To review where we stand in the Connecticut, Again (2016) post series, I keep links near the top and have made them short-links in case people wish to Tweet, or share elsewhere. Please do!! The Titles are long, but the underlying urls are not.
[Those links and text will be repeated below].
We are looking at nonprofit after nonprofit after nonprofit and the money moving between them, and between government and them. Some larger than others, often copying each other. Word is out that some low-income youth are slipping through the cracks, not having mentors, and causing problems, such as violence, which providing mentors would then correct.
It seems to me that what’s significantly slipping through the cracks and might, if found more directly affect the poverty status of troubled youth and communities, is accountability for public (and private) money run through those tax-exempts.
For example, I discovered that The National Mentoring Partnership needs people to send donations to them through “Network For Good.” Here’s THAT set of tax returns — sounds like this is working out real well for this organization, maybe not so well for people who wish to sort through over 6,000 pages of tax return to see what any “Organization We Help People” (fabricated name) received in the latest round:
| ORGANIZATION NAME |
ST |
YR |
FORM |
PP |
TOTAL ASSETS |
EIN |
| Network for Good |
DC |
2014 |
990 |
6375 |
$77,679,754.00 |
68-0480736 |
| Network for Good |
DC |
2013 |
990 |
637 |
$62,156,491.00 |
68-0480736 |
| Network for Good |
DC |
2012 |
990 |
203 |
$56,249,127.00 |
68-0480736 |
How does $56M turn to $77M in just two years? Where are those assets being held (invested)? (It turns out most of those assets are “Grants for Distribution” — meaning, they are being held somewhere, and while being held somewhere THAT SIZE of fund balance, even if held for just a single month (!!) or ongoing, WILL be producing interest. The website doesn’t show most of this — but they have just moved their employees over to a for-profit C-Corps related organization, meaning, less transparent to the public.
Their website does NOT provide searchable information on grants distributed (nonprofit leadership or employees must log in). While this may (I’m sure does) increase the amount of money moving from donors to (wherever) or allegedly moving there, it bypasses credibility checks IF and WHEN those nonprofits are involved in providing government services, or contracting/taking donations also from governments THROUGH here.
Network for Good is a hybrid organization—a nonprofit-owned for-profit. Network for Good’s nonprofit donor-advised fund uses the Internet and mobile technology to securely and efficiently distribute thousands of donations from donors to their favorite charities each year. Our donor-advised fund is accredited by the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance and meets all 20 of its standards for charity accountability. View our accreditation information.
And how does a tax return get to be that long (conjecture while it’s still loading on my laptop — out of the many grants they are distributing, the listing is only one or two showing per page, instead of the about 10/page the IRS form prompts for)….
Wow. How Network For Good is now operating –Gross Receipts for Year ending 2014 — $230M. Grants to other organizations (yes, shown 1/page for a total of $218M distributed!) $218M, they spent almost nothing on salaries — but $6.8M on Professional Fundraising services. The previous year, they spent $4M on salaries.
It has a related C-Corps for fundraising, so all board members shown on the above nonprofit will show their salaries as paid from “Related Organization” — this being the same organization Name (“Network for Good, Inc.” at the exact same street address (but different legal domicile), and the 501©3 (above, nonprofit) Network for Good owns 51% (formerly 100% it said) of the assets and revenues of the for-profit (taxable) management/fund-raising C-Corps also called “Network for Good, Inc.” (which may explain why it’s legal domicile is in a different state; the name was already taken in the original state).
That for-profit (taxable) management/fund-raising C-Corps “Network for Good, Inc.” controls another for-profit (taxable) entity called “GiveCorps (also a C-Corp) which does “software for nonprofits and universities.” At the end of the day, this nonprofit and its thus controls everything (51% is a majority stake…). Despite all having the same street address and suite#, what you see above is a Delaware Legal Domicile; the other one, a New York legal domicile, and GiveCorps, a Maryland one.
Incidentally that last paragraph I saw from the tax return: Page 1 (showing a major change in Salaries Line Item), Part VIIB (showing “Network for Good” as a $6M+ “Independent Contractor.” I never did get how an organization gets to call its own “Related Organization” an “independent contractor” in Part VIIB of the Form 990. ….. Schedule R (Related Organization) as well as Schedule L (Transactions between interested persons) reveals this, and in this case, Schedule O (Supplemental information) talks about the relationship.
As I keep saying, you can learn a lot from a tax return, and sometimes it will be laid out more specifically than clicking all over the organization’s website and speculating on what is meant by the descriptive text.
General Principles:
A lot of “PR” must continually happen about all the great projects run by smaller nonprofits which the bigger philanthropies are supporting for proper (?) distraction from what their funders are doing with the wealth held as investments within the philanthropy or private foundation, that is, filing with the IRS either a Form 990 or Form 990-PF for private foundation, or owned similarly but held under separate organization or entity.
A reminder about the process: the donation of a SMALL percentage of tax-exempt corporate “profits” (it can be around 5% only) yields for any such privately-controlled corporation positive local PR and significant corporate tax reduction simply because of foundation status.
Another reminder: they are organizing with each other as tax-exempts to act regionally with common purpose. Whether or not this is grassroots requests, or the will of the people, at this point, doesn’t seem to matter. The donations should be looked at — are they going to legitimately registered nonprofits / entities or not? However, the assets of the larger groups should be looked at as to how they are coordinating with each other regionally, and cross-cutting legal representation provided in the political units which individuals must deal with.
That coordinated privately held wealth — when combined with the public funding, is a major power bloc and political influence. This wealth will ALWAYS describe itself as for the purpose of better provision of public (government) services; but from the individual’s perspective, it should be looked at as a network, and that network as to the collective honesty and transparency of its members.=
So, who ever gets around to fact-checking whether donations record go to legitimate nonprofits, or figuring out what some of the indicators are when the dealing may be less than legitimate, despite positive local press… But this is something the average person who will commit to consistently taking a look at commonly overlooked details, can actually do. Case in point….I do…
New Haven Street Outreach Workers program had tough financial year
By Shahid Abdul-Karim, New Haven Register
POSTED: 08/03/14, 9:57 PM EDT | UPDATED: ON 08/03/2014 2 COMMENTS
NEW HAVEN >> New Haven Family Alliance Executive Director Barbara Tinney said the Street Outreach Workers Program had a difficult 2013-14 fiscal year.
The program that works to prevent violence has been operating at a loss for the past three years, Tinney said
“Full funding for the program requires $400,000 and we’ve managed the program at the funding level of $348,000 in fiscal year 2013-14,” said Tinney.
Fiscal year 2013-14 ended June 30….
According to Tinney, the program budget covers these expenses: seven full time and one part time street outreach workers; one part-time supervisor, one part-time program coordinator, fringe benefits including employer taxes, health, dental and life insurance, program expenses such as cell phones, youth activities, trips, and supplies, and administrative costs that are less than 5 percent of the total program budget.
Tinney noted that her organization has “a contract through the New Haven Board of Education for services that support families and student school achievement,” she said.
“The New Haven Family Alliance obtained separate state funding for violence prevention awarded through the city, as one of 18 organizations,” said Tinney.** “Funding is obtained through processes that require the submission of proposals and applications that are vetted by reviewers.”
The Street Outreach Workers Program is one of a number of anti-violence initiatives in the city. Other efforts include community policing, Project Longevity, the relatively new YouthStat initiative that works to connect services for youths, and numerous community organizations working to prevent violence, The number of shooting and homicide victims is nearly the same for 2014 to date compared to the first half of 2013, according to police reports.
According to city’s spokesman Lawrence Grotheer, the city’s appropriation to New Haven Family Alliance the current fiscal year is $425,308; approximately $70,000 of which came from the school district’s general fund.
**In what year is not defined.
Interesting admissions, in that the organization NHFA apparently stopped filing annual reports (as a state business entity) as of Year 2011, and per IRS, stopped filing tax returns past year 2011 also (see charts below) for which their EIN# was subsequently revoked in 2015, which the IRS published in 2016. So much for “vetting.” Moreover, CFGNH.org, local half-billion-dollar community organization which as of 2015 (webpage last revised, though its still up there) continued to promote and may have also donated to the NHFA (CFGNH’s board membership –you should read their tax return’ Schedule O –it involves by definition public officials or appointees by public officials who absolutely ought to know better than to grant to a non-filing entity after it stopped filing…) CFGNH’s therefore refusal to upload a Schedule I of identified grantees, by name, address, EIN# and amount granted each year reflects on the chief executive of City of New Haven, the Bar Association Probate court, Chamber of Commerce, etc.
But apparently neither “commoners,” nor working folk, nor anyone receiving services aresupposed to check up, or think about such things…
Section on NHFA (Street Outreach Workers Program) DONOR
New Alliance Foundation
on 195 Church Street, 7th Floor, New Haven
A New Alliance Foundation (who??) Annual Report says in Fiscal Year 2013, they gave NHFA $2,500 for the SOWP. Not much, but they say they gave for:
To support Project Success, a work-based learning program embedded in the Street Outreach Worker Program and designed to provide services, supports and opportunities for youthful ex-offenders experiencing significant barriers to academic success and employment readiness
Did New Alliance Foundation {“NAF” for this post} care that New Haven Family Alliance wasn’t filing its reports and IRS returns, on donating to it in that year? And, what’s with all the groups named “Alliance” anyhow? See NAF’s “About Us” History Page for some clues on who it is. The entire website is in bright, primary colors (red, yellow blue) and some green:
NewAlliance Foundation was established in 2004 through a contribution of $40 million in stock from NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc. at the time of the Bank’s initial public offering. Committed to the same long history of philanthropy of its predecessor, The New Haven Savings Bank, NewAlliance formed the Foundation to enhance economic vitality and improve the quality of life for residents in the communities it served.
In April 2011, upon the closing of the merger of NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc. with First Niagara Financial Group, NewAlliance Foundation became a private, independent foundation serving 44 Connecticut communities.
Since its inception, NewAlliance Foundation has approved $18 million in grants to local organizations.
??Chronologically the New Alliance Foundation was established in 2004 when $40 million in stock from the related “NewAlliance Banchares, Inc.” at time of IPO, but only “became a private, independent foundation” after a merger in 2011. So, what type of entity was it between 2004-2011 then? Well, NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc. WAS (until withdrawn) a Delaware Corporation with a NY street address and registered to do business in Connecticut, per the SOS filing (see other related ones, below):
| Business Details |
| Business Name: |
NEWALLIANCE BANCSHARES, INC. |
Citizenship/State Inc: |
Foreign/DE |
| Business ID: |
0771845 |
Last Report Filed Year: |
2011 |
| Business Address: |
NONE |
Business Type: |
Stock |
| Mailing Address: |
726 EXCHANGE STREET, SUITE 618, BUFFALO, NY, 14210 |
Business Status: |
Withdrawn |
| Date Inc/Registration: |
Mar 15, 2004 |
Name in State of INC: |
NEWALLIANCE BANCSHARES, INC. |
| Commence Business Date: |
Apr 01, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
This is both fascinating, a bit complicated (no doubt intentionally) and shows a close connection with The Community Foundation of New Haven — as in shared investments and investment income, and clouding the contribution trail on another nonprofit at the same street address (and floor number) as NewAlliance Foundation.
Accordingly, I’m moving it to a related post, with intention to post both on the same day. I looked at this approximately one-half day July 13, 2016, before deciding to include in the trail, but exclude from this long-delayed “Post #2 of 3 on Connecticut”
I’m sure there is more background to the story of this New Haven Savings Bank / New Alliance Bancshares, Inc. merger, and the two EIN#s, and the collaboration with The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven. I will leave it for later, or for others to look up; THIS post is about the SOWP and its business model, “RIMP” as part of a nationally organized partnership which didn’t bother (it would seem) to incorporate or, if it did, isn’t making the business entity an easy find.
Welcome to the National Mentoring Resource Center
Youth mentoring programs can use the Center to strengthen their services by:
Applying for no-cost training and technical assistance, including customized coaching to enhance your program and troubleshoot challenges using evidence-based practices
Accessing high-quality program implementation resources, including tools, program curricula, and training materials
Nominate your program or tools to be highlighted on the NMRC
Learning about what works in mentoring through evidence reviews on the effectiveness of program models and specific programs, practices, and services for specific populations of mentees
A bit of Acronym confusion in that “NMRC” logo. How can this be “A Program of OJJDP” in the common (in these circles) usage of the acronym “OJJDP” to refer to part of the United States Department of Justice (i.e., government) — but the same page at the bottom — if you get down that far — specifically disclaims endorsement or ownership of the NMRC?
This Web site is funded through a grant from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this Web site including, without limitation, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided.
What’s more, that link “MENTOR” leads to a website called The National Mentoring Partnership” which is currently using a fiscal agent for donations (“Network for Good, EIN#680480736”) and may or may not be a business entity itself. Did you know that not ALL children have a mentor (parents aren’t exactly referenced) and therefore we are experience (in addition to — if you look elsewhere, a “fatherlessness” epidemic) a mentoring gap that must be filled?
MENTOR: The National Mentoring Partnership is the unifying voice for the youth mentoring movement. Research shows that young people who have a mentor are much more likely to participate in after-school activities, be leaders in clubs and teams, volunteer and go on to college. But one out of every three young people will grow up without a mentor. MENTOR and its network of affiliate Mentoring Partnerships provide a range of resources and tools to help to close this mentoring gap
Meanwhile in Rhode Island another group called “Feinstein Foundation” helped those already involved (MetLife and the Chamber Education Foundation) go statewide:
In 1990, a partnership was formed among Warwick Public Schools, MetLife and the Chamber Education Foundation (now d/b/a the Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership) to develop a mentoring program to help youth succeed. What started with 10 volunteer mentors from MetLife and 10 elementary school students (mentees) has grown to include over 200 mentoring pairs at all Warwick Schools. Through the generosity of The Feinstein Foundation, we brought this successful model statewide, resulting in the development of the RI Mentoring Partnership. Since 1999, RIMP has served as the statewide expert in mentoring.
So far, we have two foundations & MetLife plus a non-entity under Network for Good and a website with funds provided by the government under USDOJ to promote the concept. Plus the public schools obviously already supported by public funding as school districts are also government entities. Keeping all this straight so far?
Complex post title as it ended up shows how convoluted federal/state government services can get once nonprofits with dbas and fiscal agents advertising the great business/service models from outside any given state, while keeping this organized nationally under websites using their own “fiscal agents” (likely to avoid detection or following the cash flow, and to better conceal the precise sponsorship & sources of the great ideas suddenly showing up locally. The promotion is — “our program MUST be great — after all it’s in use “Nationally.”
I added some links to this title for preview purposes:
#2 of 3, Connecticut’s New Haven Family Alliance | Street Outreach Worker Program (SOWP), SOWP’s Role Model, a Rhode Island 501©3 “Institute for Study and Practice of Nonviolence” + ITS partner “Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership” (“RIMP,” a d/b/a of Chamber Education Foundation) somehow organized under non-entity? “The National Mentoring Partnership” | See Also the USDOJ/OJP/OJJDP facilitating Public/Private Partnerships & Global One-World Agenda.
Which brings up the “PR” factor — I just noticed how many words related to this public/private business model have the letter “pr” in them, not to mention, how much “PR” (Public Relations — advertising) is necessary to keep up the PRetense that this is somehow all good for the public welfare. Consider:
The OJJDP of course implements the JJDPA of 1974 (see image or OJJDP site). 
Once we begin to understand that the Programs are supposed to Prevent the Problems, and that the Privately Owned Nonprofits will Run the Programs (but sometimes for-profits designed them) while Public Sector (and private) donates voluntarily, or involuntarily in advance (i.e., through taxation) to promote them, we can see then that the logical end of this rationale or “problem-solving|prevention practices” philosophy is an endless parade of programming based not just on, say, “juvenile justice and delinquency prevention” but preventing almost anything else a programmers’ heart could desire, or a technical assistance and training organization could even conceive of granting certification for while working with the press on their reputation for being “the good guys.”
Unless you REALLY dig deep and start understand this now basically describes social services and criminal justice at almost any level– coordinated consolidation and streamlining of implementation of what so-and-so- says “works” (or is evidence-based in some fashion).
Then you go read some of the followup press, as on this one, and the street outreach workers in question are in trouble with the law, again — not to mention the sponsoring organization as we have already identified as to New Haven Family Alliance (and one of its promoters — Community Foundation for Greater New Haven) are less than interested in compliance with regulations applying to them as business entities and tax-exempt organizations, both…
The even longer version of the title, with some revisions indicated.
#2 of 3, Connecticut’s New Haven Family Alliance | Street Outreach Worker Program (SOWP), SOWP’s Role Model, Rhode Island 501©3 “Institute for Study and Practice of Nonviolence” + Its partner “Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership” (“RIMP,” a d/b/a of Chamber Education Foundation) mimicking governmental acronym OJJDP to promote somehow organized under non-entity(?) “The National Mentoring Partnership” but using “Network for Good” as Online Fiscal Agent (i.e., No Legitimate Business Entity for The National Mentoring Partnership Found So Far). See Also USDOJ/OJP/OJJDP supporting dubious Public/Private Partnerships for the Global One-World Agenda.”
This post was painfully long (“like pulling teeth”) to get published. The roots went deep, and a lot of material was moved to the side for separate publication. I had to fight my natural desire to finish explaining and illustrating each concept and keep from letting my gut-level gag-response to discovering yet another network of mentoring programming with help from the OJJDP, overshadowing communication of just what I was reacting too.
The connection to the “OJJDP” led me to the OJJDP’s dealings with what is called the “Council of State Governments Justice Center” (CSGjusticecenter.org) and, again, how state and federal government sites are becoming subsidized marketplaces for private programming. Meanwhile, the various Executive Branch Departments (USDOJ, USDOE. US DHHS, USDOL, etc.) we tend to think of as segregated by subject matter / jurisdiction are blending operations in councils (example: FIRC — Federal Interagency ReEntry Council).
So, I have found a California state-wide AOC site pushing a curricula originated in Canada (!!), or a Kentucky one pushing a parenting education program based out of Georgia (Kids First), or, recently, a Connecticut state fatherhood site pushing a “MERGE” website originating in Massachusetts. For the post subject matter, the “SOWP” (Street Outreach Workers Program) was already a public/private sponsored enterprise. In reading a number of news articles on this (in the process of looking at an original board members’ name) I learned how that “SOWP” had indeed been modeled after a program in Rhode Island, and that there was a Boston version of the same program.
To review where we stand in the series, I keep links near the top and have made them short-links in case people wish to Tweet, or share elsewhere. Please do!! The Titles are long, but the underlying urls are not.
Reasons to read that June 8, 2016, post if haven’t yet: briefly (at least for this blogger) when considering “Connecticut Family Court Matters”… which by and large will also apply to other regions in type if not exact names of the private nonprofits involved…
- This post abstracts (from one of my 2013 posts on Connecticut) a timeline of how an “Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse”## was created in Connecticut and by whom. These underground economies attempt to defeat tracking of financial cash flow, power and influence. Any UNDERground economy being set up in a public institution is bad, not good. Public institutions should not be places where people who wish to hide cash flow, payoffs, coordinate and set up private operations involving multiple entities (i.e., RICO).
To explain that last point:
##“Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse” in 2013 was my short title for, bascially Connecticut’s“Regional Family Trial Docket” originated to grab jurisdiction of certain kinds of “high-conflict” cases and forward them to a venue, essentially to be controlled by AFCC personnel with a unified private agenda which may, or may not, coincide with justice, due process, gender equality of any sort, or the best interests of the children and people involved or the public — although no doubt this was a selling point.
I’d written this up in 2013, but took the time in 2016 to abstract the timeline/points for easier reading, to show HOW it happens. I’d already asked “Someone Got This Evidence — You Could Too; What’s the Followup Plan?” in the 2013 post. That section of the June 8 ,2016, is worth copying and saving separately to show others (Please include exact post (not just the generic blog) link and credits to Let’s Get Honest and this blog!)
Principles involved / violated in regards accountability in public institutions /which affects “justice” dispensed in some of them:
Recognize that the public/private partnership “paradigm” actually encourages racketeering WITHIN and WITH public (government) entities by encouraging privatization of government itself, and throughout government institutions. It sets up essentially alternate and privately controlled (but working through coordinated, different entities who congratulate themselves for such “collaboration”) forms of un-elected government. It facilitates and attracts tax-evasion because tracking the operations of nonprofits takes a lot more work and is not always possible when they only exist, some of them, briefly — but then continue doing commerce as though they existed legitimately.
Consent* for privatization of government* obtained in part through constantly promoting** the theme of “scarcity” of public resources, budget deficit which a comparison of press on State, County, or even National general funds & budgets when compared with actual holdings, pooled investment platforms of state, county and federal government entities as shown across thousands of “CAFRs” comprehensive annual financial statements, proves to be mis-labeling — essentially, a whopper of a big, fat and deliberate lie. That scarcity is in the labelling of the accountants and not a financial reality.
(*including passive consent through ignorance from apathy, manipulative behaviors verbiage, and so much of the public being under constant pressure in the first place) (**in mainstream media / “the press” and press releases). The story goes, there’s so little to go around, so we need coaching and help with distributions to better resource and target what little there is to those most critical areas of society. That’s false! It’s only relevant IF one decides just to ignore that which has been stockpiled. The stockpiles are on the basis of placing liability for all future possible needs (liabilities projected forward) especially on pensions, while not doing the same for assets. Why should held “assets” be segregated from General Funds, while held “liabilities” are dumped en masse onto the general fund — only one part of government ops?)
The “deficits” are only true when the other holdings, the revenues the produce, and that those holding them know about the other holdings, are ignored. Not to mention what’s really taking place in the nonprofit sector.
So, all this being reported recently in Connecticut was set in place decades earlier, and (inter)nationally and there is a larger agenda behind it, to break down national and jurisdiction-based rule of law in favor of a better, more peaceable (sustainable, etc.) agenda. The belief that this is better for the planet than continuing to have separate nation-states and patriotism/nationalism associated with them dates back at least to World War I and II, and NGOS set up around that time were already strategizing how to re-organize the globe so as to avoid World War III. This strategizing was deliberately done outside of straight government entities alone (parallel institutions in different countries, i.e., the Council of Foreign Relations in NY + the RIIA (Royal Institute of International Affairs) and associated journal, in London / Chatham House, etc.
I referenced this at least once this year, as in May 25, 2016 post “Federal Designer Families: How Californians got their “CFCC,” CRS Year 2000 Report on Access Visitation“
I also posted, earlier, “The Rise of the dual culture of world development and world government in International Affairs, 1930-1950” by Giovanni Farese, and how part of the preparation for world government includes parallel institutions in different countries. The role of the RIIA (Royal Institute of International Affairs) and “Chatham House” as well as the Council of Foreign relations was mentioned. The discussions from 1930-1950 were again resurrected in later decades, for example the 1970s, and only a real fool would pretend that ALL of these influence have simply somehow dissipated, been neutralized and everyone involved with them has simply given up the idea.
See Separate Post about Globalization, Regionalization, an article on the APEC Summit posted at Chatham House/The RIIA in London which spells out the “functionalist” approach in current use to bypass governments and obtain regional cooperation — as well as how to get around the “Major Powers” struggle to create single, defined “regions” which they control (viewed as desirable in the globalization context). As of now that post is called:
CT, Cont’d. — What You May Think is Local, Isn’t; Developed Countries ARE already organized “Regionally.” You MUST understand the role of Private Nonprofits in Globalization! (That link will still function once it’s published even if title changes).
The (fairly) recent article on a regional summit pointing out the intent to bypass (overcome) the restrictions of governments and nationalist leaders. I show this, then bring it home to the current topics within the USA and specific to the custody, divorce, and domestic violence issues.
It expresses what I have been seeing and writing about in the US — for example, take a single topic which is to be promoted (Marriage/Fatherhood justifying funding of “Federal Designer Families” (My term, see http://HMRF.acf.hhs.gov/grants for recent grants list and more official terms such as Healthy Marriage |Responsible Fatherhood | ReEntry).
Between what may have been some hacking (or at least significant computer problems) and my urgency to get this material out within a short time span (one post building upon another), I am prioritizing speed and “the general idea” over screening for duplications, or the copyediting issues of, whether a moving of material from one post to another leaves some “hanging, no longer accurate” internal references in any post. Kind of like a “broken link” but a verbal one.
If you want to understand this material, keep reading — and make sure you actually come Face to Face with some of the databases I keep talking about do some sample lookups! I guarantee you, understanding will increase exponentially (and accelerate) once you start taking those INITIAL steps. If you refuse to look at a tax return, or search an organization name on a statewide database, you are rejecting, as I’ve pointed out in this series, “a Rich Source of Information on Any Organization.” Organizations simply do not operate in a vacuum; they network (!), the more of this closer look (at the financials and business registrations especially) one starts doing, the more cognitive and perceptual “lights will start going on” when you are out and about reading — in general — on organizations involved and in about government/private sector power alliances.
If and when you do this, prepare also to be shocked at the difference between public persona and positive press, even federal department approval, and absolutely law-breaking behavior by the same organizations — at the state level.
Post #1 of 2 contained also material on New Haven Family Alliance (as did some other posts); this post focuses more on my discovery of what other program it was modeled on, as the title describes. Because of my comments in the Post #1 title, I felt I should clarify my concerns about this NHFA, and, apart from my concerns about its fiscal behavior, found out other disturbing events were reported in 2014 and 2015 about one of its programs, the Street Outreach Worker Program.
This post deals more with some details of the Street Outreach Worker Program, and the Rhode Island Institute on which the “SOWP” was modeled. This led to “National Mentoring Partnership” and the OJJDP.
The Street Outreach Worker Program was (as happens) modeled on another one in Rhode Island.
One begins to wonder whether or not the business model includes the fiscal fiascoes too. And why such famous, high-profile major foundations also, notably, favor these models.
In this post you’ll also see by the bottom of this page** how the City of New Haven is involved, through its Youth Division, of condoning and endorsing continued programming and advertising for at least one — and I doubt the only one — charity targeting at-risk youth, particularly young men of color.
(**Post #3 of 3 I believe has more on the “Youth Division” connection.)
NHFA — The New Haven Family Alliance, Inc.
Regarding the “NHFA,” to clarify my terms “Inactive/Defunct,” as a Connecticut Corporation since 1991 it is still marked “Active”:
…although WHY it is still marked “Active” is questionable, as the Commercial Recording Division of the Secretary of State’s database “C.O.N.C.O.R.D.” says it’s not filed any annual report since 2011. In some (not all) other states, this would’ve resulted in automatic involuntary dissolution. Take a look at the cover sheet which shows when one clicks on organization name above for the details. Filing history (link not shown) would be a third click and level of detail for search results on any organization.
| Business Details |
| Business Name: |
NEW HAVEN FAMILY ALLIANCE, INC. THE |
Citizenship/State Inc: |
Domestic/CT |
| Business ID: |
0260970 |
Last Report Filed Year: |
2011 |
| Business Address: |
370 JAMES STREET, SUITE 201, NEW HAVEN, CT, 06513 |
Business Type: |
Non-Stock |
| Mailing Address: |
370 JAMES STREET, SUITE 201, NEW HAVEN, CT, 06513 |
Business Status: |
Active |
| Date Inc/Registration: |
May 21, 1991 |
|
| Principals Details |
| Name/Title |
Business Address |
Residence Address |
| DAN SANTOS PRESIDENT |
SALES EXECUTIVE, CREST LINCOLN-MERCURY, 185 AMITY ROAD, ROAD BRIDGE, CT, 06525 |
37 PERRY ROAD, HAMDEN, CT, 06514 |
| DONALD D NELSON VICE PRESIDENT |
NONE |
50 ELIZABETH STREET, GUILFORD, CT, 06437 |
| ROBERT MACALPINE TREASURER |
NONE |
25 BRITTANY CIRCLE, CROMWELL, CT, 06416 |
| IMPORTANT: There are more principals for this business that are not shown here.View All Principals(4) {{4th Principal, Kay Harvey, Secretary, Business address “None”)}} |
|
| Agent Summary |
| Agent Name |
BARBARA B LINDSAY |
| Agent Business Address |
WIGGIN & DANA, PO BOX 1832, NEW HAVEN, CT, 06508 |
| Agent Residence Address |
5 INWOOD LN, WESTPORT, CT, 06880 |
|
IRS Revocation for non-filing (re-posted below also) (searchable at http://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/ – use EIN#)
| 1-1 of 1 results |
Results Per Page (=choose from 25/50/100/250) |
« Prev | 1-1 | Next » |
« Prev | 1-1 | Next »
I have to consider, regarding why is it still “ACTIVE,” other than that, so far, probably no one in the larger public, or even reading about this news-making (locally) organization probably noticed, or if someone noticed, no one communicated with Denise W. Merrill, Secretary of State (see logo below) or at the Commercial Recording Division to point it out — that the NHFA might just be a little too high on the food chain to “out.”
After all, its main source of revenues has been public, that is, government, grants, over one million/year recently.
Although the State of Connecticut, inexplicably, has not revoked NHFA’s business registration for not filing for, it looks like now five (5) years (2012 -13 -14 – 15) (or so far in 2016), the IRS as we can see, after three years actually did revoke it. Again, RELEVANT IN THIS CONTEXT — while (I checked) NHFA isn’t getting money direct from HHS, its last known tax return indicates $1.4 million of government grants. (searchable at 990finder.foundationcenter.org, recommend use the EIN# for searching. I also showed in my last post). This in combination with its involvement in the Male Information Network involving other organizations, AND Yale University (Dept. of Psychiatry), The Consultation Center, and with backing of not a few major foundations for its “SOWP” (Street Outreach Worker Program) is a little disturbing.
In addition, it seems to be getting some help (through the City of New Haven “Youth Services Department,” also shown on this post Post #3 of 3, when published) from the US DOJ.
Below, recommended to read the entire story. There are two accounts, it does mention current CEO (Barbara Tinney). Separately, I saw that this ‘SOWP” has also been endorsed and is supported by other major foundations:
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/ex-outreach_worker_blasts_latest_arrests/
“Ex-Outreach Worker, Arrested Again, Speaks Out” by Paul Bass, Dec. 2, 2014. 11 comments.
Paul Trent Butler former (until 9/2014) NHFA Street Outreach worker; in the 12/2/2014 “New Haven Independent” article (link above) viewed in 2016
Recent (December 2014) article regarding problems with the law from one NHFA’s “SOWP” (Street Outreach Worker Program) — read the whole thing, please. In order to have street credibility, they are hiring workers who’ve had former problems with the law. In this case, one who’d done 14 years for being an accomplice to a 1994 murder. Since then, he also was arrested for bashing through the window of his girlfriend’s home, and stealing her cell phone so she couldn’t call 911, i.e., domestic violence. There was an issue of not bringing in a co-worker (Street Outreach Worker Program) who’d been a witness to a recent murder, in how it would affect his credibility in street outreach. Towards the bottom of the article, a reference to that? recent crime involving “the father of her daughter.”
He said he was fired as whistleblower for “Gross waste of funds” at the agency, has a good working relationship with New Haven Police, but was roughed up and he does not trust Hampden Police. Whatever this situation, here’s also evidence that as of at least September 2014 (when he was fired), NHFA was paying him, not filing tax returns, and not filing annual reports as REQUIRED (but apparently, for this organization, not enforced) for doing business legally within the state.
Quotation from the article:
Butler, who’s 44, traced his recent troubles to his September termination by the New Haven Family Alliance, which operates the street outreach worker program to deal with young people most at risk of committing or being victimized by street violence. Butler lost his job there in September after getting arrested for punching out the window of a door to his ex-girlfriend’s home during an argument. He has since filed a complaint with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO) claiming that he was fired in retaliation for blowing the whistle on “a gross waste of funds” at the agency.
Butler was the second of two street outreach workers to lose their jobs in recent months. Another worker, who had received a second chance after a domestic violence arrest, was fired after refusing to cooperate with police in a murder investigation.
The cases reflect a challenge faced by an effort like the Street Outreach Program: In order to reach the toughest young people, it hires people who themselves have had troubles with the law in the past, who have lived the life and therefore have street credibility. Butler, for instance, served 14 years in prison for being an accomplice to a 1994 New Haven murder.
Family Alliance Executive Director Barbara Tinney Tuesday afternoon categorically denied Butler’s CHRO allegations. She also said Butler was fired for a “pattern of misbehavior” stretching back years.
One comment characterizes the program as “Hug a Thug.” Here’s how it reads:
posted by: Noteworthy on December 3, 2014 11:50am
Hug A Thug Notes:
1. The Street Outreach Program should be renamed as noted in the title of my notes. This is because there is a pattern and practice of coddling and cajoling vs. crime and violence prevention.
2. When you have the players running the program in repeated trouble with the law, you have a problem. Are there others whose transgressions have not risen to this level but still pose a threat?
3. This program should be shut down. Taxpayers already foot the bill for prison re-entry assistance. The NHPD has a rich budget – put a couple of these people who have “street cred” on its payroll and under the NHPD direct supervision, with accountable hours and accomplishments including a required number of direct interactions with gang members. It will also help with community policing.
4. Clearly, there is a lot of free lancing and poor management. These things do not happen in a vacuum.
[emphasis on Point #4, mine):
IF someone such as the Mr. Butler were to, being a worker, whistleblow on financial misdeeds or even waste, how hard would it be to set up a black man who’d already done time as accomplice to murder for further police harassment? Not saying that this happened, but …. Also disturbing is that any organization with the word “FAMILY” in its title is dealing with street outreach workers whose apparent habits include domestic violence and vandalism.
I found a 2007 article in the same publication (New Haven Independent) on this program’s launch which describes its origins, and how NHFA had credibility in responding to the RFP (Request for Proposal) mostly because of its ongoing involvement in — guess what? — the Male Involvement Network!
Street Outreach Workers’ Program Launched July 16, 2007, by Allan Appel In New Haven Independent
(13) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author Posted to: Legal Writes
. . . Born a year and a half ago in the aftermath of discussions about an ultimately abandoned notion of a curfew to curb teen violence, the program is being administered by the New Haven Family Alliance (NHFA), where six out of eight members of the team gathered with the mayor, Chief of Police Ortiz, Barbara Tinney, NHFA’s executive director, and numerous alders and city officials.
“A juxtaposition—” Mayor John DeStefano began his remarks, “We just graduated nearly one thousand great New Haven kids from high school. And they’re doing great. The 5 percent that are causing the municipal havoc are the kids the Street Outreach Workers Program is going to address.
“Let’s look at the facts. They’re primarily African-American, many are already in post-parole situations, and many are very young and have access to guns. In our city there are maybe 200 people like this, disconnected from resources, kids no one is talking to. These workers are going to reach them and bring them in touch with resources.
Who else is behind this program? Where’d the idea come from? Where’d the private money come from? How’d NHFA get picked out of the crowd? in a city-level public bid?
(This article names a program in Providence, Rhode Island: “Institute for the Practice of Non-Violence,” and that a similar model based on it was also in Boston)
(Cont’d from the New Haven Independent article, above):
Having those resources available is apparently one of the reasons the budget of the program has grown from the $400,000, originally discussed in aldermanic negotiations, to $613,000. Bitsie Clark, the downtown alderwomen who assembled the $400,00 from private sources, which was an aldermanic imperative for passage—including United Way, Yale, New Alliance Foundation, Empower New Haven, The Greater New Haven Community Foundation**, Casey Services, and others—was proud and delighted. The additional $200,000 was contributed by the state when the mayor and chief of police appealed to the governor.
The mayor said the fundraising was successful because everyone saw the need. Clark confirmed this….
(**I’ve looked up the business registration of this corporation. It never went by that name; same words in different order.) They considered a teen curfew. In the context of people not wanting the teen curfew, money was then raised. Next phrase is a fragment from the link to “assembled the $400,000 from private sources” leading to two more links — general information: “For background on the outreach program, to be run with the police department and community volunteers and aimed at at-risk teens, click here and here.“
Identifying the at risk kids is starting immediately, as is training being provided by these young men from the Institute for the Study and Practice of Non-Violence, the Providence-based organization whose street outreach program there (and in Boston) is the model for New Haven’s…
Pardon me, but I “couldn’t” resist looking up the Rhode Island organization. I read it was founded in 2001, is chaired by a lawyer (Robert J. McConnell, Esq.) and despite 29 independently voting board members, shows only one paid — the executive officer, Teny Gross.
Street address is 265 Oxford Street in Providence, Rhode Island, however it controls “Related’ (Schedule R) company “Managing Member LLC”– hold that thought for a minute, I’ll show below the table of tax returns — and, this one (unlike NHFA) is showing 100% private funding. It is also operating at Revs – Exps = a negative (last two years), and out of the $1.3M received, $1.0M was spent on salaries.
Apart from main activity “Street Outreach Workers” the other two were “Youth Programs” and it notes Americorps involvement (significant as Americorps is working?? with CNCS — see top of my last post, Corporation for National and Community Services) — and this is starting to look like a “what works | Social Innovation Fund” project, perhaps.
Its 79 workers couldn’t be receiving much, at that rate size seems similar to NHFA — at least when NHFA, as I believe I’ve made quite clear, was still filing, which it isn’t currently:
Search Again
The unusually large board membership (none of them paid, most 1.0 hours/week) had me curious. Chair is an “Esq.” but there are two “Hon.”s, a Judge, an M.D., another Ph.D., a Rev., a “The Very Rev.” as well as a “Sister” (i.e., nun) and a “Father.”
home page photo from “nonviolenceinstitute.org” (a wordpress site)
Look at the many affiliations listed in the board of directors (remembering that only a look at the tax return tells whether any of them are in a paid capacity, or which officers are. In this organization, just a few officers — and only ONE paid officer (employee), the CEO, and that individual only making $59K. In that regard, doesn’t this many on the board seem like a bit of, pardon the inappropriate word choice for an organization attempting to reduce youth violence, gang-related and otherwise, and homicides, but it’s what comes to mind: “overkill”? In other words, what is their interest in ALL being associated with this nonprofit?
What’s more, the organization has no independent sub-contractors, nearly all its grants are going to its (mostly unidentified) employees — who I have to assume are in good part, street workers. I’ll bold those identified as public civil servants:
- Robert McConnell, Esq, Motley Rice LLC, Chair
- Daniel Meyer, Associate, Partridge Snow & Hahn LLP, Secretary
- Jerrold Dorfman, Principal, LGC&D, Treasurer
- Tricia Fazio, LGC&D, Assistant Treasurer
- Monica Anderson, Director of Community Relations, Lifespan
- Oliver Bennett, Senior Vice President, Bank of America
- David Bowerman, Vice Chairman, Head of Business Services, CFG and RBS Americas
- Colonel Hugh T. Clements, Jr., Chief of Police, Providence Police Department
- Hon. William Clifton, Associate Judge, RI District Court
- Robert N. Dangremond, President, March Brown LLC
- Hon. Francis Darigan, RI Superior Court
- Sister Joyce Flowers, RSM, St. Michael’s Church
Jeff Gagnon, Assistant Vice President, AMICA
- Teny Gross, Executive Director, Institute for Nonviolence Chicago
- Barry Hittner, Retired Attorney
- Cedric Huntley, Director, MET Recreation Center
- Matthew Jerzyk, Deputy Legal Cousel for the Speaker of the House (gov’t employee, right?)
- Peter Karczmar, M.D., Physician, Coastal Medical
- In Memoriam: Sister Ann Keefe, SSJ, St. Michael’s Church, Founder
- Father Ray Malm, retired Priest of St. Joseph’s Church, Founder
- Maggie Meany, Chief Operating Officer, Amos House
- Hon. Jack McConnell, Judge, US District Court
- Eugene Mihaly, Ph.D, Chairman, Mihaly International Corporation = Ph.D. in what? Only named PhD…
- Rev. James Miller, Former Executive Minister, RI State Council of Churches
- Heidi Keller Moon, Community Activist
- F. Paul Mooney, Jr., President, George Fuller & Son
- Cleora O’Connor, Providence School Department
- Colonel Steven O’Donnell, Superintendent, Rhode Island State Police
- Captain Oscar Perez, Providence Police Department
- Barry Preston, Managing Director & CFO, Armory Revival Company
- Roberta Richman, Retired Assistant Warden, RI Adult Correctional Institution
- John D. Sinnott, Vice President, Gilbane Building Company
- Barbara Sokoloff, President, Sokoloff & Associates
- Nondas Hurst Voll, Community Activist
- They (sic) Very Reverend Jeffery Williams, Pastor, The King’s Cathedral
LGC&D looks like an LLP in Providence, Rhode Island, as well as CPA/Consultants. See their website. (http://www.lgcd.com/#). I’d look at their “Community Involvement Slideshow” except it’s actually now a 1 hour plus “vimeo” with no other description.
I just looked at every page under “About Us” and “Program Services” (which come in 5 categories). The “History” page is well-written, and we can see it is modeled after Martin Luther King Junior’s principles of nonviolence. The emphasis is on ‘Build the Beloved Community” and restorative justice. I find it odd that there is NO (zero, nada, nothing, not one) use of the word “domestic violence” (or for that matter “sexism”) on the site. Odd….
The Institute’s Nonviolence Training program introduces the principles and practices of nonviolence developed by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to students, police officers, inmates and community members. Our instructors also train new trainers to work in schools and the community annually.
Additionally, the AmeriCorps program at ISPN trains more than 250 students in elementary, middle and high schools in an on-going program. Our community trainers will expose at least 150 more people to nonviolence this year.
Here’s where the MENTORING shows up under the Model for Street Outreach Workers’ Program (SOWP) for NHFA.
And under “Education Services” (Program Services) (URL: “education-employment”) is a reference to another partnership focused on being a one-stop shop (technical assistance and training) for MENTORING in Rhode Island.
Let’s Make It Work
One of our core goals is to work with at-risk youth who have either been perpetrators or victims of violent crime, to engage them in the organization, train them with job and life skills and help them to become successfully employed. It is proven that a person’s risk factors (re-offense, re-victimization) significantly decrease if given access to a job.
In collaboration with the Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership, our Let’s Make It Work program is a 10-month intensive job readiness program for youth in our community who are most at-risk for committing or being a victim of violence. We also work closely with our job-site partners
to ensure they are given the tools and resources needed to be successful at mentoring one of our clients.
Again, domestic violence is quite real, and sometimes does result in deaths by intimate partners, boyfriends, sometimes girlfriends, exes, or spouses. Maybe this clientele isn’t high-percentage married, but some, if not many ARE going to have intimate (sexual, romantic, and/or live-in) partners. Why does this factor just not even rate a passing reference? Is it too feminist, or is it only for other income classes? Are we to believe there’s none occurring among gang members or with ex-offenders, or having been possibly even a cause of getting some in prison in the first place? Apparently so! I only mention this because it is an ONGOING and typical characteristic of institutions dealing with youth, and with low-income populations of color.
Also, I was a little surprised not to see this Rhode Island-based Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence” NOT running some trademarked, nation-wide (intended eventual market) curriculum, but some of this can be seen through the Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership link. They maneuvered into being the statewide quality assurance group in mentoring. Obviously, but just for the record — Rhode Island is THE smallest state out of all 50….
[Secretary of State Search for this group gives a bit of organization name history]:
The exact name of the Domestic Non-Profit Corporation: Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership, Inc.
The name was changed from: Chamber Education Foundation on 9/28/2011
The name was changed from: WARWICK CHAMBER EDUCATION FOUNDATION on 10/17/1994
The fictitious name of Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership was filed on 12/6/2006
and was abandoned on 9/28/2011 |
| Entity Type: Domestic Non-Profit Corporation |
|
| Identification Number: 000051573 |
|
| Date of Incorporation in Rhode Island: 08/29/1988 |
|
The location of its principal office:
| No. and Street: |
3296 POST ROAD
|
|
|
|
| City or Town: |
WARWICK |
State: RI |
Zip: 02886 |
Country: USA |
|
Guess that explains why it was WARWICK Chamber Education to start with. Filing history shows revoked in 1997 for failure to file and then nothing til about 2008; however, I don’t know if that’s a factor of the organization, or of Rhode Island file uploading practices.
Started as, what else, a public/private partnership — with a Life Insurance Company, a foundation named Chamber Education Foundation but now “d/b/a/” this partnership(!!), the public schools. Then a foundation (the Feinstein Foundation) helped them take the model statewide, per their “History and Accomplishments” link: Of course three is going to be a Training Institute, and since the Feinstein Foundation kicked in some help, it is naturally named (see website for more) the “RIMP-Feinstein Institute.” See also, “Quality Mentoring System” and how (on that website) this is apparently linked into the OJJDP (that’s a United States Department of Justice division….) and proudly citing themselves as the only Rhode Island (institute) named in the “National Mentoring Resource Center.” Naturally, the same is funded by a USDOJ grant — I see the website was only set up in 2014.
In 1990, a partnership was formed among Warwick Public Schools, MetLife and the Chamber Education Foundation (now d/b/a the Rhode Island Mentoring Partnership) to develop a mentoring program to help youth succeed. What started with 10 volunteer mentors from MetLife and 10 elementary school students (mentees) has grown to include nearly 300 mentoring pairs at all 26 Warwick Schools. Through the generosity of The Feinstein Foundation, we brought this successful model statewide, resulting in the development of the RI Mentoring Partnership. Since 1999, RIMP has served as the statewide expert in mentoring.
Today:
We provide extensive training for mentors and mentor program coordinators. We offer collaboration among mentoring agencies, provide volunteer referral services, statewide marketing campaigns and advocacy for mentoring.
Interesting how, above, it looks like the original idea was from MetLife. All they needed to do was get their foot in that public school door, and they were off and running….. Obviously, if I looked up three more organizations in Rhode Island (or wherever the Feinstein Foundation is), I might never get this post published. … ON THE OTHER HAND, and my being from California (if you’ve ever heard of famous Senator Diane Feinstein!) I think I’ll check it out.
http://mentorri.org/about-us/rimp-programs/feinstein-training-institute/
Welcome to the RIMP-Feinstein Mentor Training Institute! A one-stop shop for all the training and support you will need to coordinate, or participate in, a youth mentoring program in Rhode Island.
Found on “RIMP-Feinstein Institute” page. Fine print in logo reads “A Program of OJJDP.” As we should know by now (reading my blog), “Resource Center ==> WebSite”. See “National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse” also called a “Resource Center,” and others….
(Among the links on the page:)
THE NATIONAL MENTORING RESOURCE CENTER
Request free technical assistance from RIMP. RI’s only approved National Mentoring Resource Center assistance provider. … ***
QUALITY MENTORING SYSTEM
Assess your Mentoring Program against a series of quality standards. Improve your program until it has reached the coveted Premier level.
(GET THE PICTURE YET??? I just explored, briefly, the “National Mentoring Resource Center” link briefly. Keep reading:)
<==The logo to the left here is mis-leading. This resource center is NOT a “Program” of OJJP” and clicking on it does NOT lead to any government (such as the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention under the USDOJ). It is to a site ending in “*.org” and the bottom of the page contains a disclaimer in this form:
MENTOR | Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
This Web site is funded through a grant from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this Web site including, without limitation, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided.
Does that sound like an OJJDP Program??!! So, naturally I went looking for a business entity, a corporate “person” ie., WHO (and where, and what’s the EIN# of….) this “The National Mentoring Partnership” and began realizing just how slick these (dudes) are — while continually using the commonly recognized (especially for people who might be working with youth, that is, “juveniles”) initials “OJJDP” it actually takes a sharp eye to continue keeping straight that use of those initials does NOT a governmental endorsement make. Look at the next screen, on “Technical Assistance” (which again, should in most cases be translated with a large dose of “probably digital/electronic in nature…”) and see this:
The National Mentoring Resource Center provides free technical assistance to mentoring programs around their individual needs and the improved implementation of specific mentoring practices.
Requests are now submitted through OJJDP’s centralized technical assistance site, TTA360.
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Reblogged this on World Peace Forum.
daveyone1
July 20, 2016 at 10:36 am