are notable simply for what they noticed:
Over the years, I have gradually come to understand that some of the wisest people, and real fighters for the truth, are those who endured significant child abuse, including not being fed enough. Long-term child abuse will turn a person either into a coward, or a fighter. I have two in my personal acquaintance (presently), and either of them alone is worth three on-line support groups and those who support during abuse — but will not or cannot do anything to stop it.
Writers that come to mind in this category (in my book), include Viktor Frankl, and Richard Rhodes. You’d be surprised.
the comments on “vidrebel” are also interesting. Which led to some of this:
I also hadn’t known this about the John Silva Case, but apparently his child support order pre-dates welfare reform (of 1996) and the block grants to the states — which allowed for huge diversions from the actual children into programming based on social science (marriage/fatherhood/abstinence, etc.) theory:
Interesting, that this major Silva case comes from a father who let his wife go on AFDC briefly — and for such a minimal (even in 1989) monthly amount — $137? She was working FT, or what? So, around 1999, California was (belatedly) switching over to state-wide centralized agency from the DA’s offices, which hasn’t done much better, from what I can tell. they did, however, contract out with Iron Mountain (data storage) who claims it (or one of it’s partners) somehow lost in transit from Denver (what was it doing in Denver to start with?) 800,000 records’ privacy…
(On reading this account, I”m going to post it next; if one multiplies HOW MANY fathers (and mothers) are being treated this way by the same system, I believe it will add up to justify my proposal that OCSE be eliminated. Clearly, when money OR services are transmitted from one party to another by way of government of various levels (county, state, federal) — “a lot gets lost” in the translation!
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
September 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM
Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), OCSE - Child Support
Tagged with CAFR, Catherine Austin Fitts, Child Support, Clint Richardson, http://www.wanttoknow.info/, John Silva, social commentary, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., Walter Burien