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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Who Owns and Operates, and Leases, the Real Estate [and buildings] in which Justice is Dispensed?

with 2 comments


That’s a good question.  For example, if traffic court had to make its lease (quota) might this affect what kind or how many, how high the traffic court fines might go/  How about when the issues is families and children and it’s courthouses where custody, or dependency, or juvenile law issues are decided?

This “serendipity find” caused me to look at it in some detail, it’s an amazing story of multiple organizations — and definitely something to keep in mind:

Who owns the real estate around this place anyhow?  

RICHARD FINE: One of the two things that appears to have helped put the attorney Richard Fine in solitary coercive confinement for 18 months from May 2009 through Sept. 2010 (and helped him both get disbarred, and lose the income from cases he’d won, affecting his family (wife and adult daughter) — appears to have related to insisting on ethical handling of cases involving REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS, and CHILD SUPPORT (Silva v. Garcetti) and there was some overlap with “outing” the origins of the AFCC as well.   Not to mention the concept of county-paid bribes to judges.  How can anyone keep this all straight?

Described in brief at “Tulanelink.com”  My point in quoting this much — real estate is MEGAbuck (as opposed to, while substantial, the additional grants-based and other “programming” parents are forced through in the family courts).  If you get through this post to the description of WHO helped put together the new Long Beach “Governor Deukmijian Courthouse” (opened for business Sept. 2013) together — should make this clear, if it’s not already understood.  In fact, considering who and what is putting together which major infrastructure projects — one could feel like a pea, as a litigant, by comparison.  Where are the judges loyalties going to lie?  With one of their low-income people streaming through, or with the long-term relationships of who’s running, funding, leasing, and construction those real estate projects?

Quoting from 2009 write up re: FINE.   I know I’ve posted a lot on this.  However, check out the intro, and note that the individuals posting are recommending citizen grand juries (I’m not sure I agree that’s practical though)…Point here — he was dealing with substantial FORCE ($$) when dealing with real estate issues in some of these– and child support (do the math…) in others.

Attorney who fought payments disbarred, jailed 

MALCOLM MACLACHLAN  March 19, 2009

An attorney who spent years fighting against the practice of counties making additional payments to judges has suffered disbarment and been thrown in jail over the last several weeks. Richard Fine, 69, claims that his legal problems stem from his crusade against the practice. But the Los Angeles Superior Court and the plaintiff’s attorney at the center of the Sturgeon case say they aren’t related.

Fine is a real estate attorney who has raised objections to “local judicial payments” in several cases. Last May, he sued the California Bar Association, according to attorney Gary Zerman, who has staged several small protests demanding Fine’s release. Fine has repeatedly argued that these payments violate the State and U.S. Constitutions, including citizens’ “implied right to honest services” from elected officials.

“He was one of the first to discover this,” Zerman said.

Fine claimed not only that judges might have to repay the money they had received, but that any judges who took the payments could be forced to leave the bench, and any rulings they had handed down could be invalidated.

“They either have to resign or be impeached,” Fine said.

Fine has argued that the Los Angeles judges have never ruled against the County of Los Angeles in court since the payments began. Many of his legal problems appear to stem from a real estate caseMarina Tenants Association vs. Los Angeles County, and the judge in that case, David P. Yaffe, who, he claims, has retaliated against him for trying to draw attention the payments issue.



Real Estate is a Really Big Deal:

Courthouses are needed, and if they get decrepit or dangerous, or overcrowded (of course, poor decisions in the first round may have something to do with HOW crowded they are)- sure, they should be replaced.  But I can’t help noticing how WELL some of these new buildings under state, county and outfits at law schools can be — while people going through litigation, some of them, are ending up homeless or nearly.  Is there a correspondence to which way the funds are flowing?


CALIFORNIA:

In September 2013, a new courthouse opened for business in Long  Beach.  It was the first of a certain kind in America.  A fascinating story.  However anything in tan-background before that is also generic (but detailed) pointing out that the California Judicial Council, which now owns this building (and someone else operates, and yet someone else leases) is in addition getting millions of dollars of grants (yearly) from HHS (and a few from DOJ) which are affecting where children live.

This may make more sense when I get all three “AOC” posts out (this isn’t one of them, FYI).   Anyone want to follow up?   Also, there’s a corporate history trail behind AECOM which goes back to a situation involving John Dionisio (now CEO) and a 39year old engineer, alleged bid-rigging on the Port Authority, missing documents, arson and suicide, possibly murder.  Needless to say (or, for other reasons) the company then involved “Frederick R. Harris” might not want that association, and eventually ended up in this one.  the next paragraph is repeated towards the end:

In 1994, John M. Dionisio formerly of Frederick R. Harris had a 39 yr old engineer (in re: bid-rigging for a Port Authority Project) literally commit suicide in his home setting it afire, and forcing Dionisios’ wife and young son to flee. Apparently the engineer also killed his long-term (9 yrs) mistress (body never found).  I wasn’t sure IF this is the same “John Dionisio,” but his “Forbes.com”  bio makes the connection clear enough:  Frederick R. Harris & Co., Inc.  became later DMJM & Harris, which became, later a subsidiary of Aecom Technology, from which we get some amazing projects, including possibly the new Long Beach Courthouse in the Los Angeles Area.

Rendering

New courthouse just opened in Long Beach, California.  Notice the logo at the top of the set of logos — the Judicial Council of California.  That’s what inspired this post.  As usual, however about half the post (the top part) is going to be setting the stage.  Short on time?  Scroll down to the middle, where there’s no tan background, or you see this graphic again — for more on this specific situation (which I just found out about ca. 11/4/2013).

Short Brief Section with Misc. Inf on who IS this Judicial Council (tan background)

From their site:

The Judicial Council is the policymaking body of the California courts, the largest court system in the nation. Under the leadership of the Chief Justice and in accordance with the California Constitution, the council is responsible for ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice. The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) implements the council’s policies.

LATEST NEWS

Oct 28, 2013

At its meeting Oct 24–25 in San Francisco, the Judicial Council continued its move towards greater transparency, accountability, and efficiency when it approved enhancements in oversight of its administrative office. View more details on the Judicial Council meeting page. MORE»

ADVISORY GROUPS

To provide leadership for advancing the consistent, impartial, independent, and accessible administration of justice, the Judicial Council must be aware of the issues and concerns confronting the judiciary, as well as appropriate solutions and responses. The council carries out this mission  primarily through the work of its advisory committees and task forces.  [[There are plenty:  here’s Family and Juvenile Law Advisory Committee as of August 2013.  Who/what kinds of fields are represented are on those committees in other states?  Do you know yours?]]

[NEXT SECTION IS SIMPLY LOOKING UP A FEW INDIVIDUALS/ORGANIZATIONS ON ONE OF THE ABOVE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.  ADVISORY COMMITTEES MAY BE LIKELY TO GET LEGISLATION PASSED, OR INITIATED; THEY’RE RARELY CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST FREE, AND IN AN IDEAL WORLD, WE’D PAY BETTER ATTENTION TO WHOSE ON WHICH ONES…]

In addition to Judges, a Social worker from one county, and District Attorney representatives, and a single attorney with a Ph.D. (no affiliation listed, Frank E. Dougherty, Ph.D./40 yrs as a psychologist, switched to law in 1995 (interesting timing, right before welfare reform), there are these individuals:

REGARDING this (large) OPERATION:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1472604 11/29/1989 ACTIVE CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER OF CALIFORNIA JOHN MOLL
Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER OF CALIFORNIA 075047 Charity Current MONTEREY PARK CA Charity Registration Charity
CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER OF CALIFORNIA RF0002912 Raffle Expired MONTEREY PARK CA Raffle Registration Raffle
CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER OF CALIFORNIA RF0002912-08-1 Raffle Awaiting Reporting MONTEREY PARK CA Raffle Report Raffle
1
Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-11
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-12
Total Assets: $6,209,973.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $21,587,759.00
RRF Received: 20-MAY-01
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted

Notice to them in Sept. 2013, courteously asking them to answer “from whom did you get Gov’t funding for YE 2012” (no RRF for that year posted yet):   “1. Explanation/Information not provided for “YES” answer to Part B , Question No. 6.” their RRF for the previous year (revenues, $18 million) says the only Gov’t contributions came from [Although pg.2. “Statemt. 5′] shows no date or date stamp to verify it’s from the same year] : MELANIE JONES SENIOR COURT ANALYST CENTER FOR FAMILIES, CHILDREN & COURTS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 4 5 5 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA. 94102-3688 PHONE (415) 865-7960…   [[Admin office of the courts appears to have moved, however]]  Their 2008 and 2009 Audited Financial Statements are available on site, and not that for those years, how they are contracting with the Judicial Council /AOC to provide representation for dependency services, the contracts being for around $17 million yearly.   They are staying rent-free in a courthouse:  Notes to the Financial statements are on the Charitable site to upload and read, under “Miscellaneous Documents 59492“(hover cursor — however the link is a site to look them up again, and from there, click on organization name for more details – scroll to bottom of screen to see or upload individual pdfs, like that one).   An operation of this size gets sued from time to time and was sued in 2010 by a mother and two minors:

On February 1,2010, plaintiffs (2 minor children and former CLC clients) and their mother filed a lawsuit against the Organization alleging legal malpractice and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Organization has not yet [dated: Jan 26, 2010] been served. If the Organization is served, it will vigorously defend the suit.

Since this is a NONprofit contracting (for a lot) to represent children in dependency cases, its rental/leasing situation is interesting and on the same statement, you can get a flavor — it’s in a well-known court building (rent-free, providing it performs the service) and this also shows who the contracts are with.  Again, the transmittal letter with this audit is dated 1/2010 (not current):


Children’s Law Center of Los Angeles (“Organization”) which was formerly known as Dependency Court Legal Services, Inc., was incorporated in December 1989 as a nonprofit, public benefit corporation. The Organization contracts with the Judicial Counsel of California, Administrative Offices of the Court (“AOC”), to serve as counsel for Los Angeles County’s abused and neglected children. Organization’s attorneys are appointed by the court for such representation pursuant to Welfare and Institution’s Code Section 317. Effective July 1, 2005, the Organization entered into an initial three year contract with the AOC that covered the period of July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008 (hefty in size, can you spell $17 million?)


The Organization maintains offices for legal services operations on the sixth floor of the State of California owned Edmund D. Edelman Children’s Court Building in Monterey Park. The Organization is permitted to occupy the sixth floor of the Edelman Children’s Court Building without the payment of rent, provided the Organization continues to perform the services required by its agreement with the AOC.


The Organization also occupies offices for legal services operations in the Alfred J. McCourtney Juvenile Justice Center in Antelope Valley, California without payment of the rent pursuant to a contract with the County of Los Angeles that was recently assigned to the State of California.


The Organization leases an additional facility in Monterey Park, California for legal services and administrative operations. Terms of the original non-cancelable operating lease, which commenced in October 2002 called for a monthly fixed cost of $27,478 over a seven year term running through September 2009. The Organization is responsible for insurance costs, as well as its pro-rata share of various building operating costs, real estate taxes and common area expenses.


In August 2005, the Organization entered into an amendment to its original lease, which called for an expansion of the leased facility along with an extension of the lease term through September 2012. Under the terms of the amended lease, monthly rent with the additional expanded space was increased to $32,676 per month. This monthly amount increased to $34,206 on October 1,2009. The lease calls for additional annual increases based on certain escalation clauses.


During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008 the Organization leased space at 44300 Lowtree Avenue in Lancaster for a satellite office for providing legal services. The lease was on a month to month term, and the lease payment is $700 per month. In February 2009, the Organization cancelled this lease and such operations moved to offices at the McCourtney Juvenile Justice Center mentioned above. Such space is occupied without the payment of rent.

After looking at the (corresponding) return, it shows Ms. Heimov at $145K plus some, and several administrators/supervisors at between $120-close to $130K (plus some), and what are actually CONTRACTS with (as it says) the Judicial Council of California (amount, $1.7 million or so) are called “contributions or grants.”  It’s a complex operation, someone has to do this, and I’m not in a place to critique, other than to note that the money could possibly be influenced  by incentives to adopt-out children (Promoting Safe and Stable Families, other) federal funding to the Judicial Council itself as well).  More below.  It would be a very challenging job.  Anyhow — the Executive Director Ms. Heimov, is on the Advisory Committee of a body her organization exists to do business with, and who probably owns the facilities the Nonprofit is housed in, as above.  The RRFs indicate the only source of government money is from the AOC itself — which is known to be  body that processes lots of grants.

