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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for June 10th, 2017

Yet Another “Recent Research Suggests” link (2015 quoting pre-2010 source) unearths Yet Another Chameleon Corp. and Its Also Recently Re-branded Partner, ALL Targeting the $20 Billion School Supplies, Facilities, Technology and “Learning Environments” Marketplace. Internationally, of Course. [Publ. June 10, 2017]

with one comment

Read THIS post,

Yet Another “Recent Research Suggests” link (2015 quoting pre-2010 source)~ unearths Yet Another Chameleon Corp. and its (Yet Another, Also Recently Re-branded) Partner, ALL Targeting the $20 Billion School Supplies, Facilities, Technology and “Learning Environments” Marketplace. Internationally, of Course. (with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-6Wy”),

together with another one called:  School Facilities Planning Roundtables (2008 in California) and the Internationally-conferencing Trade Association Re-Branding Runaround (case-sensitive short-link ending “-6Zr”), both to be published, I hope, today, June 10, 2017. They have been about a week in process as more organizations, publications, and interrelationships continued to surface.


The material on the above to two posts came out of a page so long I provided an orange-bordered (like this) roadmap to its alternating-background-colors sections — in fact, from a reference in road-map section which identified a previously unknown professional association of the “School Facilities Planning” persuasion.

I already copied and have published the top third of the long “Page “to a “Post” promoting it:

Here are links to first the top one-third (post), with its long title, then the whole thing (page) with its shorter title), each with a color scheme as found on its place on FamilyCourtMatters.org:

Promoting Page added May 27, 2017, on “The Whole Nine Yards”: Who’s Been REstructuring the PK-12 School Planning Infrastructure; the Capital Appreciation Bonds [raising funds for school facilities] Scam; CAFRs; Unbelievably Unethical, Internationally-Conferencing 501©3s; Where University Centers, each University’s Supporting Foundations (sometimes plural); and of course Many VFFs (Very Famous Foundations) Coordinate for Cradle-to-Career GLOBAL Control (of Education).”  Here’s the ==> case-sensitive shortlink ending “-6WW” to that extended title!

[That] PAGE title, with its case-sensitive shortlink ending “-6TM” is:

About My Blog Motto (formerly on Vital Info/Sticky Links post, moved here  May 26, 2017).

All four links will be repeated at the end of this blog, some in the middle, and in addition there are titles and links to other developing posts herein you’ll see, all related to same central theme, representing research already done and soon to be posted. And, as usual, there are plenty of captioned images and internal links to outside material to make and support my points in posting on this topic.


Ironically, the shorter post title includes the phrase “The Whole Nine Yards.” Since the phrase came up (came to mind as a label for the whole mess of information), let’s talk terminology:

“The Whole Nine Yards” is a common use phrase of colloquial origin.  It gets the point across.  Unfortunately many common-use phrases regarding government financing and operations — including of schools — including planning to expand or renovate the existing school infrastructure — and how money should be raised for this — and who controls distribution of it, and the school renovation/expansion infrastructure–  come with all kinds of tax and income level references and short- and long-term consequences. “It’s a whole different ballpark” and NOT understanding their points of origin can be disastrous to the average person tossing those terms around without realizing what they refer to and, from that realization, and what they and those shooting them off in “for-public-discussion” media, specifically wish to avoid referring to, which might be summarized as “The Whole Nine Yards” of a trade and commercial sector in motion towards certain destinations (that is, with payloads for certain few, though it’s a large sector, persons at the expense of most others.

“The Whole Nine Yards,” just means “everything,” per me (I used it!) and Wikipedia, has a simple basic meaning that works OK in the colloquial arena. It’s the point of reference and origins that have puzzled experts.

A Few More Inches of Post about That Phrase and where Casual, Common-use terms Trap wise-sounding Discussions into Closed-Circuit, Going-Nowhere Collective Behaviors.  

Let’s look at the difference between colloquial phrases which work, harmlessly, for their limited purposes, and common but casually tossed-around words referencing technical, ongoing vital relationships which, generation after generation, describe and define our relationships with this country, and the states, counties, special authority districts — and school districts, and who pays how much interest on which capital infrastructures they probably will be using, periodically but will never actually own or control.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 10, 2017 at 6:53 pm

School Facilities Planning Roundtables (2008 in California) and the Internationally-conferencing Trade Association Re-Branding Runaround. [Publ. June 10, 2017]

with one comment

Put THIS post School Facilities Planning Roundtables (2008 in California) and the Internationally-conferencing Trade Association Re-Branding Runaround (case-sensitive short-link ending “-6Zr”) together with this one, please, called: Yet Another “Recent Research Suggests” link (2015 quoting pre-2010 source)~ unearths Yet Another Chameleon Corp. and its (Yet Another, Also Recently Re-branded) Partner, ALL Targeting the $20 Billion School Supplies, Facilities, Technology and “Learning Environments” Marketplace. Internationally, of Course. (with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-6Wy”)


Some images from this post give a  preview of its contents:

CEFPI (“Where great schools begin) logo shown (2013) on an “Education Markets” Association web page as a “Partner,” the website (vs. 501©6 name) was “EdSpaces.com.” Click image to see the Dec. 2013 conference page

[CLICK IMAGE for more from “ABOUT US” page] The Education Market Association (EDmarket) is the leading trade organization for the educational products marketplace. [TIMELINE shows this name dates only back to 2013 before which it was the National School Supply & Equipment Association (NSSEA). EDmarket puts the collective experience of the most successful school industry businesses in the world at your fingertips. EDmarket represents companies of all sizes that produce and deliver every type of product you find in an education environment. Founded in 1916, EDmarket promotes an open market for quality educational products and services that are produced and delivered by professional suppliers and dealers.


Ideally, both posts will be posted today, June 10, 2017.  I could do more work on this section (i.e., post more of the material I researched, including more screenprints and narratives explaining the issues the tax returns present).  But I’m taking a short break from it after some very intense days working through the material.

Also — is this not true? — once the point has been raised, anyone of reasonable intelligence and persistence, with familiarity to IRS Forms 990 (or 990O, 990PF where that may apply) could also look through any tax return to see if it’s:

  • complete
  • internally consistent in both labeling (i.e., if grants were provided — say so on where the form prompts for information about grants (In a Basic Form 990, 2008ff (the form changed around that time) that’d be:  Page 1 Summary; Page 2 under “program service accomplishments” (lines 4a,b,c & d, “Expenses…. including grants of …”), Part VIII IX (Statement of Expenses) Line 1 “Grants” and if there are some, find the corresponding Schedule (“I” for domestic, “F” for outside the US) showing “GRANTS TO WHOM.” And where the form prompts for a grantee EIN#, was it provided.  Was the listing of grantees even legible and so forth.
  • internally consistent for numbers reported under each section.

And, to:

  • simply look at the various pages, and extract the organization’s statements about itself, its activities, any related (Schedule R) entities, and any “anomalies” such as having a major cost under “salaries” while claiming NO employees.
  • look at progression or changes in funding, expenses, or how tax return is filled out (incl. Schedule A of support) over time (including earlier returns especially).
  • if there’s a number requiring explanation in an attached Schedule (such as Schedule “O”), notice if that explanation is given on the uploaded document you are viewing.
  • notice when and whether patterns of avoidance seem to recur.
  • if the entity is large ($50-$100M assets, or over $1B or more, as some major foundations are), where are the largest expenses, and if that’s grantmaking, which grantees get the biggest ones over time.
  • just be observant!

If questions come up on what is the filing rule, another source of information is simply the IRS itself (they do have an 800#) and as I read, some questions whether I’m understanding the instructions on the form do come up.  BUT, you can still learn a lot about any entity from its tax return, or better yet, from several from the same entity, one year compared to others, a lot more than if you never looked it up!

I use the word “entity” often because there are “non-entities” posing as “entities,” for example when a named program or initiative is spoken about as if it had a life of it’s own, that program or initiative is probably someone else’s (some other entity’s, or combination of entities’) puppet, or prop.  NO program or initiative exists in a vacuum; it’s going to occur in a context (platform, stage) and it has promoters, and even if it’s 100% volunteer run (the exception), it has costs.

The word “entity” also prepares us to distinguish between government or business entities, which then locates them on the tax continuum (government entities CAN tax, but their profits are not taxed.  They may and do pay employment tax for their employees — but the overall government entity’s excess revenues after all expenses and overhead, no matter how large it may be, IS NOT TAXABLE.  Business entities occur in for-profit and not-for-profit forms, i.e., taxable (depending on the level of income after write-off of expenses and so forth), or not.  Look at any Form 990 Schedule R, [2008ff] “related entities” and notice they are divided into categories “disregarded” “tax-exempt” “taxable as a corporation” and “taxable as a partnership or trust.”

Apparently those distinctions (terms) are meaningful to the IRS, and they should be to us when programs in the public interest are promoted and reported on to us, or (should we eavesdrop on the industry journals and roundtables where they are provided on-line) to each other.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 10, 2017 at 6:52 pm

%d bloggers like this: