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

[Two sections with images added post-publication, March 2, 2017.. the post is now only about 700 words longer, but takes up more vertical space because of the pictures]

This new post title (and case-sensitive shortlink ending “-5R3”):  OHIO.  My Oh My…  501©3 ACTION Ohio Coalition for Battered Women, a 1970s, deficit-ridden holdout, Still testifying – NOT, of course, about OHIO.Fatherhood.Gov (1999ff), though…

Where this came from, my January 22, 2012 post: ABA, APA, AFCC, AAML, . . and others:  Reconceptualize This!  [Some Ohio Councils, Commissions, and Headlines, Incl. Basic Links][Chosen to represent 2012 in my 2017 Retrospective, includes its own].

This post took almost a week to complete.  You will notice distinct sections with somewhat different tone or voice (although I wrote them all, it may reflect what I’d been immersed in studying at each point in time).  For example, I thought on discovering that Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women had leadership in common with Ohio Women Inc., a significant feminist organization for which I couldn’t find a single tax return this century — but which is clearly still soliciting funds, I thought that was good enough to publish.

But I also knew that putting this Ohio Coalition in the context of “NCADV” as an umbrella agency feeding off the network which (it turns out) had in recent years run its revenues AND assets down to only about $1K, chiefly through over spending its budget, and has since undergone some turnaround through finding more private funding — well, I think this level of (misbehavior) and the turnaround should be mentioned.

In explaining where NCADV fits into the ‘PUBLIC’ part of supposed prevention of domestic violence and coordinating sincere, altruistic and effective movements to do the same, I also felt it relevant to reference the HHS funding.  That’s where I hit another “motherlode” of (evidence of) fatherhood funding within the “Violence Prevention Field.”  It’s really interesting, and symbolizes just how little, I believe, most public agencies can or even SHOULD be trusted to tell the truth about what they are actually doing.  If that sounds over-rated, wait til you’ve read the material, please!

I believe you will find this (under 8,000 words) post relevant, informative, and if you can concentrate, engaging on a life and death subject matter affecting society, as well as gender relations.   I also recommend thinking twice before assuming, based on media, that the good guys and the bad guys can be separated by political party. I’ve got evidence, and it just ain’t so!   

While writing this 2017 post, I was continuing to question how and why such an organization as ACTION OHIO could continue operating with just one paid officer, minimal revenues and a continuing (and continuing to increase) yearly deficit, for so many years — as well as WHY did it continue operating in this manner for so long, while its longstanding CEO maintained something of a high profile and friendly connections with state-level entities (such as Ohio Department of Corrections) as (if) representing the battered women of the state, and the domestic violence community itself.

Please think of this somewhat complex (and the next, even more complex — or at least detailed) post(s) as my taking readers to a medium-birds-eye view of the network of HHS-funded Coalition Against Domestic Violence Networks, but rather than looking just at the proclamations and programs, I look at the nonprofit filings.  Individual organizations locally MUST be understood in terms of the networks when it’s already known they are part of such networks.  And in this world, having some conscious cognitive activity on just WHAT IS and WHO’s IN, as well as “WHO FUNDS” and “HOW BIG and HOW OLD” is that network has to happen.

I discovered a sort of parallel grant-making universe (in the course of doing this) in the field of “Family and Community Violence Prevention” over the last few days (Saturday, Sunday, Monday) and have processed a lot of information, done lookups, and annotated images on the same.

Alas, it’s not going to fit on this post, but FYI generally speaking, in addition to knowing the names (WHO, HOW BIG, WHO FUNDS, and HOW OLD) of most Domestic Violence Statewide Coalitions (such as the two listed by NCADV for Ohio — Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women and Ohio Domestic Violence Network), AND about some of the other larger players (nonprofits functioning as HHS-supported “Special Issue Resource Centers” or “National Resource Centers” on the topic) we really ought to start, again, exercising some conscious (ongoing) cognitive activity around how HHS categorizes and displays its own grant-making towards this network and, since some of it has been around since the 1980s, when the categories AND the interface with the HHS Grants Database (TAGGS.hhs.gov) functioning change, make a note of it.  This is, after all, ongoing public, federal agency grantmaking by the largest grantmaking agency, Health and Human Services.

The off-ramped post title references the CFDA numbers of those HHS grants (the two-digit “93” always represents HHS itself; other agencies have different numbers.  USDOJ, for example, CFDAs begin with “16”). So, for prompt publication and a more complex, more detailed and more disturbing (I bet) birds-eye view from a higher altitude, that post will be found at:

Understand Statewide “CADV” Funding (CFDAs 93591, 93592, 93671, and 93610) but also Check Out “Family and Community Violence Prevention” (93910) in all its Male/Minority-focused Wealth ($99M to one Recipient, spanning 10 years) and (?) ASH/OMH-endorsed Glory (post started 2/28/2017, case-sensitive short-link ends “-62M”)

Recently, I located these grants and the relevant CFDA#s again by searching TAGGS.HHS.GOV by “recipient name” “Coalition Against Domestic Violence” which characterizes some — not ALL — statewide entities in place on this subject matter and taking government grants.

To see a sample of CFDA 93591, 93592, 93671 and 93610 grantees and awards (not to be considered a complete list because I couldn’t actively KEY IN or CHECK OFF those CFDA#S UNDER “Advanced Search” over at HHS TAGGS.gov) use this TAGGS-generated “TINY URL” (I’ve sorted New to Old by “Award Date”): http://tinyurl.com/j5pufh8 (saves the search, not the results.  If database changes between my report and yours, so will results).

Notice 2017 they now have P.I. (Principal Investigator) column filled in, and a much longer Award#, plus a new CFDA# (referring to columns on table).  Previously, for most of the “SDVP” grants, that row was simply left blank, implying nothing was particularly being “investigated” and absolving any organization’s individual leader from exposure (or even resume-building honorable mention) among this data (My separate post, title above, will have annotated images to make more sense of this)…..

“SO, HOW IS ALL THIS RELEVANT TO ACTION OHIO COALITION FOR BATTERED WOMEN?”

I’m glad you asked..   🙂  The Denver-based National “CADV” organization comes up in this post when Action OHIO Coalition goes around broke, but its longstanding CEO referencing NCADV. While NCADV does not get (it seems) ANY such HHS grants, it does get membership fees (but the tax returns show clearly not the primary source of money) in part from organizations which do.  See tax returns for public vs. private revenues, and see TAGGS.HHS.GOV to confirm (assuming it’s still true as it was some years ago) that NCADV is not a direct HHS grantee.

Also, NCADV has identified this and one other in its listing of “State Coalitions.”

Click to read my commentary in the red (and one green) rectangles. There was a post-publication correction in my annotations. This image was displayed elsewhere in the post at first. Read the PDF (at the first link in this caption) for a footnote that doesn’t show (no room for it) in the “png” image displayed; it gives Ohio SOS Bus.ID# and EIN# also.

Effect, Impact:  collectively, this helps to drive what is — and more importantly, is NOT — communicated to traumatized women (and — good luck with that, men, BUT, do you not have your own fathers’ rights organizations to consult with and turn to? — also some battered and no doubt traumatized men, including those who were battered as kids or adolescents;) calling the DV organizations of their states, or the referral organizations they are encouraged to call for local help (for example, 1-800-799-SAFE (The National Domestic Violence Hotline)..

So now, before getting to details from the post’s featured Action OHIO coalition, I’m going to take a closer look at the National one associated primarily with the State Coalitions Against DV, website NCADV.org  

Without explaining the whole “deal” as to who is the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, (although looks like their fortunes are improving some recently, or at least Total (gross) Assets after a lean year in 2013), here is some information.  Also, just to make the point — how hard is it, really, to go to a state business entity site (often, but not always, under the “Secretary of State” and just do a name search?  See this image from Colorado’s, primed to search for this entity.  In Colorado, you can still read some uploaded images of older filings, though not when the filing was electronic only.

Found at Colorado business database site, Click to see fullsize and all two pp (Application to Do Business — and have its principal entity also) in CO as a foreign (Oregon) entity. Interesting decision as well as the decision to portray its legal domicile as CO on (looks like) most subsequent tax returns…

(This is interesting — it’s now an Oregon entity?)

Answer:  No — it’s always been an Oregon Entity,

Image from CO Sec. of State re: NCADV added post-publication (on discovering Oregon Legal Domicile existed since 1978, Colorado only since 1992. Moral of the Story — don’t take the word of Form 990 filings as to Legal Domicile.

From OREGON, Bus Registry, this Image re: NCADV added post-publication on discovering Oregon Legal Domicile.  I don’t think it necessary to post all the directors’ street addresses here (though it is public info) but the filing history is relevant.  View by pdf printout.(links to most recent filings should be active)

From IRS Search of Exempt Orgs (<=repeat search here)(by EIN#) displaying CO address, not OR. (Image re: NCADV added post-publication on discovering Oregon Legal Domicile

but on the its tax returns, saying its legal domicile was Colorado, through the most current available, “2015.”  Also the IRS (Exempt Org. Search) says “State” although it doesn’t define that column as “Legal Domicile…” It only applied for recognition in Colorado in 1992.  It as formed 1978, involuntarily dissolved 1982, got re-instated (and apparently tax-exempt status?) in 1983, and is still registered as current in Portland Oregon. I’ve added several images (from CO, OR and the IRS) post-publication and will follow-up when any page on this entity is published.

It just had not occurred to me that the organization had any reason to falsify its IRS -filing header by claiming its legal domicile was Colorado. (Note: AFCC also does this).  FYI the IRS Form 990 changed in 2008, and for the first time asked in the Header Info for the filer to show Legal Domicile and start date (and other things), so failing to identify itself as from Oregon on IRS Form 990s only applies, at least as an odd (and not quite honest) practice, starting then (30 yrs after organization was formed).  Still….

So I just reviewed several of the “filing history and documents” from Colorado (OR only lets the more recent be uploaded).  The changes in board of directors is interesting.

Anyhow, …….

Total results (from 990finder.foundationcenter.org): 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence	CO	2015	990	30	$1,148,655.00	91-1081344
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence	CO	2014	990	34	$524,935.00	91-1081344
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence	CO	2013	990	26	$63,585.00	91-1081344

I searched (NCADV, full name) in Colorado to find it’s since 1992 (In Colorado) a foreign entity legal domicile, Oregon. Click for Full Sized, or just repeat the search yourself from state website!

Language Change in Exempt Purpose Declarations:

Years 2006, 2008 (address, Lincoln St, Denver) “NETWORK FOR ORGANIZATIONS WHO SERVE BATTERED WOMEN.” (<=links to those returns provided)

Year 2013: TO PROVIDE LEADERSHIP IN DEVELOPING FEMINIST MODELS FOR PROGRAMS WORKING TO IMPROVE SERVICES TO WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN BATTERED, TO PROVIDE A NATIONAL COMMUNICATION AND RESOURCE NETWORK FOR BATTERED WOMEN, AND TO FORM A NATIONAL VOICE AROUND BATTERED WOMEN’S ISSUES AND OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES AFFECTING WOMEN

Year 2015: NCADV IS THE VOICE OF VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS WE ARE THE CATALYST FOR CHANGING SOCIETY TO HAVE ZERO TOLERANCE FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WE DO THIS BY EFFECTING (sic) PUBLIC POLICY, INCREASING UNDERSTANDING OF THE IMPACT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND PROVIDING PROGRAMS AND EDUCATION THAT DRIVE THAT CHANGE

Notice how the claims increase over time; reflecting in part also a change in management, it seems.

[2013 return shows only 5 employees, zero gov’t revenues, but $99K Membership, $60K “Federated Campaigns” and $197K “Other contributions” (i.e., non-gov’t grants), plus $25K “Training Revenues,” Exec. Director Rita Smith].

I looked at Year 2012 (to see “What Happened?”) and noticed that the sole paid director (Rita Smith) wasn’t paid that much, however, when revenues went down, expenses didn’t really – resulting in a reported $201K budget deficit and only $1K “net fund balances” — that’s the year before the one shown on the table.  It can then be seen (briefly) in 2014 and 2015 that this was corrected primarily by increased private contributions (basically doubled), three more employees and as of the last year only (not 2014) they have men in leadership.

I reviewed several years of tax returns (again) and the website (again), annotated some images, and will provide as a separate page on blog.  Two images (from 2012) are posted here.

Anyone concerned about why we are still dealing with domestic violence, or for the condition of referral resources for women (if their friends, neighbors, co-workers, female OR male) are being abused, should take a general reading on who or what is this SMALL but persistent organization (compared to several others) seeking and so far as I can tell, still maintaining national influence on the field.  We should understand how the network works. Tax returns and organization websites aren’t everything, but they are certainly informative and should be read!

NCADV Year 2012 Form 990 PtI (bottom) showing significantly reduced revenues not matched by reducing expenses, thus wiping out $203K of Beginning of Year Assets. The next year/s they have a different executive director, but before this one steps down (Ms. Smith) her salary is increased about $100K — see later returns) to $174K

NCADV Directors and Officers Year 2012 (Click to See Full-size) note, Exec Dir paid under $100K

…and where does this fit into the HHS-“CADV” (Coalition Against Domestic Violence) grants — not the only source of revenues, but an ongoing one at least for many), here’s an image of the NCADV’s list of “Statewide Coalitions” showing two for Ohio:

The ONLY other state that has two listed here is Washington (which has three).   This may reflect who opted to join the membership association NCADV — not much is explained on their site on the situation, but (and I’ll quote it below) Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women (AOCBW I guess) leader is seen quoting NCADV stats as testimony in various public settings:

For example, a year ago last fall (October 27, 2015) testimony on a certain bill in front of the Ohio House Judiciary Committee (this was found on-line, general search):

(ohio-oct-27-2015-testimony-sb76phylliscarlsonriehmwritten-action-oh-coalition-for-battered-women)

Many of us individually are broke, and have been economically broken (not just physically, psychological or and in other ways) by the courts and social services (+/- enforcement of court orders, especially when the enforcement is just NOT there for ones set in place, allegedly, to protect us and/or our children from subsequent crimes by the same or related individuals).

But when advocacy organizations reporting over $100K of revenues a year and with only one paid (and not much) officer are themselves also broke year after year, why should — how and when did it come to pass —  that entity’s (leader’s) voice be heard over ours when talking about family courts and/or social service systems (including child welfare organizations with an inordinate fascination with “fatherhood engagement”)?  (FYI, that’s a rhetorical question, read the blog!).  What kind of charade is the whole deal?

Click to read my annotations — this is bottom of the Fiscal Year 2014 Form 990 showing overspending into far below zero net position

<==(Links to Action OH-for-bw-990ez-fy2014-Revs-$69K  minus Expenses $79 = 10k & BEGINNING of Year =DEBT (negative assets) (-$133k) + ($10k) = END of Year Debt (-$144K) Year-Ends-jun30-2015-(viewed 2017-02-22,12-16pm)

Here’s the entire return that year (table of last 3 returns also shown lower on the post).

You can see $181K of “Liabilities” which is explained briefly in “Schedule O” as:

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES 171,119 [~] 178,944 ACCRUED AND WITHHELD TAXES 1,647 [~] 2,090

(That “[~]” divider separates beginning of year [~] end of year.  In other words, they are basically just not paying their bills, but consider themselves too important to close up shop, quit running a deficit operation, maybe forfeit that public platform which makes it easier to have something to refer to when testifying about what one wants, than, say, as a plain old individual.) Filing a Form 990EZ (versus Full Form 990) also facilitates not coughing FAQs like, any government grants received vs. private, and how many employees….

Then there’s “OWI” at the same street address, depending on where you check, and with overlapping leadership here….

Only towards the end of filling out this post (with images and narration to go with), and through a street address search (plus some of the “Equal Access to Power and Resources” language on some of the tax returns) did I manage to connect it to an also “ancient” organization, Ohio Women, Inc. (EIN#34-1293475) which is notable, if not fiscally noticeable, for having attempted in the last quarter of the 20th century to get an Equal Rights Amendment passed, while managing, at least (from what I can see in THIS century) to not file a single, normal tax return, but only one Form 990-N that the IRS website acknowledges.

It also was status-revoked and reinstated — (unless this is just plain clerical error — but if so, where are the tax returns?) for failing to file three years in a row — on the same day.

Meanwhile, the organization’s self-history claims a role in getting (about 1991) a “Women’s Policy Research Commission” legislated in Ohio, which on follow-up (this having been the first I heard of it…) I learned had been defunded entirely by 2002 (not that many funds seems to have ever flowed through it), while in 1999, Ohio obviously (see my other posts, or look it up) legislated in place, a “Fatherhood Commission.” I have evidence from their website (Ohio Women Inc’s) of awareness of the Fatherhood Commission, but apparently there was not much motivation to talk about it.

It’s behavior like this, as well as the fake fiscal filings (or legitimate ones with completely untrackable — with normal human (versus superhuman) effort, while proselytizing and seeking legislative action, power and influence — that has definitely alienated many women, including of my generation (and I’m only about a dozen years younger than some of the earlier “second-wave feminists” who apparently started up Action Ohio, or at least its CEO).

Consistently failing to bring up the impact of 1996 Welfare Reform (PRWORA)’s impact on mothers, children and family law — and the extent of federal fathers’ rights funding in the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, (esp. 2006ff) and 2010s, and maintaining instead a hard-line focus on aligning “women’s issues” with ONLY progressive issues (abortion, LGBTQ rights, Immigration rights, … … …. ) and a “soft-sell” on equally oppressive practices, such as re-framing criminal behavior as a treatable social disease, “engaging” the “faith-based organizations” as if this were somehow fair to the women they consistently repress or dismiss assault-and-battery behavior of their members, acquiescing that there should be entire industries organized statewide, nationwide and (ideally) internationally around: family justice centers, supervised visitation (how to better fine-tune the process after the latest in-session murder-suicide) (New Hampshire August 2013 made headlines; by Nov. 2016, it also made a conference breakout session at the NCADV, batterers intervention programming (pro/con), and in generally insisting government be restructured according to second-wave feminism which pretends that the nonprofit giants of this century and last (community foundations, Ford Foundation, Casey Family Services, Annie E. Casey Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, and plenty more) were not even involved in government ALREADY….

…while (these giant and larger foundations are) continuing to partner with or even just set up in the first place the below-the-radar nonprofits (for example, Ohio Women Inc. AND Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women in this instance) with bigger, better, bad-ass players (such as I discovered in the Ohio IPV Collaborative, in particularly the community foundation (Greater Cincinnati Foundation) behind the (namechanged in 2010) HealthPath Foundation of Ohio (formerly “The Anthem Foundation of Ohio” — see my “Retrospective 2017” post, year 2012 as I recall, for more information, both images, captions, and narratives).

….while continuing to act as though this was somehow helpful for women (including mothers) in this century,  …. …… is simply illogical and offensive.

Having political influence and connections (which my lookups of Ohio Women Inc. seems to confirm), these basically “bailed” along with many other feminists, including feminist lawyers, on telling the average individual, the “commoners” and the people they were claiming to represent, WHAT they are up against and, who they were dealing with in the various non-profit entities.

As I learned the hard way and have been saying for several years now, you don’t know “squat” if you haven’t read their tax returns — where some even exist.  When they don’t — but should — (as seems to be the case with OWI here) or are showing some truly deficit activity (as Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women proves has been routine, “standard practice”) — then you have learned what’s likely more important about an organization (and its leaders) than anything they might say in public, testifying to a Congressional committee or subcomittee — or on their websites implying they’re still alive and kicking on their own steam, or through some form of grassroots support and actual representation of the people living within the state (speaking here of an organization characterizing itself as representing that subject matter statewide).

Now that I’ve said that and probably readers can feel the heat of my intent, I’m removing the OWI documentation to a separate post, getting on with the already-written part of Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women (in Columbus Ohio) and Executive Director Phyllis Carlson-Riehm, long-term officer Michael Smalz, Esq. and others, and their historic deficit operations/public testimony lifestyle.  Ms. Carlson-Riehm, however FYI, shows as President of Ohio Women Inc. since 2012, so keep that in mind when reading both posts.

Anything above this double line was written Feb. 23-24, 2017; what begins below, the previous week, with most of migrated from the earlier January 22, 2012 post for an entity drill-down on one of TWO state-wide domestic violence prevention organizations that had caught my attention back then (and the smaller of two which have gripped my conscience more recently, through their various collaborations and, imho, “machinations”

There are only so many “entity updates” one can put into older posts which reference multiple entities of the DV, Family Law, Fatherhood (or all three) rhetorics.  In the case of updating a January 22, 2012 post, the “Dysfunctional, Colluding in Silence of the Fatherhood.gov Factor” domestic violence nonprofit organization position was already taken — by ODVN.org.  They echo the NCADV.org rhetoric, complete with its omissions of any substantial detail on what women ought MOST to know when entering into any action which might lead to a custody action, and particularly women attempting to leave violent or dangerous relationships with their children too, etc.

Where this came from, my January 22, 2012 post: ABA, APA, AFCC, AAML, . . and others:  Reconceptualize This!  [Some Ohio Councils, Commissions, and Headlines, Incl. Basic Links][Chosen to represent 2012 in my 2017 Retrospective, includes its own]  [words in italics added during 2017 update (adding an intro with images)/formatting cleanup.].    I was reviewing early (January)-year posts back to 2009 and was looking for a representative one or two from each year. For 2012, I chose this one (and one other) and began revisiting several of the entities and collaborations it mentioned.  They have been busy since….

In 2012 I’d referenced “Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women” as one of two statewide Ohio “DV-prevention” coalitions,  and in 2017 was only updating it there as a matter of conscience, or conscientiousness — until I found it’d been running a steady deficit (UP) year after year as a nonprofit since 2001 and under the same main leadership (one woman with a hyphenated last name, and one man– handwriting looked very old — with an “Esq.”).

Then I also found an older tax return in which people perhaps not being so “transparency-shy” had attached a list of officers AND their organizational affiliations — versus just plain old names– and so letting the public, who gets so far as to actually READ a tax return, go hunt that information down, if any member of “the public” can be bothered to look.

I’ll pick this one up RIGHT where I left it off — including the short introduction up to the point where it became clear I had another story to publish, despite the small size of the nonprofit. The light-blue background color partially marks the overlapping section.

---

Like all, or at least many states, [Ohio has]  a Coalition Against Domestic Violence (actually two groups [for Ohio are] listed at “NCADV” — see  http://www.odvn.org/  (“Increasing Safety for Ohio Families through Support, Advocacy and Education”) and

 and

http://www.actionohio.org/about_us.htm  (“ACTION OHIO’s core services are resource/referral, technical assistance, professional education, public awareness, community outreach, and public policy leadership within the domestic violence community.”)

(Also:

OUR MISSIONBack to top
ACTION OHIO’s mission is to promote quality programs, services, and resources to survivors of domestic violence. Our goal is to ensure equal rights and empowerment for all individuals as we work toward the eradication of family violence in our society.

STATEMENT OF PHILOSOPHY Back to top
We believe that:

• All people have the right to live free from the fear of violence;
• Each person has the right to and the responsibility of self-determination;
• Family violence is a systemic, not an individual, problem;
• Domestic violence is a crime and is not to be tolerated;
• There is strength in diversity.)

ACTION OHIO (2017 commentary) is one interesting, and underfunded (basically) group.  It has been operating at a DEFICIT, tax returns show, since at least Fiscal 2002.  This 2003 tax return has at the back a printout of Officers and Directors with their related affiliations, which you should read for an awareness of the affiliations of its directors (officers, and key employees, etc.).

---

For example, a staff attorney is listed at “Equal Justice Foundation.”  Several relating to Ohio Legal Services or Legal Aid (LASC) come up, and at least one relating to Behavioral Health field.

Some images are shown below; here’s one from the Ohio EJF, which is small.

Click for full-sized. Just an example of overlapping nonprofit involvements

Regarding other EJ Foundations (name search only); these seem to be providing (or distributing funds to others who provide) civil legal services for the indigent.  The ones that still seem to have money are getting government grants, or have been around long also (like Texas Access to Justice Foundation, TEAF.org. )  I.e., there are organizations by similar name (add the state geography) which may or may not be related, (“Equal Justice” is a VERY broad phrase and can have many meanings) and some of which have noticeably larger assets.  I’m not following up much on these here, but just FYI is a short, annotated pdf (links will be active) from a recent 990 search of that name.  Results are alpha by State.    Forms 990, Search Results for “Equal Justice Foundation,” with Active Links.  OHIO’s is EIN#341811268; Largest Assets Orgs are TX, IL and AZ (viewed 2-21-2017)

(I annotated this some, it’s only 2pp + a cover page).  Also here’s one image and two pdfs from the one in Texas (Gross assets, $19M, formed back in 1984).  There’s also a federal entity distributing these funds, which prefers to do one organization per state, I studied its interaction with the Pennsylvania “PLAN” (PA Legal Assistance Network) some years ago.

Look at the nearby pdfs, (Forms 990, Search Results for “Equal Justice Foundation,” with Active Links. Equal Justice Foundation (in OH) is EIN#341811268; Largest Assets Orgs are TX, IL and AZ (viewed 2-21-2017))the EJF printout (Click on Org Name) or look up 2015 tax return for EIN# 74-2354575 to see complete return, incl. Pt VIII revs (etc.)

(From that EJF Form 990s list, here are two from Texas, the $19M Assets one).

<> teajforg-ein-2354575-txaccess-to-justice-fndtn-yr2015-990-pp-1-2-only-keep-with-schedi-grants-printout <> teajforg-ein-74-2354575-txaccess-to-justice-fndtn-yr2015-990-sched-i-grants-horiz-4pp-only-see-also-my-annotated-pp1-2-ptsi-iii-same-yr-feb21-2017711pm (these links are not the same as image to left which simply identifies the organization visually (and, shows its $4M deficit at the end of the current year)….

OVERALL, WHO FUNDS LEGAL SERVICES “EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE” 501©3s?

The theme here is who among the indigent gets what kind of legal help for civil matters from which organizations in each state, and as funded by whom.  For more, read up on IOLTA (Interest On Lawyer’s Trust Accounts) (WIki states that Australia and Canada started this in the 1960s, the US in the 1980s).

This theme interacts with the post, but less directly, and so is different background color. It’s left in as a reminder that those who can’t pay lawyers are going to be dealing with organizations like this, whose programming may be controlled by its source of funding, and distribution of it nationwide via Legal Services Corporation has its pros and cons. It reminded me again of the complexity of assets-acquiring and finance-shuffling of the nonprofit sector (small, medium and large) as a whole.  Just something to keep in mind as “it exists” and is likely affecting your neighborhood (incl. “gated communities” who are gated to keep out the poor, the vagrants, the homeless and the potentially dangerous, etc.)

Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts (IOLTA)^[1] is a method of raising money for charitable purposes, primarily the provision of civil legal services to indigent persons, through the use of interest earned on certain lawyer trust accounts.^[2] The establishment of IOLTA in the United States followed changes to federal banking laws^[3] passed by Congress in 1980 which allowed some checking accounts to bear interest. The Florida Bar Foundation ^[4] launched the first American IOLTA program in 1981. Today, every state, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands operate IOLTA programs.

And on the “Legal Services Corporation: America’s Partner For Equal Justice”  (though at “LSC.gov” it is a 501©3):

LSC is the single largest funder of civil legal aid for low-income Americans in the nation. Established in 1974, LSC operates as an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation that promotes equal access to justice and provides grants for high-quality civil legal assistance to low-income Americans. LSC distributes more than 90 percent of its total funding to 133 independent nonprofit legal aid programs with more than 800 offices.

Assuming 50 states + Territories + D.C., and 133 programs, that’s fewer than 3 programs/state…  The website has not even posted a Year 2014 (YE Sep30 2015) let alone a Year 2015 (YE Sep 30, 2016) tax return yet, and I’m writing five months after the close of their fiscal year:

• 2013 LSC 990 for FY 2014 (Oct. 1, 2013–Sept. 30, 2014)
• 2012 LSC 990 for FY 2013 (Oct. 1, 2012–Sept. 30, 2013)
• 2011 LSC 990 for FY 2012 (Oct. 1, 2011–Sept. 30, 2012)

---

Interesting, in that a Year 2014 return IS available from “The Foundation Center” (meaning, to the IRS), my usual lookup place. Notice the increase in Total assets, although this corporation (tax-exempt) still does, its records show, distribute most (not all) of what it takes in:

Total results: 3. Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Legal Services Corporation	DC	2015	990	79	$91,513,929.00	52-1039060
Legal Services Corporation	DC	2014	990	166	$82,826,697.00	52-1039060
Legal Services Corporation	DC	2013	990	95	$71,866,450.00	52-1039060

Notice what was $71.8M in assets (FYI, mostly in cash, not public traded securities, land, buildings, or other investments, per the return) is now $91.5M in assets, a situation possible particularly when the primary resource is government grants, and how much gets distributed is somewhat discretionary, it would seem.  I also notice that while in FY2013 (the one I imaged and annotated below), the Sched I grants were listed on the regulation Sched-I form (every page of them) but in NO particular order, the next year (top row in table above) they were listed alpha by organization name with no regard to in which state or amounts) — but only 3 per page as part of an “Additional Data Table.”  So, for example, if the state was “Ohio” and one organization was “Legal Aid of Ohio” and the other “Ohio Legal Services Corp.” — they’d be in different places. For larger (economy) states (such as NY, TX, California, FL) the collective grantees would be scattered across the many page of the “Additional Data Table.”  Either way I notice that many which showed up under the “Equal Justice” name search above, were not showing (at least the years I looked) on the Grantee list.

Checking who was receiving directly from LSC from the Forms 990 could be done, but would be arduous.  A page on LSC.gov does list grantee entities by state (noticeably, without links to their 990s or identifying those EIN#s), and some numbers-crunching around the same. (I did a printout, annotated on p.1, and an image of Ohio’s and (was opposite in two-column format) Florida’s.

I see from the Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women (Year 2003) printout that Michael Smalz was listed as affiliated with the Ohio State Legal Services Association shown as one of only 5 Ohio LSC grantees at this time.

ourgrantees-by-state-with-state-totals-for-some-active-links-printed-to-pdf-2-24-2017-lsc-legal-services-corp-americas-partner-for-equal-justice
I previously unearthed details on the Western Ohio and LAWO situation looking up entities in the context of the DV statewide organization (board of director representing which other associations):

Ohio State Legal Services Association (OSLA) takes LSC.gov grants — but this is a list of ITS grants to others, Year 2011. My Commentary here is relevant to the larger picture (CLICK to SEE IT) (filename is partial summary: “oh-state-legal-srvcs-assocn-ein-310718185-yr-2011-sched-i4-grants-incl-3d-to-legal-aid-of-w-ohio-342485732-but-most-to-lasc-314416407-a-related-entity-wola-closed-out-in-2004-scrnshot-2017-02-1”)

“LAWO” when 990-searched by its (written-out) name, turns out to have a Foundation also, as well as related entities “ABLE”Click here for full-sized (but links won’t be active)

 

CLICK TO READ: OSLA.org (LSC.gov recipient) Yr 2011 Form 990 annotated Page 1 showing its 3-fold purpose and $7.7M Gross receipts.

LSC.gov (Form 990 FY2013 from its website) Part VIII Statemt of Revenues showing $367.5M total gov’t grants. (See also Sched A to same return for prior years)

 

LSC FY2013 Form 990 (EIN#521039060) Sched B showing $365.0M Grants from single entity (not shown, but in context would be gov’t as govt grants totaled $367.5M that year)

 

Sched I Reports the 135 Legal Services Corporation 501©3 (EIN#521039060) grantees nationwide in 2013: Annotations here might be of interest (but the related pdf is 18pp, horizontal) Viewed Feb. 2017 as latest uploaded return (!)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BACK TO DISCUSSING ORGANIZATION FOR THIS POST — ACTION OHIO COALITION FOR BW.

Below, here’s the page from list of (Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women) showing the EJF (Ohio) affiliated person at the bottom, but I am much more concerned about the other directors’ business affiliations, as well as how can people continue endorsing a nonprofit claiming to be acting in the best interests of the state’s battered women while itself failing to balance its books (at least according to the IRS filings) — and yet, involving leadership with connections and awareness of some of the higher-paying professions, and major types of funded organizations (i.e., legal associations and behavioral health associations, plus their public counterparts) justify continuing the organization at a constant deficit, and taking government money (though not much) year after year?

From EIN# 34-1376870 (Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women) personnel (partial — list is more than one page) shown on Year 2003 return

 

That return appears to have been signed by Michael E. Smalz (the handprinting under the signature is illegible, so this is a closest guess), of Ohio Statewide Legal Services Association — but EVERY tax return since I’ve looked at (which is most of them) has shown Phillis L. Carlson-Riehm as the Executive Director, (See the Fiscal Year 2001 return image below) mostly not being paid much, and as Executive Director, running the organization deeper and deeper into the red (over $133K @ 2015) instead of admitting it’s not making ends meet and shutting it down — OR, finding other sources of revenue.  Grandiose schemes are nice, but failure to finance them just doesn’t make sense — UNLESS it’s possibly intentional.

Next, smaller annotated image: From 2003 tax return, above — Phillis Carlson-Riehm not mentioned on the above list, but held the organization’s books and records:

Part of ActionCoalitn for Battered Woman (sic) Year 2003 return showing who’s holding the books (tho not listed this year as director or officer). Click for Full-sized.

I’m blogging this organization, as a current commentary on an ongoing quandary with the ODVNetwork.  I’m letting the insert, also commentary and tax returns displayed on the OVDN.org, below [now, on the 2012 post], a somewhat larger organization [remain in place, while moving this one].  This one is simply STRANGE…

 

 

 

 

<================= (up to this part was left in the originating post, 1/22/2012, link shown above) (Well, after which I added some more text and images above, here…  🙂 )

Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women “Officers” — in 2003 it was “Hilda M. Stotts 2003-2005” but she was gone by the next year, and Phillis Carlson-Riehm (who held the books this year?) in her place.

Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women “Officers” (there are more, more than a page’s worth) but this shows Michael R. Smalz (another year I thought I read “E.”) OH State Legal Services Association in Columbus, plus Christian L. Shaymak-Diaz, “Admin of Training and Intervention Services, Ohio Ass. of Co. Behavioral Health Associates” where probably “Co.” means “County (Hilliard, OH).  This indicates involvement of likely categorization of DV as a behavioral-health (vs. criminal) matter, which direction has influenced the field, large-scale, over time.

Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women, the earliest return I could find without plowing through other databases. It shows $79K out of $119K was government grants, with  contributions = the only significant source of revenues. NOTE: After the IRS form changed in 2008, this entity, like some do, quit filing full Form 990s and went to Form 990EZ which doesn’t specify govt/private grants, and a number of other things, such as number of employees. The latest tax return on the website (I checked again, but had posted in 2012) was only for FYear 2009.

Fiscal Year 2001 showing net fund balances were under $5,000 (the next page included to include org. name and year on the form)

 

This 2001 (FYr) return, the one where it came out of the “red” to above zero, shows only 4 officers, with Exec Director Phillis Carlson-Riehm (Exec Dir) Michael E. Smalz, Esq. of Columbus (Pres) Barbara Hanselman of Wadsworth VP and Florence Gibson of Alexandria (Sec), Barbara Davis of Zanesville, Treas, only the Exec Dir paid.

 

 

 

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
ACTION OHIO Coalition for Battered Women	OH	2015	990EZ	14	$36,822.00	34-1376870
ACTION OHIO COALITION FOR BATTERED WOMEN	OH	2014	990EZ	11	$39,366.00	34-1376870
ACTION OHIO COALITION FOR BATTERED WOMEN	OH	2013	990EZ	11	$50,690.00	34-1376870

Total results: 3. Search Again. [for table above, this time].

Those total assets are “gross assets” — the actual is well below zero.  In Fiscal Year 2001 (July 1 – Jun 30 of the next year, that time, 2002), their Funds Balance was above zero, at ALMOST $5K, thanks to a “budget surplus” of $33K that year,  for the first time this century that I could see.  The question “What’s wrong with this picture” given who is involved (leaders of other groups, some of them well-known one would think) comes up with every tax return.  It probably should be a separate post.

A double last name such as Carlson-Riehm makes for more specific search results.  

Looking this one up, I found some Feb. 2010 testimony by Ms. Carlson-Riehm for a Prop 33 (DNK what it is), but posted at “ProChoice.org.”  She is quoting NCADV (like the ODVN, below, this group is probably hooked into that network), and what she says, in my experience as a battered mother, with the assault and battery starting after pregnancy (although neither of my two pregnancies in this marriage was unwanted):

Ohio House Health Committee House Bill 333 Proponent Testimony February 24, 2010

My name is Phyllis Carlson-Riehm and I serve as executive director for ACTION OHIO Coalition For Battered Women, a statewide domestic violence coalition.

ACTION OHIO provides a variety of services, such as resources and referral for domestic violence victims, public awareness and outreach to the local community, and continuing education opportunities for professionals who serve victims and their children.

Domestic violence is the willful intimidation, physical assault, battery, sexual assault, and/or other abusive behavior perpetrated by an intimate partner against another. Domestic violence results in physical injury, psychological trauma, and sometimes death.

According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) …

She is quoting the NCADV as late as 2010 (NCADV is a sliding-scale membership organization, with higher fees depending on the type of organization, and its budget.  Therefore, when state memberships taking federal grants to exist join, it is indirectly public -supported.

NCADV is also among the many who chose to keep a “professional courtesy” silence on the size, saturation, intents (and for the most part, even existence) of the “responsible fatherhood” federal incentives, or the multiple nonprofits lining up to get their grants, or their involvement with the offices of child support enforcement, federal, state and county.

However, by continuing as an “entity” even with its assets, as “Action Ohio Coalition…” was that year, significantly below zero, consistently, it allowed a presumption of viability (of being a legitimate – not just barely legal and barely functional- outfit in providing such testimony).

Next, she quotes UC Davis and Harvard Public School of Health (possibly also obtained from NCADV, possibly from elsewhere).  Notice the study doesn’t involve anyone over the age of 30 and as such would automatically (by age) not even apply to women taking abuse for reasons of their professional or educational competency, and in 2010, it’s still not uncommon for women over 30 (and 40) to have babies also.  The study also, as you can say involved only 1,300 woman in a nation our size.

The name of the study isn’t in her testimony, which it easily could’ve been (how long could the exact title have been?) …

In January of this year researchers at the University of California Davis School of Medicine and the Harvard School of Public Health released their findings from a study involving 1300 women ages 16 to 29. In the study, from August 2008 to March 2009, women were surveyed regarding birth-control sabotage, pregnancy coercion (forced sex or rape) and intimate partner violence. The study established that there is a link between violence and abuse and unintended pregnancy and explains why unintended pregnancies are far more common among abused women and teens than non-abused females.

and, then:

Some abusers will take pleasure in denying his wife or girlfriend food during a pregnancy. Physical abuse is often aimed at the woman’s abdomen and genitals, creating greater likelihood of miscarriage.** And miscarriages are common in abusive relationships. Babies of abuse victims are often born premature, have low birth weight and suffer from a variety of health complications. Once they go home from the hospital, the babies face additional risks. Abusers resent victims spending time caring for the baby and often refuse to allow her to respond to the baby’s cries or needs – abusers are jealous of attention given to their own infant.**

Abuse victims with newborns face many barriers to leaving, and this is one of the reasons why we think that abusers want to impregnate their victims. During a pregnancy a woman is more vulnerable and with a new baby she is also more vulnerable. Victims need to respond to the physical and emotional needs of an infant, while also satisfying the demands of their abuser.*** In addition to protecting themselves from abuse, they now have to protect their infant from his wrath*** as well. Leaving an infant alone with an abuser is extremely risky and may result in a battered baby or a dead baby. Stories of these situations appear all to frequently in media reports right here in Ohio.

*** (underlined). Notice the assumption it’s a “he.”  In context, I suppose, it’s appropriate — but it still assumes a “he.”

It’s not possible to ever satisfy the demands of an abuser, long-term; what the abuser wants is to abuse, and if all needs were adequately met according to (in this context, his) requirements, it wouldn’t be abuse.  The primary need seems to be, to abuse another human being, possibly to experience the sense of power and control lacking somewhere else in life (or at least to experience that power and control).

And, it’s not always a matter of “wrath,” that comment is an assumption and it displays ignorance of the dynamics.  Sometimes it’s cold calculation, sometimes systemic, forced neglect…and not even direct assault and battery necessarily comes from a place of “wrath.”  Calling it “wrath” is borderline excusitis.  Maybe sometimes, but definitely not all times.

…which I feel that with her years of experience in a “domestic violence technical assistance and training/public awareness  education” nonprofit, this particular Executive Director should’ve known, should’ve caught IF the information was from another source, and not implied — that lethal and dangerous levels of domestic violence come primarily (it’s the only place mentioned) from a place of the attacker’s “wrath.”

To juxtapose the entity with the testimony at that time (or, close to it):

Some screenprints for 2010 Tax Return (Technically, the above Feb. 2010 address was during organization’s Fiscal Year 2009, as FY 2010 only began July 1, 2010.  But, generally speaking, this is an indicator of “business as usual” for Action Ohio).

EIN#341376870 | Action Ohio Coalition for BW | Yr2003 Form 990EZ<~~ ( Pg1 showing $102K contribs, and nearly no program service revenue. This organization is on “welfare.”

EIN#341376870 | Action Ohio Coalition for BW | Yr2003 Form 990EZ<~~ (Bottom of page 1 showing liabilities and “net fund balances of nearly $100K below zero).

EIN#341376870, FYr2010 Form 990EZ, Pt III (and showing conclusion of “Assets – Liabilities = Net -$98K). Click here to compare Assets to Liabilities to grandiose statement of org. purpose [Equal Access to Power and Resources] (and my annotations) full-sized.

EIN#341376870 | Action Ohio Coalition for BW | Yr2003 Form 990EZ<~~ (Incl Pt III Statemt of Accomplishmts, no breakout of details (3 lines prompted) expenses $89K)

And, list of directors (only paid officer, @ $33K, is Carlson-Riehm; everyone else listed is at 2.0h week/volunteer.  Notice now a single address is listed for all, many organizations do it this way, probably for their directors’ privacies.  Mr. Smalz appears to be the lone male on the group:

MAY K CHU PHD
5900 ROCHE DRIVE

KATHI SCHEAR
5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

FLORENCE GIBSON 5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

NENA BAUMAN ID
5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

MICHAEL SMALZ
5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

NANCY MALE ID
5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

VICKY M CHRISTIANSEN 5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

MOLLY CORRELLUS 5900 ROCHE DRIVE COLUMBUS,OH 43229

JENNIFER FARMER ID 5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

DIANA OSWALT ID
5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

JOYCE HILLD
5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

PHYLLIS CARLSON-RIEHM 5900 ROCHE DRIVE 445 COLUMBUS,OH 43229

ALICE DUNCANSON 5900 ROCHE DRIVE COLUMBUS,OH 43229

TRACI KITCHEN ID 5900 ROCHE DRIVE COLUMBUS,OH 43229

Here’s another reference point, same name:  Ohio Victims’ Council (I see ODVN Nancy Neylon also on there).  Again, my short profile of Ohio.Fatherhood.Gov, and general honesty on this matter, would acknowledge that major funding involving TANF diversions (HMRF funding) is in the “ReEntry (Fathers)” category.  What a great time to raise the issue.  DID THEY?

Here’s an Oct. 27, 2015 testimony (printed to pdf):  ohio-oct-27-2015-testimony-sb76phylliscarlsonriehmwritten-action-oh-coalition-for-battered-women (it’s a short read… and has to do with a request to somehow charge people (men) with violation of a protective order even when they have been successful in evading being served with it.

Besides violating due process, this short speech doesn’t even distinguish between civil or criminal orders (although she’s referring to sheriffs or law enforcement having to serve, the existence of two kinds should’ve been noted), and again, doesn’t cite to the legal definition of domestic violence, while it’s referring to a legal matter.  It also makes no mention of dangers incurred during divorce and custody proceedings, on-going, and the year was 2015.

At this website http://www.drc.ohio.gov/victims-council we can see that BOTH this entity and “ODVN.org” (which also features prominently as the “DV” representative in “Ohio IPV Collaborative” I have been posting on recently (within other posts, and also at the 1/22/2012 post mentioned in my 2017 retrospective, re: ABA, APA, AAML, etc.  (see top of this post)… are on the Ohio Victims of Crime Council, which apparently is a liaison with Dept. of Corrections (I really question — unless it’s just my input/viewing device (a.k.a. laptop) — what’s the point of having any web page contain gray font so fine it almost begs NOT to be read.  Same goes for the description of Exec. Director (last name “Mohr”) of this office, including that he had a firm consulting to Corrections Corporation of America since 2005, and was a 2011 Gov. Kasich appointee.

Website http://www.drc.ohio.gov/victims-council (image isn’t complete list of council members) showing two DV organizations on the list, or at least directors of two DV orgs.

Here’s an 11/27/2011 article bemoaning lack of funds for shelters

 

QUITE APART FROM THAT, she Ms. Carlson-Riehm)  is speaking as someone whose nonprofit has been reporting it cannot make ends meet for, at this point, over 15 years, and which at present still took $5,000 government grants. Her salary seems low (but I live in California…), and the entity basically seems to pay her salary (it also is carrying accrued accounts payable, as I recall).

So, I had a feeling this should be a separate post, but much of its context, Ohio-based, and symbolic of what happens when the success or failure of domestic violence PROTECTION for individuals rests on the goodwill of a government obsessed with marriage/fatherhood promotion at the highest (state and federal levels), well — much of that context shows up on my 1/22/2012 post also//LGH 2017