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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

What’s with Women Judges forming Nonprofits to run Fatherhood Programs? ….

with 2 comments

What’s with Women Judges forming Nonprofits to run Fatherhood Programs? ….


 (… is it about the Dads? Or is it about Imminent Embezzlement Scams”

2019 Update:

(This, 6,900 word-post was published Nov 1, 2013.  Its short-link ends “-22j.” It, or a near-version of it is on the VERY bottom right sidebar of my blog, which sidebar is so long it’s getting in the way of my editing process.  I decided this widget (under the above title) could go, but seemed to remember having moved it or a version of it off-side-bar long ago, and so went looking.  And, here we are!)

Why do I post such titles, and this material?

No, I am NOT trying to permanently alienate myself from anyone who might help, like judges, attorneys, or domestic violence professionals, or social service employees  or allegedly concerned advocates who might also just so happen to be: judges, attorneys, or domestic violence professionals, or social service employees. I just like the truth to get known — and in truth — some of this is disgraceful. And there IS some strange bio-receptor attraction between women in powerful positions — and poor, disenfranchised fathers. For example, the first organization here, in its founding paperwork talks about “parents.” But I dare you to find that to include BOTH fathers and mothers — rather than fathers and Grandmothers. Moreover, they are promoting programs from the National Fatherhood Initiative (is THAT about mothers too, somehow — when it comes to judges possibly involved in family courts??)….

However, my question stands: Is it that emotional chemistry — or is it the fact that this IS a certain way to move money around between nonprofits, spreading around various government based riches (keeping in mind that “government” while one word, has many levels, ALL of which tend to dispense both grants and contracts to nonprofits, and might feel more comfortable doing so to nonprofits run by people they know — like: judges, attorneys at work in the courts, DV professionals, or social service employees. et al.


Healing and Hope* versus:  “Change is Here:  Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way

More specifically, “Defending a Woman’s Rights Activist Who is Under Attack” — a 6/2013 post by Lundy Bancroft which is prefaced:

NOTE:  This post is about some of the internal dynamics of the national movement fighting for the custody rights of abused women (also referred to as “protective mothers,” because they are in the position of needing to protect their children from the other parent, but family courts are not permitting them to do so). If this issue doesn’t interest or affect you, or if you get triggered by news about infighting, I encourage you to skip this post. But for those of you who are involved in the custody issue, it’s important to know about the attacks on activists that are happening.

For over a decade I have been one of the leaders in the international effort to secure full human rights for protective mothers and their children. There is no cause that remains as close to my heart day in and day out.
            I am writing in response to the ongoing controversy on the web regarding the Protective Mothers Alliance (PMA), a grassroots advocacy organization that I helped to co-found and that is directed by Janice Levinson.

Today’s post, I didn’t elaborate much on the Claudine Dombrowski vs. Lundy Bancroft issue, or fully expose where Jerry Tello fits in, although you should probably be aware he has a close connection (like a mentoring connection) to a local, and well-established, community services agency which whose chief officers pled guilty and agreed to repay what they stole (to avoid jail time for stealing it) below.

This post instead focuses more on what I found by simply checking out, what’s Lundy been up to recently — and following up (corporate, economic, nonprofit, who’s who lookups, etc.) about that — which was, as ever, fascinating.  I should of course mention (there is now a more complete sidebar widget in this also) — that I have yet to find “Protective Mothers’ Alliance, International” showing  a corporate identity.  Which I find personally objectionable, and less than upfront.  I think it’s part (not all) of a character indicator, to talk as if one was a corporation, unless one actually IS.

I do see from this Healing and Hope blog, “Introducing  the Protective Mothers’ Alliance” (one-co-founder is from Florida, the other ??  apparently on the road a lot, Lundy, and has, strangely, chosen an underfunded and low-profile (corporately) but high-profile (on the web and as to drawing distressed mothers into its ranks, etc.) FISCAL AGENT from California, “California Protective Parents Association):

PMA looks forward to your support. Contributions can be made out to “California Protective Parents Association” (our fiscal sponsor) with “Protective Mothers Alliance” written on the memo line, and sent to CPPA, P.O. Box 15284, Sacramento, CA 95815-0284.

No indications that the situation has ever changed in the past four-plus years, in other words, that it went ahead and got its own corporation status which might allow some of us to look at the books, funders, and directors.

PMA the website pushes certain themes in certain manners — and it also publicizes for Bancroft, who collaborates with Barry Goldstein and Mo Hannah (BMCC crowd), etc.   MOST of who for most of their now TEN YEARS of conferencing, talk and conferenced as if there was no federal government, grants to the states, welfare reform, or in short, any financial, nonprofit structures at all related to the business of the courts.  Which I find odd.

Speaking of that, and of the Santa Clara County-related topic of THIS post:

It does make you wonder, in this context, why we even show up in court asking for some sound judgments, and some justice — when our own leaders can’t keep their pet projects properly incorporated — and steer clear of large fiscal agents of their smaller operations [case below]– which get caught in headlines, and in theft from their own employees.  Or is that “can’t” my assumption, and it’s a “won’t” or “don’t” and some are simply in on it?  I mean, tax evasion and theft are certainly tempting to SOME (when handling millions of $$ of OPM that is, “other people’s money,” as obtained from, guess who — various branches of government, for a nonprofit or, below, a community services agency, and a real established one….

[[2014 Feb. 24th note:  I added illustrative (graphics) material, resulting in — rogue formatting effects.  To be corrected later (perhaps — DNK what the traffic is on this page…!).  I wanted people to see how business is done in this county and what the words “Domestic Violence” now mean in fiscal and operational county structures.

I don’t know of any direct association, but eventually I did see that one of said (Community Service) organization’s current fatherhood activist employees (which would tend to indicate he was among the stolen FROM, not the thiefs) was mentored by Mr. Tello.  More below.  However, Mr. Bancroft was a co-speaker (featured) in a 2011 conference, I’m sure the link is below.

FYI Jerry Tello is up there in the National Fatherhood Initiative Leadership White House roster of notables. See recent ‘Champions of Change” thumbnails

Jerry Tello comes from a family of Mexican, Texan roots and was raised in south central Los Angeles. He is an internationally recognized expert in the areas of fatherhood, family strengthening, community peace and mobilization and culturally based violence prevention/intervention issues. He is co-founder of the National Compadres Network (established in 1988) and the present Director of the National Latino Fatherhood and Family Institute. He is the proud father of three children, Marcos, Renee, and Emilio, and grandfather of Amara.  [the underlined acronym being NLFFI].

National Compadres Network is San Jose based.  A lot of this blog material takes place in or around San Jose corporations, and the county it’s in, Santa Clara…

Regarding the Claudine vs. Lundy issue (which will show up promptly in the first few links), for people not familiar with either name, meaning they aren’t following “battered mothers” stuff, you might want to skip over it. For those who have, or are in those categories, where I stand:

The woman, Claudine, has been through hell (I have read the court docket), and in a handbasket.

That said, and having appreciated the on-line blogging group of noncustodial mothers that helped me transition from, my heart AND soul in the gutter, literally (ca. 2009) when I’d lost everything of value, it seemed (certainly contact with my children and work), through the family courts NONresponse to criminal behavior by my ex — and I ran again across NAFJC.net (which you should still read!) of Liz Richards raising again the issues of the grants, AFCC, CRC, and more — it took me literally only ONE [close to full-time lookups] week of fact-checking to realize that this was the hot lead– and the other stuff not only wasn’t it was anecdotal evidence based on poster child and based/premised on NOT even dealing with several billion dollars of federal incentives!

I parted blogging and communication paths with Claudine for a variety of reasons, only ONE which had to do with her abrasive style. Having discovered the federal billions dedicated to undermining single mothers as a profile, and minimizing abuse by subject-matter jurisdiction grab (i.e., through the ONE court venue specifically designed to psychologize criminal behavior  and order expensive treatments all round, and the one without protections granted it in other venues, such as criminal, or civil).

And as to that style, I still don’t fault someone who went through so much, for it. However, I can’t hang with it, and obviously (see this blog and my others) had another path to follow.

I never was particularly enamored of Lundy Bancroft after realizing YEARS AGO (**I looked things up years ago, too)

  • (1) he was working both conference circuits (battered mothers, and domestic violence providers — and the fathers’ rights, as I then called them, groups),** and
  • (2) after I myself knew about the Access/Visitation material, and that the elephant in the room WAS welfare reform (and also knew that Lundy most likely also did– but just wasn’t talking about it) I began to lose respect.
  • (3) Add to this joining up with another mother for the “PMA” Protective Mothers International (websites), which I’m less than impressed with, consider at many levels a cult, and have yet to find the corporation records for —

….while I have no particular interest in shutting down or shutting up Mr. Bancroft (OR Claudine), nevertheless IF (make that “SINCE”)  he is going to lecture a battered mother on her TONE, and, as if speaking for the rest of the battered mothers around (like me) — he is going to be lectured. I’ll go with Claudine on that one, I don’t care if she’s acting like a nutcase, either.  In that context,  “Defending a Woman’s Rights Activist Who is Under Attack” — a 6/2013 post by Lundy Bancroft is ENTIRELY inappropriate in context, AND hypocritical, that is, assuming he is actually its author.

**It didn’t take but a few simple searches to figure that out. Don’t know why I do this and others don’t, probably temperament. I also know that the courts know abut his material (The Batterer as Parent) and in practice, don’t seem to give a damn about it either. Batterers are still regularly getting custody. So at best I knew it was, while probably accurate in many respects, not going to do squat for my kids in family court — which was where I, and these other women — were, and where we needed help!!!

[Quote from widget begins here].This is a tale of Building Peaceful Families (“BPF”)(incorporated 1/3/2005), Healing and Hope (posted 7/28/2013), Domestic Violence Intervention Coalition {“DVIC”) (inc. 1/21/2005) the site is advertising: , Engaging, Motivating and Inspiring Men: the next step in Domestic Violence Prevention (10/2011 conference run by DVIC and selling DVIResources with keynote speakers Lundy Bancroft and Jerry Tello), Protective Mothers International (not incorporated yet? Apparently not in Florida anyhow; that’s the search site) but still has co-founders, apparently).Add to all this peacefulness and let’s get along, healing, hopeful, nice stuff — let’s add to the mix a bit of “to the contrary” material from one former battered mother who lost contact with her daughter through this system with, God bless her, a won’t-stop loudmouth (Claudine Dombrowski) with great  social media skills (AND, earlier on my blog, her court docket, to date, plus some dialogue on Kansas Fatherhood Programs, are featured. )

And another, (ditto) me (“Let’s Get Honest” will do for now)– who continues to say, “STEP ONE is to find, and read, the tax returns, and watch the money fly away– or shift quickly from one to another when one’s about to be “outed.

This pattern of filing, or forgetting to file, and comparing one with another — is not only interesting, I do believe it’s a character indicator. This little mini-history, with is characters, corps, and county-connections, also tells us (all) what the domestic violence intervention movement is doing, as opposed to what it’s preaching, these days — and by “these days,” I do mean, now. Overall, “We are not amused,” it’s hardly a laughing matter — but this one does have an entertainment factor to it. It’s a “whodathunkit?!” situation, and an indicator of how gullible the public truly is. Require ALL current sitting judges to post RIGHT ON THE *.gov website — ANY AND ALL nonprofits they have formed, along with the EIN#s. You’d be shocked..

[end of that segment]

Also see the second chart on this page, which is talking specifically about corporate filings and how very important this is to understand, and keep straight:  IS that group a Corporation, or an arm, or under the umbrella of Government, or what I call a hybrid or “UFO.”  It’s harder to track the financials of the UFOs, which these UFOs know QUITE well, and which may be why they aren’t straight corporation or straight government.  The second chart addresses some of the religious sector, and references two situations — one in Florida, and one in California.

By the way, the reference to “Embezzlement scams’ was a reference to the organization “MACSA” (Mexican American Community Service Association” based on San Jose).   I would not have seen the connection unless I looked at (that means actually click on and upload those pdfs’) in some of the Charitable Registry details.  Here’s a basic description from that page.  To each state their own — I think this is one of the better sites, because it holds a lot of scanned documents for each organization, as well as many fields you can select and search on:

Charity Research Resources

The Registry Search tool allows a registrant’s public filings to be viewed and downloaded from the Registry database. These public filings include a copy of the annual informational return (Forms 990, 990-PF, and 990-EZ) filed with the Registry, as well as registration forms and documents that organizations are required to file with this office. If you are unable to find the informational return you are looking for using the Registry Search tool, we also post a searchable database of informational returns filed directly with the IRS. PLEASE NOTE: The searchable database is not the Registry database. It is a third-party web site that scans informational returns filed with the IRS and does not include any state-specific registration data.

These tools, along with the resources posted on the Resources page of this web site, allow donors to become informed about a charity before making a decision to give. In the Guide to Charitable Giving for Donors, pdf, you will find giving tips and, at pages 9-14, a guide to reviewing the Form 990. If you have any questions regarding Registry filings, Contact the Registrar.

Click on the searchable database to see this:

Record Type: [etc.]
Registration Type: –[etc.]
Secretary of State

or Franchise Tax Board Number (numbers only):

Organization Name:
State Charity

Registration Number:

FEIN (numbers only):
Registration Status: –[etc.–a long list]
State: -All-[or by state]
ZIP Code:

Now look up THIS EIN#:

EIN# 753238774

It is a fairly small, and looks like a recent nonprofit — not much on there, not many funds either.  However, I’m not just pointing AT one organization (or picking on the incorporator, should such person happen by my website).  I’m pointing out the processes that I see public officials (like judges) engaging in, while in office or after retired (cases in point), such as forming multiple nonprofits, and then when one gets in trouble, moving to another business entity to keep one’s nose clean (UNLESS there is another reason  judge’s noprofit, of all people, could be completely unconscious of a major community organization which has been embezzling for years from its own, and the public — and just happened to be one’s itty bitty fiscal group’s fiscal agent, which itty bitty fiscal group was also running fatherhood programming out of churches….  In which case, where is the quality of discernment that judges HAVE to have to do their jobs well??

Here are the details (links probably will have timed out; you have to do the search again):

Related Documents
Confirmation of Registration Confirmation of Registration
000E2682 RRF-1 2010
000E2683 IRS Form 990-N 2010
000F09C4 Founding Documents
0015343A IRS Form 990-N 2012
0162413879119 Incomplete Notice 2012
00153439 RRF-1 2011

Organization purpose:  To improve the health, safety and well being of children by educating, honoring and encouraging involved, responsible and committed parenting.  or (further down in the same pdf)

Family violence prevention and celebrating the value of positive parenting

Of course it is.  aren’t they all?  I italicized some key words there picked up from the programming lingo..  But my main point isn’t about proclamations, it’s about business and charitable filing practices by public servants:  At the bottom of the form, it has a Corporation Number (however, you can also search for the Corporation name, not that I haven’t linked to it above already..) — and take that to kepler.sos.ca.gov and look it up.

Question:  Why would a corporation which filed one year, not file for charitable status until about 5 years later, and do so on a form that was three years old?  The answer is on the bottom of the 2nd page of the “Founding Documents” and by following up on that minor phrase — which I did.  Which is why I posted….  And will explain why the word “embezzlement” in my post title, while not directly associated with THIS corp. and charity– WAS associated with its Fiscal Agent from 2005-2010. During which time it was running Honoring Dads conferences….  Go figure!

Your mission should you accept it is to find out and write in a single list (or store in your memory) what year this business entity:

  • started functioning
  • filed for corporate status (and who or how many people, did so)
  • filed for and got nonprofit status (the answer is Oct. 2006 and 2007, respectively, they say)
  • started doing commerce or business, including receiving assets or contributions.
  • actually filed a tax return or charitable return under its name
  • and WHY did it wait so long to do so.

Also we might want to ask why, between 2010-2012 above, it hadn’t learned the requirements to do it right, or at least didn’t get around to it.  in fact, many things may be answered (for those who pay attention to some details and read) on the Founding Documents Page.  For example, someone forgot to send in their $25 renewal check for 2012 and was reminded of it last month?  But for some reason no one from the OAG reminded them to send in their (annual and required) RRF for 2012 — which if it has been received, IS not posted see above.  RRFs are important as public declarations by the association or corp. of whether or not it’s receiving any government funding (Yes/No to Question 6) –and if YES, the public gets a page 2 to the RRF showing from whom.  Instead, no one gets the RRF at all, rather noncommittal if you ask me.

You also might want to look up:

EIN# 721592492

whose charitable trust details (bottom of the page) looks like this including no Founding Documents link (I DNK if that’s required but it’s sure nice to see) and as we can tell has only been filing in 2009-2010 and 2012.  The 2009 form 990 isn’t showing, either:

Related Documents
1083983 RRF-1 2009
0020276F RRF-1 2010
00202770 IRS Form 990-EZ 2010
000E479F IRS Form 990 2011
001707D7 RRF-1 2011
128029394151 Incomplete RRF-1 2011

Charitable Details (I’ll be nice and upload it) here:   SantaClaraCountyCA DVIC, EIN# 721592492 Charitable Details.  This nonprofit “Collaborative” links (historically) to a prominent AFCC judge, Hon. Leonard D. Edwards.  NOTE:  Pushing “Domestic Violence Councils” at domestic violence conferences — and he’s leadership in a primary organization which promotes “parental alienation” “false allegations” “high-conflict” and “find our tax returns if you can” in member practices.  Unbelievable.

[[a Nov. 2, 2012 letter from the OAG mentions that they forgot to sign their RRF (which year, not mentioned) and doesn’t mention that the 990 tax return for 2009, which is marked “N” above, for “NOT received” was actually not received.  The amounts are clearly something one has to report (i.e., not less than $25) and this apparently represents their first year of operation.  However, two years later, it’s of no concern to the OAG that they haven’t filed.  Note:  This collaborative does fiscal agent work for a county that is within driving distance of the state capital that no one in the OAG’s office is aware of its existence, is simply just not credible….

Fiscal Begin:
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-08
Total Assets: $0.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $0.00
RRF Received:
Returned Date:
990 Attached: N
Status: Incomplete
Fiscal Begin:
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-09
Total Assets: $59,172.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $210,391.00
RRF Received: 16-DEC-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: N
Status: Accepted

I don’t find it real credible that this group hasn’t received ANY government funding, when they are working for an arm of a local County.  However, they say their aren’t and the corporation purpose is:

Provide classes and other services in support of victims of domestic violence

You and who else?  Why the kneejerk response to criminal and destructive behavior in the form of running classes to prevent others from engaging in it (while failing to restrain the ones that ARE)??   Is it social science arrogance, or just a business plan?  Or do they really know how dangerous many (not all, I do admit) of these men (yes, men) are after being thrown out — and how very many of them are social, religious and political leaders (if not some in law enforcement) — and being judges, need those people on their side, and not offended by actually trying to STOP domestic violence, for real ….

I don’t know.  I sure do know that when someone approaches agencies for real-time help, the real kind, that ONLY law enforcement or judges, OR district attorneys (through prosecution) can give (because only they are allowed to, by job function) — and we are told “sorry go away, we can’t help you” and I later find they are busy running classes . . . . I do get kinda curious what’s in it for them….

So, ALL this group does is run classes for DV Victims — and professionals; and a yearly conference — for the professionals (see links near the top, fatherhood programming, etc.) . . . . .  that’s ALL they do.  Their board members, to their credit, aren’t paid much (they probably are working elsewhere, at nonprofit or as public employee) — and I believe I do see one name in common on the boards of THIS one with the OTHER one I posted the details for, initials S.P.  Then again, who knows if my memory failed me — so why don’t you look!!

Incidentally this nonprofit’s status is ‘DELINQUENT” and it’s the County Fiscal Agent….  Not highly encouraging…

This is also the group who ran the conference, as I recall, that Lundy Bancroft presented at (opposite Jerry Tello) in Santa Clara County back in fall 2011:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTERVENTION COLLABORATIVE 128029 Charity Delinquent SAN JOSE CA Charity Registration Charity
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for

Service of Process


I’m a victim of domestic violence, and have had my teeth knocked loose, work sabotaged (over many years), threats, stalking, children stolen on court-ordered overnight visitation (never to be returned) resulting in work losses, and eventually return to financial dependency after having got off it shortly after the abuser was thrown out.  PerHAPS there’s a correlation with the active presence of an abuser in one’s life, even if not household, and job loss — and public debt, etc?

Either way, I have known plenty of others who were also, per their court orders and their word to me (on phone, sometimes in person, on the court dockets) victims of domestic violence.

I have YET to find one who said, “what I and my household really need are CLASSES….”

As citizens, we ought to be pushing for clearer boundaries between private and public funds.  This has become nearly impossible since welfare reform of 1996, and hasn’t been easy to start with since about World War II.   What I”m sensing is that most people would just rather work their pay-as-we-go jobs and worry about that — then face what they’re going to HAVE to face pretty soon, if they don’t, the consequences of letting thinking “let sleeping dogs lie!” when in fact those dogs arent domesticated guard dogs — shepherds or Rottweilers, or Pinnschers even — they’re  wolves, they’re never satisfied (always ravenous) and they are working their food sources, he herds (of people) which is us.

Now, there are visual identifiers between animal species, and DNA testing I guess — but when it comes to (a) human beings and (b) disembodied legal (or web-based impersonating legal) ENTITIES (corporations), it’s not that simple.  There are some basic tests to run — and I doubt I’ve shown all of them.

Corporations are more in number more rapidly shifting, appears to have many more venues to operate in, than governments.  Perhaps I’ve missed the boat on this issue and should have, once I discovered the Comprehensive annual financial reports, stuck with that, and not have gone back for survivors attempting to thrown them this lifeline, to understanding Who’s Funding What in your local Service Providers, and what juices (financial incentives and program requirements) are driving their sometimes strange behaviors.


  Domestic Violence
Intervention Collaborative
 “Promoting collaborative responses to domestic violence.”    

Para Espanol  clic aqui.


Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, was incorporated in 2005 to fill existing gaps in domestic violence services in Santa Clara County.

WHAT WE DO:  We work creatively and collaboratively with systems and agencies in Santa Clara County, Supporting development of best practices, promoting adult and child safety, and supporting worthwhile endeavors that heighten awareness of domestic violence.  

Next page of the website shows they they are running court-ordered, or court-referred classes for “CAP” (Criminal Alternatives).  Either these are free (in which case likely government funding IS involved), or they are fee-based, in which cases money is changing hands; (rather than prosecuting for MISDemeanor Domestic violence as a misdemeanor — run ’em through some classes) and yet the corporation isn’t filing its 990s properly with the state of California OAG.  There’s been “Collaboration” all right here — maybe not of the best kind: …


 “Promoting collaborative responses to domestic violence.”

1. Support groups for Domestic Violence victims

a.  Curriculum based, psycho-educational, closed group

b.  15 weeks in length and gender based

c.  Sliding scale for non-Dependency Court cases

d.  Group in English and Spanish facilitated by licensedtherapists


2. Accountability in Relationship Classes:

a.  16 Weeks, with Orientation and Exit Interview

b.  Satisfies Criminal Court alternative (ConflictAccountability Program- CAP) sentencing for misdemeanordomestic violence, disturbing the peace or vandalism

c.  Gender-based classes

d.  Classes in English taught by Master-level educator


3. Individual Therapy

a.  Licensed therapists, sliding scale, Victim ofCrime/Victim-Witness funding accepted

b.  Therapists are domestic violence and trauma specialists

c.  By appointment only.  English & Spanish


4.  Individualized Education for Special Needs Domestic Violence Survivors (IEDV)

a.  Court ordered, curriculum-based, education: 12 weeks oninstruction, gender based

b.  Classes in English

c. No charge for court referrals for Dependency Court, asliding scale for other referrals


5. Family Court Collaboration with Pro-Bono Lawyers and Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence

a.  Court support for restraining orders, dissolution, childsupport for victims of domestic violence, case managementservices

b.  Bridging clients with Pro-Bono for legal services

c.  Bridging clients with Next Door Solutions, for shelter,support and advocacy

And finally, “Donations” page — solicitation for funds through the website:

Help us in filling in the gaps in services! 
Any donation will be greatly appreciated! 
Donations are tax deductible!  
We are a 501(c) non-profit organization so any donation will help!
Donate now using Paypal:  [NOTE – this is their button, not mine!] 

Donate by sending a tax deductible check to D.V.I.C. at:* 

*Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative

P.O. Box 1839

San Jose, CA 95109

(They are an SSA contractor, material says).

Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative

(SSA Contractor)

Program: Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative,      111 N. Market Suite 1015       San Jose, CA  951113

Phone:     (408) 294-0006 Fax:         (408) 294-6542 Website:  www.dvintervention.org

  • Nancy Marshall, Executive Director: extension. 2
  • Email: nmarshall@dvintervention.org
  • Kimberly Sanchez, Group and DV Assessments Coordinator: extension 1
  • Email: ksanchez@dvintervention.com
  • Hortencia Cavillo: extension 4
  • Email: h95112@yahoo.com
  • Sharon Olson: (408) 998-5298
  • Email: rainbowsco1@comcast.net
  • Paloma Bustos: Extension 6
  • Email: pbustos@dvintervention.org

Just F.Y.I. — http://www.sccgov.org/sites/owp/dvc/Pages/dvc.aspx this is the county page not to “DVIC” which is the FISCAL agent for this council (apparently), but the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Council itself, which (as ever) seeks to advise the County on what to do with victims, and batterers:

County of Santa Clara Agency Banner

Published on: 1/23/2014 3:55 PM

Domestic Violence Council Mission Statement

The Domestic Violence Council’s (DVC) mission is to act in an advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors to assure safety and restoration for victims of domestic violence, cessation of the violence, and accountability for batterers.

The Domestic Violence Council will do this by:
  • Improving coordination among agencies, departments, courts, members of the community and victims in matters of family violence and abuse;
  • Promoting effective prevention, intervention and treatment techniques that will be developed based upon research and data collection;
  • Improving the response to domestic violence and abuse in order to reduce incidents thereof; and
  • Educating the public about the need to end domestic violence.
  • ​Batterer’s Intervention
  • ​Children’s Issues
  • ​Court Systems
  • ​Medical Community
  • ​Police/Victim Advocacy

Domestic Violence Reports and Publications

Annual Domestic Violence Conference

BrochsureEvery year the DVC hosts the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Conference in October to provide continuous training to service providers and community members. National and local experts participate in workshops to bring the latest research to our community. Additionally, participants enjoy networking opportunities, a resource fair and lunch. The DVC also recognizes two members of the community who champion the rights of domestic violence survivors with the Champion of Peace Award and theOutstanding Advocate Award.

The Champions of Peace Award is telling, starting with an obviously OLD (the man is retired) photo of Hon. Judge Leonard P. Edwards, Ret’d., and including Judge Sharon Chatman (founder of “Building Peaceful Families”), and Janet Johnston, Ph.D. from San Jose State (cannot speak for Chatman, but the other two are AFCC leadership):

The award is named after the Judge who founded the Council to Start with — sounds familiar.  This crowd loves to award themselves recognition and honor.  Notice that the 2013 award goes to the person who incorporated “DVIC” the (DELINQUENT) NONPROFIT:

Leonard Edwards Champion of Peace Award

Published on: 1/27/2014 9:44 AM


The Leonard Edwards Champion of Peace Award is presented by the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Council each year in October during Domestic Violence Awareness Month. This award is designed to recognize the contributions that individuals in our community make to promote peace and stop family violence. The first recipient of the Peace Award was the Honorable Len Edwards, for whom the award is named. Candidates must have demonstrated a commitment to peace in the family and community for a minimum of twenty years. Past winners include:

​Year Recipient
​2003 Honorable Leonard Edwards, Superior Court Judge
​2004 ​​Steve Baron, Family Court Services Director
​2005 Rolanda Pierre-Dixon, Assistant District Attorney
Kathleen Krenek, Executive Director, Next Door
George Kennedy, District Attorney​
​2007 ​​Blanca Alvarado, Board of Supervisors, District 2
​2008 ​​Honorable Maryann Grilli, Superior Court Judge
​2009 ​​Janet JohnstonMSW, PHD, San Jose State Univ.
Captain Alana Forrest, Los Gatos/Monte Sereno Police Dept.
Honorable Katherine Lucero, Superior Court Judge​
2011 Honorable Sharon Chatman, Superior Court Judge
2012 Maureen Lowell, LMFT, Lecturer, San Jose State University
2013 Nancy Marshall, MFT, Executive Director, Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative

Perhaps I should’ve been what’s considered more selfish, and turned of my internal fire alarms, and went back, somehow, to pretending.  But, I tell you, that’s easier said than done, and I have seen and paid dearly for the consequences of pretending even a month, or a year, longer than appropriate while figuring out the situation.

By the way — this IS the  news reports.  Maybe someone didn’t kickin’ on their kickbacks, or maybe it was really criminal activity.  As they’ve plead guilty, one would tend to think so….

San Jose: Former officials of nonprofit MACSA plead guilty, agree to repay diverted retirement funds

UPDATED:   02/15/2013 09:59:23 PM PST  

SAN JOSE — In a case that outraged many in the community and cast a black eye on one of San Jose’s oldest and largest Latino nonprofits, two former top officials of the Mexican American Community Services Agency will personally pay back — with interest — more than $110,000 they illegally diverted from employees who thought the money was going toward retirement funds.

As part of a deal reached with the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office, former MACSA Chief Executive Olivia Soza Mendiola, 56, and ex-chief financial officer Benjamin Tan, 62, will give workers $170,000. They have three months to do so or face jail time, as part of their guilty pleas to grand theft charges on Friday.

. . . . . cut..

Below, and accessible on the California site, are audited statements for the fiscal year 2005 calling this organization “low-risk” indicating that some major federal involvement is fro CFDA for Community Development and “Welfare to Work” (not HHS CFDA #s) — and signed by the above two individuals.  They weren’t the only ones questioned…

From their charitable return “Details” page (again, you have to search and click, links will expire)

1043961 Miscellaneous Documents
00000180 Appeal/Request for Hearing
00000164 Intent to Suspend Letter
1410 RRF-1 2009
00000155 Delinquency Letter

Putting together the SMALLER nonprofits above keen interest in dealing with MACSA, and its fiscal troubles, I can see why the potential decision to, as of about 2010, or 2009, for the other (unless that was when it was actually formed) to distance themselves.  Look at the “Intent to Suspend Letter” below, not mailed til 2012 (and it was appealed obviously), but for their not having filed in 2009, 2010 and 2011 for 990s and 2010 and 2011 or the RRFs.  From that letter:

(dated May 21, 2012 from the Office of Attorney General, which regulates the charitable trusts)


Notice of Intent to Suspend or Revoke Registration (Gov. Code, § 12598, subd. (e)(1); Cal.Code Regs., tit. 11, § 999.6.)

Dear Members of the Board:

Based on the violations set forth below, the registration of THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY will be suspended or revoked unless the enclosed written appeal is received within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of this notice. If we do not receive a written appeal, your registration will be suspended or revoked, and you will no longer be permitted to conduct business in the State of California. Government Code section 12598, subdivision (e)(1), provides that the Attorney General may revoke or suspend the registration of a charitable corporation for violations of the Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act (“the Act”) (Government Code section 12580 et. seq.).

The suspension/revocation of THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY is based on the following violations:

1. Failure to file the Registration Renewal Fee (Form RRF-1) Report(s), together with required renewal fee, for fiscal year(s) ending: 06/30/10 & 06/30/11, in violation of Government Code section 12586, subdivision (a) and California Code of Regulations, title 11, sections 301 through 306 and 311.

2. Failure to file IRS Form 990, 990PF, or 990EZ, report(s) for fiscal year(s) ending: 06/30/09, 06/30/10 & 06/30/11, in violation of Government Code section 12586, subdivision (a) and California Code of Regulations, title 11, sections 301 through 305.


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

MACSA has locations in San Jose and in Gilroy, California (“Garlic capital”) — with the most overtly fatherhood-affiliated staff person working in the Gilroy area.  A diagram (you can’t read the fine print, but it gives a sense) shows in just how many areas of service provision this particular group was involved, which might have entrenched goverment grants and contracts interests.  After the idea behind the Community Service agency movement was just that — services centralized at the COMMUNITY level; this one included housing, Early Childhood, a panorama (really) of men’s support groups, some charter schools, the whole nine yards.  Gang interventions, of course.  Mentorship — of course…

So how could government fully prosecute without pointing fingers at themselves also?   You tell me…..

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY 008257 Charity Delinquent SAN JOSE CA Charity Registration Charity
THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY RF0002661-08-1 Raffle Awaiting Reporting SAN JOSE CA Raffle Report Raffle
Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-06
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-07
Total Assets: $8,547,165.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $9,457,018.00
RRF Received: 05-MAY-08
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-07
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-08
Total Assets: $9,269,736.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $10,095,346.00
RRF Received: 18-FEB-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin:
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-09
Total Assets: $7,464,080.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $9,274,385.00
RRF Received: 09-JUL-10
Returned Date:
990 Attached: N
Status: Accepted

They were just dealing with kidstuff, of course — not much, a few million here and there through HHS, HUD, City, County, School District, Youth Services, and operating (owned) housing corporations (1 & 2 as of 2005) and a Charter school or so…. (see audited financial statements for a look-see).

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

ADDED on REVIEW, SUPPLEMENTING the DVIC portion (Santa Clara County DVIC, and Domestic Violence Council; here is the “DVIR” Domestic Violence Intervention and Resources” sector.

As a survivor, and knowing what the family courts are doing NOW, which is as bad (or worse than) what I experienced in the first decade of this century (i.e., 2001-2010), being then in the prime of my work life, still, and hopeful — I cannot tell you how extremely disturbing it is to know that AFCC professionals responsible in large part for instituting, or approving of, and publicizing, lobbying for, etc. — the PRECISE PRACTICES that have guaranteed, for my children the ongoing and INTERGENERATIONAL TRANSMISSION of Domestic Violence when I had taken a clear – -very brave, very resourceful and very CONSISTENT stand against it, at the time knowing absolutely NOTHING about welfare reform, and the millions of responsible fatherhood/healthy marriage grants streams (or the character of those pushing them through), of access/visitation grants, of supervised visitation industry (it is an industry), or in short, of the nature, character, and purposes of these courts I would HAVE to go through in the process of leaving an abuser, once he realized he was NOT being invited back in…

By insisting on being the “trainers” this “Crowd” (the membership of AFCC and their values system — treatment, not confrontation; services and education, not deterrents, etc.) virtually guarantees that the topics I bring up here, which are critical to understanding the (whole mess) — i.e., censorship of the funding streams, the double-billing, the opportunities for fraud and money-laundering (often already documented within the system) and particularly the privatization of government functions IN THIS FIELD into privately-controlled nonprofits — will be OFF the table and avoided at all costs.

They want us all to talk about Domestic Violence — and as the authorities on intervention and prevention — and not about themselves in any objective or neutral manner, for example — this private group has a known history of incorporation fraud, to this day and is doing its OWN business from the public forum.  They are the teachers, we are the listeners….

There’s DVIR — Domestic Violence Intervention RESOURCES now (who funds that?):

About Domestic Violence Information and Resources

Published on: 1/23/2014 3:54 PM

image of Judge Yew and crowd

“We wanted to give the victims and their families the opportunity to access all the county’s resource providers by placing them in one room for one evening and removing the obstacles of transportation, language, child care, inconvenience and intimidation.  I wanted the participants to leave feeling that the Court was open and accessible – whether they were suffering from violence or perpetrating it”

~Judge Erica Yew (far left)


The DVIR Network currently includes the Superior Courts, District Attorney’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, Sheriff’s Department, Probation Department, South Bay Labor Council, the Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative and over 50 domestic violence agencies and service providers who are partnering to link families in need to vital resources and support. 

The free, public workshops bring together agencies and service providers who can help the community better understand and navigate the complex system of domestic violence. 


Workshops take place at locations in the heart of the community and are presented in a welcoming and safe environment.  Free dinner, child care, and transportation are arranged to remove potential barriers to participation. Participants receive information and resources on a wide variety of topics, including housing, childcare, victim services, perpetrator services, immigration, health care, substance abuse treatment, child support, family court orders, teen dating violence, and same sex abuse. 

In an effort to reach as many people as possible, the DVIR Network produced a 12-part video series that provides simple, straightforward information to the public about the process of identifying, reporting and getting help for domestic violence.  This tool can also be used by government agencies, health care facilities and schools as a training tool.  Topics range from recognizing domestic violence situations to same sex relationships to restraining orders. 

For more information about DVIR, please contact Office of Women’s Policy at owp@ceo.sccgov.org or call 408.299.5135

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

November 1, 2013 at 7:44 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Eastern star.


    Sent from my HTC EVO 4G LTE exclusively from Sprint


    November 1, 2013 at 9:13 pm

  2. Reblogged this on Children's Rights and commented:

    Children’s Rights


    November 3, 2013 at 5:51 pm

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: