Archive for October 2017
“Health as an Asset” “Thought Leadership” and the Chatham House Rule:** A Section Unearthed from My “Smoking Control/Tobacco Litigation” Post and Reposted Here, in light of Current Congressional Events, and in light of Senator Flake’s (2014) Commentary Before the CFR citing to 9/11 and the Iraq War Commended (?) for Unifying the United States. [Published Oct. 26, 2017]
Why This Post?
The last post, on the global promotion of “HiAP,” — Post title and shortlink: HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7LY”). About 12,800 words, published Oct. 24, 2017 — referenced a “Health as an Asset” section on another of my recent posts, but I didn’t remember which one by name.
Looking to include a link, I discovered that section was so hard to find and so far down on an already information-and-image-loaded post (for which I hadn’t yet added any tags*), that I’m copying it here under its own title, to juxtapose it to the HiAP post. (It also remains at the prior location).
(*but now have — and over a dozen of them to the HiAP post too). This was an important post! It contains among other things a colorful WHO Banner explaining around which basic life elements and processes the calling-card “HiAP” intends govt – private – regional -local – and other powers to collaborate (to reduce air pollution) and clear statements of intent to impose HiAP on all — with the corollary, universal health care for all — demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt how fast this was spread through the system, and lists several organizations, of the type I continue to document and sound the alerts on throughout this blog’s history — at least one U.S. agency (HHS/CDC) and — who else? the State of California (by Executive Order 2010) all united for a cause whose name seems to have only originated in 2006! The US is also being used as a major financial base to impose/implement this on other countries as well as our own selves, which again gets again down to our own tax base supporting the same.
So, the “half-parent” post to this one (I say “half-parent” because it was only part of the above post, and despite the move, is still about half (the bottom half) of this post too)…is:
Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”) published Oct. 20, 2017.
The concepts in the recent (10/24/17) “HiAP” post belong alongside this one too: we are talking about setting global health policies, including those impacting federal agency activity (which is determined in part by Congress, but Congress is also influenced, as I continue to say, by the private sector, both for-profit and nonprofit — as ever) from afar, that is, through global and internationally connected regional governments and related, networking NGOs.
Preparation for this way of running things of course requires restructuring business and management education (schools, academia), which apparently is where the thought leadership by the Academy for Business In Society comes in as a platform from which to proselytize, help organize, and of course advertise the transformation/s.
This time I wrote the post before the title, but the title still came out long and sarcastic—
“Health as an Asset” “Thought Leadership” and the Chatham House Rule:** A Section Unearthed from My “Smoking Control/Tobacco Litigation” Post and Reposted Here, in light of Current Congressional Events, and in light of Senator Flake’s (2014) Commentary Before the CFR citing to 9/11 and the Iraq War Commended (?) for Unifying the United States. [case-sensitive short-link ending “-7QH.” Re-posted (bottom half) and written (top half) Oct. 25-26, 2017].[Published Oct. 26, 2017]
**Terms taken from 2010-2011 Conferences Among ABIS* (the Academy of Business In Society), RUTGERS (“The State University of New Jersey”), and the Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust.
“Minor details” The only home (USA) base in that list (despite Johnson & Johnson HQ being in NJ, its “Corporate Citizenship” trust formed in 2007 isn’t a U.S. entity and in fact is focused on the “EMEA” region: Europe, the Middle East and Africa)## would then be Rutgers, the public-supported “State University of New Jersey.”
The NJ state university system has other campuses and colleges. This one, in Newark (commuting distance to NYC) is just the most famous one. To show that the J&J CCT is as I said, from its website (top, and bottom/footer info) we can see that it’s about 10 years old, a slight reminder who J&J is, if this is needed, and (from the footer) that while its registered HQ is in Belgium (not “Brussels” that I can see), it is registered as a Scottish company, putting it firmly in the UK, not in the EU or the USA…
## The Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust (Trust) was founded in 2007 as a registered charity and a company limited by guarantee. The Trust is funded by the J&J Family of Companies through J&J Global Community Impact and J&J Operating Companies in EMEA. {{stands for “Europe, Middle-East & Africa”}}
Operational structure and management
— The Trust is managed by a Board of Directors consisting of 14 senior J&J leaders across the Pharmaceutical, Consumer, Medical Devices and Global Supply businesses in the EMEA region. (etc., there are three more bullets)[J&JCT: Johnson & Johnson Corp Citizenship Trust Footer showing legal domicile Scotland and registered office Belgium]
*(the Academy of Business In Society) …a global network of over 100 companies and academic institutions whose expertise, commitment and resources are leveraged to invest in a more sustainable future for business in society. ABIS enables informed decision-making on business in society issues through collaborative research, education, thought leadership, policy insights and business acumen.
“Thought leadership” — I told you so!
“are leveraged” The main verb of the leading ABIS statement is in the passive tense, leaving it open to speculation by whom they are leveraged while emphasizing scope and respectability of the network. Question: Who is leveraging it for the noble cause? Why not just say it up front?
ABIS Image #2 showing some of the organization’s purposes, and delineating four kinds of Projects: EU&UN sponsored (sky blue) | ABIS (red) | Corp. (purple) | Academic (orange)
Answer: Apparently, the EU and the UN, that is to say, briefly, one regional federated government (which the UK recently voted to exit — remember “Brexit”??) and (if the UN is an “NGO”) a prominent post-World War II NGO for the NWO.
As you can see, the ABIS conducts projects, and lists four types of them. It does not, obviously, list the EU or the UN as one of its members (how could it?), but it lists the EU and the UN first in four groups of sponsors (funders) of its projects, then itself (wonder what those membership fees are….), then “Corporate” then “Academic” although it is itself composed of both corporate and academic members. (See “Image #2”, above left).
The next image is from ABIS Home page (one of several available on its main url):
Some initial comments on and images from “ABIS.”
I’m commenting on what I saw on-line so the images will illustrate the comments.
Above, those are “ABIS” home page images (not all clearly visible) on a sliding banner with a secondary (subsection at bottom left) sliding banner advertising an upcoming conference, and it being only the 16th shows the organization isn’t that old. This is where I found the reference to (and conferences about) “Health as an Asset.” Another project was “Thought Leadership…” and another “Government Relations for the 21st Century: Beyond Lobbying..” (See nearby images).
Nice to know these things are going on internationally on the behalf of all people who are hereby relieved individually (it seems…) from thinking about structuring their own lives, futures, prioritizing their values, etc. without such mediation and (paternalistic) oversight.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. [Published Oct 24, 2017]
Two spinoff posts promised below (still in draft Oct. 27) are:
- Changing (the) World, Changing (the) Words: Sovereignty, Circumscribing Sovereignty versus Global ‘Citizenship’ (the Unmentionable: then who is the Global ‘Sovereign’?). References: (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7MB” draft post started Oct. 14, 2017). Regarding “sovereignty” and “citizens” — The quotations from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philsophy (and a few other places) and my related discussion (sic) I’ve moved to a new post:
- Another related one coming up soon: Before HiAP there was Agenda 21. A closer look at ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA, Inc. (1991ff, Boston MA legal domicile) (“-7N2,” post started 10/14/2017).
ICLEI in particular shows pre-planned globalism and tactics for it (with Canadian ownership from the start, and prominent connections to UNincorporated association in Europe, as I recall). ICLEI’s previous name is a big clue. “EI” stands for Environmental Initiatives as I recall offhand.
[“Spinoff posts” are portions of drafts of this post which are felt to be significant enough for more attention under their own titles, and usually were nearly complete before moving them under their own titles.]
This post was written basically Oct. 14-16, and continues from a theme who has been promoting “Health as an Asset” globally (and some of the organizations involved) from an earlier post. Published without further work (now that “Governance: The Final Frontier” is done and has undergone the “post-publication review” (and extensive tags have been added). This one is published Oct. 24, 2017 (a Tuesday evening, my time zone) and will likely undergo a similar post-publication review (incl. added tags).
Why post-publication revisions: As just one blog administrator, it helps sometimes to PUBLISH, then REFLECT/REVIEW MORE (which are activities with different modes and focus of attention). If this were a subscription blog (currently it isn’t yet) of course that would be less acceptable, although even on-line MSM show “updates” after the original publish time. I am also considering other timelines for the blog, urgencies to publish, responding sometimes to current events, such as government in motion,* outside the immediate scope of the blog and at times, when I publish after working on a specific post and its topics is just gut instinct. I also maintain (again, a gut-level instinct) awareness of my personal limits on how much effort can be put into a single topic.
Source: WHO. Click image to enlarge. Notice at bottom: “Health is the driver” and at the top “Health requires…. all sectors work together…” and a collective set of conditions to re-organize society, throughout. (image is unusually long and looks like it might have been a hanging banner for a conference…)
Found in a list of resources at a CDC website:
Health in All Policies (HiAP): Framework for Country Action
Developed by the World Health Organization to serve as a “starter’s kit” for applying HiAP in decision-making and implementation at national and subnational levels, this framework can be easily adapted for use in different country contexts and at the regional and global levels.
! ! ! ! ! !
Notice the elements of WHO’s HiAP Banner for Worldwide Implementation, “How Does It Work?” Clean Energy | Housing | Urban Planning | Transport | Industry | Waste Mgmt | Local and Regional Authorities | Health Ministry – More Collaboration to Tackle Air Pollution.
[I’ve noticed that] Whatever the cause (Tobacco Control, HiAP, Environment, Peace, Equity, Sustainability) the push will alway be for more collaboration (coordination) of geopolitical jurisdictions, *government agencies, and between governments and private businesses (corporations) + corporate wealth. All individuals are expected to understand that this is for their own good, regardless of where in the world they live, including in the USA.
*[i.e., focus on Local and Regional where in the USA, the States are primary levels of jursidiction on things not reserved to the federal government by the US Constitution],
This was also the request when the cause was to “prevent family violence” only then the preferred term was “coordinate” — Coordinated Community Response.” All terms will speak in collective (or “collectivist”) language. Individualism as a principle is throughout discouraged. [Green font here just represents text added during post update Oct. 27]
In case the phrase or its acronym “HiAP” is unfamiliar, see the “infographic” to right, from the World Health Organization, also labeled as a tool for promoting HiAP at the Country level. I’ll show it again below, larger.
