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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

WHAT is a “Resource,” Corporately Speaking? National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (“NRFC”) // Fatherhood.gov [Publ. Oct. 30, 2012].

leave a comment »

WHAT is a “Resource,” Corporately Speaking? National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (“NRFC”) // Fatherhood.gov [Publ. Oct. 30, 2012]. (short-link ends “-1cH”), about 12,000 words.

Certain things catch my attention periodically, and if details don’t fit, then it may be my understanding (normally) or, it may also be there are some details that seriously don’t fit.

And there has been a longstanding internal alarm on the existence of a website called “fatherhood.gov” and the serious investment of public money into media campaigns based on welfare funding!

How many millions is it acceptable not to account for, when it comes to public money?  How many people are to be on the public payroll (whose labor and assets are producing the money which the US is operating with?).

A good chunk of last night’s post,  wasn’t re-saved, and I cannot reconstruct it all here.  But I can talk about what I found and show how others can find this same information.

Here are some dots which REALLY don’t connect, but seem to be connecting; these are statements and evidence on-line:

  • The website with URL “http://fatherhood.gov” exists and is labeled “National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse “(“NRFC,”).  Click & see!
  • On the website, it says its funding is authorized by various versions of welfare, meaning public law and supporting Congressional appropriations.  These have to come from a certain fund held by the US Government which we should be able to find (see ColdHardFact$, or submit the source if YOU find it!)
  • NRFC obviously is — but has been described also elsewhere — your basic federally-funded (plus ___???) PR/media campaign, buying and selling (so to speak) grants, information (indoctrination) and in short, charity, to what it considers deserving grantees, or maybe contractors.  Or maybe individuals.  As such it is a shop and might as well be called Internet Based Warehouse Dispensary — or the advertising site for the same.  “Come and Get it!”
    • Clearly someone has a surplus and wants to offload dollars and help to the deserving.


The Problem/Question:

OUTSIDE sources declare this NRFC has an “Executive Director” — but it’s a *.gov site.   How can that be?  WHAT is NRFC corporation-wise? Is it a nonprofit, is it government, is it a government-funded nonprofit blend (there are plenty of those around).

What is the legal definition of this “Clearinghouse” which to me looks like probably (as any website could be) a way to expand an email or visitor database of who’s interested in the topic, and build some momentum for the project of RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, which already (in my opinion) has a good head of steam…

  • WIFI (Women In Fatherhood Inc) is a nonprofit with a Board.  Ms. Frances Ballard (who is married to Charles Ballard, a fatherhood leader) is on its board.
  • In this description of the WIFI Board, it claims that Frances Ballard is the Executive Director of this major website and federally funded Clearinghouse, NRFC.   Because the word “Executive Director” has a corporate meaning — it means some organization is registered in the USA to do commerce and has either a for-profit or a not-for-profit designation!
  • BUT:
    • If it’s a nonprofit, and not exempt from filing, than I, Jane Doe, should be able to look at its income, expenses, deductions, Program Accomplishments, and see an official list of its Board members, Program Service Revenues, any real estate or assets owned, its major CONTRACTORS and how much money was spent on salaries — and all the things people can look at on any group which actually files a 990.
    • If it’s a nonprofit OR for-profit BUSINESS in this country, and doing business — that includes paying salary or board members — then it MUST be incorporated somewhere and have articles of incorporation.
    • It also has to have, somewhere, a registered agent so that IF it gets sued in court on any basis– someone can receive the paperwork. RIGHT?
    • So — where is all that information for the NRFC?

The words “executive director” I do not believe are commonly used in government agencies.  “Director” yes; Czar, yes, “Secretary,” yes, “Agency Head,” yes. — Executive Director — no.  The use of “executive director” for a *.gov website and a “clearinghouse” is misleading and confusing.

However, that there should even be a website on a government site (US Government) called “fatherhood.gov” — and there is none called “motherhood.gov” (do they not go together, are they not to be balanced?) — should disturb anyone.  A LOT, but apparently it’s now just part of the landscape, and acceptable.

They tell you upfront that it’s an information dispensary, and they also want DADS to call in.  Is any of that call-in help going to end up steering them to fathers’ rights attorneys in local states, to help them win custody cases INdirectly, as the federal government is simply not allowed to mess directly with the state’s custody courts?  Here’s the description of its Mission:

The goals of the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) are to provide, facilitate, and disseminate current research, proven and innovative strategies that will encourage and strengthen fathers and families, and providers of services via the following priorities:

  • Robust NRFC Website – www.Fatherhood.gov
  • Media Campaign that promotes the Responsible Fatherhood field and efforts of local programs
  • Social media engagement
  • Development and dissemination of written products that advance responsible fatherhood research and practice
  • Outreach and presentations at conferences and events
  • National Call Center for dads and practitioners (1-877-4DAD411)
  • Virtual Trainings

If you look carefully at that list, every single item comes under output of indoctrination or media materials according to a federal policy/belief about fatherlessness.  (The history of which has also been written up in part by critics of the conflicts of interest between National Fatherhood Initiative and a rotating door of work within government, if not near the top of HHS (i.e., Wade Horn, David Blankenhorn, Ron Haskins, etc.).  Blogged recently, search “Dissident Voice” or Bill Berkowitz..

(Why is the administration so uninterested in strengthening Mothers and Families?  Search that term on whitehouse.gov and see how many occurrences in re: fathers and families.)

FUNDING, from the same page, shows the US Dept of HHS/ACF/OFA firmly claims this resource and is funding it from welfare resources, apparently:


The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) is a resource of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) Office of Family Assistance (OFA).

The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (CRA) re-authorized funding for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). The NRFC was initially funded through the Deficit Reduction Act (2005) for “the development, promotion, and distribution of a media campaign to encourage the appropriate involvement of parents in the life of any child and specifically the issue of responsible fatherhood, and the development of a national clearinghouse to assist States and communities in efforts to promote and support marriage and responsible fatherhood.

In other words, from approximately 1996 through 2010, most of American Public didn’t get smart about this entire movement and how it was affecting their “States and communities,” for which ignorance we can thank in part the Domestic Violence Movement who promoted their own agenda while failing to inform their clients the details (and even to provide any tools to look at details), not evening naming the grants stream! or the closeness of this grants stream to Child Support Enforcement (HHS/OCSE, etc.)*** resulting in individual women having to ferret it out and report it themselves, while the system strengthened its networks.


*** Clarifying re: “the closeness of this grants stream to Child Support Enforcement…”)
[***July 31, 2020, nomenclature: I am formatting this page & some copyediting with intention to re-post or reference it.  While the “NRFC clearinghouse” funding stream (it seems, main CFDA (Category of Federal Domestic Assistance) is #93086 (where “93” represents the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on whose site, obviously, the NRFC is), the most father-friendly grants stream closer to local child support enforcement (with “OCSE” — Office of Child Support Enforcement — administering it) is CFDA #93597, Grants (directly) to states for access and visitation.
The larger stream, however, is #93086 ($150 million dollars a year), and has been going on for over a decade, can go to public or private organizations and serves to establish in particular “fatherhood” as such a specialty and practice, that university centers — in cooperation with each other — feature it (Examples:  FRPN.org at Temple University, Pennsylvania, part of the leadership involves two women, including Jessica Pearson, the founder of https://centerforpolicyresearch.org in Denver (1981ff) who also has deep and long-standing (historic) involvement with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and the known fathers’ rights group with political clout pre-dating US’s 1996 welfare reform (under which we got such wonderful grants streams and websites as this post deals with), the Children’s Rights Council (see David Levy, Esq. (d. 2014) major activist for this nonprofit), and the “Child and Family Research Partnership (“CFRP”) at The University of Texas at Austin (LBJ School of Public Policy).
For an indicator how, in policy-speak, “child and family” and Zero to Three (or, “First Five Years”), in general means more fathers than mothers (mothers are “assumed” under the word “family” while the word “fathers” is often featured and is a policy focus, overall), I’m inserting two images from the “About” (i.e., self-description) of CFRP-Texas.  On the right side of a very large photo, fully four of six headlines (viewed today) focus on “fathers” and the others “Prenatal to Three.”
What, and where, are women, mothers, in this picture —  as a background presence, in the form of wombs… conduits.. birth canals, through which policy makers can gain remote (and hands-on) access to little kids to develop and practice their favored-gender-based theories on?  Do we (mothers) not even have a few NOUNS to describe us in the headlines?
Some of the “WHY” of this center has to do with its Director and her Princeton University connections.  Her first two degrees were from a private college in California which only admitted women in the 1970s and is known for its conservative politics.  Work experience outside of directing others on national policy towards children (pre-born and very young) and their families, with a PARTICULAR interest in fathers (does she have a husband yet?) (ever been a Mom?) seems to have been a few years in a “low-income middle school in California,” per the description.  Sounds like she may not be a real team player (likes to run things) and perhaps didn’t cut the mustard at the street level, with actual “in-your-face” kids…  Who BETTER to judge other women (i.e., mothers) who do this daily, and are good at it?  //LGH 2020… Cont’d next section, more on the grants.
I recently added a section to the top of my “Front Page” which gives examples of both federal funding streams, and (generally) have been talking about it for years.  But “family court reformist” academics — and, generally, journalists who follow or quote them, along with the WHOLE domestic violence advocacy organization networks (state coalitions, special issue resource centers, etc.) fail to call attention to this on their public websites, or consider that it MIGHT just be a factor affecting the problems they discuss (i.e., custody of minor children being switched from non-abusive mothers to abusive — with a documented history of it — fathers, via family court and custody hearings — which the “access and visitation” grants target. … (I use Twitter hashtags #access_visitation and #accessvisitation. Username @LetUsGetHonest)
This information has gotten out somewhat more but is still vastly under-reported in the context of family court fiascoes, or of domestic violence and child abuse problems.  The family court professionals certainly know about it, as many nonprofits some of them run were set up specifically to receive this type of federal funding.. (See “AFCC” for an organization whose members are likely to be so engaged).
Both streams are related.  While the CFDA #93597 ($10 million/year grants) by definition must go to a single state agency (each year), i.e., no private organization, they are obviously intended for subgrants, and often are subgranted to private organizations.  The CFDA #93086 (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood, or “HMRF” for short) ($150 million/year) grants can go to either public or private entities, even to for-profit ones.  You can select by CFDA in the HHS grants database, and learn a lot there, at TAGGS.HHS.gov although be forewarned — it’s not necessarily accurate data entry.  It seems to have no basic “style chart’ (consistency of entering things like state names, principal investigator names, grantee names, etc.  Multiple mis-spellings are found, and although it obviously sorts case-sensitive (with ALL CAPS in a different location from Initial Caps meaning, you could sort by any column and STILL not get an overview.  The situation was so bad that in about 2013 I started a whole blog to demonstrate it (Fall, 2013 as I recall), but before I could post the whole thing (intent was to simply show the grantees UNsorted, 500 records at a time, and expose this), the database was re-vamped, adding functionalities and removing a very important one — the ability to search by EIN# which would compensate for fake or erroneous data entry of such basics as a grantee name..]]
Most of these are individual bloggers not on salary from the HHS for their commentary on the NEGATIVE, including NEGATIVE-NCENTIVE effects of this federally-sponsored propaganda on real men, women, and children; if their name goes with some organization or nonprofit, it’s not a high-powered or wealthy one; and I put out [posted, circulated] also some names of former NOW (National Organization of Women) leadership who (formerly) kept this HHS funding on the front burner, where it belongs, until it was drowned, derailed and silenced by others.  ALL of these question the propriety of pouring money into what ends up being private custody battles — and onto one side of that custody battle, without fully alerting the other side!
Talk about promoting UNFREEZE/CHANGE/REFREEZE!!  (Change agent, Hegelian practice, the Shock Doctrine (Naomi Klein), etc. )  An UNjust situation was chosen to promote conflict, with a pre-planned agenda to solve the problem created by the same networked players!
The tinted background material below shows some individual bloggers who keep reporting on these matters over the years, and connecting these matters many times to INCREASED Danger for women & Children.  Below that, I have a reminder of just how high the tolerance of “DV,” domestic violence goes, and that, often Fatherhood Promotion =  Demotion of the Danger Level of Domestic Violence.
However, the point of this post is, where and who is the NFRC?
  • Anne Stevenson,  on Huffington Post Blog (Top 5 HHS Programs Endangering Women & Children): MAY 2012
  • The so-called “War on Women” is raging, and billions of your tax dollars are being misused to fuel it via the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The solution is to remove the middle class from the welfare roles and do away with gender-based funding incentives.The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) program it created transformed welfare policy by drastically reducing and shifting federal assistance away from the homes of mothers and children and into the homes of violent offenders. In an article entitled “How Federal Welfare Funding Drives Judicial Discretion in Child-Custody Determinations and Domestic Relations Matters” fathers and rights activists Lary Holland and Jason Bottomsly explain that this policy has backfired because the incentives are structured so that the state will only benefit if children are removed from loving homes:

by Cindy Ross., California Director. National Alliance for Family Court Justice

  • Email: nafcjcal@aol.comThis is a piece I wrote in 2002 about John Muhammad and the federally funded Devoted Dads program in WA: http://www.newsmakingnews.com/ross,cindy10,28,02.htm For three weeks in October, the “Beltway Sniper” terrorized the Metropolitan Washington, DC area. Ten people were shot to death and three seriously wounded while they were doing routine activities like shopping, mowing grass, pumping gas, or going to school. The “Sniper” left cryptic and chilling messages referring to himself as “God” and threatening that children were not safe “anywhere, at any time.”
  • After 22 days, following leads that took them from Maryland to Alabama and New Jersey to Tacoma, Washington, authorities arrested two suspects. John Allen Muhammad, 41, and John Lee Malvo, 17 were found at a rest stop sleeping in their car. Rifles confiscated from Muhammad’s vehicle included an XM-15 and ballistic tests linked the rifle to the .223 caliber bullets used to shoot most of the victims.
  • Although John Muhammad has been described as a Muslim sympathetic to the September 11 attacks, a neighbor who knew him in Washington State described him as “… far less interested in talking religion than he was in complaining about his estranged second wife and the custody dispute over their three children”. See NY Times, “Once Calmed by Faith, Suspect Turned Furious”.

URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/27/national/nationalspecial/27RELI.html

  • ME!
  • I began this blog in 2009 after completely losing contact with my own children, overnight, based on false allegations never proven in court, and no legal or factual justification presented, though the court was asked for it.  The manner in which they were stolen remains, in my understanding of the law — a felony as defined by California Penal Code, which was not applied.
  • Since then i learned that the DAs and Family Courts are collaborating in One-Stop Justice Shop Family Justice Centers funded in part by faith-based grants anyhow.  The first CEO of the on in Alameda County, CA (San Diego had the first in the nation and kickstarted the idea) was the third wife of a career politician, Bill Lockyer (and about 30 years his junior) and went from their, apparently to County Supervisor — but has had to step down in a virtual Soap Opera scandal involving an affair with a former meth-addict, a mid-morning call from a hotel for police help from a DV assault (from the head of a justice center designed to protect women from getting into such situations, and help them out!) and my reading of the news reports, it seems like her young son was possibly THERE witnessing his not too wise Mama get physically assaulted!  So, although $1million (unprecedented) had been spent on her County Supervisor campaign, she recently had to step down.   The SF Sheriff Mirkarimi was then slapped with a DV / false imprisonment/high-profile case (STILL headlines) when he improperly slapped (and falsely imprisoned) his young wife (from Venezuela) etc.  And this is who we are supposed to get some justice from in the area???  Meanwhile Futures without Violence I guess failed to educate these individuals, despite all THEIR federal and other funding over two decades (and being also based iN SF)…
  • And of course about the access/visitation grants funding — in other words fully 10 years after it was instituted, women are not being informed properly about this by groups women to go fleeing for their lives (Domestic violence in many cases) or to protect their kids.  I discoverd information that was known — but we had not press, no HHS funded PR Media campaigns, to out-indoctrinate the above — and simply tell us about how gov’t works, while we were fighting for survival in abusive marriages…. and how our gov’t believes its better for all that we shut back up and stay in relationship with those same marriages (whether same household or not) or give up our children to the opposite parents we just fled for safety!  when we resist this, the children are taken by force or illegally (under government cover) anyhow.  This relates to WELFARE INCENTIVES, not to rights, facts, or what’s in the chidlren’s best interests except through the funnel of clearinghouses like this.

“Randi James” blogged (and encourages mothers to blog) on the ever-evolving nature of Child Support Enforcement, example from Texas: Michael Hayes [[Texas OAG office]] wants to Build a Family-Centered Child Support

I must continue to emphasize that the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OSCE) is no longer about collecting child support. It is about meddling in your family business and exercising government control over families (which begins with the “birth certificate” and “marriage licenses”), with emphasis on removing control from women as childbearers and autonomous beings. This money is NOT going to raise the children–it is going into million-dollar research at the hand of psychology pseudoscience and court litigation.

Well, who is Michael Hayes?

I’m glad you asked.

(emphasis mine)
“Michael Hayes is the Deputy for Family Initiatives in the Child Support Division of the Texas Office of the Attorney General. His extensive experience includes the development of policy, partnerships, and projects that support family stability, paternity establishment, father involvement, and child support program improvement. Before his current post, he helped create and was director of the Texas Fragile Families Initiative, a statewide project involving community-based, faith-based, and public agencies to support fragile families.”

  • 1993ff– Liz Richards, NAFCJ.net:
    • One important factor which the fathers rights leaders never mention is that their leading group, CRC, was set up many years ago by people who were officials of secretive judicial organizations – AFCC: Association of Family & Conciliation Courts  — established in Los Angeles in 1982 by L.A. judges and a few others, including a man named Meyer Elkin,(now deceased) who was a prison sex offender psychologist
      (NAFCJ note: a profession notorious for being sympathetic to sex offenders). Meyer Elkin was not the only AFCC official who was also a founding official, or closely associated with the leading fathers rights group – CRC.  Joan Kelly, of Marin County CA, does research and trains court professionals,  is also a AFCC and CRC founding official. Several other AFCC officials or leaders are also closely associated with the fathers right groups.   This and other factors show that the fathers rights movement was a creation of a ring judges who dominate the family court system and public policy  in many states.  These judges are not only hearing a large percentage of domestic litigation, they are also writing the state laws covering custody, divorce and child support.  In addition they influence HHS-ACF agency which controls most of the grant funds going to the state level agencies and courts. Their people are getting the grants and using for the fathers rights cases.READ ABOUT THESE GROUPS TO COMPREHEND THE EXTENT OF THIS COLLUSION

(diversion — photo of SF Sheriff Mirkarimi, Oct 12, 2012, and his supporters:  He gets to slap his wife, leaving a bruise, but keep his job, after quite the fight for it. Notice the supporters outside the board of supervisors’ meeting to decide this matter.):

Ross Mirkarimi greets supporters outside the Board of Supervisors' chambers after being reinstated as sheriff. Photo: Jason Henry, Special To The Chronicle / SF

In a shocking end to the melodrama that has consumed San Francisco City Hall for the past nine months, the Board of Supervisors bucked Mayor Ed Lee late Tuesday night by giving suspended Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi his job back.Four members of the board rejected Lee’s call that Mirkarimi be permanently removed for committing official misconduct, an allegation that stemmed from a New Year’s Eve fight with his wife for which he later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of false imprisonment.

Lee needed nine of the 11 supervisors’ votes to oust Mirkarimi. Supervisors John Avalos, David Campos, Jane Kim and – in a major blow to Lee – the mayor’s appointee, Christina Olague, voted to reinstate Mirkarimi.As soon as the vote became official, the crowd of Mirkarimi supporters in City Hall burst into whoops, cheers and applause. Domestic violence victims advocates looked downcast and made a beeline for the exit.

Response from the mayor
Lee promptly issued a statement saying he “strongly disagreed” with the supervisors’ vote.
“The board’s decision returns a convicted domestic batterer to lead the sheriff’s office,” he said. “Domestic violence has no place in our city, will never be considered a private family matter and will never be tolerated.
. . .
Deputy City Attorney Sherri Kaiser said it is ludicrous to think that domestic violence is unrelated to the sheriff’s duties because he oversees domestic violence programs and maintains the jails in which batterers are held. Mirkarimi is on three years’ probation and enrolled in domestic violence classes as a result of the false imprisonment plea.  [{I notice not one news article cares to name who is sponsoring the classes…]]

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Ross-Mirkarimi-to-keep-job-supes-decide-3934169.php#ixzz2AoswJR00

This is not a typical case in that his wife came out real strong in support of him and against the RO, and is insulting to women with more serious abuse involved, including those who have been killed after it was minimized by judges, a practice which still is occurring in city after city.

Back to the matter of Fatherhood.gov…

(site itself has a nice, dark-blue background texture & color):

National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse

You can reach us via email, telephone, fax, or postal mail. We respond to all messages within one business day.

Direct questions and comments

Library questions and requests

1-877-4DAD411   (1-877-432-3411)

(703) 934-3740

Mailing address
National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse
307A Consaul Road
Albany, New York 12205

Federal Contact
Lisa Washington-Thomas
Branch Chief, TANF Technical Assistance
Office of Family Assistance
(202) 401-5141

I looked up Ms Washington-Thomas briefly on the web (obviously she is highly-placed).

I find it odd (do you not) that while the TANF contact lists a flesh and blood person, the NFRC / 307A Consaul road contact does not — it lists the name of this clearinghouse (website, obviously) and a street address.

As I think I showed yesterday — and you can also check out — 307A Consaul Road Albany is home to a strangely unlisted, non-taxreturn (at lesst a complete one showing any income flow) from a group headed (apparently) by a New York State ODTA (Office of Disability and Temporary Assistance) Program manager, Kenneth Braswell, in other words, apparently a state? employee & civil servant.

However the TANF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE link does tell us where some money is coming from.  Please read this brief bio blurb, and then read EVERY SINGLE associated Biography on this Collaboration Speakers page, including the ones involved with Child Support, Abstinence Education, administering the $150 million healthy marriage stuff, and as usual in these matters Ms. Margo Bean of the OCSE (and herself former head of a nonprofit association of child support enforcement personnel, “NCSEA”) and so forth:

PEERTA 2008 Collaboration Institute held in Arlington, VA (see HHS & DOL logots at top)

Lisa Washington-Thomas is Branch Chief of the Division of Self-Sufficiency in the Office of Family Assistance, Administration for Children and Families. She has experience in a wide array of social services programs, such as TANF, AFDC, Job Opportunities and Basic Skills, Emergency Assistance Group, the Rapid Response to Technical Assistance Contract, Healthy Marriage Resource Center, and Community Planning Grants. Ms. Washington-Thomas earned a B.A. from Georgetown University.

The Georgetown connection is significant, i.e., it’s in D.C..  I’m listing just one more speaker (see the rest for sure) to show what kinds of collaborations are happening.  Mothers of course, are not informed of this, it’s assumed that child support is really about Dads — although more and more of us end up paying after custody-switches, as well as paying to see our own children (I didn’t, but others have had to) after being placed on supervised visitation not for violence against anyone, but for Parental Alienation, etc.  Strangely, it’s not Parental Alienation when a formerly battering or abusing parent does the same thing  . . ..

A lot of verbiage, but do look at the listing of the positions held carefully; they are meaningful!

ROBIN Y. McDONALD. is the Director of the State and Territory TANF Management division within the Office of Family Assistance (OFA). The OFA is the operating division that administers the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)program

This is a huge source of funding:  Food Stamps, Cash Aid, etc. going to the states, and allegedly getting to individual families (except where diverted into marriage/fatherhood/abstinence stuff).

within the Department of Health and Humans Services’ Administration for Children and Families. As Division Director, Ms. McDonald oversees the planning and provision of technical assistance to help States and Territories implement new requirements authorized under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA), which are designed to expand upon successful efforts to move families toward self-sufficiency. Ms. McDonald’s responsibilities also include implementation and oversight of the $150 million Healthy Marriage and Promoting Responsible Fatherhood demonstration grants authorized by the DRA.

Immediately prior to her position with OFA, Ms. McDonald served as the Community-Based Abstinence Education’s (CBAE) Management and Program Analystwith the Administration for Children and Families’ Family Youth Services Bureau. Her primary responsibilities included oversight of government contract negotiation, monitoring legislative and legal compliance by State and discretionary grant recipients, and developing recommendations for proposed regulatory changes.

From 2002 – 2005, McDonald served as a Special Assistant to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives—part of President George W. Bush’s national faith-based and community initiative. Ms. McDonald’s primary responsibilities included development and implementation a national ex-offender employment demonstration project called Ready4Work. The project served as a foundation for the Administration’s $300 million Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative announced in the January 2004 State of the Union address.

For the past fifteen years, Ms. McDonald has enjoyed a broad career in the non-profit community, as well as in the Legislative and Executive Branches of the Federal government. She completed her undergraduate work in Mass Communications/Speech and Broadcasting from Anderson University in Anderson, IN, and earned a Juris Doctor degree from the George Mason University School of Law in Arlington, VA. Ms. McDonald is an attorney, a member of the Maryland State Bar and resides in Arlington, VA.

_ _ _ That’s part of the TANF end of NRFC, above, in action.  Regarding the PEERTA — I see the “TA” is Technical Assistance” and PEER apparently means that they will talk to their “peers” – involved some federally funded agency, or coalition — in other words, with expert what I’m going to call (sarcasm intended, because this system has omitted to tell the WHOLE truth regarding what happens when we leave, and what keeps us from getting all the way out….) Domestic Violence Expert SpokesModels…

In short, if the very topic they need to talk about among their PEERS is that their PEERS are setting up websites like this to tip the scale away from a safe exit from a violent marriage or relationship!!!  Of course that topic has to be shelved, and so the focus will be kept on “abusers.”  However true the statements are, it’s still lacking primary substance, and not told in the voice of abusers themselves, as troublesome as our stressed-out voices may be to hear!

This webinar dates from this YEAR and exemplifies what’s happening: Networks are being informed where certain voices are simply not invited to speak, or informed of the networks…Leave it to the experts!

Domestic Violence and Economic Security Webinar

Moderator: Lisa Washington-Thomas

February 16, 2012 1:30 pm EST

Good afternoon. This is MaryLouise Kelley, colleagues at the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance. I would like to welcome you to this webinar on Domestic Violence and Economic Security offered through the Welfare Peer Technical Assistance Network.

So,who paid for THAT?

In my program, the Family Violence Prevention and Services Program, we support Domestic Violence Services through 2700 different programs across the country and serve over 1.7 million survivors and their children. But we know that many victims of domestic violence will not go to a domestic violence program for services.

You just heard it “from the horse’s mouth” … the same agency is funding both fatherhood and domestic violence services, and hoping that through TANF, perhaps more women will be referred to their services (which will not inform them about the fatherhood funding) which will better help curb domestic violence, allegedly. It will at least provide warm (or webinar’ed) bodies to justify the services.

At the end of this link (which I need to review more; have already skimmed much of it) the link will be to BWJP (which is collaborating with AFCC rather than reporting on it…) and which is a “project” Undefined I guess like NRFC here) of another HHS funded (plus DOJ too, I’m sure) group, “MPDI” in Minnesota. Not to get distracted on things I’ve already blogged herein….

They** may walk into a doctor’s office, a TANF office, or child care center and still need help.

In fact, it’s more likely than not that a woman who seeks TANF benefits has experienced domestic violence during her lifetime and that’s why we think it’s so important that everyone who is working with women, working in human services programs, understands how to respond and recognize domestic violence when they see it, to respond appropriately in a supportive way and to help people link to the services and support and assistance they may need.

So I think it’s wonderful that you’re going to hear today about the links between economic security and increasing options for safety for domestic violence victims and their children. And you’re going to hear some great examples of how programs can enhance economic security and safety for these survivors in some very practical ways. ###

{{“They” — *** that’s people like me, and women I know and blog with, have seen homeless, and have personally been moral support to and vice versa during and after the process of having our kids transferred to their abusers or batterers.  Funny how it’s now 2012 (VAWA was authorized 18 years earlier, a full lifetime, birth to age of majority) and no one has come up with the bright idea of inviting people to speak who left abusive relationships, say five to ten (or one to three) years ago and report on their family court gauntlets...

###Why is it always some program needs to “enhance economic security and safety” instead of correcting the programs which eliminate it — or simply enforcing existing court orders?  People who have been threatened in this manner don’t need just “enhanced” security, they need the real thing!}}

Now for an introduction to the rest of the webinar I’m going to turn this over to my colleague Lisa Washington-Thomas, the Branch Chief for TANF Technical Assistance. Lisa.

Lisa Washington-Thomas: Thank you MaryLouise. Hi.

Our TANF regulations (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) provide the flexibility to implement special programs that are primarily for screening of domestic violence and the referral of victims to the appropriate services.

Many states that have chosen the family violence option also have the flexibility to waive some program requirements such as work requirements and time limits as appropriate. Our office, the Office of Family Assistance, is focused on self-sufficiency and increasing healthy and stable families.

We have also been alerted that domestic violence is increasing during these difficult economic times. And since we’re not domestic violence experts, we felt that it was extremely important to reach out to our colleagues at the Family Violence Prevention and Services Program in the Family Youth Services Bureau to provide useful information regarding family violence.

In addition, this information has been favorably received at several of our regional events sponsored by our TANF regional program managers. We are excited to work with our colleagues MaryLouise Kelley and Shawndell Dawson and our esteemed presenters Ilene Stohl and Kim Pentico, with Anne Menard moderating.

Our presenters will provide a brief history of domestic violence, including providing comparison statistics of the prevalence of domestic violence in the TANF population versus the general population. Then they will discuss how asset-building strategies can help these victims.

Our webinar has four learning objectives:

  1. to give TANF agencies and their stakeholders ^*^ an overview of the relationship between economic security and the empowerment of survivors in domestic violence;
  2. to provide an outline of successful asset-building models geared towards survivors of domestic violence;
  3. to raise awareness of how programs and partnership are empowering survivors of domestic violence and are providing resources that lead to economic self-sufficiency; and
  4. to encourage collaboration between TANF agencies, the domestic violence community and asset-building programs….

We have a packed agenda. We expect the webinar to last an hour and a half with presentations again from Ilene Stohl and Kim Pentico with Anne Menard moderating the webinar.

^*^”their stakeholders” really are the public who funds it and the clients who utilize it.  However, usage rarely includes this meaning when the term “stakeholders” is spoken.  I should look up the etymology of the phrase.

Please notice the frequent use of colleagues — esteemed presenters (I colored BLUE) — versus the victims/survivors (I colored ORANGE).  Again, the problem we are having is that the COLLEAGUES are welcome to talk in a collegial atmosphere, and the Survivors/women/Victim ” they” are not considered colleagues.   If we were allowed to talk, by now word is getting out, we might be talking about the fatherhood and marriage experiences AND our experiences with the abusers in specific reference to the family court venue which I’ll bet (in the 42pp of this document) isn’t even brought up.

You can empower water to get past a supposedly naturally-occurring dam (someone else did it — them abusers, I guess) all you want and pour more and more and more and more “empowerment” into the water going into the dam and hold webinars and conferences about the problems with the dam.  Of course the people who are maintaining collective silence that half the conference participators were in on the building of the supposedly-naturally-occurring dam, and taking money from the public to make sure it NEVER is dismantled, then I’d have to say the other conference participants were either being paid off to shut up, or they are simply deaf, dumb, and blind through unwillingness to listen.  Blinded by  collegial privilege perhaps (Many women, including me, have attempted to and have contacted leadership of some of the DV agencies to talk about these things and were dismissed or derailed — not taken seriously.  So, some of them have begun to organize, hence there are now organizations to address this, such as “Survivors in Action.”

My philosophy is (at present) one shouldn’t use the business model of the problem-creators to address the problems the business model itself has contributed to.  I’m working on an alternate while continuing to report!!!

I don’t want to dismiss what Ms. Menard (and her State CADV colleagues) ARE actually reporting, which happens to be true.  Please read in particular pp. 11-13 of this link, which I will affirm as true — and typical of the ECONOMIC abuse that precedes, or guarantees access to other kinds of abuse (ongoing).

This earlier section discusses other means of control to keep people (women is the topic here) in situations.  ALL of these were used to the nth degree AFTER I left the relationship; however few of them can trump the HHS/ACF/OFA/NRFC means of simply switching custody to the abuser (or funding those who do) which just about guarantees no sane and caring parent (mother) is going to just voluntarily ABANDON her kids.  That’s why the courts and attorneys are in no lack of business in this field.  It’s a simple formula — figure out which is the better parent IF there is an obvious choice — and removed the child from that one, or increase visitation with the other and then scold the protective parent for protecting (or trying to).  Or label them and order another custody evaluation, etc.


We’ve heard a lot from domestic violence victims who feel like– who have said, you know, one of the most powerful controlling things my partner did is remind me that he knew where my mother lived. And if you know that you have a partner who’s willing to use violence and is trying to keep you in a relationship that you might want to leave, that’s a very powerful threat.

Threats to commit suicide as an attempt to keep someone in a relationship that they might be trying to leave also can see as part of this pattern. Use of degrading or coercive language, and of course, controlling food, sleep, access to money, credit cards or medical abuse.

This last one, denying contact with family or friends, is particularly important; isolating–isolating your partner. Cutting them off basically from those who could provide information or assistance.

How about denying them contact with their CHILDREN?  This is characterized in at least my state’s penal code as “emotional violence” and justification for removal of the children (with proper notice of reason and cause to the DA’s office and request for a custody hearing).   The Penal Code it’s under refers to child-stealing (CA Penal Code 278, I believe still) (search herein) — however, with the family court system, it is operated In reverse!  And what we don’t know — it’s up to the D.A. whether or not to prosecute; we cannot demand our case be prosecuted as a criminal event; and there’s no financial incentive for the DA’s to do so.

And again that’s why it’s so important as MaryLouise said that we have partners so an abusive partner may let someone go to the doctor or may not; may let someone go to the TANF office and that may be the only place where they are going to be able to get information that there’s help available or access services.

Then again, of police officers witnessing the effects of abuse right after an incident actually threw someone in jail for it, and it was then prosecuted, I’m sure this would heavily deter such violence.  But jails are full, MOST police officers are still men, and as such, some are good, some are themselves abusive.

And economic abuse is an increasingly recognized tactic . . .

(ILENE STOHL of WCADV (Washington State DV Coalition) then TALKS of ): (Please see bottom of p10 through about 13).

I’m excited to highlight the great partnerships we have….”

And we know that having limited financial resources is a big risk factor for domestic violence. We also know that an abuser’s actions during the course of a relationship can plunge a survivor into poverty; even if they were not in poverty before and that leaving an abusive relationship can actually leave a survivor in an impossible financial situation…

. . .when you’re living in poverty and you don’t have access to resources, {this is the emphasis of the webinar; getting women more resources, like themselves and their expertise in assets-building programs…}} even including a credit card to go spend the night somewhere when you know things are amping up or that you can pull your kids out of school and out of daycare and do a different one. If you don’t have financial resources, you just can’t have those options. So an abuser is able to gain much more control. And that research shows that the abuse is actually likely to last longer and be more injurious.

Not having access to these resources can happen in affluent marriages.  I had a boss in this situation; her husband was EVP of a nationwide company, and she was afraid to buy herself a pair of shoes; luckily she was understanding of my situation at the time also, and helped me, as she could… We were not a “poor” family at all, but pretty quickly after marriage, it started heading that way, and it STARTED with control of finances, pretty soon after marriage.  Physical abuse came later.  I got real resourceful at finding ways and places to flee on the spur of a moment, but couldn’t always.

But when you’re leaving an abusive relationship, you don’t actually have as much flexibility or maybe you’re in a low wage job where they don’t include sick time. So we see how there’s lots of opportunities for abusers to exploit that.

And then finally we often know that abusers’ actions during the course of a relationship can plunge a survivor into poverty. Abusers use economics and

The tactics that abusers use often set survivors up for financial ruin if they ever try to become independent. We know from survivors telling us that oftentimes abusers will use their social security number and use their credit for things that maybe aren’t the safest or best investment and so that when a survivor leaves and they’re trying to get an apartment on their own, they find out that their credit has actually been destroyed when they can’t rent a place.

Abusers also know that having financial freedom allows people to make different choices about their relationships. And so they might work to limit the opportunities to keep or get a job.

And so some tactics might include harassing the victim at work, showing up, calling incessantly. And we know that of abused women, over three quarters of them who had a job were harassed by their partner.

As I mentioned, identity theft or ruining credit: a lot of times we also hear from survivors that the abusers has taken out lines of credit in their children’s names and so they don’t actually find that out until much later.

Not allowing a victim to work and develop a job history and skills: we also heard from survivors who were living fairly upper-class or middle-class lives where they were actually working for their partner and when their relationship ended, they had no work history because he couldn’t be a reference for them or refused to answer any of those questions.

Not allowing somebody to have access to their bank account, forcing victims to hand over paychecks: one of the things that we just recently also saw in our fatality review here in Washington State was that many of the women who were murdered by their partners actually were the only ones having the job in their relationship and that their partners were really demanding them to give over their money and they didn’t have control over the income that they earned and that if they didn’t continue to work, that they would actually be homeless because their partner wasn’t bringing in anything and that was a really powerful tool of control.

That’s quite a run-on sentence; I hope she made a powerpoint.  Let me point out — they learned this from a Fatality Review.  So how come those women got murdered anyhow?  If they got out?  why weren’t they allowed to vacate the area — and move very far away from the violent partner — or why wasn’t that violent coercive partner being better restrained?

The answer to that question leads straight to custody matters, but wasn’t brought up here, that I can see (yet).  See link.   that’s why these webinars need to either start having “survivors” on them or be curtailed until they do.  FYI, I sat in on a few and found fatherhood; A/V (access visitation) programs being actually promoted!

Regarding the long italicized situation above — this really does happen.  The people who pushed through 1996 welfare reform (many of whom we know their names, plus there’s a Congressional Record of many of the discussions)  want to say marriage is an antidote to poverty — they don’t know how many married people are in this situation because they don’t give a damn.

I was in this situation and there is a short phrase for it — we were being financially pimped by our partners.  It was easier to have the wife work and take her income forcibly or through prior terrorism, etc.  By having her and not also working (as a man) — I’m talking those who don’t even try — or jsut choose to give themselves a nice long vacation from trying — while also thus being home more AND abusing the woman in front of her kids — it makes it very hard to accumulate enough reserves to get free; particularly if she’s being monitored. You would NOT believe, probably, to what extent this goes, and how others will participate in the monitoring and harassing to give the poor, worn-out batterer a break from his hard and pressured work as a financial pimp in the guise of a husband (or cohabiting partner) and father.   Sorry, but that one hits real close to home for me, and was a key point in my getting out of the relationship.  

And then doing things to get the victim evicted: I’m sure many of you have heard these stories before of those punching holes in the wall or, you know, destroying the property or, you know, if they’re not allowed on the premises, still showing up and harassing or harassing the neighbors.

The first thing I did, almost, after throwing the man out with the or was repair the premises (a rental) provoking another crisis (as the landlord also had to bring it up to code) — a need to move, without access to credit.  His rental requirements were reduced by a whole lot (although losing the right to pimp me) and mine were quickly increased; but guess which partner had credit going in the marriage, and which one had it on separation?

So we know that as Anne mentioned and other folks have already talked about, we know that a large proportion of the population in this country experience domestic violence which in and of itself is really unsettling and upsetting and certainly we’re working to try and end that. But we also know that studies show that between 50% and 80% of women receiving welfare have been victims of domestic violence and that makes sense after what we’ve just talked about with all the reasons how your financial stability is really impacted by your relationships.***

And so it would make sense that folks that are trying to access TANF are coming out of those relationships or are still in and trying to rebuild.

*** As I now read this again, I am reflecting on how brilliant a plan it was for the marriage/fatherhood crowd to target the ONE thing that might help those 50% to 90% of women get OFF welfare and stay off it — which was to divert those funds into programs exacerbating the conflict, lecturing them about not co-parenting better, and training people that it’s better to marry.

And promoting compromise of child support arrears for men’s participation in fatherhood programs, sometimes this takes the form of extorting the father.  etc. and more (free legal advice relating to access/visitation increases — see the Doreen Ludwig diagrams & link, above).

Or, we could just put your kids in foster care with a married couple….  Please remember this includes middle-class and some formerly affluent as well, no doubt.

See Anne Stevenson’s Blog above (pale-yellow background, first link).  She said it right – it’s creating a climate of welfare kings.  


Mailing address
National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse
307A Consaul Road
Albany, New York 12205

I provided the link in the address there.  the site description and the incorporation/tax profiles do NOT say the same things.  I do not personally want to be the one looking it ALL up (I don’t even live on the East Coast, either). Here’s a brief description, how glorious, of the nonprofit that resides at 307A Consaul Road in Albany, NY (which just happens also to be the state capital, although this appears to be a single-family home address):
(And less we run out of words that being with “F” to association with very nice things, there’s also “FAITH-FILLED.”)
Established {{=INCORPORATED}} in 2004, FI serves as a leader in the promotion of Responsible Fatherhood and Mentoring.
If this is the standard, I’d have to say it includes:  being a public employee in charge of programming and thus able to help oversee million-$$ public grants, AND being able to while doing this maintain a nonprofit organizational status which doesn’t post its tax returns, whose NYState charitable registry has posted NO (that’s Zero) annual returns, IRS, or anything, for public examination since 2006; and which listing doesn’t even display the group’s EIN# although the group (is it a group or just one man?) actually HAS an EIN# (took me a while to locate).
It also apparently entails using three (at least) different forms of the corporation name, depending on where it’s listed:  Fathers Incorporated (website), Fathers, Inc., or just plain old “Fathers.”
It also entails, from what I can tell, continuing to file blank tax returns (or, the only one I could find was  blank with zero income.  This is a real amazing feat… And probably close to what the responsible fatherhood programming is actually about, in addition to the PR campaigns.
The agency’s** international, national, and local mission focuses on remedying the impact of father absence. This is accomplished through the use of innovative social marketing and multi-media platforms, traditional communications, and product development. FI seeks to expand the range of work in the fields of comprehensive and non-traditional family service models. Currently FI is the contractor for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
FI does not appear to have much of a corporate footprint. Kind of like that group that Ms. Frances Ballard and Mr. Ballard both were getting HHS grants for, but can you find the tax return — the Institute for Revitalization of Fatherhood (see recent posts herein, within the last month anyhow).
Well, its EIN# showed no HHS grants, so I’ll have to look up the contract.  if it is indeed a CONTRACTOR (from this street address), then where are its statements?  Or should we track it down from the HHS level funding?  I also saw Mr. Braswell listed as an ICF Consultant; he definitely gets around.
Now Here’s the Faith-Filled appeal (from the website).  Notice the “tm” in the loop of the K:
Tie Never Broken Ministries
OK, it’s trademarked?  here’s the search site to find the owner or the trademark:  I couldn’t.  Maybe it’s going to be like the corporation — just a shell registration….
TESS: search trademarks Search pending and registered marks using the
Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS).
Or perhaps it might be registered at Trademarkia.com
Intro page reads:
Calling Men of Faith!

Any man that exemplifies 2 Timothy 2:2. Ties Never Broken Ministries creates leaders of fathers that should approved and understand the distinct commission that God has placed on men to be responsible fathers and Men of God.

If we expect a larger multitude of families to attend church on Sunday morning, then we have to begin ministering to Fathers in a way that meets their specific needs and encourages them to be present and accountable.

So, this is about increasing church attendance by catering to men (I mean, “Fathers” with a capital “F”)?  If we want men to come to church — what’s in it for them, ladies? And ministers?  You must learn to nurture and encourage men, meet their needs, if you expect attendance and accountability.
INTERESTING….  because the trail of faith to Timothy (per the Bible) came through his mother and grandmother..not his father — yet two books of the Bible (epistles) are named after this young man.  And it’s not talking about nurturing and healing the deep wounds of men, but “warring a good warfare” this was a personal charge to ONE young man by an apostle aware that the end of his life was approaching:
SO, JUST A LITTLE BIBLE BACKTALK, which may also explain why some types of preachers wish that the federal government would help them shut women up in their marriages, after their marriages, like they have for generations (or at least tried to) in their churches, at least some denominations
Here’s the context: 2 Timothy 2:1ff which says this clear enough.  It also says (also clear enough) that he’s not talking ALL men be commissioned as Timothy was — but marked out this young man to whom Paul, probably realizing the end of his own life was near, committed a specific charge:
2 Timothy 1 (first chapter of second book (letter) to Timothy — and specifically to this one man) — not to ALL men because of their gender, as opposed to all women, who should shut in church {{which didn’t exist in its present form at this time anyhow, which was first century A.D.}} and quit taking things over….)

1Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus,2To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

3I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day; 4Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy; 5When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also6Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands7For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

The believing line was the maternal line here, in addition sounds like Paul had laid hands on and ministered something to Timothy when present with him.
Paul was in prison for the gospel and tells Timothy not to be afraid, or ashamed of this, though apparently many other men were — and is giving him a charge.  Not based on his gender, but based in his calling.  “Hold fast the form of sound words…in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.  Keep that good thing committed unto you by the holy ghost which dwells in us.”

 13Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. 14That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.

15This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes. 16The Lord give mercy unto the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain: 17But, when he was in Rome, he sought me out very diligently, and found me18The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou knowest very well.

Then the next chapter, which has become a trademark (verse 2 of it anyhow):
1Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also3Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. 4No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of thislife; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

(then he again lays out the basics of the gospel to remember, which you can read if you’re interested in it).

The apparent goal of this program is to mentor men in to responsible fatherhood (referring to their family life, citizenship, etc.) and church attendance.  Braswell, or Fathers Incorporated, are looking for more men to mentor about being men.  Especially men of faith.  (women need not apply).  This is to be of course supported by grants from the HHS and by everyone (of both genders) in the churches, which are not patriarchal enough (yet). . . . . . .
However the Bible itself was talking about preaching the gospel, and specifically, not letting it die out with this one generation, as Paul was in prison writing some of the epistles at the time.  That’s also (i heard) where he ended his life.

14Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit,but to the subverting of the hearers. 15Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness17And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;

saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

{{In other words, addressing one specific doctrinal thing}}

19Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

{{somehow this seems to get less attention, but I think it’s a good point!}}

20But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work. 22Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.23But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 24And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,25In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

I can’t think of ANY words about which there has been more strife, more foolish and unlearned (trying to sound esoteric) questions, and less profit, than whether child abuse, crime, domestic violence, delinquency, promiscuity, and other social ills, are caused by fatherlessness – or by fathers!

Or about what perks and incentives, carrots and sticks will turn bad men into good men and for how much.  Meanwhile, it’s socially “obvious” that single parenting is always bad, for which we have who for an example:  President Obama?    “Hey — I was raised without a father, but I became President of the United States and am happily married to a gorgeous, smart woman — also a Harvard Law School grad — and we have two beautiful daughters.   This just goes to show that every child needs a father in their lives, regardless of character, and if women wish to leave violent men, they should at least be taught to cooperate better with their ex-con or abusive exes — or fork over their kids”

(of course that wouldn’t be good PR, so the DV conversations are split off from the FR conversations, both funded from the same source, and no one has the What Happened to the Conciliation Courts Conversations, at least not at the same level of playing fields, grants-wise).

(more background of the TIES NEVER BROKEN MINISTRIES theme verse).
I Timothy 1 calls Timothy Paul’s “own son in the faith” (NOT biological son) and indicates that prophecies were spoken over him, some of which the more ecumenical around might not like:

18This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare19Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:20Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

Fun stuff, delivering people to Satan?  Calling all men of faith under the banner of Timothy…
Then I Timothy (note, 2 Timothy is being quoted) launches into a section that most mainstream Christianity doesn’t believe anyhow: (I Timothy 2)
I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3For this {{PRAYERS & SUPPLICATIONS for KINGS AND THOSE IN AUTHORITY}}  is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time7Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ,and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
Most churches are less interested in praying for kings and men in authority than in cutting a business deal with them, and being like them — in authority.  They also are less interested in this plain statement of document (most instead say Jesus was God — and not the mediator between man and God, which is part of history itself, from about 200-300 AD forward), and more interested in the part which follows, which is interpreted (not very well) to tell women to shut up in the church; this they like:

8I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

9In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence13For Adam was first formed, then Eve.14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

I’m tempted to do some teaching on verse 12 (including the additional comma) which (removed — as it as added) leaves a direct object, not having women teach nor usurp “authority over the man.” (link is to the Greek:  “woman” (73occ) and “man” (18occ) are also translated wife and/or husband, respectively.
Here’s what the new ministries (trademark will surface sooner or later, no doubt).
which clicks through to:
Ties Never Broken Ministries (TNBM) was created to continue to address the healing of wounds deeply rooted in men. Depression, Suicide, Substance Abuse, Domestic Violence, Mental Illness; etc. finds its foundation in a hurting man. Hurt Men, Hurt People. According to Jeremiah 30:17 the Lord says, “I will give you back your health and heal your wounds.” Through events, products and social media rooted in the Word of God; TNBM will engage men in healthy activities to uncover, examine, address, reconcile and overcome the pain within; inhibiting them to live fruitful and productive lives. The ministry will equip them to strengthen the TIES between them and their (God, children, family, hopes, dreams and purpose) according to God’s will and word.

That this website bears the street address of a group which isn’t incorporating (but is a civil servant — I learned late last night — working for New York State ODTA (last I heard, which seems to be 2011) — and that street address also links to a nonprofit going under THREE different names (Fathers // Fathers Incorporated // Fathers, Inc.) but NONE of which has (1) filed a tax return which shows any income or its board of directors –but there is a fragment of ONE which shows a scrawled signature (illegible and not typed underneath who it is) “Vice President) and (2) who in NYState has no EIN but with the IRS does, and (3) who appears to be a very prominent person involved in supporting Obama’s (as opposed to Bush’s) Responsible Fatherhood mentoring) — is disturbing.

To repeat: A good chunk of last night’s post wasn’t re-saved, and I am not reconstructing it here. Sources to check listed on yesterday’s (I think it was) post at the bottom.

On the blog under “DONATE” button is a small logo with a tell# which says “free help for fathers” but the logo reads “parentHELP” — so which is it?  Father help, or both genders help?



Call for FREE Parental Assistance and Mediation at 1-800-716-3468

When I click on it, it’s all but an add (without saying this) for access/visitation programming — but it’s supported by an HHS grant.   On the website of a NONTAX FILING organization — what, with all this activity, nothing is resulting in $25K a year through Fathers Inc.?  They’re not a religious exempt charity (I looked it up), but are featuring how to increase church attendance by nurturing Dads better — ???

PARENT HELPis a project of Child Find of America, Inc., a national organization working to prevent and resolve child abduction and child abuse.

To learn more about our programs & services, visit:

Funding for this PARENT HELPproject was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant: 90FR0020/01. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families

Our staff will help you…

  • Build your parenting skills
  • Open lines of communication
  • Mediate co-parenting plans
  • Find solutions to visitation disputes
  • Learn more about your child’s development
  • Understand custody, child support, court systems      Call 1-800-716-3468 today!

The TAGGS grant in question– one grant number — was given to a single group at one address yet somehow it got a change of DUNS# and Program Office the same grant came through from year to year:

If you study the grant columns carefully, it has been going on from 2006-2010, all called under 93086 (HM/RF designation, but the grant labeling is rather “FR”). Year one it was from OFA, but years 2+3 it was through ACF (and a different#), then 4&5 switched back again. And somehow “CHILD FIND OF AMERICA” is simply “WELFARE DEPARTMENT.  (address available by clicking on the grantee name).

And every single year it was a “Demonstration” — never a continuing project.  Interesting….

Recipient: Child Find of America, Inc.
Address: 243 MAIN STREET
Country Name: United States of America
County Name: ULSTER
HHS Region: 2
Type: Welfare Department
Class: State Government

(wil extend past margin.  Suggest shrink font-size to see (CTRL-, or “View/Zoom” functions).

Results 1 to 5 of 5 matches.
Excel Icon
Page 1 of 1
Program Office Grantee Name Grantee Type Award Number Award Title Budget Year Action Issue Date CFDA Number Award Activity Type Principal Investigator DUNS Number Sum of Actions

Total amount is $1.28 million.

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
Child Find of America, Inc.  NEW PALTZ NY 12561 ULSTER 361787471 $ 790,414
Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
Child Find of America, Inc.  NEW PALTZ NY 12561 ULSTER 064212806 $ 490,414

No Suite# shows on the grant, and it doesn’t look like a welfare dept. to me:

Other organizations, per google maps (somebody in that small “professional center.”):

At this address:

It is listed as a nonprofit, founded in 1980, and Donna Linder (above) is the CEO. it is not a welfare department.

Child Find of America, Inc.

Also Known As: Child Find

PO Box 277
New Paltz,  NY  12561


Mission and Programs / Mission

Founded in 1980 by a mother of a missing child, Each year, Child Find helps more than 15,000 families in crisis locate their children, resolve family disputes, and/or return them to a legal environment through mediation, over children in all 50 states and 7 foreign countries. On average at least 90 cents of every dollar Child Find receives is spent on programs of Location, Mediation, Crisis Support, Public Information and Referrals to appropriate resources. Child Find consistently receives an “A+ Top Charity” rating by the American Institute of Philanthropy; has earned Independent Charities of America’ s Best in America certification, and was named one of America’s 100 Best Charities by Worth Magazine in December 2001.

From the CHILDFIND website we can see the PARENT HELP html and graphics is now up there, and more about where this idea came from!

The Parent Help program was established as an extension of Child Find’s original Child Abduction Prevention and Support Services (CAPSS), to enhance those existing services for dads and moms parenting apart and dealing with problems sharing kids, visitation, custody, and child support. Free, confidential telephone assistance is provided, nationwide, by calling 1-800-716-3468 or 1-800-A-WAY-OUT. These toll-free help lines connect families impacted by child custody crisis, parental abduction and denied visitation to a wide array of services including crisis intervention, prevention action, conflict resolution and mediation, relationship coaching, anger management, parenting and fatherhood education, co-parenting planning, comprehensive case management, educational resources and more. On staff mediators have extensive experience in divorce, custodial and family mediation.  

PARENT HELP was designed in conjunction with New York State’s Child Support Division and with support from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services with the goal to serve as a model program to prevent parental child abduction and denied visitation while increasing establishment of and compliance with child support orders. The program was launched in New York State in the beginning of June, 2007 and went nationwide in October 2009.

{{to prevent WHO from abducting the children?  My ex abducted the children with a significant arrears, thereby sending the case into mediation, curtailing his child support obligation (current) and drastically reducing my chance of ever obtaining the arrears, while causing immediate job disruption, job loss, and severe distress  — to this mother. Is THAT what’s meant by ‘preventing abduction through mediation”  It didn’t result in one iota of better fatherhood parenting; he just simply found other women to do the job…since this one wouldn’t put up with assault and battery while doing it..!!.}}

Of Parent Help’s 2505 open cases in the 2010-11 fiscal year, 343 of them involved children who were parentally abducted, 11 involved runaways and 47 cases concerned children with whom the callers lost contact for other reasons.

Click the link below to go to the PARENT HELP website:


Watch the PARENT HELP video(it takes about 15 seconds to load.)  {{LINK TO GRAPHIC EXPIRED//LGH 2020}}


“In 2002, the White House recognized Child Find’s dedication by inviting our Executive Director to speak at the first White House Conference on Missing and Exploited Children.

By Dara Mormile (April 2012, has a quote from Ms. Linder).

(the EIN# is 22-2323336, and a different 2011 tel# shows.  It’s a very modest budget showing).

It is listed as “Crime Prevention.”)

[Leaving the table format, but links have expired, I ran from revised website by the same provider, below//LGH in 2020]…

Form Name Fiscal Year
Form 990 2011 Download
Form 990 2010 Download
Form 990 2009 Download
Form 990 2008 Download
Form 990 2007 Download
Form 990 2006 Download
Form 990 2005 Download
Form 990 2004 Download
Form 990 2003 Download
2020 Update:  This database has changed a few times since then, it’s easy, so I’ll just re-run.
However, now it only provides three years of returns per organization, not as shown above.  Earlier years may be found by tweaking the date in the urls, but this’ll work for now:  Website (for now) is:Candid.org/research-and-verify-nonprofits/990-finder/ (Hint:  NEVER trust a namesearch here.  Do the namesearch, but get quickly to the EIN# and repeat the search…  Get the EIN# from elsewhere (such as a Google search, or the IRS) if namesearch doesn’t produce any results…

Total results: 3. Search Again.

Child Find of America Inc NY 2018 990 32 $335,231.00 22-2323336
Child Find of America NY 2017 990 34 $223,325.00 22-2323336
Child Find of America NY 2016 990 26 $86,527.00 22-2323336






IRS Form 990 and Form 990-EZ images provided by The Foundation Center.

Board of Directors (2011)

  • Marc  Schweitzer  – Voting Member  – Blitz HR Solutions LLC (below)
  • Eric  Malter  – Voting Member  – MDC Group (an Ad. Corp.  Photo says it shows him, but photo lists 2 men & 2 women and shows 1 man & 2 women.  Its clients are pharmaceutical firms {testimonial for “BioDigital“)and pro bono ChildFind.  Very meager website for an ad agency, address 315 Fifth Avenue • New York NY 10016.  Or (earlier) 245 Fifth Avenue, NYNY (you can see it’s into Rx for sure)  ((what’s the connection to interest in CHILD FIND?)
  • Donna  Linder  – Secretary/Executive Director  – Child Find of America
  • Elizabeth  Baker  – President  – IBM
  • Arthur  Finnel  – V.P and Treasurer  – No Affiliation
  • Michael  Titens  – Voting Member  – Thompson & Knight LLP
    • Mr. Titens appears to be a SuperLawyer (2003-2007) with this Dallas Firm, special area Latin America, and he’s a Harvard Grad.  (he’s good-looking, too!  Given the expertise, one wonders how ChildFind became the interest:  Mergers & Acquisitions, etc. emphasis, athough I see one ADR workshop on the expanded bio.)

Michael C. Titens photo

  • Industry
  • Manufacturing
  • Telecommunications
  • Education
  • J.D., 1986, cum laude, Harvard Law School
  • A.B. in Economics, 1983,magna cum laude,
  • Harvard University, Phi Beta Kappa

(Other ChildFind Board, above):

Mr. Schweitzer has a Deloitte connection and organizational/mgmt degree from Hofstra University in NYS (AFCC is very big up there).

Marc Schweitzer, Principal, Blitz HR Solutions, LLC 
Before launching Blitz HR Solutions, LLC, Marc Schweitzer served in a variety of senior strategic Human Resources consulting and industry roles. As a Senior Manager for Deloitte Consulting’s Human Capital practice and HR Project Manager for JPMorgan Chase, Marc was responsible for leading and delivering complex HR Operations, Talent Management, Recruiting, and Training projects. Marc has collaboratively worked with HR and Business leaders across all industries including Financial Services, Life Sciences, Healthcare, and Public Sector. He holds an M.A. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from Hofstra University and a B.S. from SUNY Oswego. He is SPHR certified and has focused his career on enhancing the performance and contribution of the Human Resources function.

In looking at the tax returns( a little bit) there’s not much to see, except that around $40K extra help besides what’s marked above came to them in 2007, and Ms. Linder’s salary went from $59K to $73K (which seems very reasonable); there are no contractors over $50K, and professional consulting is very low.  However there was this under expense:


and: (under page 2, program service accomplishments) the expenses for Parent Help are $281,399  {{the corresponding gov’t grant for this program was $240,414, but the total gov’t grants listed received that year (possibly some from elsewhere, or NYstate/County, etc.) as $286,127.

Well, that is all I feel like looking up today.  Again, why two different DUNS# for ChildFind?

To be continued…. I am also blogging over at the other site (economicbrain.wordpress.com) periodically; these go together….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: