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

Preview of this post, ConnectED + MPR Associates Inc. + Gary Hoachlander, WestEd, and the US Dept. of Ed, with help from James Irvine Foundation,. (Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends in “-4LK”) (It is currently 16,000 words long, and a bit complex! Then again, so are the networks I am discussing and exposing…)

This post was started 10/22/2016, but by Nov. 16, 2016 had not yet been published. Hopefully today’s that today or within a few days….While it began with the title on the posts, as the “tags” reflect, other topics came up in association.

A middle section here deals with other organizations, but the overall topic is the same:  Watch out for coordinated-purpose foundations with a unique obsession for re-developing the nation’s (and other nations’) public schools through pouring funds into them, funds which will be hard to track.

The Bridgespan Group (tax returns and quotes from them, as well as from its website below) in particular as a brainchild of Bain & Company [Funding Universe history page] (see also Bain Capital [Wikipedia] for the Mitt Romney Component and Boston Consulting Group [Funding Universe history page; BCG spun off as consultants from Boston Safe Deposit and Trust Co.] from which Bill Bain’s investment management/consulting model spun off] should put public perception  on “alert” as much as a new US President and who is the cabinet.  These activities have been under process for decades now, and all of them are going to impact the economy, the present and future workforce, and most at stake here — the degree of accountability for use of public resources when private groups are seeking to steer the ship.

Putting dates (1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, this century) to some of those key events, and names to the key personalities WILL be time well invested (even those three links above) understanding how they have operated in the for-profit sector, and are now operating also in the not-for-profit sector.  You will also pick up a general sense through continued readings on these topics, of who the public is dealing with when such organizations decided to focus coordinated efforts on the public school system as a whole.  For example, from Boston Consulting Group:

According to company lore, it was in the fall of 1965, when the business housed about a dozen consultants, that Henderson announced at a staff meeting that they needed a way to find a specialty to distinguish themselves from their larger, better financed rivals. After dismissing a number of suggestions, he offered “business strategy.” The immediate objection was that executives would have no idea what they were talking about. “That’s the beauty of it,” was his response. “We’ll define it.” …  ….

Ultimately, the [experience-curve advantage] concept led to the conclusion that it was imperative to enter a new field first and to grab as much market share as possible in order to lock in an experience-curve advantage over late-arriving competitors. Another major tool introduced in the 1960s was the product portfolio matrix, which pictured a conglomerate as a box with four quadrants: cash cows, dogs, stars, or question marks. The goal was to achieve a balanced mix of cash cows, stars, and question marks, and to sell off the dogs. The terms cash cow and dog quickly became fixtures in the business lexicon.

Henderson’s consulting unit at Boston Safe Deposit was spun off as a subsidiary named Boston Consulting Group in 1968. As the business grew, so did the need for new consultants. By the end of 1968, BCG employed 36 consultants; a year later, that number grew to 62. To meet the need for business talent, the firm began to aggressively recruit at the most prestigious business schools, offering top salaries and luring graduates with promises of cutting-edge, challenging work. In 1970, the number of consultants totaled 100, and in 1971 the figure increased to 130. BCG also opened an office in London in 1970 (its first overseas office was established in Japan in 1966), and then in 1972 the company expanded its operations to Paris. A year later, BCG suffered a setback caused by a raid on its employees and clients by one of Henderson’s most valuable lieutenants, Bill Bain.

Among the things I learned (and will continue to post evidence on) is that “rules,” including rules of grammar for transformational education promoters, and laws governing tax-exempt entities, apparently don’t matter for the truly inspired, nobly-motivated and mutually self-anointed with a personal vision for (the globe, that, is the planet and everyone living on it).  Particularly rules enforceable for at the State level ought to be ignored (?) when the purpose is nationalizing and reproducing for public consumption a business model of how to educate those not already “born into it.”  The means justifies the end?  

In the end, I believe that the end IS altering the “means,” and to distill it into one sentence, the real end is simply personal, private profit, legally or illegally…. With Bridgespan and groups like it, the consultants continue seeking to undermine government basics (which involves PROCESSES), while commandeering (continuing to control) as many assets as possible, for which as few taxes as possible will be paid.

ALSO ON THIS POST:

Communities in Schools | The Bridgespan Group| Bridgespan’s stated purpose regarding Local Donors and Public Schools (two spinoff posts, coming up soon, came from there). Extended Section.  Then I discuss “Alliance for Excellent Education” ( a D.C. organization with personnel connections to the post title also) and discovered some investments in Bernie Madoff (see “Ponzi Scheme”) investments, multiple millions of dollars moving through it year after year, the amounts completely out of perspective with the organization’s contributions, budget, and expenses.  This money usually was only reflected on the tax return as a detail under Revenues, “Net profits from sale of non-inventory assets.”  In such situations, we are talking about capital gains (I believe) so the “Net profits” can be just a small proportion of the “Gross” amounts sold.  Only in other parts of the tax return did a reference to “Madoff” show up and get me curious enough to look at earlier tax returns.

Expect to see a lot of “drill-downs,” images of tax returns, and more.  You don’t get to the value until you dig a little deeper. You’re welcome (or — click DONATE button!) for having started some tunnels and unearthed some “core samples” of what’s taking place in the field.

Motto “Transforming Education through Linked Learning”

The next three images from ConnectED,* and a fourth from James Irvine Foundation, whom ConnectED credits as its primary private sponsors that helped set it up in 2006, are in large part why I’m writing this post.  (ConnectED didn’t register as a charity with the State of California until 2011…) And that’s only the beginning of the obfuscations…

*Not its full business name, less than obvious from the logo, and which made it harder to locate, as I’ll show below. That the organization website also declines to post its full legal name (matching what’s on the Secretary of State website) as such, or its financials, was another obstacle to locating the tax returns and, this being a California corporation, its “RRFs” documenting government assistance to the organization.

It is a symptom and a pattern of purpose and practice for those involved, and despite the rhetoric, that practice is unacceptable because it’s unethical and, at least in this state, also illegal.

connect-yourself-to-the-charitable-details-history-3pp-of-connected-ein204781979-calif-corp-c2859371-3-yrs-and-2-notices-of-request-to-register-after-22m-revs-and-grants-giving-to-schools

But as the private parties are donating TO public schools for privatized control of the public schools under the banner of improving them, the private money being poured into them looking altruistic, is in fact self-serving and already generating privately controlled income (profits, or as desirable possibly for tax purposes, losses).

One indicator those involved know this is that they withheld evidence of their own financials from the State whose schools they wish to control, for FIVE YEARS, while funnelling private money into the private subcontractor [as to ConnectEd, primarily one certain subcontractor] involved.   Which is where the name “Gary Hoachlander” as involved in both (and Advisory to yet a third organization in DC — which has had its status there “revoked,” but it doesn’t seem to have slowed it down much — got into this post title.

Meanwhile, high position in the highly politicized public education (K-12 and college/university both) system apparently is also part of the gateway to (and from) political power.  And money.

For example:

Constantly demanding more funding for the schools, to put “Communities in Schools“* or to improve them, or expand them, and attempting to close off the exit ramps to something better for low-income parents, as the NAACP submitted a position statement on just this past October, is inappropriate until proper account for what IS going in and HAS gone in is provided in coherent form to the public.  

Speaking of the phrase “Communities in Schools,” here’s another post sub-section for another networked organization and ITS high-powered (more than) subcontractor.  What, really is going on here? On taking a closer look, I found out that part of that answer is to be found in the organization’s choice of independent subcontractors, a recurring theme in understanding how nonprofits network with power, and how subcontractors sometimes obtain that power

*RE: COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS, INC. (“CIS”)

…See also its affiliates ($8.2M out of $15M+ “Other expenses” one year was “payments towards affiliates”) (“Find your Affiliate“), and its subcontractors, especially the Bain & Company planned (1998/1999) closely connected “Bridgespan Group” in Boston.  Which has some BIG backers, I see….

CIS affiliates are named, as you can see, after:  Counties (many, if not most), states, regions of a state, regions of the country, or sometimes major cities (“Philadelphia” “Los Angeles”) or metro areas.  Each one of them, or most, likely, representing another tax-exempt organization.  Wanna keep track of money run from public and/or private sources THROUGH CIS to them, as well as individual money run through this network, as well as the accountability of the multiple smaller organizations to the filing requirements with the IRS — and as it applies, with their states? …

Our network is active in 25 states and the District of Columbia. 161 local affiliates serve the lowest-performing schools and the students most vulnerable to dropping out. Use this list to find your local affiliate so you can help us change the picture of education in your community …

Translated in individual independent (if not financially, at least organizationally) organizations sharing a common naming style, it may look approximately like this:

Bridgespan Group web page in very large letters (not duplicated here) explains their “raison d’etre”

Collaborating with leaders to solve society’s most important challenges

Bridgespan helps mission-driven organizations and philanthropists to advance their learning and accelerate their impact

---

The key phrases there other than the obvious, collaborating include “Society’s most important challenges” (as determined by “leaders”), would seem to be “accelerate.”

[and at bottom of the page, footer info, and just above:]

 

We work to build a better world by strengthening the ability of mission-driven organizations and philanthropists to achieve breakthrough results in addressing society’s most important challenges and opportunities.

Collaborating to Accelerate Social Impact

Bridgespan® and Leading for Impact® are registered trademarks of The Bridgespan Group
The Bridgespan Group is a 501(c)(3) organization.

To put a little perspective on the word “nonprofit” when it comes to a consulting group TO nonprofits which has already made it clear by the logo — it wants to work with leaders, not losers — it appears to me that this group is a fine example of how philanthropy, in general, is engineered to keep the current leadership on top, in part by the ability to raise major capital and revenue — store it tax-exempt, and move fast in whatever it tackles.

Total results: 3. Search Again.

BRIDGESPAN  — rather rapid assets accumulation, ya’ think? (A closer look at the $73.8M row shows, in the balance sheet, that most of this is simply Line 3, “Pledges receivable.”  Their contributions (whether rec’d yet or not) of $52M are ALL registered under “private” (not gov’t), and there are next to no liabilities.  

See also page 2, Program Service accomplishments, 4b (next paragraph) for an idea of how many others are so happy to work with and even fund this organization:

(Code ) (Expenses $ 4,540,884 including grants of $ ) (Revenue $

ADVANCING KNOWLEDGE BRIDGESPAN COLLABORATES WITH A BROAD RANGE OF SOCIAL SECTOR LEADERS TO DEVELOP AND SHARE IDEAS, TOOLS, AND INSIGHTS THAT CAN ACCELERATE SOCIAL IMPACT IN 2014, BRIDGESPAN ADVANCED KNOWLEDGE IN THE FIELD THROUGH A RANGE OF PUBLICATIONS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES BRIDGESPAN PARTNERS AND MANAGERS CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES TO STANFORD SOCIAL INNOVATION REVIEW (SSIR), THE CHRONICLE OF PHILANTHROPY, AND THE NONPROFIT TIMES HIGHLIGHTS INCLUDE –TRANSFORMATIVE SCALE THE FUTURE OF GROWING WHAT WORKS” (SSIR, WINTER 2014), IN WHICH WE DESCRIBE NINE APPROACHES THAT HOLD REAL PROMISE FOR SCALING SOLUTIONS TO SOCIAL PROBLEMS BEYOND THE BOUNDS OF AN ORGANIZATION,- “WHY NONPROFIT MERGERS CONTINUE TO LAG” (SSIR, WINTER 2014), WHICH DESCRIBES THREE EMOTIONALLY CHARGED ISSUES THAT CREATE HURDLES TO BUILDING SUCCESSFUL MERGERS AND RECOMMENDS HOW TO OVERCOME THEM,- “PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT LEARNING TO IMPROVE,” (THE NONPROFIT TIMES, JANUARY 8, 2014- “BOOSTING NONPROFIT BOARD PERFORMANCE WHERE IT COUNTS, (SSIR, SUMMER 2014), WHICH OFFERS FOUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ONBOARDING A NEW NONPROFIT EXECUTIVE, – “HOW LOCAL DONORS CAN DO BETTER TO IMPROVE SCHOOLS” (CHRONICLE OF PHILANTHROPY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2014), WHICH IDENTIFIES THREE PLACES THAT LOCAL PHILANTHROPIC DOLLARS CAN BE PUT TO USE IN LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO IMPROVE STUDENT OUTCOMES

BRIDGESPAN’s “HOW LOCAL DONORS CAN DO BETTER TO IMPROVE SCHOOLS” (CHRONICLE OF PHILANTHROPY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2014), WHICH IDENTIFIES THREE PLACES THAT LOCAL PHILANTHROPIC DOLLARS CAN BE PUT TO USE IN LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO IMPROVE STUDENT OUTCOMES

Curious about that article?  So what I.  Unfortunately, Bridgespan’s partnering with Chronicle of Philanthropy shows that the C of P wasn’t altruistic enough to let outsiders read the whole article without first subscribing (keeps the riff-raff out, like a gated community on-line….):

https://www.philanthropy.com/article/How-Local-Donors-Can-Do-Better/152623

<== Wanna see?  You must subscribe!

RE: LOCAL PHILANTHROPIES BEING ENCOURAGED TO POUR MONEY INTO LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS, PART 1 — What does this really look like? 

Wow.  I started a drill-down on the cheap promotion of collaboration, this one focused on Charlotte-Mecklenberg Public Schools and involving the program “L.I.F.T.,”  specific lead foundations and several more.  What this really signifies can’t be seen without follow-through, and as I will keep saying, a closer look at the tax returns, as well as the summaries given for program service accomplishments as they ping through the involved networks.

After about a half-day of looking at this, I see it deserves its own post. That post has a long, descriptive title, and I look forward to publishing it:   More ~ Fees for Friends-with-Foundations from Failing Public Schools [Charlotte-Mecklenberg County, NC; program L.I.F.T.],~ Bridgespan Reports Enthusiastically.  I feel it’s time for a Report Card on Bridgespan’s (a) reporting and (b) choice of role models. 

RE: LOCAL PHILANTHROPIES BEING ENCOURAGED TO POUR MONEY INTO LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS, PART 2 

Nov. 16, 2016, blogger Interjection, three weeks after starting this post. Different color background, inside green box, marks the interjection, after which the rest of this “Program Accomplishments” quote is continued.  

A NUMBER OF WHITE PAPERS PUBLISHED ON BRIDGESPAN ORG SOUGHT TO ENGAGE OUR AUDIENCE ON TOPICS SUCH AS LOCAL PHILANTHROPY IN EDUCATION, NONPROFIT COLLABORATIONS, AND FUNDER COLLABORATIONS, TO NAME A FEW – “LOCAL PHILANTHROPISTS WORK TOGETHER TO TRANSFORM PUBLIC EDUCATION” (SEPTEMBER 2014) LOOKS AT HOW FUNDERS IN THREE CITIES ARE WORKING SIDE-BY-SIDE WITH DISTRICT LEADERSHIP AND THE COMMUNITY TO HELP IMPROVE EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES, WHILE – “MAKING SENSE OF NONPROFIT COLLABORATIONS” (DECEMBER 2014) DISCUSSES RESEARCH CONDUCTED BY BRIDGESPAN, IN COLLABORATION WITH THE LODESTAR FOUNDATION, ON NONPROFIT PARTICIPATION IN AND BARRIERS TO COLLABORATIONS – LASTLY, BRIDGESPAN’S WORK WITH THE PACKARD FOUNDATION RESULTED IN “LESSONS IN FUNDER COLLABORATION WHAT THE PACKARD FOUNDATION HAS LEARNED ABOUT WORKING WITH OTHER FUNDERS” (JULY 2014) IN ADDITION, BRIDGESPAN PARTNERED WITH SSIR TO CREATE AN ONLINE BLOG SERIES, “ACHIEVING TRANSFORMATIVE SCALE,” FOR WHICH BRIDGESPAN PARTNERS AND MANAGERS, AND EXTERNAL EXPERTS WROTE BLOGS ON SUCH TOPICS AS THE IMPORTANCE OF HIRING RIGHT WHEN SCALING AN ORGANIZATION AND PARTNERING WITH CORPORATIONS TO SCALE ON BRIDGESPAN ORG, WE RAN “MERGERS THAT MADE A DIFFERENCE,” A SERIES OF CASE STUDIES AND BLOGS CO-CURATED BY BRIDGESPAN, LA PIANA, THE LODESTAR FOUNDATION, AND THE CATALYST FUND FOR NONPROFITS THE SERIES FEATURED NONPROFITS’ EXPERIENCES IN MAKING MERGERS SUCCESSFUL AND NONPROFIT LEADERS’ REFLECTIONS ON HOW TO APPROACH MERGERS WE ALSO RAN A BLOG SERIES IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2014 ON INNOVATION LABS ON BRIDGESPAN ORG, COLLABORATING WITH THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION SUBSCRIPTIONS TO BRIDGESPAN’S POPULAR NEWSLETTERS THE BRIDGESPAN KNOWLEDGE LETTER, LEADERSMATTER, AND ALERTS HAVE REACHED A COMBINED TOTAL OF 57,000 SUBSCRIBERS AT THE END OF 2014 MEMBERS OF THE BRIDGESPAN TEAM ALSO PARTICIPATED IN AND/OR SPOKE AT MORE THAN 85 CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS

How and why this is happening will become more clear on reading about the founding of this nonprofit as discussed by a publication that search of one of its original incorporators brought up (I certainly don’t see that description in a priority position on the website).

Bridgespan Group was a subcontractor for the organization (umbrella organization that is) of “COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS.”  Repeating my lead-in paragraph, to continue that discussion, I wrote above:

Constantly demanding more funding for the schools, to put “Communities in Schools“* or to improve them, or expand them, and attempting to close off the exit ramps to something better for low-income parents, as the NAACP submitted a position statement on just this past October, is inappropriate until proper account for what IS going in and HAS gone in is provided in coherent form to the public.  

My focus had been on the ConnectED situation, but the illustration of pouring more money, staff, and programming INTO the schools naturally brought up that a specific organization by this name exists.

*That link was the “Communities in Schools” (Legal domicile Georgia, address Arlington, Virginia, formed in 1977) organization website, home page featuring, second section, exhibiting how many children in the US live in Poverty (Sept. 2016 US Census Bureau):

IN THE U.S. 14.5 MILLION KIDS UNDER 18 LIVE IN POVERTY.  Data Source

OK, so how is this organization helping that situation (i.e., how is it handling its own revenues?) under Daniel J. Cardinali (Tax return YE 9/30/2015, which is FYear 2014)?

First, it is operating tax-exempt and soliciting money or at least apparently doing business in these states.  This year, gross receipts were $21M, of which $19M (per Part VIII of the return) were private contributions not government grants (which were only $200K, or $0.2M, that is, less than 1% of the whole)

Return Part VI, Section C. Line 17 List the states with which a copy of this Form 990 is required to be filed; AK,AL,AR,CA,CT,FL,GA,HI,IL,KS,KY,MA,MD, MI ,MN ,MS ,NC ,NH ,NJ ,NM ,NY ,OK ,OR ,PA ,RI, SC TN,UT VA,WI,WV

Was this money given TO children in poverty, TO the schools, or TO anyone not an employee?    NO! (see Tax Return, Page 1, “Expenses” section, “Grants” Line).

So, where did it go?

Or, to be technically more complete, “where did it go according to the tax return image I am looking at?” which phrasing acknowledges:  tax returns sometimes are amended; tax returns sometimes have errors or inaccuracies, accidental or deliberate.  By including the qualifier phrase, this also specifies the point of reference for any summaries to follow. 

Well, of the $21M (Gross) taken in, $6.4M went to Salaries** ) , and over twice that $15M,** to Line 19 “Other Expenses” plus $2.1M to Professional ‘Fundraising expenses,” although there is no attached Schedule G re: professional fundraisers and individual events– the category under which the $2.1M is reported on Part I, nor does Part VIII (Revenues) Line 1 record a single dollar raised through fundraising “event.”  Granted, not all fundraising happens through events, but then to whom did this $2.1M go, as listed anywhere on the return?

(“73 employees” this year, and another part of the return — Part VIIA — shows that almost ⅓ of this, or “$2.1M + benefits and other comp” went to board of directors, officers, trustees, key employees and highest paid employees.  Of that $2.1M, $407K (1/5th) went to President Daniel J. Cardinali.  Maybe Mr. Cardinali might consider a pay cut if he’s concerned about the poor children, down to the level of the rest of his staff, typically about half that or less. (Chairman of the Board only earns $172K).

How about the “Other Expenses — $15M spent in a single year by Communities in Schools, Inc.”  Take a look at Part VIII for that information — and realize that over half is labeled “Payments to Affiliates” — $8.2M.  The affiliates are listed on the website, not the tax return.

Next image shows about $2.9M (rough estimate of the only 5 out of 19 total paid =/or > $100K) for Part VIIB, as well as that the organization declined to show its own directors on the same page but has opted as many do to go with “See Additional Data” instead of using the IRS form itself for public convenience who might be reading the return focused on helping poor schools).

communities-in-schools-legal-domicile-ga-irs-return-yr2014-ye9-30-2015-budget-deficit-this-yr-was-over-1m-prior-year-58m-parts-viia-total-only-and-viib-showing-29m-for-first-5-of-19-indepe

(Part VIIB is at the bottom of this page.  Normally names, designations (column c has 6 sections to mark with an “x”), hours/week and salaries would show in this section.  Instead, only a total has shown — which is the $2.1M I referred to in summary of “Salaries” expenses.

Another thing this IRS Form brings up– it’s not designed to reveal more than only 5 independent subcontractors, but many groups will have more than 5.  Why doesn’t the Form read “List additional ones in Schedule ___?”  Basically, this means the category is important enough to list, but the IRS doesn’t require  a complete itemization.  Meanwhile, that list, as you can see, the largest expense, $1.2M — this is nearly 40 years after this organization was formed (2017 would be 40 years!!) is for a group in Boulder, Colorado, and “Media Campaign” (one of two so labeled); others for “Website,” etc.  Here are those 5 with addresses (but I didn’t copy Services or $$ columns), and the only one from Georgia making some business off of this is apparently the Sheraton at Atlanta (Conference Services).

(This represents WHY I often go “just one more step” in search, click, and read.  I read the articles of organization of this group and found it was a project of Bain Capital.  I quickly noticed there was one of the originals from San Francisco — and so googled some of those individuals.  I also quickly noticed its start-up purpose was to help fast-track to success the nonprofit sector.  “They just wanna help.”

Articles of Incorporation (from “Foreign” registration, that is, Delaware) showing: Jeffrey Bradach, Paul Carttar & David Bechhofer, Thomas J. Tierney (head of Bain in SF), Phyllis Yale, and John Donahue (in SF).

Next link explains plenty: As explained Year (Nov) 2000, “Harvard Business School,” (21pp, clean print, clear language) website domain is “BAIN.com,” this takes something of a history of the group, how Bain Consulting figured this might help their image, and how they not only helped with startup capital, but also this group (the nonprofit), but several organizations a constellation of names I recognize with (I believe it was) Backers of the publication “NextCity” I posted on (context: Port Authority of NY/NJ and UNESCO “Design Cities” label…

THREESPOT MEDIA INC (“Website”)
806 7TH STREET NW SUITE 201 WASHINGTON, DC 20001

THE CAUSEWAY AGENCY (“Media Campaign”)
21 CHARLES STREET SUITE 201 WESTPORT, CT 06880

Common Catalyst is a single-person owned (or incorporated anyhow) LLC only organized in 2012 — yet suddenly it gets $1.2M of business from a nonprofit in Virginia/Georgia?   Here’s the info (google “Colorado Corporation Search” to find appropriate search sites):

So, who in the heck is Betsy Cropley? (I found a single linkedIn which related to a book-keeper with a degree from Colorado State, and an obituary saying her mother (d. 2011) was Marty Galleher Cox married to an L.E. “Bud” Cox — but not much else).  A Year 2014 incorporation for this LLC (not even a “Corp”) in California is showing the original address as registered in Colorado, which I saw from looking there first.  The year “2014” in the Entity # for an LLC appears to refer to when it was formed.

(this example of their model is from CISLosAngeles.org) dated 2012/07 upload

Which in this state, FYI, even for a veteran of tracking it down, isn’t easy to find in many communities, and I am talking CAFRs.

And as I personally experienced, as a parent, when a felony act was permitted against me, my household and my children for exhibiting even a MINOR display of “school choice” within the public school system the same year this Corporation [“ConnectEd”] was founded — and funded (startup funding appears to have been $1,000,000) — 2006.

For a perspective, the James Irvine Foundation currently reports just over $2.08B Total (Gross) Assets.  That would be $208,000,000 X 10.. This is held as a private foundation (Form 990PF filer).

What happens when organizations (plural) of this size get together on public policy and decide what things don’t matter while achieving the mutual agendas — such as whether or not the recipient grantee is in compliance with State-level charitable registration (or for that matter, secretary of state or business entity registration as required by state law?)

As it appears to have done in the case of ConnectEd…

Total results: 3. Search Again.

I backed up one more year to look at the grantees: DONOR ($64M total distributions) James Irvine Foundation 2011 (FYr=Calendar Yr) tax return <=-=click and page down to the grants (towards the end, it’s “See additional Data” on the IRS form, but at least that data is presented orderly and neat)..

irs-990pf-yr2011-james-irvine-foundtn-grants-page-20-only-showing-connecteds-9325000-bottom-of-pg-dwarfs-other-grantsconnected-full-legal-name-also-not-shown-its-rct-not-completed-til-dec-2011

<==This image to left (click link to see it full-sized) shows James Irvine Foundation’s Year 2011 $9.25M sponsorship (in three separate amounts of ConnectEd — the first year ConnectEd bothered to get itself registered with the State as a charity!) shows how they dwarf other grants in size.

For comparison, this  next, separate link=> (irs-990pf-yr2011-calendarfiscalyr-james-irvine-foundtn-grants-pp-only-advancement-project-2nd-page-of-grants-end-pp-16-43-connecteds-$9,325,000-bottom-of-pg8) shows all but the very first page of grants from the same foundation for the same year, starting with a page including $295,000 for “The Advancement Project” (one of whose officers Molly Munger is on its Board of Directors that year.

Year 2011 closeup of $1.5M James Irvine Foundation grant to “California Forward” (bottom row) (its tax returns at bottom of this post). Also $250K to Calif. Charter School Consortium in Los Angeles.  Other grants nearby, much smaller.  $1,500,000 the largest on that page.

Notice the second-from-left column of “N/As” — labeled, was any individual  grantee on the foundation board of directors. This statement of possible “conflict of interest” is easily gotten around by individuals setting up nonprofits, which they can control with few or many boards of directors to take the grant, and who’s to notice the connections?

Here’s a close up of the ConnectEd grants of $2.4M, $2.5M and $4.6M:

For example, you will also see on that first page (link, not image), a grant of $250,000 to “Alliance for Excellent Education” in Washington, D.C. — this group, slightly different name, is currently chaired by the (former?) Governor of West Virginia (!) and with Gary Hoachlander on its “Advisory Council.”  I never heard of the guy before a few days ago, but apparently he’s got some clout with the US Department of Education, for which we all must now pay.  http://all4ed.org/people/gary-hoachlander/

NEXT SECTION: Looking at “ALLIANCE for EXCELLENT EDUCATION in D.C.” = I found:

(1) a “status revoked” organization that is still soliciting and apparently operating, and (2) among its tax returns, evidence of significant investment involvement (in fact, looks like the MAIN investment involvement) in Bernie Madoff funds.  This is not immediately obvious from the most recent returns.  Showing this takes a while.

I made this section (therefore) a different background-color:

I am not a forensic accountant, just a person who reads a LOT of tax returns, and thinks about them, with attention to as much detail as I can cram into my thinking (while focused on a certain topic) at a time.  My memory is pretty good in some categories.

My generic assessment (with those disclaimers) is that whoever provided money for this organization originally was most likely aware that the managers of the entity were going to plunk it into Bernie Madoff for his “expert” handling. On a timeline of that situation, this came out I believe around 2008, a major benefactor of the investors that Madoff ripped off, Jeffrey Picower, died mysteriously in his own swimming pool in 2009, and while his estate was forced through federal pursuit to refund $7.2Billion, that left plenty for his surviving widow to put into another foundation, “JBP Foundation” in 2011 (the “P” stands for Picower).  This money is till flowing through the system, as can be found by following some of the beneficiary organizations.  One of these, I know, was Harlem Children’s Zone; which information is available to read at the NYS Charities registration website.

This material was worked on in late October and again mid-November, 2016:

From D.C. Registration of “Alliance for Excellent Education, Inc.” (must create a user name and password to access Business Search, but at least it’s free, at DCRA.DC.gov; I’ve had one for years):Registered as a “Foreign” corporation, filed returns every two years in the 2000s, then was “Revoked” (most likely for not filing).  Doesn’t reflect whether its home legal domicile organization might still be legal.  If it’s in Delaware, good luck locating current status (will require extra effort; database doesn’t say Yes or No):

DC record for this organization:

Name	File Number	Effective Date	Status	ModelType	Locale	Qualifier
ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION INC.	214156	12/20/2001	Revoked	Non-Profit Corporation	Foreign	Non-Profit

Looking at the Alliance for Excellent Education website, (“All4Ed.org”) I see they are still showing a “D.C.” address even though D.C. shows the organization as “Revoked” in the District.  Under “Donate” page I clicked on “Terms of Service” knowing that this is another source of information on at least what donation platforms some group may be using, and found “Democracy Engine, LLC”:

http://www.democracyengine.com/about (READ!)

We provide only processing services to you to facilitate your on-line payment of lawful Contributions to authorized recipients (“Recipi-ents”) in the United States of America (the “Services”).  “Contri-butions” means contributions in the case of payments to political candi-dates or committees, and donations in the case of payments to for-profit or non-profit organizations. We have no control or liability for the acts or omissions of the Recipients of your Contributions, or of any other entities or their web sites describing the Services or displaying Contribution pages or other portions of the Services.

2. Subscriber Responsibilities

A. Eligibility.

You represent that you have legal power and capacity to form a binding contract and are not barred from receiving the Services under the laws of the United States or other applicable jurisdiction. Eligibility for specific Services is subject to further requirements on various web site pages for the Services.

Check out the Team members — one former DNC finance campaign manager (Yale | Georgetown), the other (Univ. of Illinois engineer) campaign finance for Hillary Clinton. Team members show up further down on the “About” page.

CEO: Jonathan Zucker is one of the most innovative minds in political technology, and is the pioneering force behind Democracy Engine.

Before forming Democracy Engine, Jonathan was the executive director for ActBlue—the nation’s largest source of funds for Democrats—and transformed the organization into a fundraising powerhouse with more than $87 million raised. Jonathan has served as national director of operations for finance at the Democratic National Committee, where he presided over the DNC’s record-breaking $100 million major donor program in 2004, and at a wide variety of progressive and Democratic organizations as a field organizer, fundraiser, administrator, and attorney, including the Interfaith Alliance, Human Rights Campaign, Gill Foundation, and the Democratic Leadership Council. Jonathan earned a bachelor’s degree in political science from Yale University and a law degree from Georgetown University.

---

Erik Pennebaker (only other person listed at Democracy Engine)

Erik Pennebaker leads Democracy Engine’s technical development efforts.

Erik’s unparalleled knowledge of Web-based fundraising systems and understanding of complex data management for bundling operations made him a pioneering member Hillary Clinton’s groundbreaking campaigns for Senate and the presidency. During the 2008 election cycle, the system he created for then-Senator Clinton was the online heart of her more than $221 million fundraising effort.

Erik has been a pioneer of online fundraising for over a decade, providing Web-based fundraising support for Senator John Kerry’s 2004 presidential bid, developing donation infrastructure throughout the 2006 Senate campaigns, and overseeing Senator Kerry’s multimillion dollar bundling operation for various Democratic candidates.

Erik earned a bachelor’s degree in computer science from the University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign’s College of Engineering. Currently, he offers a variety of online fundraising services and technical support through his Wet Gecko Project to clients ranging from grassroots organizations to former Vice President Al Gore

---

Now that we know on which partisan side the founders are of this neutral technology, bi-partisan fundraiser….their LLC, …

---

Search Results (from “Foundation Center” anyhow) on this organization’s 990s show usually only the last three years of an organization.  EIN# 11-3487339

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Alliance for Excellent Education	DC	2014	990	38	$11,981,836.00	11-3487339
Alliance for Excellent Education	DC	2013	990	36	$10,463,204.00	11-3487339
Alliance for Excellent Education	DC	2012	990	34	$8,433,847.00	11-3487339

I did that search, and finding notations on “Bernie Madoff Settlement” among other things, decided to look at a much earlier year.

Alliance for Excellent Education (Revs notation on “Madoff Theft Loss Recovery”) in 2014

I picked Fiscal Year 2004 (early on in its operations) — only to find on Page 1, “gross receipts” (which is stated on the header information for 990s, For this IRS Form it was on the top left; currently that form has it on the right side, fine print).

Next image, click here for fullsize==>form-990-fyr-2004-alliance-for-excellent-education-all4edorg-ein-11-3487339-dc-addr-DE-domicile-showing-gross-receipts-hdrl78757268-but-contribs-only-15m-assets-see-bernie-madoff-invol (that’s just Page 1 only):

For an organization this size, $78M of “Gross receipts” of anything and much lower contributions/revenues ($1M+) in the Program-related revenues section (first few lines of the return) is going to indicate some assets were sold off.

I looked for the sold-off assets and find in the Attached statements that they had invested heavily with “Bernie Madoff.”

Next image below shows the $70M (Madoff part) investment having been acquired at dates “Various” and sold for $545K profit, plus a smaller investment in Madoff having been sold for slight ($50K of over $1M) loss, and others investments making up most of the $78M  What puzzles me is where this shows up — or doesn’t where you’d expect it to — on their Schedule A History of Support, 2000, 2001 (“None”), 2002, and 2003 for an organization only founded in 2000. How is it possible for this amount of contributions or acquisitions to have been run through the nonprofit without showing up as a “plus” on any year’s return?

Detail of the above image showing $78M of assets sold for almost no profit in 2004:

Alliance for Excellent Education (WDC) 2004 doesn’t show excellent stewardship of assets priced at $78M…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now please look at this segment of the 2004 “Balance Sheet” reflecting $11M beginning of year and $10M end of the year, and a “See Statement 9” notation, under “Other Investments” (I realize readers will have to look through the whole tax return to see it well; the image is just a signpost in what part to look for on that return.). Line 54, “Investments- Securities – Other” is the longest (=largest) number shown under “assets”.  I’m going to show the corresponding detail (image) for that amount, after this additional comment on the next image below:

On the top right Line 48, right column you’ll see “Grants Receivable” $250,000 listed as an assets.  On the bottom left, Line 61, there is $250,000 “Grants Payable” (Beginning of year) reduced to $30,000 (righthand column) End of Year, as a Liability.  This would seem to indicate that there is pass-through money; they paid $220K  of $250K Payable during the year, and at year-end declared someone else owed them $250K.  Just a detail.

Section of Alliance for Excellent Education Year 2004 Balance Sheet, Form 990. Note the IRS form changed (had fewer parts) in 2008; later than 2008 the Balance Sheet would be Part X. It may change again; change happens!

 

 

 

Next image will list which investment managers are holding, apparently, various amounts of assets under “Investments – Securities – Other.”

In case this isn’t large enough to read (I can on laptop, though), the “Description” column lists investment manager / brokerage companies, or their funds (some read “fund” others simply read “Co” or “LLC” which is inconsistent);  Charles Schwab & Co.  Neuberger Berman LLC ($1.0M) Vanguart St Treasurty Fund ($2.3M — this one I see was almost cleared out by year end, from $2.3M to $840K); JPMOrgan Chase Bank ($484,380 cleared out to “NONE”); WPG Farber Overseas Fund (stayed about the same, not large) and Bernard L. Madoff, dwarfing the others in this list, at $6.08M, increased to $6.75M by year end.  After that, there is AG&J Power Opportunities Fund ($538,021, cleared out to “NONE”) and Gracie Capital Int’l Fund, $612,231, increased slightly)

(Image filename): alliance-for-excellnt-educ-inc-ein113487339-in-dc-year-2004-detail-showing-madoff-and-other-investmts-madoff-is-largest

For “ALL4ed.org” Year 2002, Page 1 shows $33M “Gross Receipts” (see next image and associated link), and its Schedule A has another surprise — the organization received $10M of support in year 1999!

Link to the Year 2002 full tax return for browsing.  In this one you can see (towards the back) that around (Schedule D Detail, Statement 1) $1.5M profit on one of the Madoff funds was made, and $717K loss on the other. At the very back (scroll beyond “depreciation/amortization” fine print schedules) is page after page of very fine print listing of Madoff funds, by company invested in, plus ‘S&P 100″ indexes by month, the printout being dated 6/2003.

Possible answer to that question is on the fine print of the form:  “Do not include any unusual amounts here (see Line 28), and Line 28 reads what looks like a message to compile a “Schedule B” (?) of excess or extraordinary (however IRS defines it) donations — but do not file with the return.  Or, some other arrangement.  That part of Schedule A (which this year simply read “Supplemental” re: 501©3 organizations, and) IV-A Reason for Non-Private Foundation Status, with each Section (I, II, III) restarting the line numbers for that section)

Line 28. Unusual Grants For an organization described in line 10, 11, or 12 that received any unusual grants during 1998 through 2001, prepare a list for your records to show, for each year, the name of the contributor, the date and amount of the grant, and a brief description of the nature of the grant Do not file this list with your return.  Do not include these grants in line 15

Click to view image below: sched-d-statmt-1-short-termcapital-gain-loss-of-alliance-for-excellnt-educ-form990-yr-2004-showing-biggest-investmts-70m-sold-for-545k-profit1m-for-small-loss-was-in-bernie-madoff-3pp

 

When it came to the categories of revenue from interest and dividends, and on capital gains, the Bernie Madoff funds were showing the most gains (this is just one of several pages showing details).

Further towards the back of this same return is a single page listing what looks like a single Bernard L. Madoff account, and their short term “puts and calls” (very active) almost every month throughout 2004 — referencing only $1M and for a net loss of $50K.  Maybe that’s not too bad, but the press, down the road, on Madoff was that he was generating fake papertrails on profits to inflate them over time, and favored certain investors (such as the Picowers) whose profits were made up from other investors, who later on, got bilked.

Why would “Alliance for Excellent Education” be so interested in this, then? If they weren’t in on it, what does it say about over all judgment?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Too bad there was no such detail for the “Bernard L. Madoff” short-term capital gains shown on page 1 of this return in the amount of over $70M which made a profit of $858K as I’m recalling.  Why no identification of how that was done?

This is a SCHEDULE A of SUPPORT (showing several years back:  years 2000- 2003) from the 2004 return.  I’m including it as an annotated (see colorful lines…) pdf to show that in a year where its only “Contributions” were $9,000, it made almost $500K in a category (blue oval and rectangle) referencing investments (dividends, interests, rents, royalties (they don’t do), capital gains, etc.)  Schedule A also shows (see yellow arrows) that in 2001 there were NO contributions, and in 2002, then $2M contributions, but no corresponding major increase in earnings from interest, dividends, or sale of assets other than inventory as there was in year 2000.  This all points to some larger assets previous to 2000 or in that year.

pdf-annotated-alliance-for-excellnt-educ-ein113487339-year-2004-sched-a-of-support-2000-2003-raises-questions-2016-11-17-7-30pm

(Click link above for full-sized image)

 

I was curious how an earlier than 2004 tax return would look, as to Schedule A of support, and went looking.  Incidentally this one also referenced a related 501©4 which shared “Common Board of Directors” called “America Graduates.”  The top return below is marked “termination.”  It shows that three Leeds family members (I’ll assume there’s a relationship somewhere here) were the only (unpaid) directors or trustees, that $783K funds were left over, and a Schedule N (filed with nonprofit terminations) shows the money went to “National Public Education Action Fund” a 501©4 with a different EIN#, but for which Daniel H. Leeds was the Chairman.  I’ll post a few images below the tax returns:

Total results: [3]. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
America Graduates	DC	2008	990EO	15	$0.00	20-0500596
America Graduates	DC	2007	990O	14	$718,542.00	20-0500596
America Graduates	DC	2006	990O	15	$799,007.00	20-0500596

THE MISSION OF AMERICA GRADUATES IS TO USE THE POLITICAL PROCESS TO DEVELOP GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS TO ENABLE AMERICA’S MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO ACHIEVE HIGH STANDARDS AND GRADUATES PREPARED FOR COLLEGE AND SUCCESS IN LIFE.

2008 Form 990O for “America Graduates” under 3 “Leeds” directors and its final year of operation EIN# 200500596

 <==$728K spent for high school redesign…

 

 

 

Daniel H (3205 R St NW in DC), Liselotte J.and Gerard G. Leeds (same address @ Great Neck NY).  

A 2006 return specifices that Gerard and Liselotte are married and the parents of Daniel H. Leeds.  2006 & 2007 returns show only one non-relative director: ”

LEO HINDERY
THE CHRYSLER BUILDING
405 LEXINGTON AVENUE, 36TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10174

Schedule N termination, dissolution etc. for this organization shows it going to new org. with new EIN# — but under the same Chairman at the Same Address.  One might ask, why??  “Run money run — see the money run…”  “Dick, Jane & Sally….  See Dick change his uniform…”

SchedN 2008 for America Graduates (200500596) moves it to same address, same leadership (D.H. Leeds named), but new org. name with new EIN#26-2819027) amt moved $728K. Same amount also specified as “Grants” on p.1 and program expenses (see previous image full-size on tax return link in above table)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION ACTION FUND	DC	2015	990EO	6	$240,473.00	26-2819027
NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION ACTION FUND	DC	2014	990EO	6	$219,240.00	26-2819027
NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION ACTION FUND	DC	2013	990EO	7	$230,672.00	26-2819027

This NPEAF is marked “initial Return” “2008” and without telling the source, does acknowledge a contribution of about the size was referenced in America Graduates.  It promptly passes this money on in a single $400K grant to Education Voters America (keep reading, below).

Marked “first return” (see the “X”) of NPEAF, EIN# 262819027 a 501©4

 

2009 tax return (also Form 990EZ) (NOTE:  The Fiscal Year begins April 1 and ends March 31 of the following year) here shows they gave $100K to Education Voters of America (in “Feb. 2010”), did not acknowledge any website (“N/A” to that question on header) and had a more grandiose than later tax-exempt purpose:

THE ORGANIZATION WAS ESTABLISHED {{no year given? too bad..}} TO HELP CREATE AN EXCELLENT EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES THAT SPANS FROM EARLY CHILDHOOD THROUGH ADULTHOOD TO ACHIEVE ITS GOALS, NPEAF HAS CREATED A STRATEGY FOR FUNDING A NATIONAL EDUCATION MOVEMENT THE STRATEGY FOCUSES ON FUNDING (1)A NETWORK OF STATE BASED ADVOCACY GROUPS THAT PROMOTES A VISION AND A BLUEPRINT FOR EDUCATION TRANSFORMATION AND RAISES THE BAR OF ACTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL ELECTED LEADERS ON EDUCATION,

Under these hands, LOWERING the bar of accountability for the advocacy groups is clearly part of the practice, so I have to presume it’s also part of the agenda….

(2)AN EFFORT BY ADVOCACY GROUPS TO ENCOURAGE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE NATIONAL EXPERTISE FOR FEDERAL AND STATE INNOVATION, AND (3)A PHILANTHROPIC AND GRASS-TOPS## NETWORK TO SUPPORT THE MOVEMENT THE FUND’S PRIMARY FUNCTION WILL BE TO SERVE AS A GRANTMAKER TO EDUCATION VOTERS OF AMERICA AND OTHER PRIMARILY STATE- BASED 501(C)(4)EDUCATION GROUPS TO PROMOTE THEIR STATE AND NATIONAL POLICY PRIORITIES

Freudian slip? Grass-roots implies of, by and for the people. Grass-TOPS is more like what’s actually the operational plan…. I highlit in yellow the obvious play (upcoming or already in place) of “fees for friends.”  For some classic examples of how the national consultants are behaving and more are likely to behave, re-read the title of this post and some of the material, especially on “ConnectEd” and the “Alliance.”

The one 501©3 listed above was the Education Voters Institute.  While its last three returns show little to no activity (but do click to see there was actually cash flow to and from it), I see from the support schedule from the “Schedule A” (showing prior years) that back in 2007, it was showing over $500K contributions.  Another suprise to me was “Dr. John H. Jackson” on the board (unpaid, 1.0 hour week).  A thumbnail of him (as Pres & CEO of The Schott Foundation for Public Education, assuming it’s the same John H. Jackson) shows up below:

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Education Voters Institute	MA	2013	990EZ	15	$0.00	20-4569015
Education Voters Institute	MA	2011	990EZ	11	$1,993.00	20-4569015
Education Voters of Pennsylvania	MA	2012	990EZ	10	$0.00	20-4569015

(“of Pennsylvania” is a mistake, but not from the filing organization, just the 990finder):

See comment below next image (Support Sched A for Education Voters Initiative (11 Dupont Circle in WDC?)

This is the 501©3 (Mass) that goes with several 501©4s in Massachusetts run by Leeds Family members. This Schedule A Shows initial funding was 2006, and (bottom line) shows that initially, about ¾ came from contributions representing over 2%? of the total. The total was only $4M (at this point), showing a very small actual PUBLIC support of it at higher levels of contributions

another real surprise on the 2008 return of this  was to see (1) John Podesta on the Bd of Directors (unpaid), and I’ll bet it was this John Podesta: (WIKI)

John David Podesta (born January 8, 1949) is the former chairman of the 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.^[1] He previously served as chief of staff to President Bill Clintonand Counselor to President Barack Obama.^[2]

He is the former president, and now Chair and Counselor, of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C., as well as a Visiting Professor of Law at the Georgetown University Law Center. Additionally, he was a co-chairman of the Obama-Biden Transition Project.^{[3][4] …..}

Currently, he is the U.S. representative to the UN High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.^[27]

Podesta has served on the board of directors of Bedford, Massachusetts-based energy company Joule Unlimited since January 2011.^[28][29] He has also served on the board of the Portland, Oregon-based Equilibrium Capital.^[28] In 2013, Podesta earned $90,000 as a consultant to the West Chester, Pennsylvania-based HJW Foundation, a nonprofit group led by Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss.^[28]

[etc.]…  ALSO ON THERE WAS Dr. JAMES P. COMER, and no doubt this refers to Dr. Comer of the Yale Child Study Center, which I posted on earlier this year: in re: things “Connecticut”:

James P. Comer, MD, MPH

Dr. Comer is the Maurice Falk Professor of Child Psychiatry at the Yale University School of Medicine’s Child Study Center, and has been a Yale medical faculty member since 1968. During these years, he has concentrated his career on promoting a focus on child development as a way of improving schools. His efforts in support of healthy development of young people are known internationally.

Dr. Comer, perhaps, is best known for the founding of the Comer School Development Program in 1968, which promotes the collaboration of parents, educators, and community to improve social, emotional, and academic outcomes for children that, in turn, helps them achieve greater school success. His concept of teamwork has improved the educational environment in more than 500 schools throughout America. …. [continue to see many awards and 48 honorary degrees…]

Yale Child Study Center is a whole different topic… and it comes up a lot in responsible fatherhood promotion over the years.

---

2009 article at “chalkbeat.org” (another nonprofit it says) on EDUCATION VOTERS OF NY as a new kind on the block (3 yrs old) related to Education Voters of America:

A new player set to enter city education politics tonight

BY MAURA WALZ   –  AUGUST 6, 2009

New York non-profit whose political action committee supports critics of mayoral control is making its debut into city education politics tonight. But its strategy is to hold off supporting city candidates this election year and instead spend the fall collecting community input.

Glynda Carr

The effort kicks off tonight with two “neighborhood dialogue” meetings in Brooklyn and Queens, said Glynda Carr, executive director of Education Voters of New York, a three-year old branch of the national Education Voters of America.

The group has previously supported some of mayoral control’s staunchest opponents in Albany. But Carr said that she aims to launch a public conversation about schools freed of political agendas, including her own. “These neighborhood dialogues aren’t going to be framed,” she said.

Education Voters of America website “EdVoters.org” no longer functional.  Its address is in Massachusetts, and you can see the pattern of Total Asset retention here.

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
EDUCATION VOTERS OF AMERICA	MA	2013	990EO	12	$8,325.00	20-3944907
EDUCATION VOTERS OF AMERICA	MA	2012	990EO	6	$150,464.00	20-3944907
Education Voters of America	MA	2011	990EO	7	$139,165.00	20-3944907

A 2009 tax return, not in “990EZ format” finally revealed this organization started up in 2005.  It showed these “related” (Schedule-R) organizations tax-exempt, from NY, OH, and PA:

Sched R (related tax-exempts) for Education Voters America includes one 501©3 “Institute.” Most or all at the same street address. This return also shows leadership being paid in part by “Related” org. (NY EdPac), etc.

 

I looked at the 2008 return (link here) and see it shows a “Name Change” and “Address Change’ (to Dupont Circle) both (“X” in top left Header Part B).  I know you’ll be “real” surprised to see the Board of Directors:

EIN#203944907, “Education Voters America” Yr2008 990EZ, Pg1, Top (it’s a 501©4)

EIN#203944907 |IRS 2008 showing 3 Leeds and 3 others on the Board. This Yr it received $360K, spent about half on salaries, half on “other expenses”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Top return [Back to National Public Education Action Fund or “NPEAF”] I viewed — they are filing a Form 990EZ which doesn’t show date of origin, number of employees, or as much detail as a Form 990.  The stated purpose (image also shown in a bit) ON THE MOST RECENT RETURN:

THE ORGANIZATION WAS ESTABLISHED TO CREATE AN EXCELLENT EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES THAT SPANS FROM EARLY CHILDHOOD THROUGH ADULTHOOD THE FUND’S PRIMARY FUNCTION IS TO SERVE AS A GRANTMAKER TO OTHER NATIONAL AND STATE-BASED EDUCATION GROUPS THAT PROMOTE EQUITABLE AND EFFECTIVE POLICY PRIORITIES (second image below):

latest Leeds 501©4 (NPEAF) bd of trustees shows also Sunita & Michelle Leeds (hrs worked, next to none; grants given “0“

Although I just showed, above, that this organization received close to three-quarter million ($783K) dollars in 2008 on dissolution of America Graduates, it is showing “0” activity and expenses as of tax year ending 2015!  It does, however, show another Leeds family member on the board of directors working less than 2 hours a week, for free, and reference the books being in the care of “Concordia Partners” in Vienna, VA (not on next image, but on the return):

 

I included the tail end of ‘Beginning/End of Year assets” for identification. Text of this image description quoted above. Image shows “0” expenses and “0” grants, although its main purpose is grantmaking...

What I’d like to see, but don’t so far, is the FIRST return for NPEAF acknowledging that $783K from “America Graduates” reported for 2008. (I did eventually find it and it’s posted near the rest of those returns).

Back to “ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION”:

2003 return (this is the whole return, some pages may still need to be rotated), similar pattern, and provides yet more detail.  Look around page 30 for capital gains/losses on investments, or earlier for the spread of investments.  alliance-for-exct-educ-113487339-yr-2003-return-all-showing-it-was-an-address-change-and-similar-madoff-investments-main-revenue-is-from-investmts.  It also shows that that $250,000 grant was to its (related) organization, “America Graduates” a 501©4.  The President (?) during this time was Susan L. Frost (salary around $203K).   Here is the pdf to Year 2002:  alliance-for-exct-educ-yr-2002-113487339-operations-only-started-2001-it-says-return-all-see-bd-directors-leeds-family-madoff-investmts-etc-about-40pp-main-revenue-is-from-investmts …

Exec Dir Frost + several “Leeds” family members + an Exec Mgmt Company (all unpaid except Frost, who signs tax return) Yr 2002 Alliance for Exct Educ

Year 2002 (org. first year of operation it says was 2001)

One Executive Director, Susan Frost (MD)

One Secretary citing “Executive Money Management” (NY) affiliation (Sec’y) Wm. Aaron

Chairman/Pres – Gerard Leeds (NY)

Vice-Chairperson, Lilo Leeds (MA)

Vice Pres/Treas Greg Jobin-Leeds ℅ The Schott Foundation (Notes, below) (NY)  &
Director Daniel H. Leeds. (DC)

[On a separate return, for a different organization, later, I learned that Daniel H. and Greg-Jobin-Leeds are brothers; and Sunita is Daniel’s wife.]

---

“Hmmm…. Interesting….”

 

 

 

 

 

Why would all these “Leeds” individuals form, or sign on to the board of an organization which, early on, gets $10M of funds, and invests regularly in a select set of money managers (it would seem, by their names) or brokerage firms — Charles Schwab, Neuberger Berman LLC, JP Morgan, Bernard L. Madoff, and a few others…?  Then let their organization’s 501©3 at least) get revoked in Washington, D.C., but continue soliciting, showing a D.C. address — through a different fund-raiser?

Greg and Marty Jobin-Leeds in another partnership with 2006 origins, it says.  The banner for this one reads organization name, then “LLC”  http://www.democracyandeducation.us/about_us.html  (notice url ends “*.us” not “*.org, *.net, *.com or *.gov):  Who are  or were the Schotts? (as in ‘Schott Foundation’):

fine print, it’s the “Jobin-Leeds” Partnership….

Following the Jobin-Leeds family to “Partnership for Democracy and Education”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That’s illegible, so here’s a quote:

Maria Jobin-Leeds
Managing Partner

Maria Jobin-Leeds likes to think at the systems level. Using democracy as a tool, founding Access Strategies Fund became an opportunity to fund grassroots civic organizations to wield more power. Collaboratively, over the last 15 years Access has helped develop many leaders, organizations and improved public policies to benefit low income communities, African Americans, Latinos, Immigrants and Women. We help community focused leaders, especially women leaders, to actively engage their constituents to think critically about the policies we need, to advocate effectively and to either help or hold their representatives accountable, or encourage one of their own to run for public office. Maria and staff incubated the Women’s Pipeline for Change which addresses the barriers to democracy for low-income grassroots women of color with an eye toward remaking the system and developing more women to take public leadership.

At Access Strategies, our current understanding of the link between economic power and democratic power moves us towards a participatory understanding of the Solidarity Economy and how it could support democracy. We are leveraging our endowment as an investment tool to support the same mission, by investing in the same communities in which we make grants.

The Schott Foundation for Public Education supports the movement for high quality public education in an era when there is pressure to dismantle the largest civil rights project in the country: our free system of excellent public education. Maria’s founding direction keeps the work of bringing students, parents, teachers and policy makers focused and effective at changing the public frame from individual student achievement to opportunity for all, including girls, and students of color.

The Partnership for Democracy and Education provides the research on viable, community oriented candidates for public office that will lead us towards a just, egalitarian society.

Get the general idea? It’s the Solidarity Economy that will really provide more — what? Justice?

I already see that so many of these funds are out of the exact same address, and I got (from first view) that having an “LLC” Partnership here, not a non-profit like the rest, is significant.

From the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Business search on this organization (if you repeat the search), it’s clear that ONLY 3 people are in charge, this married couple and a third person serving apparently also as a registered agent.  Its stated purpose is to do the research.  They are probably the main consultants paid on the multiple nonprofits (which they also run in varying combinations.  This is a VERY “we control operations around here” setup!

Summary for:  JOBIN-LEEDS PARTNERSHIP FOR DEMOCRACY AND EDUCATION, LLC

The exact name of the Domestic Limited Liability Company (LLC):   JOBIN-LEEDS PARTNERSHIP FOR DEMOCRACY AND EDUCATION, LLC

Entity type:   Domestic Limited Liability Company (LLC)

Identification Number: 000940841

Date of Organization in Massachusetts:   01-02-2007

Last date certain:

The location or address where the records are maintained (A PO box is not a valid location or address):
Address:	675 MASSACHUSETTS AVE, 8TH FL
City or town, State, Zip code, Country:				CAMBRIDGE,   MA   02139   USA

 (That was a copy & paste of an “external master page” for one corp.) — but take a look at this pdf and image based on Officer or Agent name-search of the compound-last name Jobin-Leeds (in Mass):
mass-corporations-search-individuals-name-%22jobin-leeds%22-shows-access-strategies-fund-csigmund-shott-fund-the-oppty-to-learn-fund-proteus-action-league-partnership-for-d-e-etc-2pp-at (and the image to go with this):

See related pdf which is TWO pages long..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(This is starting to make more sense once I found the EIN# and looked up the “Caroline and Sigmund Schott Fund” (which was formerly labeled “Foundation” but got a name change), “tax-exempt since 1987” says another source (as opposed to any family foundation starting in 1991 referenced at the Schott Foundation website):

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Caroline & Sigmund Schott Fund	MA	2015	990PF	45	$39,311,130.00	11-2856561
Caroline & Sigmund Schott Fund	MA	2014	990PF	74	$40,703,887.00	11-2856561
Caroline & Sigmund Schott Fund	MA	2013	990PF	46	$37,564,102.00	11-2856561

This also shows some income from “Bernard Madoff Recovery.”  Attachments 10 & 11 show where assets are being held (in faint print, not clear, or literally black on white), including some in corporate stocks, and some more (more than half of investments) in category “Other.” Looks like several are overseas  investments though (for example, the one labeled “City of London Emerging Markets!”)

I would show it, but this is wearing me out, and you can look for yourself!

(This organization gave over $1M to the “Schott Foundation for Public Education” (in two installments, the million-dollar one labeled “Opportunity to Learn Fund“) as well as smaller amounts to the NPEAF. It took in $403K (Schedule B) and I now see that “Neuberger Berman” apparently is administering the estate of Gerard G. Leeds – IRA.)

---

Click the Link on the image below for some more family history and another assertion that funds should be poured into preK-12 education, which is then called “free” — when it’s obviously not.  The same low-income public continues to support this, mostly not functioning tax-exempt, while the tax-exempt organizations continue to demand influence, with their private funding, from ever expanding that infrastructure — while multiplying the nonprofits involved which — at the end of the day — are often controlled by related (by blood or marriage) family members with access to assets.

I thought I lost the original caption (second image below) and retyped it (first image below).  Decided to leave both of them in; it’s getting late and my eyes are starting to cross with all these tax returns anyhow.:

Click image the link found on on Partnership for Democracy and Education, LLC page which actually leads to a ‘SCHOTT FOUNDATION.org” page. The Schott Foundation is named after Lilo’s parents and was co-founded by herself and her son Gregory Jobin-Leeds (it says) in 1991, becoming a public charity years later. reader is encouraged to explore that site further, and recognize also that at no obvious point does it declare the original source of funding for this, but know for sure that it’s pushing Early Education for All like most major corporations. IN ADDITION (See “History” page) through subsequent leadership, also pushing specifically for Black Men and Boys, while Marty Jobin-Leeds (separately) talks in glowing terms about her promotion of women and feminism.

Click image which actually is from SchottFoundation.org (9.8/2016). While I’m sorry for the loss (I lost my own mother some years ago), I still ask readers to explore the Schott foundation (named after Lilo’s parents), the “History” of the Schott Foundation (formed 1991 as a Family Foundation, later became public) and make a note that after it became a public charity later, it also became involved (through additional leadership) in promoting a sexist agenda by way of equalizing the racism (i.e., Black Men and Boys initiatives re: common Core), while simultaneously Marta Jobin-Leeds is spoken of in glowing terms as to her feminism. This reflects “Standard practice” among the largest foundations — they’ll take the feminism, so long as it will also accommodate mens’ rights initiatives under the correcting racism banner, and in the process, insist on yet more and more public education hours, years, and infrastructure for all — like most well to do foundations have already agreed upon for the “low-income” of the world. This also ensures that young girls growing up will be exposed before puberty to pro-patriarchy practices, regardless of what the label is. Meanwhile, I see no immediate reference to where the original wealth behind this foundation came from. Needless to say, as a parent and former teacher who has taught across the spectrum of schools, I think the formula for greater success is LESS school (not more), and less standardization. Anyhow…. ALSO — just for a refresher — under the Constitution (like it or not) the USA is called a republic, not a “democracy,” no matter what MSM declares, constantly. They are not the same. Privatizing control of the public schools is simply attempting to remove the “representative” part of government, a continuation of the CIvil Rights movement which doesn’t address where racism and sexism went after the 1960s in the USA….(!!! written at the end of a long blogging day tracking Leeds-run nonprofits who last for a few years, and leave serious gaps in the accountability)

---

Some people may not like my commentary, but it comes from an awareness of the HMRF (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood) field overall, and key players and campaigns within it.  Here’s some evidence from the Partnership Page, listed under Gregory Jobin-Leeds section:

In 2006, Schott began publishing the report, “The Schott 50 State Report on Public Education and Black Males” which has created a groundswell of support for reforming public education. In 2008, Schott launched the Opportunity to Learn Campaign to build a national movement to close the opportunity gap in public education. Schott helped organize grassroots and religious groups across the country around the opportunity to learn framework.

Let’s look at that 50-state report starting 2006, from the website “Blackboysreports.org/#.”  Really, they want us to look at the video first, but I just scrolled down some; the title says “lives” but the context is Males.  What’s egalitarian about that?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acknowledgments  [in 2015 report, “revised” it says]

The Schott Foundation for Public Education gratefully acknowledges our philanthropic partners who supported this report.

J.P. Morgan Chase Foundation | Heinz Endowments
W. K. Kellogg Foundation | Lumina Foundation
Open Society Foundations | Campaign for Black Male Achievement

Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation

Who did the research:  

The research for this report was conducted by the Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools at New York University. It was edited by Ann Beaudry. The report was designed by Patrick St. John.

The CEO and President of the Schott Foundation from this report is John H. Jackson, who wrote the Preface.  After the Preface is the “Foreword” written by Michelle Alexander, Associate Professor of Law at Ohio State and author of a book (book on thumbnail image). The Executive Director of “The Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity” is Pedro A. Noguera, who wrote the Afterword.

Before the Afterword (and references and page after page of Appendices) each of the sponsor organizations (listed above) gets to advertise.  Not referenced on the list at the top, but shown at the back, I see, is the California Endowment (my state, and I’ve published on it recently, I believe — unless that post is still somehow in draft).   The text of its logo, ad, and PR on its commitment to helping black men and boys goes like this — they’re going to contribute $50 Million.

Somehow it never occurs to long-standing, powerful, entrenched power bloc groups to simply quit squirreling away their assets (TCE is a large one, statewide) in tax-exempt investment platforms under tax-exempt entities (a shifting array of them such I’ve just shown on this post), and help those men and boys by freeing up the billions of dollars of assets (collectively) producing dividends and returns (tax-exempt or tax-reduced), and diverting funds from the employees, and as to TANF (welfare funding) often also diverting funds from the caretaking households of parents of young children into behavioral modification programming..

Of if it occurs, “mum’s the word” for THAT program initiative…!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, link to the full, 49-page Fiscal Year 2004 ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION return; and towards the top of this section marked by background-color sky-blue, again, are, otherwise, those last three year’s returns, including years in which CORP.DC. GOV says their status is “revoked.”  Apparently donors don’t care whether their grantees maintain proper registration as corporations at the state level. Sometimes (I’ve seen it among HHS marriage/fatherhood grantees or coalitions of grantees, in particular) they don’t seem to care about the IRS registrations, either.  As will come up at least once below re: “ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career.”

Here is the Jobin-Leeds couple (I DNK if the only one with this last name) from “Access Strategies Fund” (founded, it says, in 1999) in Massachusetts:

Click caption to read the description. It sounds like Maria is the daughter of some Baby-Boomers (Civil rights Generation).

Access Strategies Fund was founded in 1999 by Maria and Greg Jobin-Leeds, a couple who were inspired by the success of social movements from civil rights to feminism, and anti-apartheid.  Access Strategies Fund is a philanthropic foundation that harnesses the collective power of underserved communities to use the democratic process to improve their lives.

---

Maria was motivated by her parents’ dedication and leadership in the areas of civil rights and feminism. Maria had a stimulating childhood surrounded by adults who worked to improve schools and stop the Vietnam War. Greg, a son of immigrants who escaped Nazi persecution, developed a commitment of fighting for fairness and social justice from his parents’ experience. As teachers, the Jobin-Leeds’ became more aware of the barriers to healthy and happy lives that many students from low-income communities struggled against, particularly those in communities of color.

Maria and Greg are deeply committed to the power of community-driven philanthropy to advance progressive social change using a race, gender and economic lens. The sale of the family publishing business gave Maria and Greg the financial freedom to put their ideas into practice and support social justice issues such as democracy and education.

Wow.  For ALL the reading I’ve been doing on multiple Leeds, or Leeds-Jobin founded enterprises, that has to be the first one that ever references where the family wealth came from, or at least this generation’s — a family publishing business.  It’s certainly nowhere on the Schott Foundation for Public Education pages, as colorful and multifaceted as they may be.  No financial statements — probably because it doesn’t hold that many assets. In looking for this I also discovered that the landscape (many states) seems full of Schott Family Foundations, named by the couples’ first names, as well as one apparently just labeled “Schott Foundation.”  I didn’t see one with much more than $100M of assets:

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Schott Foundation for Public Education	MA	2014	990	70	$8,892,445.00	04-3457065
Schott Foundation for Public Education	MA	2013	990	55	$8,579,415.00	04-3457065

AND ….

Total results: 3. Search Again.
(Click on the column headers to sort.)

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Access Strategies Fund	MA	2015	990PF	37	$7,680,909.00	04-3464581
Access Strategies Fund, Inc.	MA	2014	990PF	45	$8,015,842.00	04-3464581
Access Strategies Fund, Inc.	MA	2013	990PF	52	$8,198,795.00	04-3464581

---

---

This entire setup defeats accountability and any at-large public awareness of what is being done with and in the public schools by way of looking at any number of private organizations pumping money into these schools, with a goal potentially of private profits and long-term goal of control of the education system to fit the workforce (Cradle-to-Career pipelines).

That might sound good — IF it were being done above-board, ethically, and with the FULLY-INFORMED consent of the public, low-income and otherwise.

Put that it’s deliberately — which this post I believe proves, among many such on the blog regarding other organizations of similar practices and apparently coordinated purposes — not being done in this manner, that is, with the FULLY-INFORMED CONSENT of the PUBLIC, Low-Income and Otherwise — together with the regionalization of California, in particular (see next section with “linked” posts on this), for purposes of making better friends with The People’s Republic of China, Mexico, and other foreign investors — and it becomes pretty clear that part of the “investment offerings” includes a primed workforce of local drones — educated to their expected necessary level of expertise as workers (including a technical, white-collar class and university faculties), but NOT to the wily ways of networked nonprofits, networking among major tax-exempt foundations which should and is properly interpreted as storehouses of family and/or corporate wealth in the first place, in a NON-STOCK (NOT accountable to shareholders, for example) manner.

Part of ENSURING the masses are not “over-educated” and start thinking like business owners and investors / investment managers, is ensuring that most of the masses are kept IN the public schools — and not “overeducated” to the point they compete on a level playing field with the elites, raised, typically (for the most part) in a different system, or if in the public schools, possibly at times when they had not deteriorated to the state they have today.

I speak as someone who has been watching this topic over time, as a former teacher (in a variety o f types of schools and neighborhoods, in which I lived at the time), and of course as a parent whose children were born and raised in California, and in which state I was repeatedly forced to defend against the continued usurpation and degradation of these young girls, then young women’s lives, and was dramatically punished for attempts to exercise sensible, legal, and court-order-compliant choice as a single mother with the qualifications to make sensible judgments on the matter.

Currently only one of two is known to have completed college TEN YEARS after they were stolen overnight; and both are seriously estranged, allegedly over this issue.  From a more personal (my family, and the father’s) perspective, of course, control and usurpation of the children’s education was also a way of personal control over me, and from their, other finances that certain people wanted their hands on and, to date, have not been forced to let go of — or give a proper account of.

POST SEQUENCING:

Long Title of this post with Short Url:  ConnectED + MPR Associates Inc. + Gary Hoachlander, WestEd, and the US Dept. of Ed, with help from James Irvine Foundation

Of the  post from which this emerged: California–Who RUNS this place anyhow?  Well, See Go-BIZ, CITD (and its California-China Office of Trade and Investment), for Promotions + Explanations, the Bay Area Council (BAC/BACF, who runs California-China Office, and “BASIC”) Tax Returns for:  Missing Money+Info, Odd Obsfuscation (of the California-China Office projects), and Internal Inconsistencies.

We (so to speak) have been talking on this blog of “pipelines” — and here is my own recent “in-the-pipeline posts,” on that topic, all in draft status, and on the verge of their individual debuts: School-to-Prison-Pipeline (end it) and Cradle-to-Career-Pipeline (promote it) Pipeline Next-Gen Civil Rights, Harvard|Yale Lawyer-Founded ADVANCEMENT PROJECT 501©3 (Los Angeles and D.C. offices) (marked as closely related in part by its similar, lime-yellow background-color). Which was continued/developed from prior post “Speaking of Pipelines,** a simple search of “School-to-Prison-Pipeline” unearths a common operating schema” in which I looked into top search results for the phrase in that title.

As of today, 10/22/2016, none of the above have been published, but most are close to it. Their subject matter is “Linked.”  But on another track of who is “linking” whom to what, and how:

(Linked Learning + College-to-Career Model Pathways or should we say, Pipelines?) 

Yet another case of just how dumbed-down the public has become, in believing what’s pushed on it about CAUSES without taking into account the ACCOUNTING.

“ConnectEd” was set up in the center of downtown Berkeley at a certain street and suite # only in 2006.  So was MPR Associates, Inc., in 1989 (different suite #), though both controlled by Gary Hoachlander, whose relevance to both and to the USDOE  (and his bio blurb) I post below.  MPR Associates remained throughout the stunning tax return history of ConnectEd, including failing to register with the California Registry of Charitable Trusts until its second request to, for FIVE YEARS, as can be seen clearly by the schedule on Charitable Registration details — once they did.

While it is privately funded, for the most part (I’ve looked at several returns — some do take government grants), it is consistently favoring ONE major subcontractor — MPR Associates, Inc.

The company “ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career” cannot be found by a name search (with or without the colon) of “Connected” on the Secretary of State (California) Business Entity website.  I tried this both before and after eventually locating that entity (on a suggestion to use what looked like potentially a company “motto” as the search requirement instead of the common word “Connected”).  It should also be obvious from how tricky this was that the website currently up is not much more helpful in “fessing up” to its own EIN# or posting any Form 990s.

---

It also failed to show up under the Charitable website until 2011 (apparently), although three years earlier (tax year ending 2008) it had $21 million of revenues showing.  There is one word for this besides dishonest — and that word is “illegal.”  Yet this privately controlled for-profit/not-for-profit combo is being allowed to buy influence in the California public schools, apparently because those schools are just so under-performing, so disconnected, so impoverished, and so lousy (none of which I as a parent and former teacher am particularly disagreeing with, particularly when compared with other available forms of K-12 schooling — for some people…).

I only noticed ConnectEd at this point* when the largest grant of a certain year from the James Irvine Foundation went to this organization.  I’m curious whether the same foundation was granting to this organization before 2011, that is, before it became legal as a charity in the state of California — or whether they simply “just don’t care” in the grandiose scope of preparing children to work in their corporations.

(*My children are grown and I no longer teach in the former profession, which many public schools are also notable for having eliminated, decade after decade along with other arts, and “peripherals” which many parents know are in fact, central to a good education and developing children,  in efforts to prop up underperforming maths, science, and reading scores — although that form of the arts is commonly known to be excellent for all of the above; I’m talking music….including reading it, and performing music from a variety of cultures.  It’s good for the brain, good socially (ensemble and private skills to be developed), good academically, good for exposure to other languages, cultures, and historical eras, if done well.

So, the public schools historically having been sold as equalizing opportunity, but as practiced (and after, not just before the Civil Rights Acts and historic cases regarding this), are neighborhood-influenced and still fantastic ways of preserving the social caste system, with the wealthier areas having, for example, one-income two-parent families and Mom (or Dad) dedicates the volunteer time to prop them up, to raise money for the local school foundations to replace at least in part what budgets cut out, etc.

Now we are supposed to believe that, suddenly, the not-for-profit/for-profit control system partnering with governments (the school districts AND state-run universities, typically at (at least) two different selectivity levels per state: higher, and lower) have had a change of heart, and a sudden inspiration of what MIGHT be done if children could be put on the College-to-Career Pipeline, starting of course somewhere between the “Cradle” (age “Zero”) to 12th grade.

If you believe this, then you should take a look at the behaviors of those involved, and how transparent their reporting has been at the state level, and what this signifies to what is really thought about the public’s right to know.

---

 

Molly Munger of “The Advancement Project” cited James Irvine Foundation among her (current) Board memberships.  VERY interesting Foundation — and a large one.  So??  Its current Vice-Chair then referenced, among her many connections, ties to the Bay Area Council.  That’s how it came up.

Total results: 3. Search Again. [NOTE TOTAL ASSETS ARE IN THE $2.0 BILLION RANGE AS of Year ENDING 2014]

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
James Irvine Foundation Foundation-Administered Program (<=another mislabel…)	CA	2014	990PF	95	$2,080,342,364.00	94-1236937
The James Irvine Foundation	CA	2013	990PF	99	$1,887,715,935.00	94-1236937
The James Irvine Foundation	CA	2012	990PF	104	$1,675,267,930.00	94-1236937

One look at any organization this large, starting with Page 1, will give a sense of perspective on where its profits are being made, and as to the grants, where they are going (this one gave several grants, top row year, to The Advancement Project and to the other one Ms. Munger cited (UNITE-LA)..

Around $15M alone was made in interest and dividends, let alone profits from sale of securities ($139M). They had enough to donate $87M to others, still pay their treasurer a salary of over $1M — and still give at least two, that I saw, grants over $1,000,000 to others, and plenty well over $500K also.

Such returns are well worth paging through — it doesn’t take that much time, and it does develop some perspectives.  Here’s a single image showing three grantees receiving over $1,000,000.

James Irvine Foundation 2014 Form 990PF (EIN#941236937) page 18 ONLY of Grants showing 3 >= $1M (Total Grant-giving $87M, Assets – over $2B).pdf (<==click to see full-sized image)

The three grants over $1,000,000 on this page…. there are others on other pages… which begins with “Building Skills Partnership” on Row 1, are:

California Forward 1107 9th Street Suite 650
Sacramento,CA 95814  ($1,400,000 for core support)  {I looked at tax returns.  There is a 501©3 (larger but being spent down) & ©4. See footnote for the returns}.

California Science Center Foundation 700 Exposition Park Drive Los Angeles, CA 90037, ($1,000,000 – “support EndeavorLA campaign”)

California State University Foundation 401 Golden Shore 6th Floor Long Beach, CA 90802 ($1,500,000 “prepare teachers for “Linked lng,” an unnecessary abbreviation — considering plenty of space and other words among the $87M grants which were not abbreviated — and potential “obfuscation” of “Linked Learning,” about which we are going to speak because of a certain much larger grant given out this year.

“Linked Learning” is connected to ConnectEd, et al. and in particular Mr. Gary Hoachlander and his private firm MPR Associates, Inc.

 

$1.4M may seem like a large grant, but the same year, this same foundation granted $4.6M, says its IRS filing to:

Motto “Transforming Education through Linked Learning”

Our Track Record

In 2006, in collaboration with the James Irvine Foundation, ConnectEd played a key role in developing and launching a transformational approach – Linked Learning — in a demonstration project with nine California school districts, including Long Beach, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Porterville, Oakland and Pasadena

As to The James Irving Foundation Vice Chair shedding some light on connections of Ms. Molly Munger of The Advancement Project, more on that at prior post in this sequence (not published unless this link is shown to be active):

School-to-Prison-Pipeline (end it) and Cradle-to-Career-Pipeline (promote it) Pipeline Next-Gen Civil Rights, Harvard|Yale Lawyer-Founded ADVANCEMENT PROJECT 501©3 (Los Angeles and D.C. offices) (marked as closely related in part by its similar, lime-yellow background-color).

But as to the “ConnectED / WestEd / James Irvine Foundation (among no doubt other contributors) and what this means for who controls California (for starters) Public Schools — as judged in part by how honest and law-abiding has ConnectEd been in its California-resident behavior as a charitable trust .. . “Let’s Get Honest, we have another post, and (FYI) “Houston, We have a Problem.”

However, I also looked at their largest single donation ($4.2M; they are listed alphabetically) to “ConnectEd” in Berkeley, noted that the (Chief) Board of Directors of “ConnectEd” is affiliated with “WestEd” (the name comes up frequently in boards of directors) and in looking quickly at WestEd, it’s immediately obvious that this is a natural outgrowth dating back to 1965 of attempts to “Regionalize” the country as to public education, involving what were called RELs (Regional Education Labs).  Out of 10 of these two merged in 1995 (the Far West Labs and SouthWest Regional Labs) as “WestEd” which then later became the official “National” Lead agency, and acquired an East-cost company as well.

The ConnectEd has many founders, but this portion describes its activities:

Motto “Transforming Education through Linked Learning”

Our Track Record

In 2006, in collaboration with the James Irvine Foundation, ConnectEd played a key role in developing and launching a transformational approach – Linked Learning — in a demonstration project with nine California school districts, including Long Beach, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Porterville, Oakland and Pasadena. These districts demonstrated significant increases in student credit accrual, college eligibility, and graduation rates compared to before Linked Learning was implemented.

Linked Learning seeks to better prepare students to graduate from high school ready for college and career. Linked Learning combines rigorous academics, demanding technical education, personalized student supports, and real-world experience. Learn more about Linked Learning.

Where We Work

ConnectEd works with more than thirty school districts in California, Michigan, Texas, Wisconsin, Illinois, Ohio and New York.

ConnectEd’s “Governance” link (above) showed at the bottom “Gary Hoachlander, PhD, Ex Officio” President, so I looked him up separately, only to find him as Advisory Council on “Alliance for Excellence in Education” which I already know was another LARGE James Irvine Foundation grantee, so I looked that up also — to find it was founded ca. 2005 (note:  ConnectEd it says dates to 2006) by the former (2001-2005) Governor of West Virginia, who previously (1983-2001) had been in the West Virginia House of Reps. Anyhow, this part is Hoachlander’s background –and you will notice the background is Princeton (BA), then — across the country, Masters and PhD from UC Berkeley (Dept of City and Regional Planning).

Gary Hoachlander, PhD (UCBerkeley, BA, Princeton U), Advisory council to James Irvine Foundation (significant $$) Grantee “Alliance for Excellence in Education,” a DC-address organization led by a former US Governor/House of Reps (West Virginia) that is, currently, playing “coy” on its website about is financials. But — they want every child to be “a graduated (whether college or high school, not specified) and Career Ready

http://all4ed.org/people/gary-hoachlander/

…Beginning his career in 1966 as a brakeman for the Western Maryland Railroad, Dr. Hoachlander has devoted most of his professional life to helping young people learn by doing—connecting education to the opportunities, challenges, and many different rewards to be found through work. Widely known for his expertise in career and technical education and many other aspects of elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education, Dr. Hoachlander has consulted extensively for the U.S. Department of Education, state departments of education, local school districts, foundations, and a variety of other clients.

{‘Coincidentally”] Dr. Hoachlander is also Chairman of MPR Associates, Inc., an educational research and development organization closely affiliated with ConnectEd, and is also one of the country’s leading policy analysts for the U.S. Department of Education, including the National Center for Education Statistics and the Office of Vocational and Adult Education. Dr. Hoachlander earned a BA degree at Princeton University and holds Master’s and PhD degrees from the Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California, Berkeley.

Friday Night UPDATE:  A self-described “retired genius” [my experience suggests the term is deserved, however, former “Apple Genius Bar” so that’s also good enough when it comes to creative problem-solving on things electronic and computerized] one day after my unsuccessful search through ALL the search results using the word “ConnectED” (which not being case-sensitive, could just the simple word “connected” in any combo) — which are displayed 10 at a time, and 127 results — aware of the “failure to find” this business entity, suggested I search on what looks like its Subtitle or possibly a descriptive phrase:

“The California Center for Career and College”

No “colon” in that logo above, is there?

I did so, and immediately found the Secretary of State registration with a “:” in its name and which still (If you search “Connected” only) does not — I have a laptop witness on this one — show up in any of 13 pages (12 x 10 + the final page of 7) of results either with or without the “:” in its legal name.  Here it is:

Entity Name:	CONNECTED: THE CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER
Entity Number:	C2859371
Date Filed:	03/10/2006
Status:	ACTIVE
Jurisdiction:	CALIFORNIA
Entity Address:	2150 SHATTUCK AVE STE 1200
Entity City, State, Zip:	BERKELEY CA 94704
Agent for Service of Process:	INGRID MITTERMAIER
Agent Address:	235 MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 1200
Agent City, State, Zip:	SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104

With the entity# I can get an EIN# if it’s registered over at OAG RCT Verification Site:

EIN# 204781979

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career	CA	2014	990	38	$10,045,487.00	20-4781979
ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career	CA	2013	990	37	$11,435,459.00	20-4781979
ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career	CA	2012	990	39	$13,721,775.00	20-4781979

ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career Initial Return (YE 2006) (“application pending”) Began with a $1,000,000 “Direct public support.”  I just paged through several earlier IRS forms, including the one year they received $21M in contributions, and distributed under $2M of grants.  The next year, contributions were only $4M+, but $10M of grants were distributed (mostly to school districts in amounts of over $1M) to produce a deficit of $9M.

Throughout a clear relationship between Gary Hoachlander’s “ConnectEd” and Gary Hoachlander’s “MPR Associates” has been acknowledged, in fact this nonprofit rents space from the other’s office (Until its apparent relocation in 2015), and it has been consisently almost the ONLY subcontractor listed, many years in amounts of over $1.4M.

 

Unbelievable.  See also the “Charitable Details” — this organization didn’t even register as a charity until asked to — twice — and apparently turn in its forms until August 2011 and April 2012, although as early as 2008-2009 its total assets / revenues were $20M / $22M.

Gary Hoachlander, in whose name this is, received $342K salary (top year shown), and the only two subcontractors were (his) “MPR Associates” in Berkeley (address just a suite or two away from the organization’s address) — for a considerable amount — and RTI (Research Triangle International), in North Carolina.  The next year (keep reading — I have it in here) MPR Associates “merged out” and incorporated out of state, that is, changing legal domicile, jurisdiction, and registered office from Northern (Berkeley) to Southern (Los Angeles) California.  “cute.”

---

A similar description of Hoachlander (I found looking for “MPR Associates, Inc.”) seems to indicate, this is not a public-traded company.  It also puts a few dates on his degrees (1970, BA, 1973, 1978 — he’s apparently about my age (older, by about five years, if you were curious), and while this mentions ConnectEd, it is FOR “MPR Associates, Inc.” from Bloomberg.com, marked “private”  Bloomberg has no information on the company’s size or his pay. His only other known relationship is with UC Berkeley.

http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=116842134&privcapId=6699677

Mr. Gary Hoachlander serves as president of ConnectEd: the California Center for College and Career. Mr. Hoachlander serves as the Chairman of MPR Associates, Inc. He is a nationally recognized expert on improving high schools and transitions to postsecondary education and career. He has focused especially on integrating challenging core academic instruction with demanding technical curriculum emphasizing authentic application to complex problems in the world of work. Mr. Hoachlander’s Expertise inculde (sic): Career and Technical Education, Creating Multiple Pathways to College and Career, Curriculum Standards and Integration, Program Organization and Delivery, Performance Measures and Standards K-12 Education, National Data Systems and Surveys, Using Data for School Improvement, Transcript Analysis, and Postsecondary Persistence and Attainment. Mr. Hoachlander earned Ph.D. in 1978 and M.C.P. in 1973 in City and Regional Planning from University of California and B.A from Woodrow Wilson School for Public and International Affairs, Princeton University in 1970

Per California Secretary of State, MPR Associates, Inc. (1982ff) of the Berkeley Address California has “merged out” and, of interest, “MPR Associates, Inc. (2015ff) is now: Legal Domicile:  Delaware; Entity address, Virginia; Registered Agent Address California (Los Angeles):

Results of search for ” MPR ASSOCIATES, INC. ” returned 2 entity records.

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C3847531	12/03/2015	ACTIVE	MPR ASSOCIATES, INC.	C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
C1107827	03/30/1982	MERGED OUT	MPR ASSOCIATES, INC.	TERRY ROSS

The former address of “MPR Associates, Inc.” in Berkeley now shows as the same address (except suite #800 vs. #1200) to which checks to “ConnectEd” ℅ “Institutional Development” can be sent.  Be patient — it’s just below!

File that under “Hmmm…..”

plete or certified record of an entity.

Entity Name:	MPR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Entity Number:	C1107827
Date Filed:	03/30/1982
Status:	MERGED OUT
Jurisdiction:	CALIFORNIA
Entity Address:	2150 SHATTUCK AVE STE 800
Entity City, State, Zip:	BERKELEY CA 94704
Agent for Service of Process:	TERRY ROSS
Agent Address:	2150 SHATTUCK AVE STE 800
Agent City, State, Zip:	BERKELEY CA 94704

~ ~ ~For a point of reference, the US Department of Education only separated from the former Department of Health, Education and Welfare” in Year 1980 — when we also got “HHS.” ~~ ~

Entity Name:	MPR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Entity Number:	C3847531
Date Filed:	12/03/2015
Status:	ACTIVE
Jurisdiction:	DELAWARE
Entity Address:	320 KING ST
Entity City, State, Zip:	ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
Agent for Service of Process:	C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
Agent Address:	818 W 7TH ST STE 930
Agent City, State, Zip:	LOS ANGELES CA 90017

and as for WestEd — it’s a nonprofit AND a Joint Powers Agency; the Board of Directors shows primarily (but not only) Public School leadership at the state level, in various states:

 

Since its inception in 1966, WestEd* has been tackling real-world challenges, often in partnerships with others, to make a positive difference in the lives of millions of children and adults. Our work is far from over as we continue to identify and develop ways to ensure success for every learner.

* WestEd is a Joint Powers Agency, authorized by a California Joint Powers Agreement(pdf) and governed by public entities in Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah, with Board members representing agencies from these states and nationally.

A nonpartisan, nonprofit research, development, and service agency, WestEd is tax exempt under Section 115(1) of the Internal Revenue Code. Because of this status, our work meets the giving guidelines of philanthropic organizations.

(and, please take a few minutes to see their timeline).

So, ConnectEd is a dba for “Institutional Development”?  The Form 990PF doesn’t ask for grantee EIN#s (and doesn’t provide them either), nor does the ConnectEd website, so I was left scrounging for this information on their website (or some other means):

If you prefer to make a gift by check, please make the check out to “ConnectEd” and send to:

ConnectEd
C/O Institutional Development
2150 Shattuck Ave. Suite 1200
Berkeley CA, 94708

I just looked under BOTH C-corp and LLCs for any organization by that name at anything close to that address.  Most were NOT active, but none matched.  I also looked — which is just about a self-defeating cause for any organization in California named “ConnectEd” — and as this database does ALL CAPS– that means Any and All Corporations with the word “Connected” in them.  However, they are listed alpha — and out of 127, I didn’t find this under the “Cs”.

I looked up the street address (incl. suite#) and am wondering if this previously housed someone that served as registered agents for others.  However, Suite #300 here is the UCBerkeley “Sponsored Projects Office” <–(directions; see also home page)  that is they negotiate, collaborate and help with federal, state, foundation (public and private sources) awards and proposals for UCBerkeley.  The address is right downtown, near “BART” and a very short walk to campus.

2150 Shattuck #1200, Berkeley, CA DID show up as “Tera Computer Corporation” — but, oddly, it also merged out in 2015 (the older address below), although its legal domicile or that of the similar but not identically named corporation, is at least still in California):

Results of search for ” TERA COMPUTER ” returned 2 entity records.

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C3809894	07/22/2015	ACTIVE	TERA COMPUTER & SURVEILLANCE INC.	JOSH WANG
C0977604	03/14/1980	MERGED OUT	TERA COMPUTER CORPORATION	JOANN C WALZ