She is a Governor Scharzenegger appointee from 2008 (bio at link): Naturally!  There has been some turnover in who directs DCSS; in March, 2012 it was announced “Security Breach: Lost Data Cartridges May Have Exposed Personal Records From California’s Child Support System (Huffington Post 3/30/2012 by Tayefe Mohajer: ”

LOS ANGELES — Four computer storage devices containing personal information for about 800,000 adults and children in California’s child support system – including their names and Social Security numbers – were lost by IBM and Iron Mountain Inc., officials announced Thursday. … [after noting the format they were in was probably hard to access] The cartridges also contained addresses, driver’s license numbers, names of health insurance providers and employers for custodial and non-custodial parents, and their children. The department has notified all those possibly affected by the March 12 data loss via mail, and has notified the three major credit reporting agencies, the state attorney general’s office and the state Office of Privacy Protection. The agency’s interim director, Kathleen Hrepich, says the incident won’t affect the processing of child support cases. The backup storage cartridges had been sent to IBM’s facility in Boulder, Colo., as part of a disaster simulation, so the technology company could test whether it could run the state’s child support system remotely. The cartridges are believed to have been lost in transit, somewhere between Boulder and Sacramento, Lally said. The state contracts with Iron Mountain to provide secure transportation services. But Iron Mountain doesn’t fly, so the data storage company had FedEx transport the cartridges.

I think it’s pretty clear what I feel about the child support system in general.  See “Boycott Child Support (Title IVD) Feed Kids, not Slush Funds”  Another investigative journalist Anne Stevenson puts Child Support and the Access/Visitation grants under it as #1 among “5 Top HHS Program Dangerous to Women and Children.”  So poking fun (?) at the data loss above is my way of not saying what I think about it, at this time.  This organization has been restructured to favor litigious fathers who probably shouldn’t have custody of children — or if they AREN’t litigious so prodding them through irrational child support amounts, they get that way and sue anyhow. Or, throwing some in jail for nonpayment when they CAN’T pay and letting them “get of jail free” if they sign up for a fatherhood class that earns someone else (not their kids) some money.  (State of Kentucky Family Court System, Turning It Around; there are many others).  Don’t get me started!!!
  • Ms. Sharon M. Lawrence [Esq.], Executive Director “Voices for Children, Inc.”  [a San Diego area nonprofit (since 2002] that recruits and trains CASAs (volunteers) to accompany abused children to court, etc. Ms. Lawrence’s salary, $146K, her main assistant’s /other Director Anne Farrell’s is $125K/EIN# 953706847 [2011-2012 return]

Didn’t do the breakout as above — this is a smaller organization, still dealing with dependency cases.  Who is on there to speak for mothers who are losing their children improperly, or being reduced to a functionless existence through long-term fighting to protect them, being forced to pay their former abusers, being stalked (case in point ,year after year), or the ones that got killed?  Or whose children got killed (or stolen) but they didn’t?  No offense good Dads, but some of you aren’t, and it wasn’t someone else that made the ones that aren’t, murder. Atypical Antipsychotics in some cases, MAYBE.  Others, a serious case of @ssh0le-itis.  Charles Pragnell wrote some about how FR groups exploit men in emotional trauma to either go suicidal, or think in those terms, and blame it on someone else. As a mother — not on the map, won’t happen, couldn’t even think of it.  WHY?  I’m a mother, I have children, even as young adults, they’re still my kids.  End of story!!!  And it’s not from lack of pressure — plenty of pressure on year after year ….

  • Ms. Julie Saffren, Esq. (Law offices of Julie Saffren)(“Pro Bono Project” powerpoint 8/2013, which I just paged through, makes NO mention of Conciliation code, states that the (only) grounds for divorce is irreconciliable differences (true??), is still thorough and helpful — and  reveals that she is a member of the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Council; see recent post on “What’s with Women Judges forming nonprofits to run fatherhood programs..?” which pointed out that in this county, “DV Prevention” means Fatherhood Intervention and that a prominent (now retired) AFCC judge formed that DV council to start with, etc.  Ms. Saffren appears to be someone who is definitely active in and concerned about DV matters (See “In re: marriage of Nadkarni” ), HOWEVER, she is still a FAMILY law attorney).

Anyhow:

In addition to whatever from the California budget supports the major operation of the Judicial Council (and its subsidiary operations, including the AOC, the CFCC, all staff, all attorneys, all supporting infrastructure in the terms of their location (in San Francisco), and in terms of many other things (telecommunications, phones, travel, etc.) — there are the grants to this entity from the United States government through HHS (I’m not checking from elsewhere, currently). These are not date-selected; we can see three different DUNS# — and if it’s on here, it’s a grant (not contract or loan) from the United States Dept. of Health and Human Services.  Most TAGGS records (the database in question) go back to about 1995:

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO CA 94107 SAN FRANCISCO 124971982 $ 7,437,367
CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL ** SAN FRANCISCO CA 94107 SAN FRANCISCO 360709414 $ 3,778,060
CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO CA 94107 SAN FRANCISCO 609626320 $ 33,767,373

**a quick look at these (63) grant records shows they are:  Access/Visitation (sometimes labeled “CASVP” of usually >= $950K/year), CASCID (State Court Improvement Data) or CASCIP (State Court Improvement Programs) grants.     The address showing from that middle row isn’t the Golden Gate Address usually associated with this council, but 303 Second Street, South Tower” (Click to see grants), owned and operated by “Kilroy Realty”

CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL
Address: 303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107

Welcome to 303 Second Street!


303 Second Street is located in the South Financial District of San Francisco.  The Property is in a prominent position in the direct path of continued urban growth.  With the redevelopment of the nearby Transbay Terminal, the area will become the eventual center of the Financial District. [Apparently, from the grants records, some business continues at the old address?]

Grants for 2013 from the Top and Middle-row “DUNS#” above are $3+ million:

FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
2013 1301CASCID  FY 2013 (SCID) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT- DATA PROGRAM 1 1 ACF 04-25-2013 124971982 $ 725,392 
2013 1301CASCIT  FY 2013 (SCIT) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT-TRAINING PROGRAM 1 1 ACF 04-25-2013 124971982 $ 713,835 
2013 1301CASCIP  FY 2013 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 1 ACF 04-19-2013 124971982 $ 840,498 
2013 1301CASCIP  FY 2013 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 2 ACF 05-09-2013 124971982 $- 133 
2013 1010CASAVP  FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 1 6 ACF 05-08-2013 360709414 $- 26 
2013 1310CASAVP  FY 2013 STATE ACCESS AND VISITATION  1 1 ACF 10-22-2012 360709414 $ 958,704 
Fiscal Year 2013 Total: $ 3,238,270

In 2009, when the Long Beach Court House project apparently begin, it seems that the third-row DUNS# 60626320” (See 3-row chart above) was “retired” and that funds from prior years of Access/Visitation Grants, labeled “fiscal year 2009” were being subtracted, in amounts about the salary for an average, or low-income family, per year):

FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
2009 0901CASCID  FY 2009 DATA STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 1 ACF 12-07-2008 609626320 $ 786,069 
2009 0901CASCIT  FY 2009 TRAINING STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 1 ACF 12-07-2008 609626320 $ 788,370 
2009 0901CASCIP  FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 1 ACF 12-07-2008 609626320 $ 807,034 
2009 0901CASCIP  FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 6 ACF 06-06-2009 609626320 $ 266,289 
2009 0010CASAVP  2000 SAVP 1 8 ACF 09-14-2009 609626320 $- 48,827 
2009 0110CASAVP  2001 SAVP 1 4 ACF 09-14-2009 609626320 $- 26,938 
2009 0210CASAVP  2002 SAVP 1 6 ACF 09-14-2009 609626320 $- 46,392 
2009 0310CASAVP  2003 SAVP 1 2 ACF 09-14-2009 609626320 $- 15,092 
2009 0910CASAVP  FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 1 1 ACF 12-23-2008 609626320 $ 942,497 
Fiscal Year 2009 Total: $ 3,453,010

It would appear that this Council is getting over $3 million of free money from US taxpayers per year (nearly 1/3rd of it A/V, although money has been moving away from that category), consistently — in addition to the same taxpayers paying all salaries, and all expenses of the council itself.  Why this should be, I don’t “get.”

I ran a chart looking to see if ANY of the grants actually had a Principal Investigator a citizen could contact to know what they were about (all 63 entries; given that several were negative-entries).  I found that the ONLY grant with any Principal Investigator listed (at all!) were three under “Adoption Opportunities,” P.I. being  Diane Nunn (of the AOC, and I believe an AFCC member) — which were the only grants under this CFDA 93562 to the Judicial Council (on the TAGGS.hhs.gov database).  There was even over $800K to them in 1996 (first year of welfare reform) which had NO CFDA#, and NO principal investigator and also NO grant title! (Grant 9601CASIP). In addition, in far too many the “type of award” was also “Unknown.”  Moreover, these were consistently “Year 1” of budgets — so while it’s getting $3 million+ per year of free money with less than appropriate accountability — apparently each year, it’s a new award, no continuing.  Interesting way to run things!   Chart at the bottom….


I only bring this up because it turns out that the California Judicial Council is going to be the owner of the brand new Long Beach area “George Deukmejian Courthouse” opened — last month, and occupying two square blocks.



File next to “Judicial Council delegates too much authority to the AOC” (admitted in the SEC report) who has been expanding exponentially, assuming authority it wasn’t delegated, and focusing on getting grants.  (Note:  many of these grants relate to issues dealing with families and children, marriage, fatherhood, custody, adoptions, foster care, etc.).


So, the new courthouse was a “serendipity find” — I don’t live in Southern California or Los Angeles, but apparently they have a spanking new courthouse opened in 2013, ,while complaints about courthouse closures for lack of funds, and government shutdown are very, very recent history.

The question of Real Estate ALWAYS belongs alongside the question of who owns and runs local jurisdictions, counties, states, and of course, America — and where do the (family and conciliation, for this blog’s purposes) courts fit, in that mix?

Other than this recent courthouse is fairly spectacular, and that AFCC began originally, it would seem, within a then-new courthouse in Los Angeles, using the county EIN# instead of its own, this is still a live question.   At some point, the rest of us need to start finding a way to untangle, classify, or at least vaguely perceive what’s going on.

I might not have posted this until I noticed a single detail on a single (of the several) corporations involved in opening the courthouse pictured below.  I noticed the CEO’s name, “John Dionisio.”  As my manner is, I looked it up, and found that he and his wife were exposed to a suicide (and arson) by a 39-year-old engineer in Mr. Dionisio’s bedroom, with his wife an 11 year old son having to flee.   This suicide and arson possibly related to bid-rigging on a very, very large project (relating to the New York Port Authority) and are extremely disturbing.  The corporation Mr. Dionisio was then working for (no indication he was involved in the same bid-rigging, or stolen documents from the Port Authority), however there seems no question that the former corporation connects, sequentially, to the corporation preceding AECOM (see below) which is doing major infrastructure projects, globally.  It puts a whole different light on the treatment of welfare recipients in the courtrooms, and why these people were on welfare to start with, given how easily well-positioned, well-connected (and obviously talented) people in association (corporation) with each other can pull in a $10 million a year salary, with other options and stock figured in.

This is also enabled by technology (software, obviously) to coordinate projects across time and geography, and get them up ahead of schedule.   Bentley, Inc. (who provide software to major infrastructure projects) were involved with the group AECOM involved in this one.

*Speaking of “rapid expansion” —

see the California Judicial Council’s recent Real Estate Acquisition: Governor George  Deukmejian Courthouse (@Sep.2013)

[In quickly looking up “Deukmejian” I find there is a spectacular new courthouse named after him in Long Beach California.   LBJP, LLC (Long Beach Judicial Partners) describes who was involved in the project, and another link, from the Administrative Office of the Courts gives a factsheet on the “Governor George Deukmejian Courthouse

(Long Beach being right near the City of Los Angeles, and on the Bay/think “Port of Los Angeles” and you got it.)   [[WOW — reading about the new courthouse and “PBI” (Performance Based Infrastructure” reminds me of the private ownership of public facilities, and then who gets billed for the leasing?)

!!!

Rendering

AECOM offices (see logo), Global enough for you?   [this brings up the issue of “Who Owns and Operates the Courthouses? in which lives and livelihoods are adjusted and re-allocated?]

Marv Bryer ALSO brought this up in the late 1990s.  (see johnnypumphandle.com, that old site with so many different leads — he talked about the issue of how many “public benefit corporations” is it possible to squeeze into one address, and ways in which we often just do not know who owns the real estate in which justice is dispensed — when they are private corporations.

Wow…. more information (note, the URL ends in a “*.com” so it’s not a gov’t site).

Long Beach Judicial Partners LLC (LBJP) will continue to operate, and maintain the 545,000 square-foot state-of the art courthouse in Long Beach. The project has been delivered under a unique public/private partnership agreement, which has a total development cost of approximately $490 million and a design-build cost of $343 million. The five-story building houses 31 courtrooms, as well as court administration offices, Los Angeles County lease space, and retail leasable space. The building includes below-grade secure inmate transfer facilities, detention facilities, and separate secure parking areas for judges. A five-level great room atrium enclosed on two ends by a cable-supported glass wall system serves as the single entry point for the public and provide access to a secured central courtyard. Clad in deeply-articulated curtain wall and elements of stone, the project spans two city blocks in downtown Long Beach and replaces the functionally- obsolete court-house building one block away. In addition to the new building, the project team also renovated and expanded an existing 399,000 square-foot parking structure (right nearby? owned and operated by whom??  Revenues go to whom?) This court building is the first social infrastructure project in the United States procured under the principles of Performance-Based Infrastructure (PBI) contracting [[see factsheets]. Under the PBI agreement, the Judicial Council of California (JCC) owns the building, and the Superior Court of Los Angeles County occupies approximately 80% of the space.

Then, does the Superior Court of Los Angeles County pay rent to the Judicial Council of California? If so, how’s THAT work in re: conflicts of interest, when the County gets sued, if it does?

The JCC pays LBJP an annual, performance-based service fee for 35 years. The PBI delivery method leveraged the private sector’s access to financing, technological expertise, and management efficiency to quickly provide a high-quality facility serving the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

This project was started for bidding in 2009, I thought.  LBJP, LLC, was formed in 2009:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
200914110161 05/21/2009 ACTIVE LONG BEACH JUDICIAL PARTNERS LLC C T CORPORATION SYSTEM (C0168406)

515 S FLOWER STREET 8TH FLOOR, Los Angeles 97001

See “Aecom Services, Inc.” dba Aecom Design” (same address and floor):

AECOM Services, Inc., doing business as AECOM Design, operates as a design, management, and technical services company in the United States, China, and the United Arab Emirates. Its services include engineering, architecture, consulting, engineering, integrated facility management, interior design and planning, master planning, security, and sustainability, as well as system solutions and information technology/telecommunications. The company offers client staff augmentation and staff extension, system integration, quality control, and financing strategy services; technology services for intricate and critical infrastructure facilities and systems; and program, project, and construction management services for building projects, including new construction, expansion, renovation, and modernization projects. It serves aerospace/industrial, corporate, defense, department of energy, telecommunication, education, federal, hospitality, nuclear, leisure, and transportation markets; and ports, airports, public and commercial facilities, justice facilities, sporting venues, and government facilities. AECOM Services, Inc. was formerly known as DMJM H&N, Inc. The company was founded in 2000 and is based in Los Angeles, California with additional offices in New Mexico, Virginia, Illinois, Colorado, Texas, Michigan, California, Florida, New York, Arizona, Washington, and Utah, as well as in Abu Dhabi, the United Arab Emirates; and Shanghai, China. AECOM Services, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of AECOM Technology Corporation.
2013-10-31 06 :
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1260794 11/05/1984 ACTIVE AECOM GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
C1745075 05/31/1994 ACTIVE AECOM MANAGEMENT SERVICES CORP. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
C0390443 02/01/1960 ACTIVE AECOM SERVICES, INC. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
C0608461 09/29/1970 ACTIVE AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
In order (row by row) they are a:
  • Delaware Corp. with a Fort Worth, TX address (C126074)
  • Delaware Corp with a 555 S. Flower St #3700, Los Angeles address (C1745075)*
  • California Corp. with a 515 S. Flower St, 4TH Flr Los Angeles (C0390443)
  • California Corp with a 515 S. Flower St, #1050, Los Angeles (C0608461)

(*see also Chubb Group of Insurance Companies 555 S. Flower Street, Third Floor Los Angeles, CA  90071 Tel: (213) 612-0880 Fax: (213) 612-5731

Because I cannot find either LBJP or Aecom on “Public Traded Companies” search in California, they do indeed look to be privately controlled (major scope of activity, international) Incs and the LLC.

On a hunch, I went to see whether “AECOM” was listed in the Bentley 500 that I keep squawking about on this blog (and in other forums). Bentley provides software infrastructure support to major projects, one reason they probably know alot about who owns what assets.  I was floored when I saw their list.  … Sure enough, AECOM is involved with them (using some of their software) and got an  award (from Bentley).  I just want readers to see the scope of the projects involved here.  They have about 45,000 employees worldwide, are involved in rebuilding the World Trade Center (as in, NYC, rising from the ashes), and:

AECOM is a leader in all of the key markets that it serves. AECOM provides a blend of global reach, local knowledge, innovation and technical excellence in delivering solutions that create, enhance and sustain the world’s built, natural and social environments. A Fortune 500 company, AECOM serves clients in approximately 125 countries and had revenue of $7.7 billion during the 12 months ended June 30, 2011. More information on AECOM and its services can be found atwww.aecom.com.

Essentially it is collaborating across time and space, utilizing high-quality and secure software (provided here by Bentley, Inc.) to complete projects in a cost-effective and timely manner:

AECOM saves $850,000 using ProjectWise for Work Sharing and Engineering

25 October 2012

Selects Online Deployment for $416 Million Texas State Highway Project

EXTON, Pa., U.S.A. – Bentley Systems, Incorporated, the leading company dedicated to providing comprehensive software solutions for sustaining infrastructure, today announced that AECOM Technology Corporation, a global provider of professional technical and management support services for government and commercial clients, has selected Bentley’s ProjectWise for the cloud-based engineering content management of its Texas State Highway (SH) 161 Phase 4 project. The ProjectWise system of collaboration servers and services provides industry-proven work sharing, content reuse, and dynamic review capabilities that are essential to leveraging information modeling throughintegrated projects for high-performing, intelligent infrastructure. The $416 million design/build project completes a 6.5-mile link in the loop around Dallas-Fort Worth, managed by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA). AECOM was challenged to complete the major design elements within 15 months. With the project office in Grand Prairie, Texas, and team members distributed across 22 locations in seven U.S. states, AECOM implemented ProjectWise Online to provide project team members, regardless of their location, with a single, secure environment to create high-quality design documents. ProjectWise enabled AECOM to increase quality, create documents that were 95 percent compliant with its client’s CAD standards, and reduce risk, saving NTTA $850,000 in costs associated with information, workspaces, and standards management as well as quality-control review.

However Long Beach Judicial Partners, LLC (which operates the courthouse now) is sited as underneath a different corporation (while sharing a street address with AECOM).

Did you notice that tiny “A Meridiam Infrastructure Project Company” under the logo for “LBJP, LLC” above? So who is “Meridiam” and what does it mean to be one of their “infrastruct project companies?”  Meridiam:

http://www.meridiam.com/en

History:  Meridiam started as a French/USA (venture?) in 2005, with support from AECOM Technology Corp* and Credit Agricole:

[*note that exact name is not among the four California Corps listed above.  AECOM Technology Corp =/= “AECOM Technical Services, Inc.” the closest similar name listed under California Business Entities Search, is..]

A PIONEER LONG-TERM INVESTOR IN PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE Meridiam was established in France and the United States by Thierry Déau, formerly Chief Executive of Egis Projects (a subsidiary of France’s Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations, specialized in developing, financing and managing infrastructure projects), with operational and financial support from AECOM Technology Corp. [operational presumably] and the Crédit Agricole Group [financial, presumably] Set up to achieve convergence between the needs of public authorities and the interests of institutional investors, Meridiam finances public infrastructure while aiming to create a secure investment framework for long-term savings.

In 1994, John M. Dionisio formerly of Frederick R. Harris had a 39 yr old engineer (in re: bid-rigging for a Port Authority Project) literally commit suicide in his home setting it afire, and forcing Dionisios’ wife and young son to flee. Apparently the engineer also killed his long-term (9 yrs) mistress (body never found).  I wasn’t sure IF this is the same “John Dionisio,” but his “Forbes.com”  bio makes the connection clear enough:  Frederick R. Harris & Co., Inc.  became later DMJM & Harris, which became, later a subsidiary of Aecom Technology.

Profile

John M. Dionisio, 64, was appointed Chairman of the Board in October 2011 and has served as Chief Executive Officer since October 2005. Mr. Dionisio previously served as President from October 2005 to September 2011, and was elected to our Board of Directors in December 2005. From October 2003 to October 2005, Mr. Dionisio served as our Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. From October 2000 to October 2003, Mr. Dionisio served as President and Chief Executive Officer of our legacy subsidiary DMJM+Harris operation. Mr. Dionisio joined Frederic R. Harris, Inc., predecessor company to DMJM+Harris, in 1971, where he served in a number of capacities, including Chief Executive Officer from October 1999 to October 2003, President from July 1996 to October 1999, Executive Vice President in charge of U.S. operations from 1993 to 1996 and Manager of the New York Operations and Northern Region Manager from 1992 to 1993. Mr. Dionisio is also a director of Corinthian Colleges, Inc.

AECOM Technology Corporation
Compensation for 2011
Salary $1,000,002
Bonus $3,000,000
Restricted stock awards $4,312,516
All other compensation $125,749
Option awards $1,437,506
Change in pension value and nonqualified deferred compensation earnings $264,348
Total Compensation $10,140,121
Options Exercised for 2011
Number of securities underlying options unexercisable 153,089
Stock Ownership for 2013
Number of shares owned 270,657
Corinthian Colleges, Inc.
Director Compensation for 2011
Fees earned or paid in cash $79,500
Stock awards $64,500
Total Compensation $144,000
Stock Ownership for 2012
Number of shares owned 89,194

(the background-color change signifies going back to the topic of grants to this arm of government called the California Judicial Council): Printout of 63 HHS grant records, looking for who are the Principal Investigators, and showing the “Adoptions” grant to Ms. Nunn of the AOC.  For Further Inquiry! NOTE:  It’s known that Shelly LaBotte of the AOC has (long) been responsible? and the contact person for those Access/Visitation grants. Omitting a name seems to me intentional, and might otherwise highlight her other nonprofit association affiliations (Supervised Visitation Network, the 2010ff  CASVSP (California Association of Supervised Visitation Service Providers — she’s advisory board; they are linked directly to the CFCC website where “Trainings” for this field are advertised; however she is one of the trainers.  This outfit (CASVSP) also recently (2011 or 2012) sponsored a California Bill (AB 1674, I think) which actually was passed, requiring 24 hours annual of training for providers who are called “professional” (unprofessinoal are not required to sit through the trainings).  As I have a post upcoming, maybe (it’s been looked at), I’ll leave it at that).  For this database to year after year NOT mention even a person in charge of the grants (when there is such a person) shows that:

#1.  Most of us aren’t watching the database anyhow, and if so

#2.  No one, that I”m aware of, had made a stink about it.  How many people even know about these grants at all?

Results 1 to 63 of 63 matches.
Excel Icon
Page 1 of 1
  1 
Award Number Award Title Budget Year Action Issue Date CFDA Number CFDA Program Name Award Action Type Princ. Inves. DUNS Number Sum of Actions
0001CASCIP SCIP 2000 1 07/06/2000 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 805,456
0010CASAVP 2000 SAVP 1 10/10/2000 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 987,501
0010CASAVP 2000 SAVP 1 09/14/2009 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs OTHER REVISION 609626320 $- 48,827
0101CASCIP SCIP 2001 1 07/02/2001 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 778,774
0110CASAVP 2001 SAVP 1 08/23/2001 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 987,501
0110CASAVP 2001 SAVP 1 09/14/2009 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs OTHER REVISION 609626320 $- 26,938
0201CASCIP 1 07/08/2002 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 1,071,211
0210CASAVP 2002 SAVP 1 08/06/2002 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 970,431
0210CASAVP 2002 SAVP 1 09/14/2009 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs OTHER REVISION 609626320 $- 46,392
0301CASCIP 1 07/16/2003 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 1,192,273
0310CASAVP 2003 SAVP 1 09/11/2003 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 970,431
0310CASAVP 2003 SAVP 1 09/14/2009 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs OTHER REVISION 609626320 $- 15,092
0401CASCIP 2004 SCIP 1 07/21/2004 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 1,210,185
0410CASAVP 2004 SAVP 1 09/15/2004 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 609626320 $ 988,710
0501CASCIP 2005 SCIP 1 09/20/2005 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 1,226,900
0510CASAVP 2005 SAVP 1 09/14/2005 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 609626320 $ 988,710
0601CASCID 2006 SCIP –

DATA ANALYSIS

1 09/20/2006 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 885,142
0601CASCIP 2006 SCIP 1 09/27/2006 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 1,201,407
0601CASCIT 2006 SCIP – TRAINING 1 09/20/2006 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 904,380
0610CASAVP 2006 SAVP 1 09/19/2006 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 609626320 $ 987,973
0701CASCID 2007 SCIP –

DATA SHARING

1 09/19/2007 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 870,481
0701CASCIP 2007 STATE COURT IMPROVE. – BASIC 1 09/19/2007 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 1,272,138
0701CASCIT 2007 SCIP – TRAINING 1 09/19/2007 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 871,401
0710CASAVP 2007 SAVP 1 07/20/2007 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 609626320 $ 950,190
0801CASCID 2008 (SCID) STATE CT IMPROVE. –

DATA SHARING

1 09/15/2008 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 818,023
0801CASCIP 2008 (SCIP) STATE CT IMPROVE. –

BASIC

1 09/15/2008 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 1,082,580
0801CASCIT 2008 (SCIT) STATE CT IMPROVE. – TRAINING 1 09/15/2008 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 792,773
0810CASAVP 2008 SAVP 1 01/30/2008 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 609626320 $ 957,600
0901CASCID FY 2009 DATA STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 12/07/2008 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 786,069
0901CASCIP FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 12/07/2008 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 807,034
0901CASCIP FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 06/06/2009 93586 State Court Improvement Program ADMIN SUPPLEMT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 609626320 $ 266,289
0901CASCIT FY 2009 TRAINING STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 12/07/2008 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 788,370
0910CASAVP FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 1 12/23/2008 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 609626320 $ 942,497
1001CASCID FY 2010 DATA STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 10/30/2009 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 833,016
1001CASCIP FY 2010 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 10/30/2009 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 806,010
1001CASCIP FY 2010 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 02/12/2010 93586 State Court Improvement Program ADMIN SUPPLMT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONaRY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 609626320 $ 265,910
1001CASCIT FY 2010 TRAINING STATE COURT IMPROVE 1 10/30/2009 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 808,689
1010CASAVP FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 1 11/25/2009 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 360709414 $ 946,820
1010CASAVP FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 1 05/08/2013 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs OTHER REVIS’N 360709414 $- 26
1101CASCID FY 2011 (SCID) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – DATA PROGRAM 1 01/21/2011 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 815,374
1101CASCIP FY 2011 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 12/10/2010 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 799,429
1101CASCIP FY 2011 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 05/17/2011 93586 State Court Improvement Program ADMIN SUPPLMT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 124971982 $ 262,956
1101CASCIT FY 2011 (SCIT) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – TRAINING PROGRAM 1 01/25/2011 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 778,551
1110CASAVP FY 2011 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 1 10/08/2010 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 360709414 $ 928,087
1201CASCID FY 2012 (SCID) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT- DATA PROGRAM 1 04/17/2012 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 812,635
1201CASCIP FY 2012 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 04/17/2012 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 911,485
1201CASCIT FY 2012 (SCIT) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT-TRAINING PROGRAM 1 04/17/2012 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 777,345
1210CASAVP FY 2012 STATE ACCESS AND VISITATION 1 11/22/2011 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 360709414 $ 944,475
1301CASCID FY 2013 (SCID) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT- DATA PROGRAM 1 04/25/2013 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 725,392
1301CASCIP FY 2013 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 04/19/2013 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 840,498
1301CASCIP FY 2013 (SCIP) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT – BASIC PROGRAM 1 05/09/2013 93586 State Court Improvement Program ADMIN SUPPLEMT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 124971982 $- 133
1301CASCIT FY 2013 (SCIT) STATE COURT IMPROVEMENT-TRAINING PROGRAM 1 04/25/2013 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 124971982 $ 713,835
1310CASAVP FY 2013 STATE ACCESS AND VISITATION 1 10/22/2012 93597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs NEW 360709414 $ 958,704
90CO0874 EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIONS FOR TIMELY ADOPTIONS 1 09/15/1998 93652 Adoption Opportunities NEW DIANE NUNN 609626320 $ 175,000
90CO0874 EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIONS FOR TIMELY ADOPTIONS 2 08/11/1999 93652 Adoption Opportunities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION DIANE NUNN 609626320 $ 175,000
90CO0874 EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIONS FOR TIMELY ADOPTIONS 3 09/14/2000 93652 Adoption Opportunities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION DIANE NUNN 609626320 $ 175,000
9601CASCIP 1 01/01/1996 NONE Awards not funded from a program listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance NEW 609626320 $ 824,628
9701CASCIP SCIP 1997 01 02/27/1997 93586 State Court Improvement Program NEW 609626320 $ 824,628
9701CASCIP STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1 01/31/2002 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $- 19,049
9801CASCIP STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1 05/01/1998 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 761,536
9801CASCIP STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1 05/21/1998 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 85,000
9801CASCIP STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1 12/14/2001 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $- 987
9901CASCIP SCIP 1999 1 08/12/1999 93586 State Court Improvement Program UNKNOWN 609626320 $ 827,811
Results 1 to 63 of 63 matches.

Keeping in mind the disclaimer about D&B data (at top of the USASPENDING.gov site), A search on this DUNS# only at “USASPENDING.gov” and I checked “Grants” only (in other words, I did an “Advanced Search” and the ONLY select field I entered anything in, was the DUNS#) — and keeping in mind that this database doesn’t go back as far, but gives more details — tell us about the above grants, that their “PROGRAM SOURCES” were one of two kinds — which I don’t believe TAGGS tells us:

Either they were Program Source 75-1501  Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement (for the A/V grants, labeled “CASAVP” or by the words “Access Visitation” in the grant title under TAGGS).  We should therefore remember that A/V grants are considered “Child Support Enforcement” in purpose — all the mediation, all the supervised visitation, all the parental education/counseling (the three purposes allowable for SAVP grants in this state).
OR, they were Program Source 75-1212 AND labeled “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”  (translation:  Adoptions, essentially, from kids in Foster care.  The fact of ripping kids away from their protective or law-abiding parents, it seems, is not a “covered” purpose for this set of grants.  Other information (plenty of it) is available on-line about the “PSSF” grants.
OR, they were Program Source 75-1212 (as above) AND not specified anything at all, on USASpending.gov ,that is:

“Timeline” display shows this as fairly equal amounts from years 2007 – 2010 only…

Total Dollars:
$14,728,641
Transactions:
1 to 22 of 22


Transaction # 1
Federal Award ID: 0210CASAVP: 6 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: 2002 SAVP
Obligation Date: 
09-14-2009 
Obligation Amount: 
$-46,392

Transaction # 2
Federal Award ID: 0010CASAVP: 8 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: 2000 SAVP
Obligation Date: 
09-14-2009 
Obligation Amount: 
$-48,827

Transaction # 3
Federal Award ID: 0910CASAVP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION
Obligation Date: 
12-23-2008 
Obligation Amount: 
$942,497

Transaction # 4
Federal Award ID: 0801CASCIP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: 2008 (SCIP) STATE CT IMPROVE. – BASIC
Obligation Date: 
09-15-2008 
Obligation Amount:
$1,082,580

Transaction # 5
Federal Award ID: 0901CASCIP: 6 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
06-06-2009 
Obligation Amount:
$266,289

Transaction # 6
Federal Award ID: 1001CASCIP: 2 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2010 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
02-12-2010 
Obligation Amount:
$265,910

Transaction # 7
Federal Award ID: 1001CASCIP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2010 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
10-30-2009 
Obligation Amount:
$806,010

Transaction # 8
Federal Award ID: 1001CASCIT: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2010 TRAINING STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
10-30-2009 
Obligation Amount:
$808,689

Transaction # 9
Federal Award ID: 1010CASAVP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION
Obligation Date: 
11-25-2009 
Obligation Amount: 
$946,820

Transaction # 10
Federal Award ID: 0701CASCID: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: 2007 SCIP – DATA SHARING
Obligation Date: 
09-19-2007 
Obligation Amount:
$870,481

Transaction # 11
Federal Award ID: 0901CASCID: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2009 DATA STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
12-07-2008 
Obligation Amount:
$786,069

Transaction # 12
Federal Award ID: 0701CASCIP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: 2007 STATE COURT IMPROVE. – BASIC
Obligation Date: 
09-19-2007 
Obligation Amount:
$1,272,138

Transaction # 13
Federal Award ID: 0801CASCID: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: 2008 (SCID) STATE CT IMPROVE. – DATA SHARING
Obligation Date: 
09-15-2008 
Obligation Amount:
$818,023

Transaction # 14
Federal Award ID: 0310CASAVP: 2 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: 2003 SAVP
Obligation Date: 
09-14-2009 
Obligation Amount: 
$-15,092

Transaction # 15
Federal Award ID: 0110CASAVP: 4 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: 2001 SAVP
Obligation Date: 
09-14-2009 
Obligation Amount: 
$-26,938

Transaction # 16
Federal Award ID: 0701CASCIT: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: 2007 SCIP – TRAINING
Obligation Date: 
09-19-2007 
Obligation Amount:
$871,401

Transaction # 17
Federal Award ID: 0901CASCIP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
12-07-2008 
Obligation Amount:
$807,034

Transaction # 18
Federal Award ID: 0901CASCIT: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2009 TRAINING STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
12-07-2008 
Obligation Amount:
$788,370

Transaction # 19
Federal Award ID: 0810CASAVP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: 2008 SAVP
Obligation Date: 
01-30-2008 
Obligation Amount: 
$957,600

Transaction # 20
Federal Award ID: 1001CASCID: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: FY 2010 DATA STATE COURT IMPROVE
Obligation Date: 
10-30-2009 
Obligation Amount:
$833,016

Transaction # 21
Federal Award ID: 0710CASAVP: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1501 “Payments to States for Child Support Enforcement and Family Supp”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs
Description: 2007 SAVP
Obligation Date: 
07-20-2007 
Obligation Amount: 
$950,190

Transaction # 22
Federal Award ID: 0801CASCIT: 1 (Grant) 

Recipient: CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL 
303 SECOND STREET, SOUTH TOWER, San Francisco, California
Program Source: 75-1512 “Promoting Safe and Stable Families”
Department/Agency: Department of Health and Human ServicesAdministration for Children and Families
CFDA Program: 93.586: State Court Improvement Program
Description: 2008 (SCIT) STATE CT IMPROVE. – TRAINING
Obligation Date: 
09-15-2008 
Obligation Amount:
$792,773

… Description of the purpose of “Promoting Safe and Stable Families (CFDA 93556, which could include adoption promotion) grants, from a site “CFDA.gov”:

Authorization (040):
Social Security Act, as amended under , Title IV, Part B, Section Subpart 2.
Objectives (050):
To prevent the unnecessary separation of children from their families, improve the quality of care and services to children and their families, and ensure permanency for children by reuniting them with their parents, by adoption or by another permanent living arrangement. This is accomplished through issuance of grants to State child welfare agencies and eligible Indian Tribes to serve families at risk or in crisis, including provision of the following services: reunification and adoption services, preplacement/preventive services, follow-up services after return of a child from foster care, respite care, services designed to improve parenting skills; and infant safe haven programs; to fund community-based family support services that promote the safety and well-being of children and families, to afford children a safe, stable and supportive family environment, to strengthen parental relationships and promote healthy marriages, and otherwise to enhance child development; time-limited family reunification services to facilitate the reunification of the child safely and appropriately within a timely fashion; and adoption promotion and support services designed to encourage more adoptions out of the foster care system, when adoption, promotes the best interests of the child. In addition, a portion of funds also is reserved for a separate formula grant for States and territories to support monthly caseworker visits with children who are in foster care. A small proportion of appropriated funds are [“is”.not “are”.  Sentence subject “proportion”= singular.  “Funds” = plural] reserved for research, evaluation and technical assistance, which may be awarded competitively through contracts or discretionary grants.

JUST TO TAKE A LOOK AT A SINGLE (the 2nd largest showing, over $1 million) ‘PROMOTING SAFE AND STABLE FAMILIES” GRANT, year 2008, 0801CASIP transaction#4 above) for the detail (clickable on the grant # at USASPENDING.gov) we see that it was a Block Grant (no “State Application ID possibly because state didn’t have to apply?) and place of performance, and other data, remarkably vague: – – – – – – – – -(part of the detail under that grant, below):

Project and Award Info

Major Agency Department of Health and Human Services
Agency Code 7590
Agency Name Administration for Children and Families
Federal Award ID 0801CASCIP
Federal Award ID Modification 1
State Application ID Number SAI UNAVAILABLE
CFDA Program Number 93.586
CFDA Program Title State Court Improvement Program
Assistance Category G::grant
Assistance Type Block Grant
Project Description 2008 (Scip) State Ct IMPROVE. – Basic
Program Source Agency 1512 75
Program Source Account 1512
Program Source Sub Account N/A
Program Source Description Promoting Safe and Stable Families
Business Fund Indicator NON
URI

Back to top

Action

Fiscal Year 2008
Fiscal Year / Quarter 200810
Action Type New assistance action
Original Subsidy Cost of the Direct Loan/Loan Guarantee $0
Face Value of Direct Loan/Loan Guarantee $0
Federal Funding Amount $1,082,580
Non-Federal Funding Amount $0
Total Funding Amount $1,082,580
Obligation / Action Date 09-15-2008
Starting Date 10-01-2007
Ending Date 09-30-2010
Record Type Individual action
Corrected Fiscal Year / Quarter 200810

Back to top

Principal Place of Performance

Principal Place Code
Principal Place State
Principal Place County or City
Principal Place Zip Code 0
Principal Place Congressional District 0
Principal Place of Performance Country Code : UNITED STATES

IF THIS POST PROVOKED SOME DIFFERENT WAYS OF LOOKING AT THE SITUATION, AND WAS HELPFUL, HIT ME WITH A COMMENT.  THANKS!

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 6, 2013 at 7:03 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. OKay….. well looks like I’ll have to reduce margins, pdf, or delete that TAGGS chart. I’ve been talking about the situation (the subject matter it covers) with some friends recently; discovering too many “anomalies….”

    Let's Get Honest

    November 6, 2013 at 8:55 pm

  2. […] Who Owns, Operates and Leases the Real Estate [and buildings] in Which Justice is Dispensed?  [[make that "from which" justice is dispensed…]] […]


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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: