Again, I am only sampling a field that was sent in place decades ago, has major foundations supporting it (one should ask WHY) as well as the many resources of the HHS, and the “yeah, man — right up our alley!” of one too many tax-exempt religious foundations. Or, as you will, faith-based.

TAGGS.hhs.gov on this group (I searched by its EIN# — which is below).

Before we get too far into the economics of this field, I’d like to post a sample of what some of the DYNAMICS of it are about.  This 2001 Appeal is interesting because it incorporates how the court responds to evidence of injuring a child on visitation and severe violence (breaking a woman’s sternum and grabbing her by the throat) — that woman being the 2nd wife // stepmother — and because the man in question is on the board of (another — not the above) Fathers’ rights group based in WDC (ACFC).  This is one child — a girl, born in 1989 (divorce, 1991, first evidence of post-separation bruising of the girl, ca. 1996) and it covered two states, Michigan and Louisiana.  It’s a short-double-spaced read, and I hope you do.  Because at least in part — no offence to non-abusive Dads — this is also what the “FR’ movement is about — that FR are FR even when these things happen:

McManus & David Usher wrote 10 “marriage policies..” #7. Effective Shared-Parenting Laws

Children of divorce or of non-marriage need parenting by both the mother and father, unless a parent is found unfit.  Each parent will get at least one-third time with their children.  Shared Parenting laws will assume a default change of custody from one parent to the other at the half-way point to the date of emancipation, unless the parents voluntarily agree to another arrangement, assuring that the children will receive approximately one-half of their upbringing from each parent.

8. “Poverty to Marriage” policy

Welfare and child support will be modified to discourage long-term non-marriage.  Shared Parenting will be required unless a parent is found unfit, is incarcerated, or voluntarily waives custody.  The emphasis will be on building marriage or remarriage, and maximizing parental access to children.  If a single parent is cohabiting current subsidies such as Medicaid and Earned Income Tax Credit – would not be sharply reduced if the couple marries, as at present, but would be phased down over time.

(this, from secularNewsDaily quotes the dangers of same-sex marriage, calling it “feminist marriage” (feminist = bad):

The longitudinal impact of feminist marriage on reproductive and marital choices of unmarried individuals will be profound. Women who are presently on welfare will be propelled to marry each other, leaving unmarried men already sidelined by the welfare state machinery doubly-disenfranchised. Women who are not married can enter the welfare state by having a child out-of-wedlock, and then double their entitlements by marrying another woman on welfare

There’s more — that’s just a sampler…  Or, see “Holy Crap and The Center for Marriage Policy”

..back to the other group, “INST for FAM REVITALIZATION” etc.  Most of this post is more about corporations and grants, social science matters, than divorce, or DV…

Here’s the version showing to which program office & CFDA (award code) it was appropriated, as well as who was Principal Investigator when (AND — that there was never a DUNS# entered for this institute).  However, this version is not chrono by year (it’s going to sort on whatever column shows up furthest to the left.  The database is a little rigid that way:.

Results 1 to 11 of 11 matches.
Page 1 of 1	1

Another (Chrono) way of looking at this same chart, will show that none of this extremely fatherhood grant was under CFDA 93086, and how it played out, by year, and by person:

And I wonder what other grants were “90PR” and 90XA” — do you?

(this shows a 10 year gap between the last fatherhood and a different series at Johns Hopkins (only one of that grant series, I just skipped the top 2 rows of the same grant:

Who is Dr. Wallace O. McLaughlin, (READ the 2003-2004 newsletter about the Indiana Perinatal Network sharing space with Fathers and Families Resource Center in Indiana, and where young men (fathers) were referred from, including the child support agency….below?  also see 2011 Annual Report and note Community Donors and Corporate Donors for this group, may have blogged before.

Anecdotal

One reason I know of this group is I know a noncustodial mother driven homeless (in Indianapolis!) through wage-garnishments to pay child support to a child she was not even able to SEE.  This woman was working FT at a reasonable salary, but so much was taken out, she couldn’t afford ANY housing.  Being a noncustodial parent (female) she also approached this resource center (if I have which one right) which most likely gets some access/visitation funding — to see her own child, but received no help.  The woman also had been battered by the father and ended up in a shelter, after which the custody switch.  That’s about how it seems to go now.  I’m pretty sure that taxes also were taken out of her wages.  This is one of many reasons reason I want this funding and all marriage promotion, etc. stopped!

what about the XP and XA grants?  There are 489 results for “90XP” and all are 93647, as above.

Here’s a sample of some given to “CITY – something.”

I’m interested in the Columbia grant knowing that there’s  fatherhood research center up there (see Ronald Mincy Ph.D.); it’s very well known.  A lot of “titles” being entered under the Principal Investigators. Here’s another one:

we should know how influential Mr. Levy and the CRC has been, however they aren’t showing many HHS grants….  Notice also — NO DUNS (how cute!)  This group has been around since, like 1985 or earlier?

Also note — the habit of ALL caps some and Initial Caps others means that a name sort is not alphabetical within single letters.  I.e. “FATHERS DAY RALLY” came before “Family & Children First.”  The latter handles abuse and violence against children matters (I looked up saw same street address) and Mr. Fox is its President

…Child sexual abuse medical examinations are made available, in part, by a grant from the Child Victims’ Trust Fund. The Child Advocacy Center is accredited by the National Children’s Alliance.

Darkness to Light

Family & Children’s Place is pleased to offer Darkness to Light’s Stewards of Children training program. This revolutionary sexual abuse prevention training program educates adults to prevent, recognize, and react responsibly to child sexual abuse.

It has a VERY long list of funders (including Annheuser Busch, JP Morgan, etc.) — why did HHS need to pay this man’s salary or for an executive director??)

First 5 was statewide, if I recall,and there was talk about misappropriation of funds for political purposes.  DNK that this meant these grants however…

90XP0057 (Mr. Sullivan’s group in MO) deserves some notice, particularly as to SPELLING in another fatherhood grant series, and in addition, this particular group provoked a state audit for misuesof funds.  This 90XP was the first, apparently… in this series:

AWARD ACTIONS

Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions

How about responsible SPELLING (year 2011).  Notice also, the sudden increase in the amount of the grant….They were audited for the year 2007 — here’s a letter about it.  I blogged it, but you’ll have to “search”on the blog, which is long.  However, they showed the problem with accountability.

However, a Missouri State Senator giving glowing reports about this nonprofit, and the Fathering Court:

Criminal Nonsupport and “Fathering Courts” — Senate Bill 140

Senator Smith with staff of the Fathers’ Support Center who supported Sen. Smith’s legislation to update Missouri’s paternity law to provide DNA testing in paternity disputes and grant relief of child support when a genetic test disproves paternity.

Kansas City’s innovative experiment with “Fathering Courts” for men struggling to pay child support has been a tremendous success. Now, with the passage of my Senate Bill 140, Missouri courts dealing with criminal nonsupport cases can create special courts to assign nonviolent defendants to court-supervised educational, vocational or employment training, substance abuse treatment or work programs. Instead of being sentenced to jail time for missing child support payments, fathers will now have the opportunity to take advantage of programs that can help them get back on their feet, start paying child support, and re-engage them in their children’s lives. This system is projected to save the state $1.5 million annually in reduced prison costs. And more importantly, it means that children are much more likely to receive the financial support they need — money they definitely won’t see if their fathers are locked up in jail and unable to work.

To help accomplish this, a commission will investigate funding opportunities for the assessment and training of persons assigned to criminal nonsupport courts and/or for the operation of criminal nonsupport courts. The commission will work to secure grants, funds, and other property and services necessary to facilitate criminal nonsupport court operation and allocate resources among the various criminal nonsupport courts operating within the state.

I want to thank the Fathers’ Support Center, a North St. Louis non-profit that brought men to the Capitol who offered compelling testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Senate Bill 140, and who will play an important role in sharing a model of success. I believe that this legislation would not have passed without the courage of those men who came to testify.

Senator Smith’s work with the Fathers’ Support Center in St. Louis prompted him to offer legislation creating “Fathering Courts” as an alternative to prosecution and incarceration for men with child support debt. During a Senate hearing, a number of men provided compelling testimony in support of Sen. Smith’s legislation.

Establishing Paternity — Senate Bill 141

Because there are many men in our state who have been paying child support for children who are not their own, some of whom have fallen behind on paying and now have criminal records, I sponsored Senate Bill 141. This bill will allow men to be relieved of child support payments when they provide a DNA test proving they are not the child’s biological father. In some cases, they can’t support their own families because they must try to avoid a criminal record for failure to pay child support. At the same time, the true biological father is not involved in any way with his child. My legislative director Stacy Morse and I crafted Senate Bill 141 because we wanted to restore justice for men who, often for reasons beyond their control, have found themselves legally obligated to support children who are not theirs.  

Working with multiple agencies, we first solved the notification process for notifying men of paternity so families can resolve paternity disputes, and child support is assigned to the responsible party.  Instead of being notified through the mail — a fairly arbitrary process in this age of rampant evictions and foreclosures — those alleged to be fathers will be notified in person by process servers.  Second, if there is doubt about the paternity of a child, judges will be able to order mothers to bring in a child for DNA testing, and any man who can prove he is not a child’s biological father will be able to have a child support order overturned so the real father can be pursued for child support payments. (There is a window of opportunity from August 28, 2009, through December 31, 2011, when this can occur.) Additionally, any “non-father” who had been convicted of nonsupport may have his record expunged, and the child’s birth certificate will be modified.

Who are Charles A and Frances H Ballard?  well, for one married to each other.  For another, being paid over $100K each at one point on the tax return of this organization…. I went through that on another post.  And more, at the bottom of this post…..

Yep re-instituting fatherhood.  This is necessary after policies which tend to eliminate vast populations of fathers, for example WARs, or other policies in association with wars and more related to trade, called slavery.    It helps to enslave a population to break up families against their will and take over the women forcibly — for breeding, menial labor, or just for fun and because that’s what some do — oldest story in the book.   Then, having done that and STILL doing that, institute the revitalization of the same thing that was earlier destroyed and all but worship it.  Scapegoat someone or something else for having disgraced this idol, and thus keep the public emotionally whipped up with each reactive swing of the pendulum til they are frazzled and/or broke.

Then swoop in with the solution intended all along — collective, centralized government of the many by the few, using superior resources and technology and, of course, strategizing how to do this in a MOST non-representative way.  For example, writing letters to the Pope about “Defending our Father’s House” or having consultations behind closed doors in the executive branch of State Governments (Kansas), or have multi-state participating conventions in places where most people may not think to look, for example in one of several dozen nonprofit trade associations intent on lobbying legislatures to favor their policies.   Such a deal.

Establish things (offices, Commissions) by Executive Order in general, always of course to help larger groups of people more efficiently (electronically replicatable) and etc.  If they neither want, nor need, this type of aggressive “help,” too bad, once it’s already in motion.  Call it voluntary, but is it really?  What are the options?  Again, here’s a basic standard:

SAMPLE from last post, and a little follow up to where some of the boards of directors are now:

(the tax return has to be seen to be believed….) (AND IS THE ONLY ONE I CAN FIND!)

“ASSISTING FATHERS TO BECOME LOVING NURTURING PRODUCTIVE FATHERS OF CHILDREN AND MEMBERS OF SOCIETY.”  PROGRAM SERVICE EXPENSES:  $2,847,578

Board of Trustees (all 5 salaried) Charles Ballard, $127K, Frances Ballard $121K, Emmanuel K. Idowu, $73K; Kay Watkins, $61K, Robert Woodfork, $53K  “Other income:  $128,471 (Unexplained except “All income relates to its exempt purpose” (completely described in the single phrase, above, assisting fathers….)

Consultant:  Alan J. Inman of New Rochelle, NY, paid $63,542 (see HHS grant in chart below).

This one was hard to find!  Finally found it, by this EIN#, under the IRS list of “automatically revoked” nonprofits!  (hover for description of revocation & street address of the firm per IRS) It shows receipt of TAGGs funding from 1995 through 2003, and I have only been able to locate the above tax return, so far….  The above tax return indicates that from 1998- 2001 (four years) it received over $14 million of gifts and contributions…..  It says it paid consultants $188K (only one is listed, though, who got one-third of that).  And then, the organization is simply allowed to dissipate… (revoked for nonfiling of return).

EIN	Legal Name (Doing Business As)	City	State	ZIP	Country	Exemption Type	Revocation Date	Revocation Posting Date
52-1867708	INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE	WASHINGTON	DC	20036	US	501(c)(3)	15-May-2010	09-Jun-2011

the IRS-listed street address seems to match a few gov’t authorities, like International Bridge, Tunnel & Turnpike Association, etc. (1146 19TH ST NW STE 800 WASHINGTON, DC 20036-3725), making so far the third address listing for the one organization.

Another site run by the Urban Institute is a clearinghouse of data on the nonprofit sector of the United States where I often find things that I can’t find on the 990finder (although that’s supposedly where they get their images from), and under the following three categories, pasting in this same EIN# (only, and no other sort) I couldn’t locate the above organization. In other words, not even under INactive charities

1.  the database: (accessible through “nccsdataweb.urban.org” or a newer one (which leads to the same search screen though, I believe) simply called “Nccs.urban.org”

2.  the three categories I searched (with the EIN#) under, all which came up, no records found:

These are the only organizations (through this site) with the word “fatherhood” in their title ranked by size or assets (not income.  Income is typically much larger…)

WHO IS  “THE URBAN INSTITUTE” ANYHOW? (WHO SPONSORS NCCS, ABOVE)

Incidentally, here’s the form for the Urban Institute:  (there are actually 45 results on this search, I”ll just include the top few, sorted by assets. I doesn’t sort by state….)

The Urban Institute’s tax return should be looked at — get a scope of the size (the paychecks of those board of directors who are paid; i.e., the president is around $400K when combined with $39K from a related organization.  They received in ONE year ca. $35 million (that’s million) government grants, and in general are supportive of the fatherhood field. This database was put out by them, from what I can tell…  They publish all kinds of things with other institutes (Like Brookings) and Foundations about — the rest of us.  Sample of Ron Haskins (welfare reform/access visitation promoter) articles from The Urban Institute Site:

This money was not all from HHS, obviously — because here’s the search results on Urban Institute (The) funding — including one minus a DUNS# — why am I getting used to that by now?

The type of institution:

THIS organization is a nonprofit (meaning, tax-exempt because they’re helpful, the good guys) and is located right in washington D.C. gets $35 million gov’t help in one tax year, and it’s a private NON-government institution?)

Or it will put out stuff like this speculating (or, examining) about racial wealth gaps and how they happen.  It’s nice to know one is being profiled behind one’s back, no? And that most likely some of the money to write this up came from your wages… or other asset losses…

Do Financial Support and Inheritance Contribute to the Racial Wealth Gap? (Fact Sheet/Opportunity and Ownership Project)

Large differences in wealth holdings exist between white households and their African American and Hispanic counterparts. This factsheet summarizes key findings from a study that explored the impact of private transfers on racial and ethnic wealth gaps. It found that small cash transfers had little or no effect on wealth holdings, but in the case of African American households large inheritances or gifts explained about 12 percent of the difference in wealth between them and white households.

Families and Reentry: Unpacking How Social Support Matters (Research Report)

This study evaluated the family-inclusive case management component of the Chicago-based Safer Return program, which engages family members in service provision to former prisoners. Using qualitative and quantitative data, the research focused on the associations between family support and family members’ and formerly incarcerated persons’ short-term outcomes. The research found that family members have strong and positive relationships with their formerly incarcerated relatives. However, engaging families in the reentry process directly can be challenging because incarcerated persons are reticent to nominate family members and/or family members are unwilling or unable to participate in their family member’s reentry program.

or real gems suggesting that more mental health treatment for mothers might get more of them back to work (whereas more connectivity between fathers and their children is allegedly supposed to inspire the fathers to get back to work.  Somehow, the connection is not made that connections between mothers and fathers where low-income is a factor may relate to violence by one upon the other….
The Impact of Mental Health Treatment on Low-Income Mothers’ Work (Research Report)

This study analyzes the impact of mental health problems and mental health treatment on low-income mothers’ employment, using the 2002 National Survey of America’s Families. We find that all mothers, low-income mothers, and low-income single mothers in very poor mental health are significantly less likely to work. Instrumental variables regressions show that mothers receiving mental health treatment are significantly more likely to work. These findings suggest that mental health problems are an important barrier to work among low-income women and that access to treatment for these problems can substantially improve the probability of work for this group.

On the other hand, as we see, the key to getting more men back on the child support track (the employment track) is access to their families..There were some devastating studies on this many years ago (see MDRC website, Parents Fair Share) and subsequent audits of the program required at the state level — but a good cause should never be forsaken for lack of success…  so the writing and evaluation continues (under “Father Involvement”):
Strengthening Families Through Stronger Fathers: Final Impact Report for the Pilot Employment Programs (Research Report)

New York state implemented a pilot employment program from 2006 to 2009 for parents behind in their child support. These pilot programs, part of the Strengthening Families Through Stronger Fathers Initiative, provided employment-oriented services, fatherhood/parenting workshops, case management, and other support services to nearly 4,000 parents behind in their child support in four New York communities. Our evaluation shows that these programs successfully helped participants find work, increase their earnings, and pay more child support. These gains continued for at least a year after enrollment, the length of time participant outcomes were followed.

(i have a post here somewhere mentioning Ms. Sorensen, it can be searched).

USASPENDING.gov — shows $343,773,983 in contracts or grants with this DUNS# for The Urban Institute, 1287 actions (keeping in mind, that doesn’t go back to the 1990s — see timeline).   This gives a little scope of what sectors of government it does business with.  As we can see, HHS tops the list…HUD comes second then I guess USAID (international).

More/Fewer By Type of Spending 

Here are the 81 award actions from The Urban Institute, 1995-now (HHS Grants only).  Notice the Special Improvement Projects are Child Support Demonstrations’ MCH is “Maternal Health Care” and in general something of an obsession with the reproductive and pairing habits of different profiled groups — probably with an intent to manage the same groups…. or, who knows?

Do you see a single reference in there to anything about violence towards women or children?

THE URBAN INSTITUTE HHS GRANTS (ALL):

***grant 3 R03HD043081 — it only makes sense if one is going to experiment on people (Welfare Reform was such an experiment) to study them afterwards, right? Plus, then one can publish and go on and do some more research, while those being researched may just very well be hungry, or cold.  But I’m sure if enough people publish enough, they’ll get past the root causes of poverty and unemployment (particularly unlikely, in my opinion, when some of the agents of poverty, i.e., this of this economic and tax system, are paying the professionals writing this up).

I think this earlier post expresses my feelings and tells social scientists where to stick it, and to stop sticking their/its nose up our skirts, pants, and most importantly, taking our pocket(book)$$.

This also covers the 90FI0096 grant and a retrospective on Access Visitation Grants. However, it also probably insults Republicans and people of faith, so proceed at your own risk.  Not enough people are writing about these grants:  I googled Renee Hendley and got two of my own posts, simply because I do write about them!

As it turns out, she is working for NORC at Chicago (University of) and is an expert in the field, something I’m not debating.   http://www.norc.org/Experts/Pages/renee-hendley.aspx

Senior Research Scientist International Projects  (So, given that focus, what’s with the US OCSE demonstration project assignment?)

M.P.A., Public Affairs, Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin B.A., Government, The University of Texas at Austin

NORC is a social science nonprofit, and has a center at University of Chicago:  See what they do?  Study almost everything so we can have a nice, planned society, and make several careers in the process I’m sure.

​Founded in 1941 as the National Opinion Research Center, NORC has helped establish and continues to strengthen the rapidly evolving field of social science research. Numerous data collection and analytical tools that now set the industry standard were pioneered at NORC. Since its early years – when wartime opinion polling first brought the organization to prominence – NORC has enriched public policy debate and decision making by gathering and distilling critical information and contributing to the creation of entirely new bodies of knowledge. Committed to serving the public good, NORC’s work continues to inform decision makers and provides the foundation for effective solutions.

Let’s have a look at the Leadership and Board of Trustees, knowing that a lot of who this organization is likely to be studying is people with darker skin, at least when it comes to Americans in the welfare system or child support:  LEADERSHIP AND TRUSTEES.  I began noticing this around two (or three) years ago — it’s very obvious in the Congressional Testimony preceding welfare reform who the main concerns were aimed at.   Again, to be a social science researcher, economist, or sociologist takes a certain mindset and distancing from the subject matter, i.e., people in groups.  So here they are, from NORC:

In defense of my photographic profiling — their studies (HHS studies) are clearly into all kinds of profiling, so I figure fair’s fair!  And now’s as good a time as any.  I particularly note skin and gender, and the nearly complete absence of dark-skinned men or women in the whole mix, although perhaps on the board of trustees (which is 1 female to 4 male) there is a little more color.  Then again, if we want to take color off the map, the entire country would be structured differently, no doubt — starting with the public schools.  But that’s another matter:

Now these may be and for all I know are professionals doing their job and maybe even nice people.

But what’s being done through the HHS grants is immoral and wrong — they are being given out, but not tracked right, and when it comes to welfare reform and research and demonstration projects run through a system (child support) which has the power to seize paychecks, or assets, or persons (i.e., the power to incarcerate for noncompliance) — or, when not enforced, result in extra poverty (hunger) — and which has in fact been involved in what I will CONTINUE to call “roadkill” because it is (i.e., BadDad doesn’t want to pay child support, his family, sometimes with others, end up dead or kidnapped or in the case of too many kids, both) and has been known to influence the seizure or non-seizure of kids — then, someone else’s being a nice professional is less than interesting to me.  THAT they are doing this, IS, and for whom and for how much — IS.  WHY is this being done, this centralized planning and control of society from the top down, the exact opposite of the way intended from the start of the USA as a country – – – is this for our own public good somehow?  What’s the endgame?  (Truly I believe the ECONOMIC viewpoint explains the obsession with crowd control).

In short, if the United States is in as serious debt as everyone says it is, then when that debt is called in — or when more of us start figuring out who stole our assets, and what they’ve been doing with it — then crowd control is in place to make sure (this type of individual) gets out of hand.
Crowding people and unfair treatment in the courts, the schools, the police stations (the airports), etc. — and respect of persons in the IRS — seems to set us against each other (one against the other) so as to justify more force and control from some “authority” to come and make peace.

I have experienced many years of this up close (nothing like others have, many people have worse experiences and nightmares, and more serious injuries and physical losses, although I have some), and it’s people who have been through some of this that are best positioned, I believe, to understand such strategies of what — on a personal level — is called abuse, but what on a governmental level is simply called tyranny.  If there is no fair justice, and no recourse when there isn’t, then there simply is tyranny, in my opinion.  (hey, it’s my blog so I just spouted off some, OK?)

How many more groups like this exist, and how closely do they look like this?

NORC Leadership and Trustees

Senior Leadership John H. Thompson President and Chief Executive Officer James E. Dunne Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Daniel S. Gaylin Executive Vice President, Research Programs Michele Koppelman Executive Vice President, Operations and Information Technology Kirk M. Wolter Senior Fellow and Executive Vice President, Survey Research Curtis J. Bailey Controller Chet Bowie Senior Vice President and Director Economics, Labor, and Population Studies Kennon R. Copeland Senior Vice President and Director Statistics and Methodology A. Rupa Datta Vice President and Senior Fellow Center for Excellence in Survey Research Michael Davern Senior Vice President and Director Public Health Research Angela DeBello Vice President Strategic Innovation Eric Goplerud Senior Vice President and Director Substance Abuse, Mental Health, and Criminal Justice Studies Jeffrey Hackett Director, Business Development Douglas E. Himberger Senior Vice President and Director Security, Energy, and the Environment Ronald J. Jurek Chief Information Officer Daniel Kasprzyk Vice President and Director Center for Excellence in Survey Research Jennifer A. Kelly Vice President, Telephone Survey and Support Operations Kymn M. Kochanek Vice President Greg Lanier Vice President and Director, Communications Bronwyn Nichols Lodato Senior Vice President and Director Education and Child Development Adil Moiduddin Vice President Caitlin Carroll Oppenheimer Vice President Kathleen E. Parks Senior Vice President and Director Academic Research Centers Judith Nell Petty Vice President, Field Operations Andrey M. Pryjma Director, Human Resources Fritz Scheuren Senior Fellow and Vice President Center for Excellence in Survey Research Joshua P. Seeger Vice President of Technology Linda K. Sharp Director, Facilities and Purchasing Stephen M. Smith Senior Vice President and Director Health Care Research Jeffrey Telgarsky Senior Vice President and Director International Projects Jeffrey R. Vose Vice President, Information Technology Project Services Betty Wood Director, Contracts and Grants

Board of Trustees Edward O. Laumann Chairman and Director Kerwin Charles Trustee Harry L. Davis Trustee Robert Gertner Trustee Mary Louise Gorno Trustee John Mark Hansen Trustee Diane S. Lauderdale Trustee James L. Madara Trustee Walter E. Massey Trustee Ralph W. Muller Trustee Kenneth S. Polonsky Trustee Kenneth Prewitt Trustee Thomas F. Rosenbaum Trustee Mario L. Small Trustee Judith M. Tanur Trustee Gail R. Wilensky Trustee

I see there are several which don’t show any associated 990s…

Strangely ,”motherhood” as a practice is less prone to nonprofit formations:

As to “mothers” they seem more aimed at specific fields, i.e., “MADD” (Mothers against Drunk Driving, etc.)  Although in DC there is an American Mothers, Inc. on 1666K NW (#260)street, with a lot of directors (all unpaid) and somehow $163K in investment income, not bad for such a group.  Purpose:

TO STRENGTHEN THE MORAL & SPIRITUAL FOUNDATION OF THE HOME THROUGH EDUCATING AND HONORING MOTHERS

Then there are nonprofits, per this database, simply called “Fathers” something or other.  Because that term blends in specifically religious (i.e., “Dominican Fathers” etc.) with fatherhood-specific, I’ll pick a few states.  Here’s “D.C.”

The top one’s exempt purpose is actually a political purpose (but not phrased as such):

“public education on shared parenting and how it is viewed in society; member counseling and maintaining a phone support helpline.”

The unpaid officers are:

• David A. Roberts
• Mike McCormick (the name should ring a bell)
• Stephen Baskerville (ditto)
• John McGuire, and in Michigan, …
• James Semerad

Membership fees total only ca. $20K, it’s a small outfit (with a larger web presence; it happens….) – but I note the address is 1718 M Street, NW in our nation’s capital.  There must be something about “M” street….  I see no tax return past the year 2008…

Review the speakers list below to see members of this group, Mike McManus, David Levy (esq.), a number of ministers, and a Judge

Mr. Semerad, here at a washington Rally in 2007:

**now that’s a valid issue, however shared parenting for all, is not…

In Texas & California, there are more; these appear to be the non-religious (at least non-overtly religious) ones around:

What’s really odd – one of the larger, and “in your face” coalitions (umbrella to many nonprofits), I can’t locate its filing in any state, and this is NOT an organization whose activities and proclivities should be ignored (I’ve blogged it before, search…)

Fatherhood and Child Welfare …

They do the usual things, only moreso:

The National Hub for Fatherhood & Family Service Professionals

 Denver

Mountain West Regional Fatherhood & Healthy Families Summer Institute

June 27 – 28, 2012

Event Venue: City & County of Denver Human Services

HOSTED BY:

Fathers & Families Coalition of America

City & County of Denver Human Services Our Denver FFCA Affiliate* * *

Join national and local leaders to expand practitioner abilities, organizational capacity building, research and program evaluation, and networking. The FFCA Certificate Program received National Association of Social Workers certificate approval that will be offered at all Summer Regional Institutes with Continuing Education Units sponsored by National Association of Social Workers and certificate issued with approval by Fathers & Families Coalition of America.

So – -how can a “City and County of Denver Human Services” group be an affiliate of a gender-specific nonprofit?  Look at the three links (Advisory, Legislative & Welfare Board) links to left under “leadership.”

To briefly summarize (because I’ve looked before and posted on it before) — historically, this group appears to have started in 1994 (as it says in the fine print at bottom of its main page) as a coalition of a WHOLE buncha federal grants.  without that, it probably wouldn’t have started.  However, it DOES have the “sponsors” of none other than Jeffrey Leving, Esq. of Chicago Area (with direct ties to obama white house last I heard, I mean a position; definitely supported Obama in 2008) and a small NC? based grants-getter organization, primarily Faith-based if you catch the drift.  Their two logos are here:

SPONSORS

Leving provides prominence, publicity,press (and no doubt some money) — and he’s an attorney.  The ABA now has its main headquarters in Chicago, I saw (Sold their WDC building for some reason.  Incidentally, it sold for $65 million if I remember it right!) . . . .  And the other (nonprofit) was jumpstarted with an HHS compassion capital grant and is listed on taggs – you can check it out.  I think it’s a matter of “hidden out in the open.”  It’s so prominent no one things to fact-check.  That is, it’s prominent if you’re in HHS or in the group.  Domestic Violence Coalitions and Protective Parent Associations (guess who I’m referring to there) make sure most Moms in a custody battle never here of this group, or look at its activities, in between their White House rallies, and sucking up to any group led by any upwardly mobile leader with any agenda, who will publish a well-filmed lament….

See paid-for press release, then tell me how come I can’t find a nonprofit registration for this nonprofit (meaning, FFCA), or any corporate registration for it pre-dating 2006?  Are they like the AFCC, just failing-to-file and managing-to-evade (paying state taxes, and a bunch of federal, too?) or moving funds around below the radar, too?

To summarize what’s below — Although this organization “Fathers & Families Coalition of America” claims to be a nonprofit, I can’t find it. Moreover the only apparently corresponding Corporation (which is listed in AZ as a nonprofit) seems to have started 2006 — not 1996. Maybe, like TAGGS, that’s just a slip of data entry on their promotional website.  Or — you figure it out. As of right now, I give up.  However, the street address, which l0oks something like a clean and classy warehouse, showing no entry street address on the outside (“15 E. Jackson” on one side, and I forget which # on the other end, and which viewed from above shows two organizations (OIC and Ebony House) which share listings as the same STREET address as FFCA ( our organization below) –well, what’s up, then? I’m sure the conferences are real (see the press) — but what about the Corporation?

Its affiliates are listed (and from looking, I know they aren’t all up to snuff on corporate status/nonprofit filings, EITHER)…

But where is the BUSINESS INCORPORATION (profit or nonprofit) for this F&F Coalition?   Because I seriously doubt it’s running the conferences at a loss!  Can I find it in Arizona, where it started, per its own website?

Copyright © 2011 Fathers and Families Coalition of America, Inc. • 39 East Jackson Street , Phoenix, Arizona 85044 [[Google map/zoom, etc.]] • Telephone: Los Angeles (424) 224-1DAD – New York (347) 850-DADS and Phoenix (602) 254-5081

Fathers & Families Coalition of America was originally formed as The Arizona Fathers & Families Coalition was established as a grassroots in 1994 with formal program services in 1996 to address the particular needs of fathers and their children.

I’m looking (Arizona SOS) but I did not find.  The closest organization to it (with the same chrono span) is the top one here, formed by a guy in Tucson and another in Venice California, and with repeated dissolutions throughout its long history:

(it’s not the bottom row, which wasn’t around long enough).

This one matches address and officers — but has significant trouble (?) staying incorporated, and only harkens back to 2006.  The PR says it goes as far back as 1994!

For the record, here’s the second one (#11180968):

You get the whole panorama below — I feel we should know.  Again, this is Jeffrey Leving-sponsored group. He’s an attorney!  (actually, they are all overlapped and we’re now at 9000 words, so, hey…)

JAMES RODRIGUEZ MSW
PRESIDENT
2930 W CARSON RD
PHOENIX,AZ  85041
Date of Taking Office: 02/18/2004
Last Updated: 09/21/2012

SANTINO BERNASCONI
DIRECTOR
822 S AVENIDA DE YAQUI
GUALDALUPE,AZ  85283
Date of Taking Office: 02/24/2006
Last Updated: 09/21/2012

GENE C BLUE
DIRECTOR
39 EAST JACKSON
PHOENIX,AZ  85004
Date of Taking Office: 02/18/2004
Last Updated: 09/21/2012

Annual Reports

Back To Top

Back To Top

Back To Top

Back To Top

650 Tucson Nonprofits Lose their status

I CAN’T find either name (Arizona Fathers & Families, or “Fathers & Families Coalition”) on any of 3 sites (national) I looked at –NCCS, 990finder (= basically the same source) or IRS listing of exempt organizations.  I then went to USPTO (trademark search) under live & dead and found only these 10:

#2 is registered by “the guys” in Boston (=/= the coalition):

#7 says incorp. in MN, but shows a WDC address for these matters, and the name/mark was abandoned in 2000… Notice goods and services..

THAT’S ENOUGH FOR ONE POST.  THERE’S STILL MORE FOLLOW UP ON THE BALLARDs (First group above) as Frances H Ballard (the Mrs.) chairs the 2008 nonprofit called WIFI (women in Fatherhood Inc.) and her bio there describes a national fatherhood resource clearinghouse, which funding should be looked at; it appears to be an HHS.ACF.Gov site, however she is somehow “Executive Director.”

I got a little far off-track today.  Most of this information should not be news to us, however I do bet the scope of the (nonregistration of corporations) is highly understated and under the radar.  What kind of people would put together coalitions or groups like that, and repeatedly fail-to-file?  Huh?  Are people REALLy that dishonest, when they get together around a cause?