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

Assembling the Pieces: [1] AFCC Conference Diamond (top) Sponsor “Avirat” (2001 MN, later in UK, product “OurFamilyWizard(™)”) found promoting [2] “Family Works, Inc.” (last found registered in Oregon, running “ParentingWisely(™)”) which probably profits ℅ royalties from [3] “Center For Divorce Education, Inc.” (Ohio Legal Domiciled Nonprofit at the same Ashland, Oregon, address, under same CEO, running “Children In Between(™) “) which takes (for Out-of-State + Spanish-Speaking Parents) Court-Ordered Parent Education Business from [4] Cuyahoga County, Ohio’s Domestic Relations Court’s “Special Circumstances, Rule 34” (1994ff). (Short-link ends “-9lB” and the middle character is a small “L” not the number “1”) This link and full title will be posted again further below. Post as published is just under 12,000 words.

(How do you think I keep my own posts straight after nine years and almost 800 of them — by total recall and three-word reminders or by placing as many clues in the title as possible to the contents resulting in outrageously long, but memorable [to me!] titles?)

---

Don’t shoot the messenger. I didn’t make this mess.  I’m just untangling and translating some of it.

See nearby image: My last two posts have background on this (mess) and explain why I haven’t dropped the topic yet. (Red Flag for RICO situations evident as well as a prime example of classic court-connected programming). If these two posts aren’t still showing under the widget to the right (i.e., if you’re reading this post months later, knocking them off the “Last Few [10] Posts” list), to access those two posts easily, use this blog’s “Archives” (calendar widget near top right): set it to December, 2018, and click on Dec. 11 or 7, which display on the calendar as having links. The “Most Recent Posts” widget displays dates automatically; Archives links to them automatically;I don’t know why they are one day off from each other. You can also use the links I added to the nearby image caption.  

The first of these two, ‘A Substantial Background Check and History,” (posted separately Dec. 12 but written almost a year earlier and originally published then on my extensive Front (Home) Page) has a section on “Avirat” and court-mandated consumption of its digital-platform product (OFW).

The second post shown in nearby image, “The Public/Private Nor-For-Profit/For Profit…” (posted Dec. 8) focuses on the nonprofit “Center for Divorce Education” (“CDE”) as related to the presumably for-profit (NOT tax-exempt) “Family Works, Inc.” (“FWI”) being also at the same Oregon address In this dynamic duo, the nonprofit is legal-domicile Ohio and the other one, at this point, I can’t say in what form or where it still exists…).{{**}}

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

{{**Later, I found it (?) back in Ohio.. Searchable at the Secretary of State Business Search website}}.  Its single incorporator (Don A. Gordon) and the only filings shown are: 1997, 1999, and again in April, 2018, then June 2018.  I knew Ohio didn’t require annual filings — but only once every about twenty years??)   Typo in Entity # corrected.  Correct Entity# is “975105,” it formerly displayed “971505 .” I realize the slideshow (image gallery) format is sometimes hard to see details on, which is why I’ve also provided a link so people may repeat the search on-line themselves from the Secretary of State website, and view whichever pdf images are also available there (recommended!).//LGH Image gallery added Jan. 14; typo in FWI Ohio Business ID or Entity# corrected Jan. 16, 2019 }}

---

To know whether or even approximately how much revenues stream through CDE through court-mandated referrals (in many different states) to FWI, or separately to FWI directly OR through nonprofits supported by social services federal grants, or federal grants to states, one would have to also find some of those government entities accounting trail that handles those types of grants or that type of programming.

In this post, while I just picked one of many county entities that CDE apparently counts on for its business, I couldn’t even find that county’s CAFRs (comprehensive annual financial report), although the county website freely admits it’s obligated to produce them and submit to a higher authority (the “GFOA.”). It doesn’t admit, in the same paragraphs, that the public might deserve access to these or have an interest in reading them.. It sounds to me, then, that generally speaking, this topic tends to on closer look, run through a leaky circuitry whose overseers are less than interested in talking about such leaks, or plugging them, or that the public should even be aware such leaks may characterize the system overall.

In the process of writing the Dec. 8 post, I found yet another “MIA” entity, “Solutions for Families,” run by one of the CDE board members P. Leslie Herold, Ph.D., in San Bernardino, and posted on it also.  This one became “MIA” voluntarily (voluntarily dissolved shortly after registering) without telling the public (on its website) where it might have resurfaced legally.  Nevertheless as a named program with the specific named provider, it received an AFCC award.   These types of things surface through following up on Board of Directors involvements or descriptions on any organization:

P. Leslie Herold’s description on the website freely acknowledges his AFCC involvement and names his organization which I confirmed, is shown as a provider on at least Riverside Superior Court website.  His company also no longer shows as a registered LLC in California; I don’t know its current status or whereabouts… Religious proclivity (Christian) is evident on the website…Notice the next board member (from Colorado) referenced will help people once they’ve completed the “Children In Between” program…

For even more background context on the situation I’m describing here, see also my earlier posts this year on “FamiliesChange” websites in various states. Writing them originally led me to this information, when I just looked up two CDE directors’ co-authored books, being promoted on a State Judicial Council website! along with several other known AFCC professionals’ books regardless of quality or whether self-published or by some respectable house (like Oxford University Press), as suggested resources for parents.  If I locate the exact post, I’ll link to it here also, otherwise search for the rather uniquely spelled name (I learned it’s Scottish) “Arbuthnot” on this blog or posts with reference to “FamiliesChange.”

---

 

Again, I did not make this multi-state, missing-registration, cross-country (in fact “Across-The-Pond” as to Avirat companies) mess, but if you want a substantial list of who did, look through this blog’s Table of Contents (browse post titles 2014, 2016, 2017 and if I get it out soon, 2018), follow me on Twitter (more active since spring 2018 though have been on it since 2012) and (or) click on the policy-, grants-program number-, organization- or standard family court reform advocacy bad-habit-specific hashtags I use there, such as #ArguingPAS, #ArguingGardner, #1996PRWORA, #1994VAWA, #1984FVPSA*, #PASG, of course #AFCC, #NCJFCJ, #DVLEAP (smaller nonprofit based at GeorgeWashington Univ with Domestic Violence Clinic), #HMRF #Reunification #OvercomingBarriers**  and several more not in common use — like #CFDA93086, #CFDA93597), or survey the landscape yourself.

The difference is attention, and language and with the language concepts (awareness).

---

REGARDING “*” and “**” to that comment:  This much fine-print footnote”*” left up top here is an example of the type of information I feel is important to keep in mind and wish that more people would discuss when complaining about problems with PAS, DV, custody, the family courts (in any jurisdiction), fathers’ rights, or even (it comes up) bitching about the “Violence Against Women Act” with no reference to Welfare Reform.

Let’s have fewer discussions in apparent ignorance (failing to mention) of the substance and the circuitry involved.  Let’s find out how much on “our” side or “their side” of any cause knows about some of the things I’m showing here.  Just because it doesn’t all fit on a single Tweet or Twitter thread (and it barely fits on a single post as you can see here) doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be talked of or even referenced.

And let’s not base so much of our personal “right and wrong” values systems based on chosen experts to fight our battles (pro or con).  Remember for every chessboard, there are players (whether a computer or a live human being).  The real actors and strategists are NOT the pieces on the board, although those piece certainly do represent a hierarchy, with the most expendable, those on the front lines, the pawns.  Those who are tired of seeing their children, neighbors, etc. sacrificed like pawns should quit acting like pawns.

---

Meanwhile, whether or not anyone wants a list of who helped make this mess, or who did not help disentangle or translate it, this is my post title:

Assembling the Pieces: [1] AFCC Conference Diamond (top) Sponsor “Avirat” (2001 MN, later in UK, product “OurFamilyWizard(™)”) found promoting [2] “Family Works, Inc.” (last found registered in Oregon, running “ParentingWisely(™)”) which probably profits ℅ royalties from [3] “Center For Divorce Education, Inc.” (Ohio Legal Domiciled Nonprofit at the same Ashland, Oregon, address, under same CEO, running “Children In Between(™) “) which takes (for Out-of-State + Spanish-Speaking Parents) Court-Ordered Parent Education Business from [4] Cuyahoga County, Ohio’s Domestic Relations Court’s “Special Circumstances, Rule 34” (1994ff). (Short-link ends “-9lB” and the middle character is a small “L” not the number “1”) This link and full title will be posted again further below. Post as published is just under 12,000 words.

(How do you think I keep my own posts straight after nine years and almost 800 of them — by total recall and three-word reminders or by placing as many clues in the title as possible to the contents resulting in outrageously long, but memorable [to me!] titles?)

---

I see the verbiage, I look for the entities, I notice certain patterns, and I post them. Even my titles often have explanatory phrases: category labels, sometimes add a year of origin (time), a legal domicile (geopolitical place) and distinguish entity from the product or service an entity is selling (a program is not a “person”) (type). Those make for long titles.  If the language were more universal, I wouldn’t need to keep repeating them; they’d be understood by now.

Unfortunately these patterns are only seen and identified in a language which differs so much from the propaganda and the chosen fields to debate in public, it apparently seems to be not just foreign vocabulary, but also foreign syntax and sounds and with it, concepts.

It’s not really foreign — it’s central to how we do business in America, and how governments and businesses interact and keep track of each other.  There’s a dissociation issue; the public just doesn’t speak the same language as our rulers, leaders, chosen guides, and representatives.

For example, rights under private sector differ from rights under public, and rights under the public are also subject to limits.  When the system involved is (by design) full of both private and public interests (both sectors have employees with mortgages, families to support, etc.), determining and assigning responsibility is an uphill fight.

Government entities [I’m speaking, USA, the country I’m most familiar with!] must register and produce financial reports, with balance sheets — they tax, they employ force to control people, they are supposed to give an account.  But people do not have rights under all created entities because some legally established government entities (joint power authorities, etc.) cross jurisdictions and exist to interact primarily with the federal governments, or other non-local governments (joint power authorities, etc.) for the purpose of a dedicated function or task. This factor goes back at least to the Tennessee Valley Authority, and I’ve posted on this functionalism (vs. legal authority) way to induce people to forfeit rights piecemeal over the decades, in favor or regionalism is an intentional tactic for establishing world, not local, government.

While in California (I’m no longer there), I’ve looked up and at articles of organization of many of these, in part on behalf of a friend interested in real estate development in a certain area.  I’m no real estate developer (and have never even owned any real estate): I track government entities and nonprofits under the general interest areas of this blog.  It’s evident that residents, citizens are NOT represented (do NOT have a direct voice) in many JPA operations or financing, no matter how directly or deeply it may (and does) impact the neighborhoods and infrastructures of the neighborhoods where people live, or how much their own contributions to the authorizing government entities (i.e., income tax, sales taxes, etc.) enabled them.

Like government entities, business entities have to state a home domicile and are assigned (US) an EIN#; tax-exempt ones, unless they are specially-exempt, have to ALSO make available to the public their financials, and stay current on their filings.  If they operate in multiple states, only ONE can be called home, and registration must be maintained in those other states, too. BUT OFTEN THEY DON’T.  AND THEY’RE TOO MANY AND ARE NOT ALWAYS FORCED TO CORRECT COURSE.  ENFORCEMENT IS PARTIAL, AND ERRATIC.  THERE ARE SOMETIMES CONFLICTS OF INTEREST WITH THE ENFORCING AGENCY WHEN THE NONPROFIT IS HANDLING GRANTS TO/FROM ITS DEPARTMENT (i.e., JUSTICE) OR AGENCY.

Looking these up are starting places to find “WTF” is up whether on the birds-eye or the organization-specific scale.  In this post, I continue showing some of those filings, looking up ones I haven’t found yet, and posting some I have.

I ‘ve picked here a classic case of an older, established public/private connection:  the public (government) institution (Domestic Relations Courts) forced, on parents seeking custody modifications, consumption of trademarked curricula to only TWO chosen providers: one for in-state and another for on-line (out of state) and/or Spanish-speaking parents.  The in-state provider (not dealt with in this post) isn’t named by its business entity either.  I looked it up under a behavioral health organization large enough to make detailed tracking also burdensome.

The out of state provider (Center for Divorce Education) in its own words has been involved since the 1980s and the Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Domestic Relations Court, also in its own words, by special rule, since 1994, ongoing.   Separately, and from another home state (Minnesota) Avirat, Inc. (with related other businesses in Minnesota and related entity in the UK) having only started in 2001 is more recent but still highly leveraged (already parents have protested and lost those protests IN court to avoid court-mandated consumption of ITS product), and positioned to expand rapidly, exploiting close relationships with people and organizations (including AFCC) with leadership either IN or closely related to family courts.  SOME states or areas only legitimized (created) family court divisions as late as the 1990s…. (Kentucky and Maryland come to mind.  I haven’t looked them all up).

Can you see why a closer look at this, as a “core sample drill-down” might illustrate a larger problem, and lead to some demands for accountability — and stopping programs which refuse to maintain accountability? Can you yet see why it’s NOT about individual judges, family lawyers, or custody evaluators.  The system is organized privately and connected (hooked up) to the public ongoing cash-flow system, and polished and presented as in the public interest.  It’s also not even about individual, single nonprofits — it’s about types of nonprofits specifically positioned to take court-ordered business.  Regardless of results, the money is delivered up front in the training; through running people through classes and, apparently, running civil servants through training in how to run the classes.  That income stream IS a motivator for the program providers; even the advertising falls far short of claiming to produce any results.  It just claims to set the potential for indirect benefit to (the public, to parents, or to children).  I quote it below…

The technology-based, downloadable, digital (i.e., internet-based) provision of services once set up has LOW overhead and HIGH profits, and this “parent education” situation melds nicely with existing (since the 1990s — USA’s “Welfare Reform” decade) and continuing to date existing “marriage/fatherhood promotion” campaigns which ALSO pull business from the family court / social services / child support sectors to justify the programming.

In addition, especially since the SON of the late President George H. W. Bush, i.e., former President George W. Bush, formerly Governor of Texas, in 2001 (basically his first significant act on assuming office — within the month: Jan. 29, 2001) issued two executive orders inviting and restructuring executive-branch federal government to better accommodate “faith-based” interests obtaining federal funding to providing public services.  This came in the immediate aftermath of a major restructuring of the social service act of 1934 (i.e., in the systems-changing period affecting ALL states of 1996 Welfare Reform Act (“PRWORA”) which specifically targeted single mothers as a social scourge and public debt burden… These U.S. Presidential executive orders further pried open the floodgates to run public-supported (through Congressional appropriations to HHS, still as I understand it $150M a year EVERY year) marriage/fatherhood programming through churches; a natural match, and an area already familiar especially to evangelical circles (such as Focus on the Family) with massive media experience and selling product and on-line curricula directly through churches.  Those in on the start of this stood to profit the most.

Taking all three sectors together — Family Court-Connected; Marriage/Fatherhood Social Services-Connected, and in general conservative Evangelical Christian circles already expert moving inventory and services through churches and among religious people (affinity marketing, moral duty to contribute and volunteer) — many have already been running private programs for private profits (but through private NONprofit tax-exempt organizations) using a variety of Top-Down, Outside-In policies to take advantage of existing public-supported and public-institution distribution networks (courts, schools, social services, child support enforcement offices, prisons, …) AND private.   In the case of churches and other religious organizations, often not just tax-exempt but also further privileged by being exempt from even having to file normal tax returns like non-religious entities) nonprofits.

The amount of funds changing hands in the name of the poor and the public benefits + The amount of such funds or alleged funds which are lost in the maze of distribution networks, often with owners well aware that most people will never bother to track them down, if they even could or would =/= good news for the public.  From my observation (over time), the situation is phenomenally widespread.  It’s commonplace and it’s rapidly expanding while the same people and entities involved speak more and more emphatically about how concerned they are for the poor, for the oppressed, for inequality, for injustice and so forth — from their tax-exempt privileged status.

---

---

SPECIFIC TO THIS POST:

Being now made aware of just a few providers (care of just two entities, Center for Divorce Education and Family Works, Inc, with overlapping ownership), and I’m flagging JUST ONE county’s referrals, look at where CDE claims to be operating from some of the largest counties in the following states, and (second image of these two) targeting which kinds of professionals:

 

To track this down would mean — with little help from CDE, obviously — and see even if the claims are valid — to figure out WHICH counties in EACH of the above states has a domestic relations (or other) court referring business to CDE and then finding out, somehow (researching contracts, grants, expenditures at the fund level) just how much business has taken place.

Again, it seems that the nonprofit CDE major expense over time is paying “royalties” and, while it’s not absolute, most likely to the for-profit “FWI” owned 100% (at least Form 990 I found for CDE) by Donald A. Gordon (which the tax returns do at least mention).

But FWI is no longer currently registered (as an LLC or Corp) in Oregon, the street/entity address shown on its website.

Seems to me that an UNregistered entity with website saying it’s in Oregon isn’t likely to be worrying about being forced to pay corporate taxes to any locality, especially when such income is coming at least in part (and which % is an unknown) through a nonprofit legally domiciled in Ohio  and/or through an indeterminate number of other nonprofits funded in part (small part, or the major part) by social service agencies in other states or counties.

It also looks like odd efforts to conceal both FWI’s AND CDE’s (look at its website “Contact Page” — no street address or state shown) actual legal domicile are in place, AND in this post (while it was in draft) I also discovered, and show you below, that just ONE county (Cuyahoga, obviously) has made it nearly impossible to locate their required CAFR reports which might reflect amounts allocated to the domestic relations courts (or whether these are county-funded), unlike other large counties in the state, one of which I also check for comparison.

WHY might all this that be?  For public benefit?  What about the benefit of accountability TO the public at least equal to means to manipulate and exploit?

Naturally, nonprofits will sponsor the initiatives and programs, and whoever is owed the royalties makes out like royalty.  Nonprofit involvement is essential to mitigating tax liability that’d be shown up if it were simply run direct to the for-profit providers.

---

PROGRAMS: In this post title there are three (3) programs referenced — “OurFamilyWizard®” “Parenting Wisely®”  and “Children In Between.®”  I’m only discussing the Parenting Wisely® program’s claims (as advertised).

ENTITIES: There are four (4) private entities (if you count “AFCC” mentioned in passing; and count all “Avirat” entities as just one —  as I counted, there are about four in Minnesota and one in the UK…) and four (4) government entities (two states, one county, and a local municipality in Oregon, “Ashland”).  NOTE:  a Domestic Relations Court isn’t a separate government entity, but part of a larger one.

• (Private/Business AFCC, Avirat [multiple registrations in two countries], Family Works, Inc., Center for Divorce Education;  my only qualifier being, I can no longer find “Family Works, Inc.” as a legally extant (registered) business in Oregon, where, its website says, its entity address still is.
• Governments: Cuyahoga County, the states of Ohio and Oregon, and assuming it’s incorporated, Ashland, Oregon…  Please notice, the Domestic Relations Court would not be a separate government entity, but likely part of the County.

What’s more, among the private entities, some are nonprofit, and some are not, as follows:

~~>Private entities AFCC, mentioned only in passing and in reference to Avirat, and Center for Divorce Education are nonprofit and should have tax returns for public viewing.  I looked at the latter’s Forms 990 in another post and am not returning to them again in this one.  That said, the “anomalies” on those 990s told me to flag the situation for follow-up.  RE: the former, AFCC, a good part of this blog is about AFCC, so I’m not looking at its nonprofits in this post either.. It’s been covered repeatedly already. It’s relevant to know that Avirat, Inc. (misleadingly characterized as its own product, “Our Family Wizard”) has been featured as a big AFCC supporter. TO see it also forwarding traffic to Family Works, Inc. is another indicator of its standards and associations.

~~>Avirat (both here and the UK) and Family Works, Inc. (at least as originally shown) are for-profit (not tax-exempt). Where that leaves a possibly not-registered for-profit taking court-referral business and (aided and abetted?) by Avirat websites sounds like, possibly, tax-evasion.

When I last looked at the tax returns of Center for Divorce Education (several images are seen on my Dec. 8, 2018 post, link above), those available, it was getting plenty of business, and of that business (of those revenues), for “expenses,” funneling most of it — several hundred thousand dollars in a single year — to “royalties.” (Its classes are being run in several states– see images above stating in which ones — and as to Family Works, Inc., the Center for Divorce Education is unlikely to be the only source of royalties or income.

How this affects us — when government entities are helping drive (Cuyahoga County) or maintain hospitality towards (Ashland, Oregon) such entities.  Certainly not in protection from scams, frauds, or exploitation.  Perhaps more public funds should be allocated fiscal transparency, rather than fiscal obfuscation.  Differentiating our parental behaviors as whether low- or high-conflict….and perfecting behavioral modification tactics (at public expenses) I believe should be low-priority.

Punish real crime — not thought crimes.  Those engaged in criminal behavior will figure it out quickly enough.  Right now, what it seems they’ve figured out is how NOT to get punished for real crimes.

Any government entity should be either filing a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. While I’m here, I’m going to look for the ones mentioned above to further prove my point — let’s keep which is which straight — ALWAYS! — when they come up in conversation.

And let’s talk more about the court-connected corporations whose owners “just so happen” to be AFCC involved, OK?  AFCC isn’t that large, and it’s not representative of the US populations (chapters aren’t even registered one per state and in all territories and the District of Columbia, but its members seek to run ALL the nations’ courts as to policy and align those policies with those in other countries.  How “patriotic” and in the interest of “justice” as defined by the laws of the land — whether US laws, Canadian, UK’s or Australia’s and New Zealands, all of which countries have something the USA doesn’t (i.e., a very special relationship with a certain Monarch).

Show and Tell:  My quick-search for Four CAFRs of Government Entities uncovered at least one Wild Goose Chase (at the county level):

• State of Ohio, for Fiscal Year-Ending June, 2017 (I don’t believe FY2017’s, for the year that ended June 30, 2018, is out yet).  A good read, it’s still over 200 pp.  Notice, there’s an Introduction, TOC, Notes, and plenty of help deciphering the contents for anyone with a high-school or GED-level English literacy which should (I hope) include the ability and willingness: <>to look up any word not defined clearly enough or reader doesn’t understand <>to distinguish big numbers from smaller, <> to recognize which words (“Revenues”) represent PLUSES for the state (and minuses for those providing the State with those revenues) and which (“Expenses”) represent MINUSES for the State (and PLUSES for someone else, assuming the recipients really received them) and <>to understand that  at all points, more than one set of financial statements matter.  For every “TO” claimed a corresponding “FROM” should exist on another balance sheet and revenues|expenses statement, and vice versa.   This is true also in the private sector, or interactions between private and government, or Government-to-Government. etc. At all points, there should be the capacity to fact-check claims.  Simple example:  Sometimes nonprofits claim to have distributed at a certain time (or, governments grants, even an “action issue date”)! Sure it’s extra work, but sometimes I go looking.  By looking I’ve discovered it’s not unusual to find major amounts missing:  $250K, at least once in this blog I’ve documented $10M “missing in transition.”
• Cuyahoga County page describing the requirement to produce an annual CAFR — after about a half hour of looking (incl. time to make, caption, upload (to the blog library) and download (from blog library to this post) images of where I looked here), I see that this county’s CAFRs (for any year) are, so far, “Missing in Action” despite admissions they exist SOMEwhere... Maybe I should contact the GFOA.  See nearby, captioned screenprints! — but (I just checked) the same page offers up several other reports — not the CAFRS. It doesn’t even say where (on the website) to find them!

---

Cuyhoga County MIA CAFR Discussion:

I even see a “PAFR 2006” and, not having heard of “PAFR” understand that means “Popular Annual Financial Report” (with a certificate by the same GFOA who awards certificates for great “CAFRs”) taken from the pages of the former (YE2005) Cuyahoga County’s “CAFR” — which isn’t linked to either internally or externally on this web page.Something tells me we’re not supposed to really get down to those CAFRs in this county, while asserting that the county is of course, concerned (greatly) about accountability… I wonder if other Ohio Counties are this “coy” about their CAFRs — “Do you REALLY want it?  Then come and get it — if you can... and if you do, we want your name and address…No free, anonymous downloading from OUR web pages!“Here’s yet another link (on the County Gov’t website, page with similar appearance to the large image nearby for this county) where you can find plenty of reports — just NOT the CAFR.  Amazingly, through a Google search for this county’s CAFR, I found CAFRs of several component units — several cities, a school district, a community (charter) school district, and even “NEORSD.org” (NorthEast Ohio Regional Sewer District) CAFRs — just not the actual county’s.As several of these were showing the website “OhioAuditor.gov (as opposed to …CuyhogaCounty.us/en-US/..) I then went looking there, and discovered there’s a “Hinkle Internet-based Reporting” system in place for certain entities. It’s possible the county is uploading directly there, and a good bloodhound (with a faster computer than mine) would’ve found it by now.  After reading the basic information and drop-down menus at the Ohio Auditor of Systems (“AoS”) website and about the “Hinkle” application, I found: 1) a listing of required financial statement components (EXCEPT an independent auditor’s or any auditor’s “transmittal letter”) that mimics — pretty exactly — the CAFR components I’ve become familiar with.  It just doesn’t call it “Comprehensive Annual Financial Report” — just DOES include several other acronyms, some of which I don’t known (and without any translation “in the public interest” and if this doesn’t answer one’s questions — which in my case, it didn’t — you can — and I was right to conjecture — submit (fully identifying yourself in the process) and on-line question..At about this time I am remembering from my earlier posts that within this county or FOR it (and I DNR which but I believe it was within it) the Canadian (!) entity “Justice Education Society of British Columbia” had been contracted to provide “helpful” websites for a number of United States state or county government  courts. Only California, that I’m aware of, incorporated such websites (along with free promotion of AFCC authors leading to my discovering this Cuyahoga County situation in the first place) under the url ending “Gov..” — the other ones seemed to have websites ending “*.org” and have come up through the pro bono legal service providers in each state (like Vermont).  So JUST perhaps there’s a reason for this season of “Just not available at the county level” financial reporting and waste of US Citizens who may want to know about it, personal time!Just for comparison, I arbitrarily looked at a list of other Ohio Counties, found a handy (icon-based) list of them by population, and picked one that showed similarly (large) population to Cuyhoga County’s — which was Franklin County (named after Benjamin Franklin) and containing the state capital, “Columbus” along with Ohio State University (which I’ve reported on, in view of several aspects of the blog, both fatherhood grants received, and, in Columbus, Ohio, the entities (including the state Children’s Trust) in “Ohio IPV Collaborative” (IPV = “Intimate Partner Violence,” with the general idea, preventing it) featuring David Mandel’s “Safe and Together” programming…From a website ending *.gov with only one false lead (a broken link on the top-level “Financial Reports” entry was easily corrected by removing a second “fiscal” in its web address, just a guess on my part) and from there, NOT hard to find the CAFRs, and below them, the PAFRs, up through (Year ending December 31) 2017… Here’s FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO’s CAFR YE 2017 It’s written very clearly.  While the website it’s on ends “*.com” I got to it through one ending: *.gov”

---

• State of Oregon’s latest CAFR accessed in just about three simple clicks — no problem! (website ending *.gov).  Such statements always provide useful information the reporting entity, including what other entities it does NOT report on.  Somewhat at random from the introductory (Transmittal Letter) section for Oregon, I’m posting some sample images below under “FOOTNOTE OREGON STATE CAFR YE2017 TRANSMITTAL LETTER EXCERPTS” at (or near) the bottom of this post.
• Ashland, Oregon’s latest CAFR “2017” was also a “piece of cake” to find: one Google search and two clicks.  The web page even has links to a 2017 CAFR for the Parks and Recreation, which I gather is not reported under the City’s statements.  For a sample of typical Table of Contents pages, see nearby images from Ashland’s latest one.

That leaves us out, of all four government entities with the only one not coughing up (easily) ANY of its CAFRs  the one also where the mandatory court-ordered parent education going to a “registration missing in action” for-profit “Family Works, Inc.” (or so it seems), and that’s one of the largest Ohio Counties, Cuyahoga.  Missing CAFRs is a big deal even when the citizens may not be clamoring to read them (as we’ve ALL been coached not to, let alone even know they exist): they still provide government-produced records for citizen accountability on use of what they’re being taxed for, here, down to the county level.  Definitely “make a note of it”!

---

Again, as I said above, unfortunately [these] patterns are only seen and identified in a language which differs so much from the propaganda and the chosen fields to debate in public, it apparently seems to be not just foreign vocabulary, but also foreign syntax and sounds and with it, concepts.It’s not really a foreign vocabulary — it’s central to how we do business in America, and how governments and businesses interact and keep track of each other.  …

Both types of entities (government, business), and both in collaboration with each other, often sponsor public campaigns for certain causes or goals.  That means types often are outspoken, have an on-line presence with web addresses, and sponsor publications.

So it only makes sense that consumers of this information, and people subject to various government policies, should, if they don’t already, understand how important it is to start speaking this language, and reading some of the basic financial declarations of, particularly, government entities to understand the policies affecting our lives.

I did. I had to start somewhere, even after years of working for (primarily the private sector, but sometimes IN the public sector, i.e., schools) corporations which required me to handle financial statements and multi-document projects and as a hired-hand (employee) seek to work efficiently and with respect to the organization’s or corporation’s bottom line.  I also had to in the private sector when self-employed, pay attention to my own “bottom line” which typically wasn’t that high above ground-level even before I married an abuser– but it was sustainable. It did pay basic bills. … Faced with evidence that SOMETHING was off in these courts, and having been given a few basic clues to start with, I continued looking, and as I looked, I wrote it up, providing a track record and means to compare across sectors and within sectors, and developments within specific organizations over time.  I started deciphering the fine print of tax returns even though that wasn’t my typical specialty (and there are still sections I need to understand better).  The thing is — at least I started,

…and I continued until I got to a point of beginning to understand and developing an instinct for the ethical character of organizations (and of the larger landscape) based on who was filing openly, staying on this side of state (or federal) laws to maintain registrations and produce reports, for size, age (of entity), related entities forming an official or unofficial enterprise (i.e., organization not easily identified as an organization, but functioning like one).

Or not….

Too many people never even start.  That is NOT good for general community well-being, and it’s not good for justice.

It means substantial, ongoing, dramatic, and widely resonating discussions are taking place in ignorance of (and with zero reference to) some of THE most basic indicators of any public, or private, or public/private initiative, available.  MOST of these go right back to why we are being taxed and why tax-exempt organizations are so prone to structuring and seeking to direct and control the lives of “low-income people” when they are entities are privileged with EXEMPTION from income tax (i.e., as corporate persons or businesses).

---

 

IN writing this post, although it mostly (except the Avirat page referring to Family Works, Inc.) wasn’t new territory to myself, I became better acquainted with a major part of the US Department of Health and Human Services, “SAMHSA” and its history, as well as the recent migration of a website referenced (on “Family Works, Inc.” home page, bottom), and submersion of a project under which its “ParentingWisely” was launched into (first time in 2012) Mental Health – State Prevention Grants (MH-SPG). I learned more about how our government is working and evolving within the largest federal grant-making agency.

Is that not worth a little time — and some useful information beyond just a single parent education program?

I think so and I’ll be posting on it soon (I hope…).

---

ASSEMBLING (some more of) the PIECES: AFCC conference sponsor “Avirat”* (Our Family Wizard(™)), Dr. Donald A. Gordon & Friends** (Family Works, Inc. & Center for Divorce Education), and, as previously reported, someone in charge at Cuyahoga County, Ohio’s Domestic Relations Court:***

*Now registered in the UK as well as Minnesota, USA**with at least one Traffic Director in place as a mandated parenting education — from only these two providers “or else” — by *** Administrative Judicial Rule #34 (1994ff as to the rule, DNK if from the start it was only these two providers).   As the post title also says, where “OH np” stands for “Ohio nonprofit”:

Assembling the Pieces: [1] AFCC Conference Diamond (top) Sponsor “Avirat” (2001 MN, later in UK, product “OurFamilyWizard®”) found promoting [2] “Family Works, Inc.” (last found registered in Oregon) which probably profits ℅ royalties from [3] “Center For Divorce Education, Inc.” (Ohio Legal Domiciled Nonprofit @ the same Ashland, Oregon address, under same CEO) which takes [4] Cuyahoga County, Ohio “Special Circumstances” “Rule34” (1994ff) (for Out-of-State + Spanish-Speaking Parents) Court-Ordered Parent Education Business.  (short-link ends “-9lB” and the middle character is a small “L” not the number “1”)

ABOUT THIS POST:  The situation above is so “out-there” but typical, I got sarcastic in describing it.

I wanted to post images (with links of course) to some Avirat website pointing readers to the “Family Works, Inc.” website, a situation I’ve recently posted on, as well as corporate filings for several (as I recall, FOUR different ones) Avirat-named entities (under the same people’s control or at the same addresses) found on Minnesota BLS (Business & Liens System) portal, plus the more recent one visible in the UK.  I’m also going to, somewhat, dis-assemble the verbiage on the Family Works, Inc. product promotion page (underneath those very large photos of happy parents and kids) and challenge the wording and the lack of documentation.

---

THIS IS A CONTINUATION POST ON AT THREE BASIC COMPANIES INVOLVED (ALL, AFCC-involved and Supportive) and how/where they also connect with a single Ohio Domestic Relations Court in Cuyahoga County, which contains Cleveland (i.e., Great-Lakes adjacent).

Find my previous posts covering on these topics at:

A section on “OurFamilyWizard® and Avirat is on a recent post migrated from my Front Page, and one featuring Center for Divorce Education (the nonprofit) and Family Works, Inc. (the for-profit currently “Missing-In-Action” as a registered business entity– maybe it’s now a dba somewhere, or an entity with legal registration outside Oregon with an Oregon “entity address”), which post also included samples of the tax returns showing that most expenses went to paying “Royalties” to an unknown source — probably Family Works, Inc. — and which admits that a director of the nonprofit, Donald A. Gordon (PhD), also owned 100% of Family Works, Inc.

 

And, this topic came up in posts on Reunification camps and on how the State of California’s Judicial Council Website now features cartoons (literally) designed by a Canadian Charity (Justice Education Society of B.C. / British Columbia) and listing helpful books which just so happen to be predominantly authored by known AFCC members, even when self-published by nonprofits run by AFCC members.  Those post titles will have some reference to “FAMILIESCHANGE.”

---

I’m posting the referral up front, and the international registrations for Avirat (in USA and UK) at the bottom, but inbetween also blow off some steam and express my incredulity in commentary on other situations and commonalities to this whole “thing” with the family courts. Why should such a public institution in such a large country be featuring directing traffic to privately-owned corporations for profit they might not have if operating in a more competitive marketplace?  Is that why we are taxed —  To divert funds through public institutions into private hands, systematically and without regulation as the practice increases — and then call that (psychologically) in the public interest because otherwise people’d be fighting longer and harder in the family courts (as if they aren’t now anyhow….)?

I also believe the greater leverage of complaint against such practice is that the courts are private and supported by public funds. I’d like to point out that in the UK, it seems that divorce and family disputes and proceedings NOT involving child protection or dependency, are (I believe — contact an expert to verify or disagree) — PRIVATE and it’s the ones involving child abuse and protection considered PUBLIC.  Deducing from various readings which come up on social media where the footnotes were quoting US experts (which is how they came to my attention).

In the USA, the family courts dealing with domestic violence (through off-roading) diminishes the criminal aspect of it, while giving opportunity to create other categories of crime based on psychological categories, diluting the field.  These separately created courts and dockets are opportunities to create new terminologies, practices, and values, which seems to be where membership groups of involved professionals (“international, interdisciplinary”) seem to congregate and position themselves as activist in more local jurisdictions.  It’s a common tactic in any systems-change agenda.  The coordination at first is less then evident until strongholds are obtained, after which connections (and the traps) become clearer.  (See also “spider webs…”)

https://www.ourfamilywizard.com/directory/familyworks-inc 

with “Homepage” link to: http://www.familyworksinc.com over “Filed under: Parenting Education”

Once on “Familyworksinc.com” under “Programs /Divorce Education” (drop-down-menu) the only “divorce education” program linked to is the related non-profit taking court-ordered business in (at least) Cuyahoga County, Ohio:

https://www.divorce-education.com,

---

FAMILY WORKS, INC.

Not exactly a subtle referral, or a modest claim.  “By targeting parents, our training programs are proven to significantly reduce child and adolescent behavior problems…and get to the core of child and teenage delinquency.”  This introductory claim is under the label “Familyworks Inc” (odd spacing, capitalization) but on an Avirat (“Our Family Wizard”) web page over a link to “Family Works, Inc.” (different capitalization and spacing).

Once on FamilyWorks, Inc’s home page, it’s clear there’s a STORE and operating on-line.  Under “Developer” link there, we’re right back to Donald A. Gordon, Ph.D. and his background.

Below the VERY large pictures at top of the page are two faint, link-less, no-footnotes paragraphs (missing a break between them, undated) with more undocumented and basically undated promotion using important-sounding words like “evidence” “research” and “skills-based” in association with broad-based, subjective (qualitative) claims of “improving parental communications” and eventually attempting to connect (in this promotion) the “communication skills learned in the programs” to a focus on creating (not even “creating”) successful outcomes which are in the best interest of their child(ren).”

As an introduction, Family Works, Inc’s Parenting Wisely is evidence, research, and skills-based.{*}  It holds the distinction of being the only online parent education course for families that is currently listed on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Registry for Evidence-based Programs and Practices. [[A LINK, A FOOTNOTE, AND  DATE SHOULD BE, BUT ISN’T, HERE]] Our work with family service agencies, probation officers, court appointed special advocates, counselors, therapists among others has shown that PW improves parental communications. [[A LINK OR FOOTNOTE CONNECTING TO PROOF OF THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE, BUT ISN’T HERE]] This allows parents to utilize the communication skills learned in the program to remain focused on creating successful outcomes which are in the best interest of their child(ren). We offer the curriculum in a variety of formats, as well as different versions for your target population. 

{*} This first sentence contains several grammar and punctuation mistakes. Just careless, or intentionally distracting? I didn’t even catch them first reading, focusing more on the content…which wasn’t much better:

• The words “evidence” and “research” should be hyphenated, as “skills-” is — all three in context modify “based.”  
• “Family Works, Inc’s”  lacks a period after the “Inc.”  The business name includes that “.”
• “Parenting Wisely” is a proprietary product (curriculum) name and should be distinguished by either quote or change of font from the business which runs the product. It isn’t.
• “As an introduction” is a phrase modifying what follows it.  However, there’s nothing “as an introduction” about “Parenting Wisely.”  The word “Introduction” as a title would’ve served (without grammar error), or a different construction where it might apply, i.e., “Let us tell you, as an introduction….”

The second sentence, besides lacking a reference (which is appropriate in any such claim) is also false — because the reference has expired, which I discovered later, looking it up.  NREPP is no longer in existence and has been moved to a similar but different ‘EBPP” website at SAMHSA. So the “currently” is in fact, not current.  With all the referral business, someone should’ve kept their websites current (as well as grammatically correct and punctuation error-free)… After all, they’re the wise teachers of a nations parents, right?

The paragraph is obviously aimed at users other than the parents — it talks about the parents in third person and “your target population” in second (direct address) person.

The promotion assumes parents: did not have the skills taught in the program beforehand (any screening for that, or if one does and the other doesn’t it’s assumed that both don’t?) and cannot even claim that the parents, after sitting through the program DO use them. It only claims that it “allows” them to.  That’s a lot of undocumented and dubious-benefit claims and doesn’t even document which “successful outcomes” in the best interests of their children it’s referring to, although we can assume given the source it has something to do with reducing family “conflict.”

You may be aware that all across the country, Parents and Family Service Agencies are using Parenting Wisely.

The program has proved to be an excellent resource for parents with at risk children as well as those who are interested in improving their parenting skills. {**} Recently, our research has shown [[ANOTHER UNDOCUMENTED, FOOTNOTED, UNDATED OR LINKED CLAIM]] that the parents most in need of this skill training are unlikely to seek parent education on their own; they need a dedicated advocate to help them.** Our organization continues to further the cause for families with children involved in the court system* and aid parents in need.

{**} “… has proved to be” implies some proof, but the next sentence changes topic andprovides no proof of anything.  A simpler wording — which would still be so vague as to be unsupportable and unchallenged because it the term is so subjective — is “This program is an excellent resource for {the two types of parents}”

(It seems the two types of parents they’re interested in are those who (a) ARE and (b) ARE NOT interested in “improving their parenting skills.  Taken together, this target market is ALL parents, but where parents just aren’t convinced this is a priority, dedicated advocates must help convince (or, force) them to participated.  It sounds like.  //LGH added 12/27/2018 post-publication).

*”Families with children involved in the court system” could mean couples (with children) with either basic divorce and custody without any criminal issues or allegations [“families involved in the court system”], or specifically child welfare or even juvenile-delinquency-involved [“families with children involved in the court system,” that is, two other ways that children can become “involved” in the court system, and their families with them].  Obviously this corporation’s (and it is a corporation) owner — if the tax return I read is still relevant, that means 100% a single individual, Dr. Gordon — is going for both categories and the broadest income base with the vaguest of claims, and doing so confident of federal government backing in the NREPP designation.

Assuming the NREPP is behind this too, it means our own government is backing this poorly-presented “shlock.”

**Could “dedicated advocate to help them” potentially be referencing fathers, including fathers in prison, a demographic that’s historically been hard to recruit into HHS-supported “responsible fatherhood” demonstration projects.  (Look up “Parents Fair Share” or other ones run by MDRC, Inc. for more information.  HHS has specific outreach to fathers in prison as a category of its grantmaking, separate from both “Marriage” promo and “Fatherhood” promo in list of such grants.)

---

BLOGGER’S NOTE ON NREPP:

I WENT LOOKING (SINCE “FAMILY WORKS, INC.” DECLINED TO POST IT) ANY LINK TO “NREPP,” LEARNED THAT IN APRIL 2018, “NREPP” HAD BEEN DONE AWAY WITH AND REPLACED WITH SAMHSA’S “EBPP.” I LOOKED THERE AND FOUND ONLY TWO (THE BRIEFEST POSSIBLE!) passing REFERENCES TO “PARENTING WISELY,” HOWEVER THE ONE DATED TO 2013 shows me it was under discretionary funding labeled “LAUNCH” — Linking Actions for Unmet Needs in Children’s Health (or similar acronym) under certain public law dating back to 2008, and for which SAMHSA’s intention has been (per the two: 2012 and 2013 budget rationales I saw) to take these initiatives now nationwide, because continued funding, under Mental Health – State Prevention Grants (MH-SPG) was asked.

You can study the links.  I don’t know how soon I might get out a post on this….

This 2012 SAMHSA budget justification request from SAMHSA.gov shows Project LAUNCH moving under a new funding stream (For 2012) labeled “Mental Health State Prevention Grants” It also reminds me that SAMHSA was only created in 1992 (The Administration for Children and Families was created in 1991).  (Search for Project LAUNCH; some description on page 67ff shows it’s under discretionary “MH-SPG” funding and the origins). Interesting reading; see also the similar report for the following year which shows in how many programs it was occurring:

I’ve said repeatedly that the USA is establishing a Mental Health Archipelago, and “watch out.”  Along those lines, so it seems!  Meanwhile, the 2015 publication (one of only two references to “Parenting Wisely” I found; with zero detail on it) was an independent evaluation of programs under those State Block Grants (from SAMHSA|CSAT and CSAP) with more illuminating insight into where the concept of Block Grants to States got started, at least a decade earlier than I’d realized (under Reagan Administration.  Block Grants to States for TANF was ℅ Clinton Administration in the 1990s — but with a Republican-controlled Congress). …  I’ll work to post this information.

---

At the bottom of that page (I’ll show in the next three images), no shyness at all — top left point of reference (red background, white lettering) is “frequent presenter” at (AFCC).  One third (five of 15) points of reference are outside the USA: (in the UK, Canada, Singapore, Norway, Portugal), I see “Ohio Domestic Relations Summit” (which is an event; no link and no year shown).

At the bottom of FamilyWorksInc.com  web page you can see (bring green background) a reference to being Parenting Wisely being SAMHSA NREPP-endorsed and around(?) since 2002, as well as (black background, white letters), the “Family Works, Inc.”the street address of 92 Van Ness, Ashland, Oregon, which parcel I was even looking up recently.  (Tax assessors’ website, Jackson County Oregon); I know who owns it now, but haven’t seen that specific street address tied to a specific parcel (yet).  It’s near the railroad, which I guess helps with shipping product?  (Who knows!)…  Why would an Ohio-legal domicile entity (the related nonprofit, Center for Divorce Education) have a business entity address in Oregon?  Nicer place to live? (Ashland is picturesque and within driving distance of Northern California border)…

That said, court-ordered corporations (forcing the public to consume services) whose business paperwork can’t really be tracked is a serious problem, and it’s not an isolated situation in just a few courthouses or even states. It has EVERYTHING to do with justice and with what kind of country we live in.

(In my opinion) people who could (i.e., have some time and internet access, as evidenced by how active they are on certain social media) but will not even try to follow the money must not really care about representative government or justice.

For many years as a younger working professional, and as a battered wife, and for years in the family court system, I did not realize the importance of this either.  Was just focused on the business ahead of me.  BUT, The experience of running that gauntlet (and seeing family reaction to my having separated from an abuser) has made me more activist than I’d ever be, had this country facilitated safe-exit from violent relationships without forced extortion all along the way, with no real end in sight.

I hate the hypocrisy throughout the system and the waste of life and time in arguments with no winners — I’m talking where the subject matter is psychology and/or “social science” which — if it was real science, wouldn’t need the description “social” in front of it.  The real language and “science” of government when not in population persuasion, is economics – – – accounting. The rest of us had better take a closer look at it and seek expertise in it — not in the intergenerational transmission of psychobabble used to justify the cashflow.

Behind all of this is the rationale for continued taxation and fees (massive, large-scale, universal almost, and ongoing).

“WHERE’d IT GO?”  “WHERE’s IT GOING?”

The more “blended” the sources of revenues  + expenses, while it sounds good in scarcity-theory of government — the harder they are to trace. ALWAYS.  Public/private organizations in tax-exempt associations facilitate undue influence on both government and through it, on people. The private capacity also facilitates more and more undermining of jurisdictions into (in effect, if not in law) REGIONALIZATION of the United States (not “Regions”) of America.  The population are supposedly being both serviced and sheared.

When we cannot track the balance of services to shearings (Expenditures to Tax Receipts) (and “BUDGET” is not the whole picture — BALANCE SHEETS are also vital to see), it’s time to put the brakes on until we can.  HOW MUCH ACCUMULATED POWER (held, invested assets) IN PUBLIC SECTOR IS ENOUGH?  However, philanthropists — and charities running the charitable databases for them to communicate and have greater “impact” (major term in use with specific applications, i.e., federal government’s “Social IMPACT Fund).

---

---

---

For this post (as originally inspired) I am piecing together the inter-state, multi-player puzzle which seems to lead into a “where is the money going?” dead end either from the tax return’s unnamed “royalties” entries, or from the mysterious non-registration in Oregon of Oregon-based for-profit “Family Works, Inc.”

I’m only following (at least for some of the entities mentioned) that money — amount unknown how to track — coming domestic relations court-ordered consumption of services out of Ohio and asking (calling attention to) why would a separate family-court-connected company (formed 2001 in Minnesota, expanded later to London, UK with the MN entity sole shareholder,  a “Non-European Economic Area” entity, also a recent “Diamond Sponsor” of the Association of Family and Conciliation Court’s 54th Annual Conference in Boston, be pushing/promoting (linking directly to its website) an “Inc.” (U.S. corporation) with entity address in Oregon, when no current entity by that name, still registered to do business there, seems to (<=my disclaimer… Smarter or more persistent people than me may be able to locate in what form it’s still around, if it is) exists.

Although I do note that what both of them have in common is owners’ awareness that consumption of product or service can be and has been court-mandated, sustained under legal challenge (the former) and simply administratively ruled into being (the latter — through an intermediary nonprofit)… and obvious awareness that an organization “AFCC” has members quite willing to help advertise and forums in which to do so (professional association’s conferences, member professional websites, newsletters, etc.)…

FOOTNOTE OREGON STATE CAFR YE2017, TRANSMITTAL LETTER EXCERPTS (<= link to  access full CAFR). Or the CAFR itself:  https://www.oregon.gov/das/Financial/Acctng/Documents/2017_CAFR.pdf  (“DAS” represents “Dept. of Administrative Services”).  The images are just some food for thought, about rainy day fund, entities NOT reported on in the audit but referenced, meaning they’d probably have their own separate CAFRs, and a few things characterizing Oregon as a state.  Plus, the organizational chart, reminding us all that of all three branches, (most states, and the US), that Executive Branch has the most subdivisions and (bureaucratic infrastructure), it seems…