Key concepts — consolidation of departments and agencies within government, and planned communities with not even a complete concept — just a single word “health” as the organizing factor.
Relevance to “FamilyCourtMatters” issues:
The immediately preceding post introduces my concerns about this topic, using “Big Tobacco” litigation (Public policy and economic impact)” under “health” rationale as compared with “Domestic Violence” (Child Abuse is related and parallel), something I had experienced and whose advocacy organization, both HHS and DOJ-funded, and others, I had researched (primarily posted on this blog). After writing (but not publishing yet) that, I became engrossed in this aspect, especially after finding WHO citing to its involvement in a global treaty around tobacco (introduced 2003, signed by over 170 members or “signatories” – i.e., mostly countries — by 2005) as an example of why it should also lead setting the framework for HiAP — after all, it was experienced.
In that post, Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I see is By Design GUARANTEED, (like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates), (short-link ending “-7Lp”), which I plan to publish same day or within 24 hrs of this one,…
I discovered connections between major pharmaceutical (and other products) multinational corporation, its trust started only in 2007 (in Europe) but the company home base in New Jersey, USA — and meetings under the “Chatham House rule” (it said, “rules” but it seems there is only one — anonymity!) which is a connection to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) in London. Which brings up the question, if we are to be globally aligned, and one country (the USA) doesn’t have a monarch, titles of nobility or a national (declared at least) religion, why would be be seeking to align one of our most expensive areas of public policy (i.e., “health”) with a country, formerly an empire, and to this day still characterized as a “kingdom” although with a queen instead?
If – hypothetically — I were, from a position of authority (elected, appointed, or corporate, whether in the for-profit or not-for-profit sectors) to say over several years, and from a variety of platforms (each time referencing organizations or offices I held to underscore the authority of the message), such as a keynote speaker at a conference or university center, to say to Americans, that is U.S. Citizens, or (which is closer to the reality of networked organization communicating public policy themes), if I and my friends and colleagues… were, concurrently, repeatedly and openly, to say:
Hypothetical message/directive:
Everyone stop talking about legal rights and due process, justice as it relates to anything expressed in the U.S. Constitution, or state laws, as passed by the U.S. Congress or state legislatures (respectively), and instead, repeat after me:
“Health in All Policies”
…In fact, let’s not talk about laws at all — just policies, as enacted and implemented through the executive branch of governments, plural, of course in closest meaningful consultation with local, state, regional, national and international associations/NGOs working collaboratively. … From now on, when a conflict between law and policy comes up, policy wins every time. When a geopolitical jurisdiction conflict comes up, regardless of the law, the argument, practice, or ideas originating in the larger body’s jurisdiction prevail and will become standard practice — even if that’s not what either its or the smaller body’s law says (for example, federal vs. state). From now on, right and wrong are no longer expressed in law, but in “policy.”
From now on, national sovereignty, and concern about it by any nation’s citizens, especially for the U.S.A. and its citizens = “bad.” Global citizenship = “good, equitable, sustainable, fair and necessary for world peace (and the planet).** And anyone who disagrees or protests is a lunatic/fringe element/conspiracy theorist, or _____(substitute other negative name-calling at will). We allow freedom of expression, and value it — so they can talk, but we, the intelligent and reasonable, should not engage with such backwards nutcases.##
## The two sentences in blue weren’t in my original hypothetical, but after running across an OpEd and NY article using some of those terms (mocking the concept of “conspiracy theory” and applying certain labels to those in protest) — and having just been researching the organization being defended — I felt it appropriate to add. A large part of public policy IS marketing it to the public; advertising, “PR.” Part of PR is discrediting the competition, which here appears to be, using a different set of language, vocabulary and concepts to discuss common concerns….i.e., independence of thought, or reference to a different standard for reasoning and evaluation of public policy. … Keep reading, I have examples….
From now on, leave the complex thinking –including about your families and children’s educations, public schools, housing, transportation or energy infrastructure, etc. — up to the experts, and go back to work funding them. During your work, family, schooling or any leisure time, stay tuned in for any major changes in the current catechism…and what to think and talk about…”
**Interjection on the two-word phrase “Global citizenship” and logical corollaries:
In writing this, the phrase “global citizenship” slipped out so normally as a concept in common usage, that I didn’t at first consider how it implies but does not cite to a supreme or “sovereign” power over the entire planet.
Because the phrase and concept of “global citizenship” (unlike citizenship of known political States with their defined land and water masses) does not or cannot cite or refer to such a supreme or sovereign power with geographic/territorial authority over the whole planet (which I learned is key to the concept of “sovereign”) while also protesting allegiance to the same (warring nations, states, sovereign entities seeking to expand themselves) as the innate cause of war (and poverty, inequity, slavery and other human rights violations and social ills), the rationale for any means to achieve the concept of, and the ongoing use of the two-word phrase “global citizenship,” and corresponding allegiance to it, as a way of life or principle for assuming or assigning duties and responsibilities, however, fails.
Historically (especially post World War II) the call for global government by consensus as opposed to “national sovereignty” (which by definition comes with subjects or citizens attached…) comes from criticizing and attempting to distance all people (especially the more powerful, “developed” nations) from over-commitment to their own countries. But, without an organized body politic which implies, historically, something “sovereign” and reigning supreme over all owned territories, there can’t be “citizenship.”
RELATED, PREVIOUSLY POSTED DISCUSSIONS: I’ve already blogged repeatedly over time about the concept of “functionalism” (David Mitrany, his involvement with the RIIA Royal Institute of International Affairs (US parallel might be the Council of Foreign Relations), (the RIIA, or “Chatham House” comes up again in the “Health as an Asset” context) and the incremental way of disemboweling, so to speak, or draining the innate power of governments — such as ours here, or the Brits, or the Germans, or the French, or the Spanish (the RIIA dating only to 1927, and it is in London) — by outsourcing it to trans-national bodies. Or, within the USA, trans-state authorities, an early example of which would be the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) — as an example, of by persuasion, different states giving up some of their autonomy for a common geographic, regional good.
THIS ROUND, Fall 2017, having just used the word “global citizenship” almost without thinking, I went looking again for definition of “sovereign” and “citizen” and came across two Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (“SEP”) articles (one written in 2003, “substantively revised” 2016; the other in 2006, “substantively revised” 2017), which presented enough historical narrative to, I feel, communicate the concepts in a historic context well enough to explain my concerns. (SEP “Citizenship” & “Sovereignty“)
From SEP on “Citizenship:”
Supporters of global democracy reject the conventional identification between demos, territory and citizenship. In their view, citizenship is not a set of practices and rights that need to be anchored in a particular demos defined by specific territorial boundaries. On the contrary, citizenship is ideally exercised in a multiplicity of ‘sites’, situated at different levels of governance: local, national, regional and global. Global democrats sketch a multilayered, global democratic order in which no single layer or site is dominant (Pogge 1992, 58, Young 2000, 266). This scheme {{scheme or sketch — which is it?}} implies a ‘vertical’ dispersal of power above and below existing sovereign states, which are stripped of their centrality. This would give less of an incentive for conflicts over power and wealth within and between states, “‘thereby reducing the incidence of war, poverty, and oppression’ and environmental degradation” (Kuper 2004, 30, quoting Pogge 1992, 102–105). [[Citation: Leydet, Dominique, “Citizenship”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/citizenship/]]
(I notice in the news, the word “democracy” is so often used as opposed to “republic” when referring to the USA also, and intents to help promote it internationally. When I was young, in school, I do not remember pledging allegiance to the “democracy” of the United States of America, but to the “republic.”…Apparently “republic” along with “Republicans” (unless you’re one) is also a bad word…)
The SEP article on sovereignty spoke of a major turning point (at least in Europe) between religious wars and the concept of sovereign states as recent as 1647: “the Peace of Westphalia” (History.com reference) ending the Thirty Years’ War AND, separately (though obviously with religious overtones) an Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Dutch. And of the role of Martin Luther and the Reformation in changing the concepts of temporal versus spiritual power at the time.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Governance the Final Frontier (NCSC © 2013), This [Harvard-Kennedy-School-of-Gov’t.-based] Executive Session Detail includes an SF BAY Area Nonprofit APIAHF, which had 2013 spinoff API-GBV (Symptoms: DV Solutions are Mainstreamed, Well-Heeled, and Often Reluctant (or at least slow) to “Come Out” as Separate Entities.)
……… As I say within this post:
My protest, as a domestic violence survivor (1990s) myself in the same area, is that the opportunity for some of US to provide intelligent feedback against overwhelming built-in infrastructure funds from both private AND federal sources has become like spitting in the wind.
Perhaps that’s where this blog fits in, I am tacking against the wind in public/private partnerships and am certainly no cheerleader for all this (financially) coerced “collaboration” in a vaccuum of financial transparency among the nonprofit sector, …
This post is:
Currently about 9,000 12,200 words [@Oct24]. Moved here Sept. 21, 2017 from page “How and When Collaborative Justice (Problem-Solving) Courts…” (etc.**).. There is considerable overlap of content. Most images are “click image to enlarge” so I won’t say this for each one (some more touch-based viewing devices, like many cell phones, tablets or I-pads, won’t need to “click to enlarge”; desktop or laptop computers more dependent on keyboards probably will). Some images may be linked to a larger website, but typically most are linked just to the screenprint image. Added “SF” to the title (“SF Bay Area”) Oct24.
Meanwhile, on Oct. 20, 2017, I also posted:
Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern Cali fornia Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”).
Click image (this time) to access full newsltr., 16pp
That post features a 2008 NCJFCJ “Synergy” newsletter literally narrating (not 100% accurately, but at least naming the component parts) and timing of some networked family violence institutes and resource centers (NRCs and SIRCs for “National” and “Special Issue”) which I’d already identified at the TAGGS.hhs.gov level, and flagged at the time (on this blog). … The same “Synergy” newsletter also referenced NCJFCJ’s 2007 “Wingspread” conference with AFCC and self-congratulated the NCJFCJ Family Violence Department for mending fences with AFCC (although it seems they started out on or near on the same page anyhow, with probably major membership overlap and viewpoints.). This newsletter itself was public-funded by HHS, as its final page showed:
To clarify, the NCJFCJ gets paid to do this newsletter, by the public (HHS Grant# shown)
It also claims the “National Resource Center on DV: Child Abuse and Custody” which the newsletter appears in part to represent, dated back only about five years to 2003). The key feature, however, is that NCJFCJ is the sponsoring entity; who they are as an organization. The public (HHS) funded this project (see nearby image). NCJFCJ years earlier was deeply involved with the Greenbook Initiative also, opposite or with the then-“Family Violence Prevention Fund” (namechange to “Futures without Violence” occurred ca. 2010).
Brief reminder of NCJFCJ conference and training activity, and with whom, and promoted by whom, funded in part by whom (if you’re working and registered with the IRS in the US, pull out a mirror)…(Section added post-publication, Oct. 23) ADDED section about 1,000 words with images.
NCJFCJ 81st Annual Conference in Denver
Factoids: NCJFCJ’s 79th annual conference in Monterey, CA was Summer 2016. In other words, they claim to pre-date World War II. They do regular conferences and trainings: Summer 2018 in Denver (see image), December 2017, now regularly training it seems with Futures without Violence (and the USDOJ), in Santa Fe, NM, “Enhancing Judicial Skills in DV Cases.” This one is open only to certain kinds of people and limited to 50 participants, and designed to inculcate certain understandings and behaviors, I see:
… an essential foundation for new and experienced state, tribal and territorial judges and judicial officers to enhance their skills in handling civil and criminal domestic violence cases. Judicial participants will leave the workshop with greater knowledge and skills for handling cases involving domestic violence. …
A long list of points follows, incl. one that sounds in part like a CYA protection for intended judicial and judicial officer participation in local leadership councils (etc.) regarding DV):
- Identify administrative and community barriers to accessing/achieving justice in DV cases
- Devise methods of overcoming barriers to justice, become motivated to work to remove barriers, and use information regarding available community resources to assist in removing barriers.
- Recognize and apply ethics rules that govern participation in extrajudicial activities, e.g., domestic violence councils, legislative proposals, local court rulemaking, and education programs of non-judge providers. …
“There is no charge for the educational portion** of the workshop. Participants are responsible for their own lodging, travel arrangements, and costs.”
**What other portions of an “enhancing judicial skills” workshop besides educational would there be? Practice sessions, role-playing to solidify concepts? (Eating, socializing…etc.)
Here’s the 79th Annual (2016 in Monterey, CA, conference) advertised at “NationalHealthyMarriageAndFamilies.org,” itself an HHS-funded project (incl. website) with a focus on “HMRE” (Healthy Marriage Relationship Education) training with an “underpinning of family safety,” presided over by their “Family Violence Advisory Committee” of three men and two women.*
One of the men comes up around (as board member on) an organization (Nat’l Latino Alliance for the Elimination of Domestic Violence) on the post below referenced as a multi-cultural institute for violence prevention, which is not mentioned here, although his other fatherhood connections are (Fernando Mederos of Boston MA).
And two of the three men on the “Family Violence Advisory Committee are from MenStoppingViolence.org in Atlanta Georgia. One woman is from a Rutgers University (NJ) Center on Violence against Women and Children, and the other, the only listed attorney in the mix, from Los Angeles, at an LGBT center. I saved it to pdf, in case of future broken link above, with some comments at the top, however some right-margin text is lost and content harder to read: Family Violence Prevention Advisory Panel | National Resource Center for Healthy Marriage and Families (5 people viewed Oct 23, 2017~>this NRCHMF is HHS-funded, says footer info) its Goal? Apparently ~Integrating HMRE educ into the Safety Net~5pp
Men Stopping Violence Inc. (EIN#581618891, since1982ff, GA, running BIP, 90% gov’t supported (ProgrRevs and-or grants), year after year, is primarily government sponsored, whether through grants or through government fees and contracts under “program service revenues.” Unfortunately, after 2008, IRS Form 990 doesn’t break down (have a printed line-item designation for) “government fees and contracts,” which pre-2008 shows that most of its Program Service Revenues were so classified. It’s maintained a moderate size. I annotated two tax returns, one from 2005 and one from 2008:
- MenStoppingViolence EIN#581618891 FY2005 (24pp (990) showing 311K of 537K (of which 391K Prog service) revs are GOVT FEES+CONTRACTS (PtVII Ln93g) (and its budget deficit)
- MSV Men Stopping Violence EIN#581618891 (since 1982, DecaturGA) FY2008 (25pp) Note IRS form change now conceals which PSRev was govt fees=contracts Also 52K Split-Interest Agreemt with ?
Detail from IRS Form 990 FY2005 of Men Stopping Violence reveals that most of its “program service revenues” come from (Line 93g), gov’t fees and contracts, regardless of whether most of its direct grants (contributions) for a given year did or did not. Over the years, Schedules of support show increasing revenue from “services provided” — but those services apparently were provided mostly under gov’t contracts and fees. Even so, it’s still managed to overspend and deplete standing assets.
I should do follow up, however, please note the connection of board member with “Georgia Commission on Family Violence” which was set in place by the legislature in 1992, and that (I just saw from its website) apparently the same “Enhancing Judicial Skills in Domestic Violence Cases“** workshop was brought to Georgia, co-sponsored by (its) Judicial Council/AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts) and the Family Violence Council, with NCJFCJ, and help from the “Criminal Justice Coordinating Council.” This is going on as I write, Sunday – Wednesday this week! (FYI, NCJFCJ’s home base is, mostly, Nevada).
Current look at GA Commission on Family Violence Pls. notice “Enhancing Judicial Skills” at bottom right. This is taking place (as I write) Oct. 22 – 25th, 2017! Below (but not visible in image) a Sept. one was for DV advocates.
** Through a grant from the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC), the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) is bringing its workshop entitled “Enhancing Judicial Skills in Domestic Violence Cases Workshop for the State of Georgia” to metro Atlanta in October of 2017. Specifically, the training will take place from Sunday, October 22, 2017 (beginning at noon) and will continue through Wednesday, October 25, 2017 (ending at noon), at Mansour Center in Marietta.
The Judicial Council/Administrative Office of the Courts and Georgia Commission on Family Violence will be sponsoring the training. The class size is limited to 50 judges, one judge from each of Georgia’s judicial circuits. The registration website is set up so that one judge from each circuit may sign up. After that, your circuit will show as “sold out,” but the names of any other judges from that circuit who wish to attend will be put on a waitlist. If we do not have one judge from each circuit sign up, we can then register judges from that list.
There is no fee to attend. Some meals will be provided by ICJE and the Judicial Council/AOC.
Click to enlarge, or here for the website (the MSV Bd of Directors shows powerful connections still.
Kirsten Rambo, Ph.D., I see, in Dec. 2016, was reported as becoming the new Executive Director in a domestic violence shelter on the opposite coast (California), San Luis Obispo County, after a leadership pair (Exec. and Deputy Exec. Director) resigned suddenly, complaining about work conditions and a “climate of chaos and distrust.” I felt this was odd enough to report, especially if she’s Exec Dir. of a California entity while on the board of a batterers-interventions-services provider on the opposite coast (i.e., Georgia) and with a background under HHS, that is the CDC (which has a major foundation supporting it, by the same name, in Georgia). If she is still at the California shelter AND “men stopping violence” board member, this should be made known on the shelter website. IS IT?
“Kirsten Rambo, who was recently hired as executive director of the Women’s Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County. Courtesy of Kirsten Rambo” LOCAL Read more: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/ local/article118738393.html#storylink=cpy]
Dec. 3, 2016 by Kirsten Rambo, Ph.D., CDC Violence Prevention Center and MSV (Men Stopping Violence) Board of Directors, assigned to a California (not Georgia) shelter Exec. Directorship (San Luis Obispo County, CA) in Dec. 2016. Still there? I didn’t check, yet.
Women’s Shelter Program of SLO Hires New Exec Director Dec. 3, 2016, Lynn Holden, in the “NewsTribune” LOCAL:
The Women’s Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County has hired a new executive director after its longtime former head suddenly resigned in June.
Kirsten Rambo, formerly of the Division of Violence Prevention at the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention in Atlanta, will assume her new position on Dec. 12. [2016] Adrienne Harris was contracted to serve as interim director after Marianne Kennedy’s departure, according to Robin Mitchell Hee, president of the shelter’s board of directors. …
Kennedy and Deputy Director Jason Reed resigned during a third-party investigation into undisclosed employee concerns about work conditions. The nature of the concerns remains unclear, although Reed told The Tribune in June the organization’s board of directors had “created a climate of chaos and distrust within the organization.” Read more here:
(This Women’s Shelter Program was decent enough to post its EIN#, 95-3370729, in fine print on a web page, at least…)
SLO County (CA) Women’s Shelter Program detail posts its EIN#95-3370729 in small print (but the financials are not uploaded on the website).
I see from the “resigned” article (or main one) that the leadership duo had been there for 30 (Marianne Kennedy) and 11 (Jason Reed) years, respectively, and that from now on there won’t be a “Deputy Director” but the new Exec. Dir. (Rambo) “and other staff members” will take over those duties — mostly grantwriting. (So, the shelter had had a man as primary grant-writer those 11 years, sounds like).
Mitchell Hee said the shelter isn’t planning to hire a new deputy director, a position primarily devoted to grant writing. Instead, Rambo and other staff members will assume those duties
As for any problems the shelter may have faced at the time of Kennedy’s resignation, Mitchell Hee said the organization has since moved on. [Read more here: …/article118738393.html#storylink=cpy]
Last 3 tax returns shown on 990finder website (EIN# 953370729 search results):
Total results: 3. Search Again.
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Womens Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County | CA | 2015 | 990 | 37 | $2,503,905.00 | 95-3370729 |
| Womens Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County | CA | 2014 | 990 | 32 | $2,408,852.00 | 95-3370729 |
| Womens Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County | CA | 2013 | 990 | 31 | $2,412,754.00 | 95-3370729 |
Among other things, the latest return here is only FY2014 (Marianne Kennedy still shown as Exec. Director, and Robin Mitchell Hee shown, but not as President). In other words, despite the negative/positive publicity in 2016 and 2017, it doesn’t seem to have generated an updated tax return with the IRS (990finder gets them from the IRS…). Fiscal Year end is June 30. So in October 2017, at least FY2015 (YE 6/30/2016) should’ve been uploaded — but seemingly it isn’t. FY2016’s would be (if timely) due soon, but what’s shown above does not represent the transition which took place almost a year ago, per the news articles.
EIN#95-3370729 under a different org. name, FY2003 (see footer & header on image). Simpler program service description back then..
EIN#95-3370729 under a different org. name, FY2003 (see header on image). Ms. Kennedy and two other women were paid officers, total pay for all three only $155.7K. This is ODD: The org. name GLINDA SErVICES, INC., bears NO resemblance to the website shown on the return, womensshelterSLO.org. Why? [2003 return from “990finder” HERE
EIN#95-3370729, WomensShelterSLO.org (bd of director excerpt, site viewed Oct. 2017). An Exec Director =/= a Board Member; the website may not be current; last available tax returns aren’t either, it seems.
As Deputy Executive Director, I guess Jason Reed wouldn’t have shown on the Part VIIA listings of “Bd of Directors, Officers, Directors, Key Employees, Highest Paid Employees” and he doesn’t.
I looked back at returns for several years (Here’s for FY2005), and saw it was formerly called “Glinda Services, Inc.” and has (at least now) an endowment controlled separately (from a related entity trust), with income fr om it varying radically (but never really that high) and in some prior years, the controlling board members were men. And that their main program service (versus all kinds of revenues including grants/contributions) revenues seems to be counseling fees required of DV victims.
I also note that on their website, currently under volunteer “Board of Directors”, the Secretary (a woman) shown is also “Chief Deputy District Attorney” for the county, i.e., on city payroll. Interesting…I realize this happens, but question how this would benefit conflict-of interest free operations.
Of interest: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2530
As late as FY2008, tax returns retain the name Glinda Services, Inc. but have deleted the reference on header to any website. Tax information it says, is offered on “Another’s website, “but whose is not shown. However, by 2010, based on letterhead of a supporting letter to the City Planning Commission for permit to allow a “Homeless Services Campus” on surplus city property adjacent to Social Services. This would combine two operations (daytime core services + night time shelter) by other organizations, and (says a letter of support from, by now it’s called “Women’s Shelter Program of SLO”) within walking distance of the Women’s Shelter. I found this reference looking for board of directors “Willo Cather” to find out (after noticing board tended to be run by men) whether this is a man or a woman. They were planning for a 24-hour building with a central courtyard to be set up.
Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County (CAPSLO) has submitted an application for a Planning Commission Use Permit to allow a Homeless Services Center (HSC) to be developed on the vacant property adjacent to the Department of Social Services at 3451 and 3511 South Higuera Street. CAPSLO is the operator of the Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter and the Prado Day Center. The new HSC would combine the functions of these two facilities and would provide comprehensive services to the area’s homeless population. The HSC would be a regional facility and is a key implementation measure of the 10-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness.
These are FY 2008 returns (4 images). By June 23, 2010 (above letter of support for Planning Commission permitted development of surplus city land for centralized / “regional” homeless services center with beds, courtyard, a kennel for pets, and more) the entity had changed its name to better match its website held for years previously.
Image 1 of 4, IRS, FY2008, EIN# 953370729, Pg.1 top, Glinda Services, Inc.
Image 2 of 4, IRS, FY2008, Pg1 BOTTOM, Glinda Services, Inc.
Image 3 of 4, IRS, FY2008 top Glinda Services, Inc., Form 1023 available on another’s website (but “website” marked N/A on this return….)
Image 4 of 4, IRS, FY2008 top Glinda Services, Inc., (now “Women’s Shelter Programs of SLO, Inc.” under the same EIN# 95-3370729;) Just pointing out, sometimes public interface for a “Woman’s Shelter” may be female, but the power structure (board) still male-dominated. As of 2008, seems to hold, here…8 yrs later, the Exec Director who signed this return (but is NOT listed on this page, Marianne Kennedy) made headlines by, with another man (also not listed on returns, as “deputy” exec. director, mostly a grantwriting position said the news article, Jason Reed)
Back to “National Healthy Marriage and Family” (“NHM&F”) website promoting an NCJFCJ 79th annual conference, remembering NCJFCJ’s prominent role in the “DV network” at least as to federal funding, and its relevance to FAMILY COURTs and proceedings under STATE (not Federal) control.
The funding disclaimer on the “NHM&F” (NOT “Men Stopping Violence”) website footer, in fine print, is a grant I’ve talked about before on this post (long ago) (See “Disclaimer” quote with dark-teal background):
Disclaimer: Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant: [90FH0003]. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.
An HHS-funded website advertising nonprofit (that also takes significant HHS funds) NCJFCJ’s annual 2016 conference in California.
Pushing Marriage and Relationship Education AND responsible fatherhood year after year (a PRWORA 1996 welfare reform “special feature”) requires at least token lip-service to the existence of domestic violence. So they have an advisory council of, it says, four people.
Incidentally, where I said I remembered that grant “90FH0003” above, I did. Link to a saved “TAGGS.HHS.gov” search to show it was granted to “I C F, Inc” which is an improper spelling of the name — there are no spaces between), three years in a row for $1.5M/year to, probably, set up and maintain this website, a grant to a multi-national GLOBAL, FOR-PROFIT corporation (financials not readily traceable because it’s for-profit), to help other nonprofits continue taking TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) funding away from families, and diverting it through “CFDA 93086,” as the image says, to run people through curricula, endlessly, sponsored by nonprofits also, often, taking more 93086 grants, and/or other ones (Compassion capital funding) etc. to get themselves set up to run the curricula, and make sure America remains properly patriarchal according to the protocol.
Click on image to repeat the search (results will change if data changes meanwhile at “TAGGS” Recipient name is 3rd column from the right; notice this happened, it’s saying, 2015-2017…
Before 90FH0003, ICF got also 90FH0002 (also $1.5M/year for three out of four years, starting in 2011), purpose: ”
| 90FH0002 | National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage – Non Competing Continuation Application |
but the only other entity getting a “90FH00##” grant raked in even more and was also a for-profit PR firm — in Oklahoma. Public Strategies, Inc., deeply involved from the start with the “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative.” (Saved Search) showing all three and that Public Strategies, Inc. got first $2M, then (4 yrs in a row, “noncompeting continuation) $3.25M ANNUALLY for “developing materials.” This is an advanced search (I picked the columns displayed. Above was a basic “Award”search, so picking columns wasn’t an option.
Click on image to see the saved search, which includes grants 90FH0001 and “0003” as well. This just shows the predecessor grant to “I C F Inc.”
Does it sound like, perhaps, running periodic domestic violence prevention trainings serves as a “heat shield” to facilitate and continue (silently when the headlines around DV roadkill surface, year after year) running VERY profitable — to those running them — private practice HMRE “professions“?
And the public pays for both sides of the argument — that’s genius policy design, if you ask me! Not ethical, but definitely brilliant foresight of just how much the public doesn’t investigate things they aren’t prodded to from mainstream media, or political Left/right debates on a particular set of causes as defined by each political party, for the most part. All kinds of protests and women’s rights organizations can continue going on, year after year, so long as this business agenda utilizing public institutions, goes on.
Anyhow, I have just shown you that so-called “I C F Inc.” as legitimized by the HHS appropriations (and during Bush AND Obama White Houses/Presidential Administrations, two four-year terms each) was fine with advertising the NCJFCJ annual conference. So we must get to know both financing and specific nonprofits, as a general rule, in the power plays of the nation…
The Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation. Guaranteed..(Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. post is Recommended reading if you haven’t yet! Look for section around the above-left (“Synergy” Page 1) image (shown larger on the post, and unlike here, with more caption and commentary). FYI so is that newsletter, even though it’s nine years old now.
Continuing some commentary still on that Oct. 20 post……
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates)
__
Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern Cali fornia Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”)
Post Technicalities: Tags may be added later. After over a week reviewing and supplementing this post, I’ve decided to “punt” (publish). It MIGHT also be split later, but the sections on exploring national DV networking over the years (from key organizations’ narratives) and “Health as an Asset,” an academy (“ABIS”) globally networking under the “Chatham House Rule” (basically, anonymity)(which brings the topic to the RIIA / Royal Institute of International Affairs in London and its historic intentions, as expressed in its founding documents) towards the bottom, which has a sequel, actually belong together. And this still IS “Domestic Violence Awareness Month,” for what that’s worth, in the USA..so I took a closer look at how certain organizations like to collaborate for a unified voice, and consequences of that collaboration, down the road a few decades….//LGH, Oct. 20, 2017
Or, you could call this “October Local & Posts-in-the-Pipeline Update” which is how it started out, attached to another post started earlier I’d hoped to publish with just a brief update.
As my About Holidays / Personal Backdrop” (posted Oct. 10)** says, I took a brief, about half-month, pause while handling (different kind of writing required) personal things and am now catching up on some of the posts already in the “pipeline” referencing, basically and most recently the themes of (a) Big Tobacco Litigation/Smoking Cessation Control (Public policy) Efforts and (b) The Problems with Problem-solving Courts (“Collaborative Justice”), which includes the development and implementation nationwide of family courts, too. [** after next few reminder images…]
I wrote about an East Coast/West Coast connection involving one government sub-sector (Administrative Office of the Courts, under the Judicial Council of California, the ruling body of the Judicial Branch in the state) with an improperly named non-entity (it’s not its own legal business OR government entity) — the “Center for Court Innovation” in New York. You will not find it registered under that name on CharitiesNYS.com or Business Entity search, and so far as I know, it’s not a trade name of some registered entity — because the EIN# associated with it, generally speaking, belongs to a private foundation, “Fund for the City of New York.”
Four logos show sponsorship (not membership) of the Executive Session for State Court Leaders” (click image to enlarge, for fine-print commentary) as I recall. Only 1 logo represents part of government (BJA is under the USDOJ) directly; the other 3 (including Harvard) count as “tax-exempt, privately controlled entities” even though the NCSC Board will have public officials on it.
I talked about how organizations like the NCSC got involved and discovered yet two more (subsequent to “The California Story” published in 2005) 501©3s promoting the same “collaborative justice” concept, keying off the concept of drug courts:
Fund for City of New York is one-half (the Private) half of the Public/Private (agreement, project, collaboration — whoever it’s defined) comprising the “Center for Court Innovation”. Look at the affiliations of the Board members — former NY Attorney General, Designer of the World Trade Center, Adm. Judge of the City of NY…!
(There’s also a foundation to go with this one).
**(The rest of that title, the same link as just given above: “….Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page].”(ends “-7AD”)
The other “Collaborative Justice” non-profit showing clear judicial membership and sponsorship, as well as an MSW involved in “Children and Family Futures.” I won’t say more on that in this post, just pointing out that the process seems never-ending:
CCJCF-related, image series labeled: “Search for CCJCF President turned up EARLY Annual Rpt (Final Draft) WITH EIN# attached and its Significant Others (Judge Lynn Duryees, Peggy Hora)”
[Image may be added here post-publication, can’t locate a certain annotated one just now. It may be on the bottom of the related page]
One post in the pipeline taken from part (b) above again (“Governance, the Final Frontier,” now in draft, full title further below) reminded me of how early (how long ago) I’d realized that the “powers that be” within the domestic violence field obtained, and maintained, control over the field with an agenda to “therapize” the nation’s language of crime and consequences under the health, social science, and behavioral modification treatment [“therapeutic jurisprudence” and other concepts] paradigm — while still claiming to be tough on crime and domestic violence. And that one of the ways of doing this to mimic popular, grassroots demand from multiple seemingly diverse platforms (organizations) was having already-established tax-exempt foundations first internally sponsor projects, then spin off the projects off into more 501©3s (nonprofits) which, while the names may be new, the world view, personnel, response to the problems and practice of letting philanthropists run government or organize with intent to run it, is not. In other words, by setting up interconnected nonprofits collectively run by people of, except perhaps subject/topic focus area, the same general persuasion, having been so persuaded possibly in part because alternate viewpoints or alternate solutions to the problem were out-funded, and out-maneuvered.
[Phrases above in this color were added long after the original paragraph; it this is too much overexplaining, read around them.]
Both this post and the one whose title shows next, linked from the “Collaborative Justice/Problem-solving Courts” page, should be published today, Oct. 20, 2017, or within 48 hours of each other. (That “today” date kept getting moved back as I continued adding to the top part of this post!) The one you’re reading now will be published first.
I’ll repeat that link near the bottom of this post.
VERY early on, assumptions about WHICH are the KEY POINTS IN (foundational to) any new field or regime (for the DV field, that treatments and interventions, such as batterers’ intervention, or supervised visitation, mandatory mediation, parent education, etc.) become foundational, basic for that new field or regime’s claims to even BEING a field of practice or a new profession or area of professional practice (example: “fatherhood” or “domestic violence PREVENTION”). Assumptions and omissions of relevant information which might speak against that selection of points get “baked-into the infrastructure and system” (including to its literature and downloadable curricula, webinars, etc.) as entrenched positions, and continually a part of whatever solution is chosen.
This proprietary, linguistic control makes later protest by people harmed by such policies, even if among the classes the policies are allegedly representing in the first place — for example, survivors of domestic violence, and/or child abuse who, with full information up front might have made different choices in picking their court battles, or how and how hard to fight back once they were dragged into one — an even heavier burden and uphill battle. The public is fed information leading (or at least encouraging) readers/viewers to believe (until personally involved) that “the experts are on it,” so where there’s evidence to the contrary, maybe it was just the family’s problem, or one of the family members.’ Or a rogue judge, or a local problem..
After all, don’t we hear about domestic violence on TV shows, sometimes in a movie, in ads, and after headlines involving recent roadkill, perhaps from experts on one of the major organizations’ comments?
A SHORT SECTION ON THIS, FOLLOWED BY MORE ON THE NETWORKS:
Who can even find the long-standing/oft-quoted SF Domestic Violence Consortium? What does its spokesperson do for a living? Take tax-free donations (It’s not an incorporated entity, but its “Executive Director” maintains apparently a speed-dial on some local news media with each new domestic violence vitality — year after year — or otherwise disaster that has potential for making national news too.
Looking at this one, I also took a quick re-view of California’s registered and still active known major DV organizations, including (but not posted here) the “NNEDV.” I also added a section in which one of the networked entities did us (belatedly) a courtesy summary of the networks themselves, nationally, that is. Recommendation? Pretend this is a conversation, and just deal with its about 15,000 words as they come up. When you see a new section coming up, so be it, and remember that some of the material that inspired a post may (in my writing style) still end up closer to the bottom, while what’s in between is, to say the least, “illuminating.”….
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page].
I might as well get this over with, and am taking the opportunity at the same time to say I finally published a related PAGE, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov (Page started 8/29/2017, published Mon 9/18 evening. With case-sensitive shortlink ending “-7w9″).
Together, that page, another post introducing that page (full title soon, just below) and this post About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page](case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7AD“) are “good stuff” and history on some major program-propagation vehicles in New York and in California, with more in their middles on Minnesota-related events, people, and even a few nonprofits.
What’s here below was originally an insert or aside. At the bottom here, I again provide the link to both the page and my post introducing the page. I hope readers will go back and read both if they haven’t yet.
There are reasons we are continuing to have “family court fiascoes” and destructions of household wealth generation after generation by way of prolonged litigation IN these courts.
Why not take a closer look at how they were assembled, systematically, in recent decades (generation or so) and the pieces from which the parts comprise the whole, or the engine, chassis, fuel, guidance system, [I’m no auto mechanic, but consider the essential parts — and the roads as part of the infrastructure too] and ensuring a constant stream of passengers, with “no stone left unturned” and no child, or life, left unscathed….?] That’s what I tend to do, when not speaking personally..take closer looks. Lots of them.
“ABOUT HOLIDAYS, SPEAKING PERSONALLY:”
About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women who Say No! to Abuse and Proceed to Exit it) (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7AD.”)
This post, while written (except this foreword) around Sept. 4, Labor Day Weekend 2017, was taken from another post then still waiting publication; its full title (and basic background-color) is “Introducing A New Page, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov. AND Some of the Backdrop (Personal Experience of Turn-of-Century Social Policy towards Women Reporting Abuse and Their Efforts to Exit It… ).”(case-sensitive short-link ends “-7xs“)
Exactly one week later, in fact another historic (but not “holy”!) day in recent history, I was still working on both post and page, as I was over Labor Day weekend, a major US holiday from September 2, 3, and (Monday) Sept. 4, 2017,* through to that day, Sept. 11, 2017…
{*The aside added for international visitors to the blog. I don’t know all their national holidays, and they might not know all ours, either. While this blog covers some international issues because it covers private associations dealing with US courts — many of which make sure to advertise that they have an international membership— FamilyCourtMatters still primarily addressed to people dealing with Life In The USA… because the courts here are tax-supported and public institutions in every state, and in territories, of the USA. We pay plenty for them, while we also through our system here (as to the income tax, corporate taxes, and tax-exemptions) sponsor, incubate, and overall, encourage the formation of tax-exempt corporations to fix whatever national, state, or local governments omit, forgot, or “got wrong..”}
BELOW HERE (within this blue box) is “Soap Box” talk on public vs. private. If you “get this,” skip it this time. If you don’t, please consider the stakes are high in blurring one with another, which is a known practice and agenda now commonplace in the country (and not USA only).
These tax-exempt and other corporations can legally register as domiciled in one place, but operate and influence operations across state and national lines. But the family courts regulating life within the states are subject to state legislatures for individuals once they obtain jurisdiction over a case — and through that, the family members involved — do not have innate jurisdiction over people outside the state except as related to something anchored in it. There’s a division, in other words, between jurisdictions within states, and federal. What I’m saying here – it seems to take corporations to overcome legal boundaries to representative government at the state level — and that seems to be the intent and purpose of a variety of such corporations who would rather “legislate” or at least influence, rule, and have power, over whole regions, or nations, at a time, and the streamlined ability to also influence legislation in multiple jurisdictions without having to fight it locally, place by place — and deal “face to face” with those who might, were they aware of the purposes — have cause to oppose them. (See “Big Seven Associations” and/or the variety of “Do You Know Your NGA, NCSC” etc. posts I’ve written within the last year, or maybe two.. for how this seems to work when those on the private corporations ALSO hold public office, either concurrently, or in revolving-door fashion, recently…
{{As I understand it, there ARE no “regional governments” under the US Constitution, that I’m aware of. Some people have a problem with that (search “functionalism” on this blog for more info), and want it changed. The more and more functions that can be “outsourced” to regionally organized private-sector organizations (or JPA’s — Joint Powers Authorities) — the less and less individually responsive less-than-regional governments become. They feel the pressure and appreciate the prestige of “belonging” as evidence of good governmental behavior.
Sure, federal government’s Executive Branch Departments (like HHS, which was formerly — taken together with the part that split off, the Dept. of Education and any other — “HEW”) organize operationally by regions (cross-state lines), as do Districts of the Federal Court system yes — but even those are not independent government entities.
To organize legally cross-jurisdiction WITHIN government here, one must either be anchored in some part which IS either federal OR state, i.e. be state government or something underneath it– or simply be a corporation, including tax-exempt ones. Joint Power Authorities such as I’ve been blogging, like WestED, SWRL, or FWL (Far West Labs, South West Regional Labs — subject matter, education) still must anchor with a state domicile. WestED’s state domicile, so far as I know, is in California, although other states are spanned in its OPERATIONS (shared programming).}}
That’s why, at a time when “Public/Private Partnerships” (or, strategic operating relationships in the forms of Memos of Understanding — one shown below here as to CENIC and California’s HighSpeedRail Authority) are MOST popular with those already in power — we really should be able to tell the difference between that which is public — and its LEGAL power over individuals, including the power to tax, incarcerate, seize assets, seize children, etc. — and that which is NOT public, over which when we are not consumers of the product or entering into conscious contracts with the corporations, we don’t have many real rights. So government uses corporate to cross jurisdictions, and to (as privatized) avoid full responsibility for its actions, and streamline (efficiency) and corporate uses government to encourage conditions it finds conducive to operations and bottom-line profits. This may or may not include the public interest or health; it depends on the situation. [[end of “SoapBox” commentary.]]
Personal timing & publication dates:
The weeks between Sept. 11 and now (early October, 2017), I was working again on some personal writing for an ongoing situation, which was because of its nature and, shall I say, “tenacity,” triggering PTSD and some deep, deep considerations about how far I should or dare take the push for justice in that situation and with these particular individuals who have gained a legal inroad into my life recently, caused damages, and then inflicted further distress through minimizing/dismissing the same. Classic gaslighting and strategy for controlling personalities and/or abusers.
In “About Holidays,” I also speak about some of the long-term tenacity of the prior personal situations, without naming names — because the names aren’t the point. The patterns are. I realize this type of communication is anecdotal, and speaking about it here is for general info.; expressive, not presented as a basis for policy.
When that communication (or at least the initial stage of it) Sept.11 / end of Sept. was handled (or, at least, delivered) I worked again diligently to update this post’s Table of Contents page, a project I am finally, for the most part, satisfied with (for now) and which led to more fascinating subject matter to research, involving consolidation of telecommunications (broad-band-providing) companies servicing government entities (like schools, public and private universities and research institutes), and such.**
**[Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California, “CENIC.org”; its network “CalREN,” and as it’s a membership association, one of its Auxiliary Associate members (in fact the only one currently) “City of Hope” (hospital, institute, development corporation, foundation all inter-related) and dark-fiber network subcontractor, “Level 3 Communications” with its own fascinating history, intersecting with some of the giant telecommunications providers (esp. broadband) mergers of the turn of the century — and its predecessor entity “Kiewit Diversified Group,” which came out of Peter Kiewit & Sons (or similar name), the construction industry. This is basic communications history in the US, and fascinating. It also speaks to the access to high-quality internet capacity and speed of higher education institutions (membership to CENIC or groups like it) vs. the average person, who is the subject matter of so many of the programs, including the social science R&D, federal designer family, poverty research, behavioral mod etc. — while when working as employees, contributing to support the same infrastructure financially based on the trickle-down premise.
Californians are aware of longstanding plans, highly political in nature, for a high-speed physical, commuter (to carry human beings!) rail system connecting Northern Cal. to SoCal (take another look at the map of the USA and see — that’s a good distance!).
So, it looks like CalREN’s (CENIC’s network name) involvement with this high-speed rail project may result in communities along the intended route getting an upgrade to their free? Broadband service. Amazingly, the researchers figured out that poorer, less-educated people living in rural areas are less likely to have internet connections –aren’t they smart? Courtesy “California Emerging Technologies Fund” field research poll, I see.
CENIC article referencing Calif. HighSpeed Rail Authority (a gov’t entity) plans to make broadband communities. CENIC is private nonprofit, so that’s another Public/private partnership, assuming it goes through.
Announced at “Cenic.org” · PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES & NPS, RENS & NRENS
In general, the HSR will connect Los Angeles to San Francisco at 200mph or in about 3 hours by (2025? see info). Another phrase that comes up is “Silicon Valley to Central Valley” with Central Valley being an area where unemployment (and poverty) are high. I see from HSR website that ARRA funds were involved:
SACRAMENTO, Calif. –The California High-Speed Rail Authority today announced it has met federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 requirements by fully investing the more than $2.55 billion granted to the State since 2009 to build the nation’s first high-speed rail system. These funds have helped to create thousands of new jobs and generated approximately $4 billion in economic activity in the Central Valley and across California. Read our News Release to see what Board Chair Dan Richard is saying about meeting the ARRA deadline. For more information, read the full Investing in California’s Future through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 report.
Wow. I remember where I was in high-employment area SF Bay Area in 2009, after child-stealing events, retroactive reduction of child support arrears owed, dramatic curtailment of my own work as I went repeatedly to court in an attempt to resolve the household who stole the kids’ reluctance to comply with court orders granting me: visitation, or even at its lowest point, weekly phone calls placed by the children (after my attempts to reach them weekly went unanswered time after time), and by 2009 I had not one job in the profession left. No one in the agencies or law enforcement seemed to care about enforcing any court orders which would mitigate the situation, and I was running out of the wherewithal to keep coming back to court (let alone even get TO the courthouse) time and again. During that time I had not yet “figured out” what I have since (on this blog) regarding potential financial DISincentives for continuing any government OR nonprofit advocacy group, i.e., the whole systems, to protecting maternal parenting time once it’d been eradicated without legal cause stated on the record, let alone proved on any record…
In other words, those “access and visitation” grants aimed at increasing non-custodial parenting time, apparently lost their motivational impact when that non-custodial FATHER time had been increased to 100% and mother’s to “0%.” I had never been offered or encouraged to do supervised visitation to prevent the stealing in the first place, and when it was brought up, a commissioner said “there’s no money for it here..” — AFTER which I realized, well, yes there was, in the form of those grants to the state of California for such supervised visitation and exchange — to protect the children from being stolen, and myself from injury or repeated forced dealings with traumatic situations absent support for them, in the context of known prior domestic violence…
That fall 2009, I also had learned my children had been abandoned by their father (physically and it appears financially) and was dealing with both stalking while attempting to extract information from ANYONE involved on WHEN this occurred (including what month/year) or in what manner (two conflicting versions were presented by the ex-girlfriend and my ex-batterer (husband) and father of two children by then both almost adults, with me. Abandonment is also a felony, so I was working through both shock and again attempting to speak with law enforcement on this (district attorney’s office, as I had when they were stolen the first time three years earlier). This went nowhere — other than that in my need to speak to their father for this information, he somehow decided again to claim me “before God” as his wife, resulting in the need to at this low point now deal (again) with the stalking issue — which was terrifying… especially without funds to leave the area even temporarily which was a need.
But that commentary is getting ahead of the subject matter of this section…. Just correlating the State-level developments with my personal timeline developments. Back to “HighSpeedRail”….
Read it from the HSR.CA.GOV (HSR=”High Speed Rail”) point of view — this is their MOU (Memo of Understanding) which, actually, clarifies that one is a 501©3 and the other a state agency, and that a partnership, this absolutely does not make!. The signatures of each party are shown — but not dated (so this is probably not an executed copy of any MOU, despite its title page):
MOU as shown (Nov. 2016) header.
REGARDING OTHER CENIC or “NATIONAL LAMBDARAIL, LLC” referring to a different kind of “rail” with different kind of cargo (the optic fiber kind) images I may include below — these are obviously another story waiting to be posted (here — it’s already posted elsewhere!), consider these footprints and reminders for now.//LGH 10/9/2017
This excerpt of a Form 990 shows Nat’l LambdaRail as a related entity of CENIC, though not the largest one… || … “NLR” has a major, and dramatic though short history, and was purchased in 2011 by a billionaire from its university (public/private) membership. Won’t fit in a single caption. Stay tuned (or look up yourself!)It is a 12,000 mile optic network and the first one to go transcontinental (See Wiki or Bloomberg.com for more; also IO.com)
just web page header.
CENIC corporation, California Registry of Charitable Trust (search results page)
These sprang from an unusually-named corporate (nonprofit) visitor to the blog, but in general reflect major themes and turning points in U.S. history, i.e., control of access to the internet, and characteristics of the organizations controlling this access. For the general outline, see my 2017 Table of Contents page, about half-way down, and the bottom section, and the second section of my Oct. 9, 2017 post talking about SIZE STILL MATTERS. …..
WOW: See that image on National LambdaRail, LLC, above? Well: from Wikipedia:
…National LambdaRail was founded in 2003 and in 2004 its national, advanced fiber optic network was completed. In addition to being the first transcontinental, production 10 Gigabit Ethernet network, National LambdaRail was also the first intelligently managed, nationwide peering and transit program focused on research applications.
In 2008, a company named Darkstrand purchased capacity on NLR for commercial use.[1] By the end of the year the Chicago-based company was having trouble raising funding due to the Great Recession.[2] On May 24, 2012 the NLR network operations center services were transferred to the Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California.[3] In October 2009 Glenn Ricart was named president and CEO.[4] On September 7, 2010 Ricart announced his resignation.[5]
In November 2011 the control of NLR was purchased from its university membership by a billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong for $100M, who indicated his intention to upgrade NLR infrastructure and repurpose portions of it to support an ambitious healthcare project through NantHealth.[6] The upgrade never took place. NLR ceased operations in March 2014.[7][8][9][10]
Bloomberg.com on National Lambda Rail. Bloomberg.com gets its data from S&P Global Marketing, part of S&P Global Group (S&P = Standard & Poors, probably)
http://internet2.edu/news/detail/3695. Not shown — this is a 2003 article. See Wiki for follow up info on NLR.
Please click link (or image to enlarge) and read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_LambdaRail#cite_note-5
At Bloomberg.com, but can’t read more w/o subscription to “Professional Services.”See more at NLR “Wiki” page.
Internet2® started in 1996 and has a timeline. See website for more info.
Internet2® doesn’t post its financials With offices in these states, perhaps they could be found. If “internet2” isn’t an entity, then some membership organization ENTITY does have financials somewhere…
Found at Internet2.edu home page, blog article Sept. 17, 2017.
Separately, which I know from email news alerts and family court reform advocacy groups’ social media sites, there are also pending “current events” in local (California) “family court reform” news making the rounds which I feel urgent to address in new posts. I have an idea of a better way to present the situation to people new to it (those familiar with it are welcome to watch from the sidelines, or inbetween rallies, re-blogging, or complaints about the overall injustices in the system, judge by judge or jurisdiction by jurisdiction, something I can’t remember the last time I EVER signed onto that approach as halfway sane, or effective, given the disparate resources….). Some of that way is blended into this otherwise more anecdotal, expressive post about the personal backdrop to our so-called problem-solving courts.
I keep hoping to squeeze enough blogging and activism in between my own ongoing, though more periodic, life events which have been incited by the systematic disruption of my household, work and relationships through the family court and now, probate court, systems and self-important, self-congratulating, and overlapping circles of well-endowed and court-AND social-service-systems-connected “fauna and flora.”
That is, just as in any domestically violent relationship, while there may be at times a “plateau” between incidents (events), during which not a whole lot can be done to push them forward (whether through availability, regulations, or simply personal stamina), and then, responding to moves the individual (here, me) might make to change the status quo or resolve the conflict — there’s an escalation, or other way in which “power-over” is communicated. This communication may be first made in private, but sooner or later can be gestured towards (by the abuser) should it go public, “we attempted to communicate with [____].” Communicate in that context is a euphemism. Something WAS communicated — message of intent to continue the dynamic was sent-and-received — but it’s not what witnesses or outsiders are, for lack of tangible substance, or facts in context, unable to do anything other than assume might be meant were both parties above-board and honest. [I don’t know how that last sentence in green may read to others, but I do know what I meant. There are just multiple layers of meaning, and a style of speaking — which I hate! in trying to actually get down to the facts and resolve the situations — which is more theatre than written communication of important truths. It’s for show, but only those closest to the situation and “in the know” about the overall pattern of the relationship in question, realize how fake it is.
So, again, stamina, or consequences, etc. I don’t know how much longer this can be kept up, either the personal fight, or the writing. It worries me, and may be prompting to get what’s done already in order, backed up, and on-line. And it’s no way to live… with constant risk management while resources are drained, year after year.
Moving on….
Blogging Context/Sequence:
“Introducing A New Page… Problem-Solving (‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts…,” (for short) has a case-sensitive short-link ending “-7xs” and is now published.
See next inset block:
[That] page (#28901) I have named: How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov
I was talking on [the] post — NAATPN, Inc (2000ff, Total Current Assets, $0) and Caffee, Caffee and Associates PHF, Inc. (Hattiesburg MS, 2003ff, Total Assets $0, Tax Filings Questionable), and others trying to squeeze a California Race-Based Stop-Smoking Network (AATEN) into that recipe. .. [Published 8/28/2017 evening and as usual may be updated for clarity, basic copyediting, or length (splitting)//LGH] —— about how the 1996ff (PRWORA-related) events overlapped with my current blogging interest, the 1998 (Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement) events, and similarities (not to mention overlap) of involved networking nonprofits, along with the stories told the public omitting the details of Who’s Who and the gradual, (dare I say “progressive” in today’s political climate, but referencing the generic, not political, meaning of the word?) incremental erosion of local or even state-level accountability to citizens living within those state, as opposed to privatized special-interest nonprofits continually telling us all that the same are protecting against other privatized special-interest FOR profits as though these two were unrelated….
Again, the genealogy (so to speak) of that page, includes ITS originating post, on the NAATPN. So, the sequence is from NAAPTN {already published} ==> Page “How and When Problem-Solving..” ==>Post “Introducing New Page” + ===> before I publish either that Page (or the post introducing it), I sequestered my expressive/reflective section “About Holidays” which you are now reading.
The originating post (“Introducing a New Page…”) will contain some lead-in and concluding material from below for a “footprint,” as is my writing style.
Impediments / Other reasons for the delays:
SHARE THIS POST on...
Size Still Matters — So, How to Assess Who’s Got the Biggest (Most) Assets, Where Are They Stored, Who Manages the Most of OTHERs’ Assets (AUM), How Much are Americans Bankrolling Both, or Should We Be Measuring Something Else? [Started 8/24, Published 10/8/2017.]
Post title: Size Still Matters — So, Who’s Got the Biggest (Most) Assets, Who Manages the Most of OTHERs’ Assets (AUM), How Much are Americans Bankrolling Both, or Should We Be Measuring Something Else, like Donations? [Started 8/24, Published 10/8/2017] (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7up”)
This short, informative, and I admit at times flippant post still makes its points about distinguishing size of entities and ones that seek to present themselves as smaller (or larger) than they actually are. I also was going through some of the definitions of “syndicate” in reference to topics I was more focused on in August, 2017 (Tobacco-RICO-related), than I have been in September 2017. Those comments are on: Basic Definitions and Etymology (Roots) of the word ~syndicate. Syndicates can be formed for legal OR illegal purposes. Know the Difference! (8/26/2017, published Oct. 3) [short-link ends “-7vi”]
Still, with persistence, I find that topics covered in one context tend to come up in others, too. Some of these revelations (to me at least) continue to astound as to the casual tossing around of millions, or sometimes billions, of dollars from a given entity towards the cause, and from there to subcontractors, grantees, while being retained — or lost — as reflected on the corresponding huge and sometimes rapidly fluctuating, but always illuminating balance sheets of each entity.
Take for example the American Legacy Foundation later renamed “Truth Initiative Foundation(™).”
The post title, and this post, came from my feeling I should qualify the statement that the American Legacy Foundation (total gross assets around one billion, only formed in 1999, too) as being “monster-sized.” Obviously, with Robert Wood Johnson Foundation being ten times its size (and involved in some of the same projects) — or a center under the CDC which involved a tobacco-cessation nonprofit I was writing about (because it was among the USDOJ Intervenors in the RICO Case against Phillip Morris et. al…) which referenced this nonprofit — that center’s 2016 budget was $1.17 Billion, I learned — size is still “all relative” (only meaningful in comparison to other entities or some outside standard). (where it started, ca. August 29, 2017)
After publishing the post, on reviewing it more, I saw and decided to label its three basic sections, which may help people understand why those particular organizations. American Legacy Foundation (first section) relates to the ongoing recent blog themes re: big tobacco litigations as it intersects with HHS and agencies under it. The second and third sections below are:
- 2nd section: CENIC (Corp. for Educ. Network in Calif.) & CITY OF HOPE
- For non-Californians: other states surely have parallel organizations, and City of Hope typifies what comprises a major healthcare operation, with its component parts as shown on their financial statements. The takeaway here is, ALWAYS check for tax returns, but realize because of the networking, individual tax returns are rarely the whole story.
- 3rd section: Forbes’ 50 Largest Foundations 2016 and its #2 Charity: The Task Force for Global Health & Related /Similar Orgs. associated w/ Emory University in Georgia.
- Take-away here includes the tendency of organizations that get big — often from public funds but not always — to form spinoff entities in later years, often on the exact same website.
- Emory University anchoring both Task Force for Global Health and (see that section) the famous “Carter Center” (named after former President Jimmy Carter and his wife) in effect clouds the types of in-kind medication donations, and in the latter case, millions every year targeted specifically to sub-Saharan Africa through the spin-off entity.
- Not reported here — but I will post: I found through looking at board members, another small but still “iffy” set of nonprofits run by an Emory University business (not Public Health) professor. From what the tax returns are telling me, this is a legitimate professor using tax-exemption for illegitimate purposes (i.e., simply paying less taxes, write-offs, etc.). That’s not what academic privileges are for, and has me even more curious about what else is going on in Georgia, and at this institution.
- Organizations also tend to copy each other’s behavior.
I believe all the topics are interesting in their own right, but as usual and as ever, am still promoting individual initiatives to look up and look at foundations, charities, and of course the direction of government programming (especially under HHS) over time. I found that even turning away for just a period — a year, a half year, two years — major developments that are NOT typically referenced in the mainstream media, OR the “alternate” media supposedly correcting mainstream (“alt-right” or “far left,” “progressive”), although once you start looking some of the big ones up, the connection to MSM and headline news will become more and more regular.
AMERICAN LEGACY FOUNDATION SECTION:
American Legacy Foundation funds as I recall came from the MSA Tobacco Litigation settlements, a process which had been driven by some of the organizations mentioned in the (see next link) post, which in part was also pushing for major HHS/NIH (Nat’l Institutes of Health) expansion especially for biomedical research, also for cancer.
My August 5, 2017 post (ca 15,500 words) has many details, images and documentations. I was studying some of the background of key organizations and of the related (driven by some of the same major players in this field) NIH funding expansions…because Congress appropriates the HHS (NIH is under HHS) funds, when I say “driven by,” I’m talking here about the ability of well-connected people and their well-funded organizations to influence Congress and specifically here regarding smoking cessation efforts on the basis of smoking causing cancer.
An Alternate Viewpoint on the Anti-Smoking / Smoking Causes Cancer! Campaign and its Syndicated (?) Backers incl. the Whiteheads, the Laskers, the NIH and the U.S. Congress (from SmokersHistory.com and Other Sources. See also Tobacco Lawsuits and 1998 MSA Settlement Funds ~~} American Legacy Foundation, now the so-called Truth Initiative®) (post started 7/31, published 8/5/2017) with case-sensitive short-link ending “-7na”
(Check out the closing paragraphs on the “Alternate Viewpoint” post…)
For a general “size” point of reference, I showed that back in 2002, the “ALF” managed to lose $35M by selling over $8B of securities — but then again, it also earned $54M** $16M from dividends and interest the same year. Then again, it spent $91.7M on “Other expenses” per its tax returns, of which (says the Form 990 detail) most ($87M) went to “Contract Services”.” The other major chunk of expenses that year were $32M of grants, the delegation of most ($27M) of them being presented at least as uploaded to the databse which gets them from the IRS, in virtually illegible form. Of another $4.2M (of those $32M) grants under the “sponsorship” category, the largest chunk went, unsurprisingly given the subject matter, straight to UCSF ($3.3M as I recall). Here’s that tax return, all of it, in pdf format:
**correction — double-checking the $54M quote, I see that referred to “unrealized gains” part of the return, not shown on Page 1 summary. This would’ve been shown in the financial statements. On the other hand, $54M of the $91M (“Other expenses) that year was shown going to a single contractor in Boston “Arnold Communications.”
Three images from within the FY2002 return and one from FY2003 showing a $46.8M gain from sale of securities.. Which securities, one wonders! Who is donating $8B worth of securities over such a short period (or possibly even within a single year).
ALF 2002 details some of the “sponsorship” grants — showing ca. ¾ ($3.3M of $4.2M) went to UCSF.
ALF FY2002 detail from a listing of $27M grants to others had been shrunk to below visibility, in explicably… and the entity is at this point only a few years old…
ALF FY2002, $87M in “Contract Services” is major “Other Expense” of $91M total.
American Legacy Fndtn FY2003, prior yr lost $35M selling over 8B assets; this year somehow they profited $46M. Where that many assets came from, I still don’t see reflected on tax returns.
The numbers we are dealing with over time are, by a normal person’s standards (supporting self, family, maybe contribution to charities, or saving for retirement, helping/hoping to send children to a decent college) are phenomenal — millions, hundreds of millions (regularly) and billions. Plural.
But within these there are still degrees of relative size, there are types of donations (for example, in one example below — actually two — among the $100M+donations (or close to it some years) of donations, were in-kind donations of drugs, medications and related inventories for use in, (Carter Center Collaborative, Inc.) primarily sub-Saharan Africa.
Another issue that came up as I looked for some of the “50 largest foundations” on different lists, besides how they were categorized, is what are actually membership dues (contributions, technically speaking) are classified on the Form 990s as “Program service Revenues” in one place, and contributions (same organization) in another. Also, in looking for “the largest” for some list — for example, Forbes had one — this often doesn’t take into account related organizations, which consideration of the tax returns would quickly show.
Here’s “American Legacy Foundation” (“Truth Initiative”) tax returns from that post:
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Legacy Foundation | DC | 2016 | 990 | 65 | $957,381,718.00 | 91-1956621 |
| American Legacy Foundation | DC | 2015 | 990 | 92 | $1,096,789,302.00 | 91-1956621 |
| American Legacy Foundation | DC | 2014 | 990 | 97 | $1,151,506,314.00 | 91-1956621 |
It’s hovering around $1B assets (Gross) now — but it had its hands on much more a dozen-plus years ago. See also my post published 8/19/2017 (continuation of this one) which may have more detail. I looked at this again recently, took more “screenprints” and am considering posting a separate page just on that year’s return, to emphasize — what’s really going on there? Why should the public be funding such an operation?
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Public Health Service Act Timelines since 1944 through Affordable Care Act of 2010 (Incl. contributing Bill S.4108, right before before National Cancer Act of 1971). See also Tobacco Control Act of 2009 and NIH-FDA-related updates, Like: TCORS’ (so far) 14 Regulatory Science Resource Centers, or NCATS (2012ff) to better Advance Translational Science; predictably with continued Big Tobacco Litigation (protesting First Amendmt. Violations promoted by Tobacco Control Act of 2009) — and let’s not forget UCSF’s Multi-million-dollar, NIH- or FDA-sponsored: Centers, Institutes, and Famous Anti-smoking Professor. [Publ. Oct. 7 2017]
This post follows logically from October 3rd’s, which was called:
This post is called: Public Health Service Act Timelines since 1944 through Affordable Care Act of 2010 (Incl. contributing Bill S.4108, right before before National Cancer Act of 1971). See also Tobacco Control Act of 2009 and NIH-FDA-related updates, Like: TCORS’ (so far) 14 Regulatory Science Resource Centers, or NCATS (2012ff) to better Advance Translational Science; predictably with continued Big Tobacco Litigation (protesting First Amendmt. Violations promoted by Tobacco Control Act of 2009) — and let’s not forget UCSF’s Multi-million-dollar, NIH- or FDA-sponsored: Centers, Institutes, and Famous Anti-smoking Professor. (short-link ends “-7Iq” with “I” being a capital “i” as in, commonly used for the first person, singular, pronoun)
Or: Timeline of Public Health Service Act since 1944 sets “Dance of Legislation” re S.4108 in historic context, including shortly before National Cancer Act. See also more recent Tobacco: Legislation, and TCORS (14 New FDA-funded Centers managed by the ODP, under NIH) and, as ever, with substantial Input and Output courtesy the famous anti-smoking Professor/Dr. (PhD not MD)/Author/Principal Investigator at UCSF!
Or: Speaking of Big Money for Big Systems Transformation to Control Big Tobacco, see also more recent Tobacco Act Updates, NIH/ODPC’s 14 New Resource Centers (TCORS) incl. at UCSF, by way of FDA, and Business Opps for Linking Software Semantics Firms to Translated More Research, Faster, into Practice (CTSI at UCSF, funded by NIH coordinated under NIH by NCATS)!
Or (10/7/2017 version): “…not to mention NIH’s NCATS (2012ff) to better Advance TRANSLATIONAL Science, not to mention ongoing Big Tobacco Litigation over First Amendment Violations, and let’s not forget UCSF and the Prolific Professor Glantz.
An appropriate title may be a lost cause. Perhaps “Read this!” might work better….
Researching and writing it up was fun and further deepened my appreciation for anyone who dares stand up and ask some hard questions about how long we may expect this expansion and control of anything remotely unhealthy to be justified as up for centralized control of its use in commerce… I learned that even some of the involved scientists at some of the centers were quitting over the disregard for basic science and the headlong rush from research to results.
Not reflected in this title — towards the bottom, I also took a look at how decisions at the international (WHO) level obligated members states — and the USA is one — to enact legislation for stated goals at the “National, regional and local levels.” In this world view, national borders are the senemy — but within the US, an increasingly expanded HHS continues to claim that the private sector (i.e., cigarette and tobacco product manufacturers) are the bad guys…
You’ll see the post divides roughly into two parts — where I originally started it (second half) and where I elaborated and provided some background information on the various acronyms within the title — which represent responses in part to the most recent tobacco act updates. In the bottom half (also not able to be squished into the title) I looked closer at how to facilitate the”CTSI” at UCSF for Professor Stephen A. Glantz, the semantic categorizing and extracting software must have had access to publications on line — which brought me again to “CENIC.org” and its “CalREN” project.
There are two “Read More” links in this post, so don’t miss the rest of the post by not clicking on the second one! It’s about 12,600 14,000 words long. Tags were added after publication.
ACRONYMS from the Title of this Post and within it:
TCORS = “Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science,” which is not to be confused with basic, medical, or any other kind of science. These centers are not AT NIH, but they are coordinated by — well let’s quote the first paragraph of the NIH website, then from the FDA website. From the NIH website under “Prevention.NIH.gov”
P50 Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science (TCORS), RFA-DA-13-003
The Tobacco Regulatory Science Program, located in the NIH Office of Disease Prevention, coordinates the trans-NIH collaborative effort with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products to conduct research that is needed to ensure that U.S. tobacco regulatory actions and activities are based on sound and relevant scientific evidence. The P50 Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science (TCORS) are the centerpiece of this NIH-FDA collaboration.
Researching and writing this post, I at first thought there were only 14 TCORS centers, however the “P50” designation may mean that the 14 centers (including one at UCSF headed by the professor referenced in the title) are only a subset of a larger number, perhaps 50. Or perhaps not. It’s just not immediately obvious.. or explained…. typical HHS!!
What “P50” as a designator refers to obviously it has some meaning to those using the term. However, that we should probably start using the term, is implied… Fourteen centers are named (and no others), however it simply doesn’t equate those fourteen centers with “The P50 Tobacco Centers…” It says, fourteen have been funded.
Question: Is there any limit on how many such (P50 Tobacco) centers may exist in the future or how much is being spent on them?
Or on how many new categories of scientific-sounding phrases involving the word “clinical” and of course modifying the noun “science” can be devised to say “we want to speed up drug production and delivery,” get even better at telling people what’s healthy and unhealthy behavior, and forcing them to pay (whether through taxes supporting federal agencies, or taxes on cigarettes — or both — and to the point those efforts are simply in violation of basic rights of persons (including corporations), to defend themselves through on-going litigation by the well-endowed industry) to develop better ways to modify their unhealthy behaviors… ?
“Translational” wasn’t exactly a new term to me (although NCATS is a new center within NIH) but REGULATORY science? (the science of control and persuasion??)
Fourteen TCORS, made up of scientists with a broad range of expertise (e.g., epidemiology, economics, toxicology, addictions, and marketing) have been funded. More information about each of these fourteen TCORS is found below: {{I also shows images on the 14, from this same page, much further below in the post}}:
Other clicks on this page (on “Tobacco Regulatory Science Program”) describe the FDA-NIH partnership as having been established in 2013, which is after the NCATS:
Tobacco Regulatory Science Program (TRSP)
Located in the NIH Office of Disease Prevention (ODP), the Tobacco Regulatory Science Program (TRSP) coordinates* the trans-NIH collaborative effort with the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) to conduct research to support its regulatory activities over tobacco products. Established in 2013 through an interagency partnership with the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products in 2012,** TRSP coordinates the collaborative research effort across the NIH with the FDA CTP.
**Thanks for “clarifying” that it was “established in 2013. through a partnership… in 2012…” Where are their copyeditors?
*”TRSP … coordinates”: Again, “programs” don’t coordinate, but the people or entities that run them, do. A named “program” simply labels the work product, whether it’s from one entity, or a partnership between entities. Example: “Center for Court Innovation” (see recent post on “Collaborative Justice/Problem-solving Courts”) is a partnership, and a label to describe the joint operations (activities) of one major government entity — the NYS Unified Court System and another also major private one — Fund for the City of New York.
So program names are for promotional purposes and to direct others thinking, including towards anything special, shiny, or new, while in general, the huge size of the underlying entities continue to, continually, expand, and periodically restructure or reorganized. My point is to continue pointing out the underlying entities behind the programs, especially when they are major public institutions, like HHS.
Here (TRSP), it sounds like one entity — the NIH Office of Disease Prevention (staff and leadership) is coordinating the TRSP which obviously involves communications with the FDA, (<-Investopedia, a short paragraph; Wikipedia, incl. a timeline); which has been around since 1906 to administer the Food and Drug Act
(Question: Since when did TOBACCO become either a food or a drug? How does this interact or relate to something quite different — but containing the word “Tobacco” — the ATF/Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, which goes as far back as to collecting for the Revolutionary War Debt (see “Allgov.com” on the ATF)?) …
