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

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

Search Results

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]

leave a comment »

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)

 The title needs some work, but regardless of the version, the underlying shortlink stays the same. Some prior versions feature different parts of the post:

Earlier, shorter version: 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 Act Updates, 14 New Resource Centers (TCORS), incl. at UCSF, FDA, and the NIH! .


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)?) …

Partial answer: ALLGov.com on the ATF history (I see it’s changed its name recently, to add “Explosives” becoming ATFE.) So, it was FIRST about money — and raising it — for government debt, until at some point it was decided to be ALSO about health…

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 7, 2017 at 4:12 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FamilyCourtMatters.org Blog Previews, In Hindsight: Short(ish) Summaries (Collected July 1, 2019ff)

leave a comment »

Post Title ~~>FamilyCourtMatters.org Blog Previews, In Hindsight: Short(ish) Summaries (Collected July 1, 2019ff) (Shortlink ends “-adQ”).<~~


I may add some “Taken From/Because” info for each, but in general the reasons are 1) No longer applicable except as a time capsule; life moves on… 2) Too damn long & 3) Embarrassing for other reasons also.  I’m also curious what this personal “Wayback Machine” process may reveal about whether my current writing is just repeating with newer examples or is covering new ground.


~ ~ | (ca. 6,500 wds total) | ~ ~

While reading this blog (in other words, elsewhere on this blog now that I’ve started this process), you may see something resembling the top few lines here (post title + purpose inside an orange border) where I removed some extra paragraphs about this blog, why I blog, or the overall situation I blog (see blog motto!) from the top of some post or page to this post. The connecting label here will be originating post title and date published. I’m also adding tags showing only the originating post’s first-published date that’ll read like this: “About My Blog | taken from 2019March24 post.”  Tags display as usual at the bottom of any post.

I already know that as a blogger I’m digging into deeper layers on various subjects and/or entities, spiraling back into them over time, or if connections surface.

I don’t want to keep re-writing, at significant effort, things I’ve forgotten because, once something is written up well enough, it’s no longer the leading edge of my focus.  The drill bit here, the edge, let’s not forget, is the inquiry itself; my curiosity and desire to know, NOT just to show, perhaps the force behind it.  Like any drill bits, focus helps efficiency. (<~~That link is to a “Wiki,” with examples).

Drill bits come in so many shapes, sizes, and materials, depending the substance to be penetrated and how fast they’re going to be spun. They also wear out at different rates depending on their composition, what they’re drilling into (i.e., which surface may be tougher) and how fast rotated (where speed generates heat). I’m no mechanical engineer

I’m saying, it’s more effective to look at certain aspects than other when trying to get through the topsoil of this whole situation involving the family courts and why families are being destroyed, not particularly helped, through them. In some ways, our own ignorance functions as a substance, an opaque mask which needs to be penetrated, aired out, and seen through; but that’s an individual responsibility.


I’m most effective when highly focused without forgetting the overall direction and roadmap, and it’d help communications if there weren’t a need to re-iterate what that roadmap is every time, or every third time, as there’s not a whole team involved here.  This post along with some others summarizing or keeping track of results as I find them (i.e., tables of contents, newly off-ramped sidebars, key posts, etc.) help me worry less about losing the chronology, better access parts of it not still residing just in my own internal “RAM” (or “cache”), etc.

They may also clear out (excess text summaries) prior drill-down sites for anyone who chooses to follow this type of inquiry and start doing (and ideally, posting, too) their own. Or even just to know the material, whether or not it’s written out, when it comes to on-line discussions with others aghast at the situation in public institutions, or what’s driving the ideology/ideologies behind them.

Is it really just beliefs, or a combination of beliefs and incentives, or mostly “incentives”?  Wouldn’t it good be to have extra information on what’s on the menu of possibilities before deciding which meal to order, I’m talking, advocacy-wise?


In another blog** I know I’ve described the business entity (ensconced within public/private financial arrangements) drill-down process as going down a rabbit hole.

[Comments inside this blue-box added July 12, remembering the context and point of reference..]  


**That blog was inspired (I began it) as a mother by a recent family outrage upon a (by then) young adult [son or daughter] and its significance in the larger context of court-connected events at the time), but in the process also deals extensively with family justice centers, who can be identified both organizationally (which parts public, which private, how they blend and where they tend to be housed — i.e., who rents to whom (Private to public, public to private, public to public, etc.) ) and who pays the staff/employees) and, if you’ve been to a few, by typical responses.  I’ve been down a lot of rabbit holes in my time, looking to nail down who or what is the involved entity, and where nonprofits or government grants (i.e., potentially from either the US DHHS or the US DOJ ℅ the Violence Against Women (&/or “Victims of Crime”) Act to address things related to things this blog deals with (the issues coursing through the program-producing/maintaining veins of family court systems throughout the country, and internationally)), which ones — and how much father-engagement/marriage-mongering is taking place in the name of domestic (or “family”) violence prevention and — oh yes, why not also some — services.

Have done more types of investigations since I wrote that blog about six years ago but its topic covers a classic example (being replicated) endorsed by former U.S. President Bush in the early 2000s. It took me a while to understand how fiscally advantageous it was (due to tax-exemption) not to mention due to public/private blending, to co-locate “fragmented” services at “One-Stop Justice Shops” funded by the public, but often controlled or administered by a private tax-exempt foundation, making sure to encourage faith-based leadership (i.e., pastors et al.) to get involved.


Not all buildings labeled “Family Justice Center” seem to be necessarily aligned with “Alliance for Hope International, Inc.” fka the “National Family Justice Center Alliance,” (EIN#113692035<~FY2017 Form 990 in San Diego; also highly active in promoting batterers’ intervention and supervised visitation, etc.  Someone ought to start a blog on this network.  I’ve not posted all I have, but called them out long ago; visible on this post and the one linked just above this text box.  An attempt was made to pass a law designating this model as THE model for co-locating DV and CA services throughout the state.  It gained support from Former President Bush.  SanDiego Union-Tribune Nov. 24, 2017, under “Watchdog” by Jeff McDonald (City Attorney just hired someone (Gael Strack) that refused to cooperate with a 2013 audit of the nonprofit.  She’ll keep both jobs while City Attorney)<~~!!!  Multiple name-changes of this filing entity and of its various “related” (or not) “Camps Hope,” i.e., let us get at those vulnerable kids (and some of their Moms) for nice vacation healing times — let us do the conference circuits and trainings; provide government grants (of course), but no (see their Form 990) we will NOT post our audited financial statements, (for the most part) file on time at the State level (as required by law) or even answer direct questions on short forms when submitting them months late — and all for a budget under $5M, involving government grants AND contracts, too..  

Other search results** show that this (Ms. Strack, along with Mr. Gwinn also likely true) double-paid professional made a career in NOT talking about things like AFCC or “Fatherhood.gov” (at least on public websites) and taking advantage of Survivors as Volunteers (“VOICES”), has been making over $100K a year for a while.  VOLUNTEERS can do something about this by insisting their supported organization file its tax returns on time, post independently audited financial statements voluntarily (Good Grief:  Are former or current victims still concerned about stalking going to want to always provide address in exchange for information?) or go find some other volunteers — and report the organization meanwhile.

City Attorney position in any distinct from District Attorneys, in charge of prosecuting crime (or, under discretionary decision-making it seems, or practical matters, not doing so). Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer.  **(Dec. 2017 (per url) sublinked through Bio posted at Strangulation Institute, an Alliance for Hope program (see footer © detail)   // [End, comments added post-publication, on July 12].


Down those rabbit holes:  With experience, it’s less overwhelming, but what often shows up is in essence corruption and hypocrisy which leads to an increasing personal awareness of just how powerfully placed the most corrupt manifestations of overall and even individual public sectors are.

The actual harm shows up more on the surface (and often dramatically so, along with long term erosion of basic living conditions).  But below surface, it’s those previously-laid pipelines (whether electric, fiber-optic, water, plumbing & sewage, etc. — and I’m saying that metaphorically**) which show evidence of intent, planning and experienced planning at that.   The infrastructure, the design, itself isn’t “flawed,” it’s predatory.

Divisive and conflicting theories of cause are set up, disseminated, and at certain boiling points, the “resolution” committees (already prepared for this) move into “help.”  It’s disgusting in both quality and quantity.

**While some of those utilities are involved, I’m using those terms to refer to lines of communication, business entities, cross-border societies which provide expense-writeoffs for conferences to plan each new language or theory to drive government-backed commerce to (perpetrate) upon the unawares through basic judicial or other institutions

I cannot live down there mentally; I need to come up for air and food and more casual, normal human being communications.  Condensing summaries here should help my own sense of the need to keep inserting them into posts, or just re-writing which was written OK the first time, although probably in different terms.

Format here is straightforward, just be aware a new heading represents a new summary added:  Block copy & Block Paste. I’ll keep the same color scheme as originating post, and link back to it. If the  material contains new or significant subject matter I’ve also posted on elsewhere, i.e., some show & tell images or links, I’ll try to tag those topics by content.  My second entry below has some content tags already.

Either way (with or without new or significant subject matter), I’ll also tag them by date of where they came from in this format:

“About My Blog | taken from 2019March24 post”

On this post, to get to more than one summary, you must page-down past the ones on top: there are no drop-down-menus or fancy “see more at” linkages.  (If you’re a WordPress user,  so far I compose in “Classic Edit” mode not the newer “Block” mode which might facilitate this, but seems to complicate basic formatting access).I say this because browsing or skimming more than one will not be straight repetition (I’m fairly sure) and will include other material.

Thanks in advance for your time reading on such an important topic for our times, and all times: How we understand our own governments, how to put some back light on backstage operations of advocacy groups, cross-country and cross-jurisdiction database differences, and the vital importance of identifying WHO is speaking when ANY reference is cited.  

Look up those references! whether you see them as footnotes to some publication (academic or otherwise) OR in casual or credential-building reference within a paragraph in some news article.  I try to and, mostly, do!

And was it ever necessary for governments A,B,C, and/or D to make it that hard to follow the money and thus (so hard to) help put the brakes on mis-appropriation of it in the name of public services?


So far (starting list of contents), previews from posts published ~> Jan. 9, 2017# ~> March 24, 2018# ~> July 9, 2019 ~> From HOME Page (“FamilyCourtMatters.org”) removed Sept. 5, 2019, written sometime in 2018 ‘Why So Long?’ ~~>(tba with each new addition)

#at that time post marked “sticky”


TAKEN FROM POST:

||”Many of My Sidebar Widgets,…Now Live Here!”

Published July 9, 2019,  shortlink ending “-abt” (full title included below).

The following preview is about: 2,151 words.  There is some overlap.


Read the rest of this entry »

Mix ‘n Match Misleading Terms: QIC, Coordinating Councils, Collaboratives and Commissions | Which Organizations Use Them | Which Parts of Government Control and/or Fund Them…(June 16, 2019)

leave a comment »

The moral of this story?   What’s my point in this post? 

Mix’ n Match Misleading Terms: QIC, Coordinating Councils, Collaboratives and Commissions | Which Organizations Use Them | Which Parts of Government Control and/or Fund Them…(June 16, 2019) (Short-link ending “-9ZS.”  About 15,000 words; about a third of them subject to “sudden post-publication re-allocation”).  (By definition, almost, any post this length needs about one-third, one-half or even two-thirds moved elsewhere!  We’ll see!  Tags to be added within 48 hours, I want to make sure tags naming nonprofits include any related EIN#s).

This post has been a long time in draft– in fact it stretched I see from Memorial Day in late May right up to Fathers’ Day mid-June, today.  Finding a stopping point on endlessly connected issues, some of them disturbing, new-to-me examples of the same theme, was a challenge.

I’m writing these first paragraphs just before publishing. They are my personal expression and reactions, not the main substance, the arguments and supporting exhibits/illustrations below.  I recommend just reading straight through them.  It was written in one sitting, copyedited and developed some, developed sections off-ramped for further detailing.

My  arguments begin with a Q&A “Think About It!” section in this color and after that, it’s showtime.

When you have read even further down and see these two images (together, my last ten posts from the sidebar), you are near to the starting point of this post…they will be on the right side.


Some of the showtime introduces in detail (texts, links, images) certain off-ramped material which has gripped my attention.  I am increasingly shocked by the blatant omission, misdirections, indications of new age terminology spun off more ancient forms of spirituality behind backers of “early childhood development,” some aspects of which definitely raise a few red-flag alerts on the touchy/feely healing-from-trauma involving children aspects.  (Somatic Meditation, Integrative Manual Therapy Meditating with the Body®

In the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, the body is considered the gateway to enlightenment—to discover the body is to discover awareness—to uncover the most direct and effective path to profound spiritual transformation.

Commentary:  That’s fine, but spiritual transformation should not be the goal of public policymaking aimed at institutions which will be and are sponsored by U.S. federal agencies.  We have no official religion on this country — not “new age” not Buddhism or Hinduism, nor the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic-kind.  Whether from the one aspect, sex and the body is “bad” except as religiously certified (and women are second-class citizens), or sex and the body are not only good, but a pathway to the divine, a debate that’s older than the Bible, I think the aspects of personal boundaries is a live issue, especially where children are involved with teachers and in association with university-based child care clinics or centers.


Neither viewpoint should be imposed upon or snuck in the back door of public-funded programs under the label of science — which, face it, public schools and Head Start / Early Head Start programs (along with many others) certainly are; in part because very religious people continue to flock towards situations where they can impact, influence, and mentor others:  the fields of psychology, psychoanalysis and interfacing with traumatized adults and children attract people of such mindsets.  The coaching/mentoring field is full of organizations and associations run by gurus and evangelists for their own world views.  NOT my main concern in this situation, though.  Lack of accountability and adequate terminology to track the accounts, is.

This topic came up (this time) along with FrameWorks Institute and Harvard University’s new Center on the Developing Child only because the Hemera Foundation, among its top investors (ranked by cumulative amounts of donations) was an unknown to me.  Understandably — no website up, only formed in 2005, and registered outside the United States run by someone who’d spent much of her young and adult life also outside the U.S.


Even without that fascinating, and due to Caroline E. Pfohl’s (Wellesley, Wharton, London School of Economics) Hong-Kong connection, historically interesting aspect (relating to the Hemera Foundation incorporated 2007? in Bermuda (listed alpha, it’s Reg. # 40623, but you cannot view without log-in), but run by ‘Hemera Regnant, LLC’ in Boulder Colorado; Ms. Pfohl at one point (? per Philanthropy Impact) was the daughter in law in a very wealthy and well-known Hong Kong family (and philanthropists) line and involved with the Robert H.N. Ho family foundation, and was chairman of it until 2010 (See image nearby). but seems now married to “Dr. Reggie Ray”  Dharma Ocean institute director also in Boulder) ||  what about donations to fake entities (also discovered), ongoing involvements with public/private alliances (some even called that in their business names), all creating major spin?

Robert H.N. Ho Family Foundation 2010 Press release (Appointing successor to Chairman Caroline Pfohl-Ho, gives a bit of foundation context. See also Hemera Fndtn (Bermuda-based, U.S. Registered agent via an LLC in Boulder, Colorado is Ms. Pfohl who seems now re-married. Hemera Foundation (previously unknown to me) listed as a top funder at Harvard University’s Center for the Developing Child, established in early 2000s.

**See pp. 27-28 of “Investing in  Bermuda, A Piece of Paradise | Opportunity for Foreign Investors” which specifically names Hemera Foundation along with Atlantic Philanthropies and others as among those helping start the Bermuda Community Foundation formed during the 2008 financial crisis, and the inset on the next page about how, conveniently, how some charities need not register in Bermuda. Or,  (2015) (“Zero to Three in Bermuda” (Hemera working through that Bermuda Community Foundation, with a BSMART1 Foundation: brain science, early neurodevelopment, etc.)) Hemera Foundation also contributing to Harvard University’s Center mentioned below.


“Hemera” is the name of a Greek goddess of the day, with her brother “Aether” god of the light, both of them sons of night and darkness. (Source: GreekLegendsandMyths.com) They are said to pre-date the gods of the Pantheon (Mt. Olympus, etc.).  Interesting choice for a foundation name.


Here’s a quote** from that “showtime” on off-ramped material section, below the first Q&A “Think About It!” blue section on this post and borrowing (bright-yellow highlit) a question from it.  Definitely one to keep an eye on, which is hard because of all the non-entities citing their famous donors, and at least one of their famous donors, primarily a grantmaking (front) based in Kansas with strong Buffet family flavoring (plus, as typical in the field, Annie E. Casey Foundation and others).

**When I say “here” I mean, after some text and images setting that up in effect adding about 1,500 words, after I just took out a similar amount earlier today.  After two days of that routine, I’m publishing it WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get):  I have other things to do!  These last additions/introductions I’ve marked with a different background color and a bit smaller font:

Previewing that quote (previewing other material), you can see how crowded the field of early childhood development is getting, and how trademarking, streamlining, and multi-media marketing is being used to keep it flush with (often untraceable) cash and expert advice.  And media experts to “translate” the expert advice faster into justification for structural change of policy making.  Good grief…


The FrameWorks Institute, Inc. is bred into the Harvard (non-entity) Center and has been enthusiastically embraced by another multi-holding enterprise/name-changing foundation based (mostly) in Canada, as shown at “Alberta Wellness Initiative.”  THIS scenario effectually shows who is running public policy, and how they do it — once you start looking closer, it’s evident this takes place in some of the most brazenly unaccountable and (my opinion) arrogant manners, which practices seem to be just a normal part of the operators’ career curves. Some key names keep recurring, but they are not all familiar names. However, they tend to be in familiar industries…

If you can, somewhat, remember Coril Holdings Ltd., Ron Mannix (3rd generation in this private family business from Canada, Nancy Mannix, Norlien Foundation (old name, until 2015), Palix Foundation (new name, and as recognized on the Harvard Center), Harvard University, Frameworks Institute (naturally) and what country, province, or state they’re registered in (and since when), that’s at least a start…  Palix  was Norlien then, funded by the Mannix(es), who run Coril, and Alberta is of course a Canadian Province.

Frameworks Institute’s founder Susan Nall Bales previously worked at the Benton Foundation (See William Benton, 1900-1973, briefly a U.S. Senator who stood up to Sen. Joe McCarthy (<~History.com, see also HUAC, House Un-American Activities Committee) (or the one-paragraph Senate.gov../ArtandHistory version); Benton & Bowles, publisher of Encyclopedia Britannica, i.e., media-related wealth), Voice of America and definite visionary for the role of communications, foundations, and education reform at the university level.  His son Charles Benton (d. 2015) established that foundation in 1981 and daughter Adrianne B. Furniss carries it on.  Or, as under FAQs,:

The Foundation was officially incorporated as a 501(c)(3) private foundation in 1948 under the name William Benton Foundation. In 1981, it was restructured and renamed as the Benton Foundation. back to top

I just found an “International Innovation.org” website reference to three of the above names (see three-image gallery above, which excerpts include an insert on how governments can buy outcomes (referring to the development of their human resource stock, i.e., kids and future workers).  However, says the main website, “II” the website and publication closed in 2016; now, see “ResearchMedia.com.”  In other words, media consultancies sure help spread the good news.  Namechanges (etc.) hinder the average person not in on it from keeping up with anything BUT the PR (positive press).

Last-minute find here, from the Clinton Whitehouse Archives:  Speaker bio from  May 2, 2000 White House Conference on Teenagers shows Susan Nall Bales as a speaker, and Frameworks Institute as the project of another Institute, as well as some of her other connections, including National Funding Collaborative for Violence Prevention (nearby image). Other conference speakers (link to this list accessible from the link I provided above) included Geoffrey Canada of Rheedlen Family Centers (later? Harlem Children’s Zone); Ken Casey of National Center on Fathering, and some other names I recognize.  The nearby image shows who (which foundations) were funding “Frameworks Institute” before it incorporated, which seems to have progressed naturally out of another organization’s “project.”  The “Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation” has come up on this blog some years ago in connection with my studies on public school transformation networks.  The Alliance for Excellent Education, one of them, was funded by CMP Media, Inc. executives Gerard and Lilo Leeds (The Schotts were Mrs. Leeds’ parents, also Nazi refugees). Their children are carrying on the cause.

National Funding Collaborative for Violence Prevention (<~Oct. 2000 commissioned (by NFCVP) Survey of Technical Assistance Providers to (?) Community Organizations for Violence Prevention.  See pg. 10 and the last page (Appendix B) for the list of TA providers surveyed, which includes some names familiar on this blog. (or see Linda Bowen bio blurb, which cites this in her background at ‘Attendance Works,’ a different organization**) is now called Institute for Community Peace, )<~history) and was brought together in the early 1990s (i.e., before VAWA passed) to try to start a “violence prevention” movement in the U.S.  No question the framework is progressive, as is made clear in Linda Bowen’s Dec. 9, 2015 article posted there, “Framing Inequality” which (see last two paragraphs) talks about how to counter the persuasive and well-funded conservatives.  The website seems inactive (at least the blog) since that date.

[THIS SECTION is Post-Publication Details Added/Follow-up on “Attendance Works”, June 17, 2019]
**AttendanceWorks, says its website, was initiated by the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

The words “born” and “incubated” occur in its short History page, however, at the end of the day (as of today) it’s a project of “Community Initiatives” which serves as its fiscal agent, so presumably is not an “Inc.” one can locate any tax return for. Not one iota of help identifying WHICH “Community Initiatives” (a vastly over-used name for both projects and, parts of business names for nonprofits, nationally).  Another instance of failing to properly even identify who’s providing an umbrella for the lovely graphics (lots of primary colors) on yet another website.

Attendance Works is a fiscally-sponsored project of Community Initiatives, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. Our funding comes primarily from foundations and from contracts from school districts and communities seeking technical assistance. //

The report cited and linked to which inspired creating Attendance Works was itself a project under cover of a fiscal agent was described as initiated by an written by a single consultant approached by Ralph Smith of the Annie E. Casey Foundation (“AECF”).

Yes, the AECF sponsored, but a closer look even at the 2008 report  Present, Engaged and Accounted For: The Critical Importance of Addressing Chronic Absence in the Early Grades, shows two co-authors, and publication under not AECF but the NCCP — not just one person as referenced in the AttendanceWorks.org “History” page summary,. The other co-author was at the NCCP (National Center for Children in Poverty at Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University).  So it was already a public/private report from the start, but as AttendanceWorks oversimplifies its own story, it left out HALF the characters!

The link also (under “Acknowledgements”) mentions a THIRD entity (no geographic home mentioned) which served as fiscal agent for THAT project resulting in the 2008 report.  THAT nonprofit is in Des Moines, Iowa — “Child and Family Policy Center, Inc.. The Sep. 2008 published report Acknowledgements also admits encompassing efforts from yet four other entites (including the Urban Institute), and a symposium held in only February 2008.  All this is in the fine print.  Are we NEVER expected to read the fine print and recognize that the website summarizing projects are including less than half the actors, mis-leading descriptions of how organized, and the nature of the collaborations?

Attendance Works operates as a virtual organization, with no headquarters office. Many of us work as consultants. While Attendance Works is headquartered in San Francisco, the members of our diverse team live and work in locations throughout the United States.  (“Our Team” page)       [One image above also shows that page]

There are 10 “Senior Fellows,” only one, based on names and pronouns used in biographies, is a man.  Here he is, looks like a middle-aged white guy, Rick Mockler (notice involvements and background).  Of course being Senior Fellow at possibly a non-organization operating under cover of another not exactly clearly identified 501©3, regardless of one’s skin color, means … exactly what???

….  INFLUENCE EXERTED THROUGH FIELDS OF RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN RELATIONSHIPS  … 

Back to the ICP (Institute for Community Peace, formerly National Funding Collaborative on Violence Prevention)

One page also references and contains a youtube on Frameworks Institute. I found the Institute for Community Peace’s (“ICP”) EIN#521943852 and see that the organization is barely still holding on ($407 in contributions only for 2016, only two employees, basically Linda Bowen, and a disclaimer that she is related to two of the board members. It is being artificially propped up after dwindling support since 2012).

Likewise, now Linda Bowen is among Framework Institute’s listed Fellows (<Links to Staff and Fellows) now, and the bio blurb mentions that before working for ICP, she was ACYF (special assistant to the commissioner) at HHS during the Clinton Admin, which is to say, probably during Welfare Reform years and assistant dean at University of Chicago’s SSA.  I’d call that prestigious, yet it does seem the ICP has just faded out, almost….
Read the rest of this entry »

2018 Blog Posts and New Pages (Full List with Titles) in Standard TOC Format [provided March 24, 2019]

with 5 comments

Title of this post: 2018 Blog Posts and New Pages (Full List with Titles) in Standard TOC Format [provided March 24, 2019] (Shortlink ends “-9y7″…)…


Sept. 2019 update: preliminary “TWO HELPFUL LINKS” insert (may be found scattered on other posts, too)…

Because we had enough ‘sticky posts,’ when compiling a Table of Contents for 2019 (“so far”) in August, 2019, I didn’t mark it sticky — but did stick it on the blog sidebar as its own widget.  Then I added (right below it) the link to this post.  Then I took that information and patched it onto a few existing posts (from 2019) as a quick link to a general overview of the last two years of my writing.   As shown here:**

re: ‘TWO HELPFUL LINKS’ — Image from TopRightSidebar, ‘GO TO POSTS’ widget, shows TOC 2019 & 2018 + ‘Key Posts 2012-2017’ (LGH, @ Sept. 1, 2019)

TWO HELPFUL LINKS added Sept. 1, 2019 (for recent subject matter overview):

 Table of Contents 2019, Family Court Matters’ Posts + Pages: January 1 – August 31 (so far). (Shortlink ends “-ayV.”  About 6,300 words,posted August 5, updated Aug. 31) (You can also link to this TOC post any time from the top right sidebar, under”GO TO: All Posts, incl. Sticky, Tables of Contents..” widget, which holds several boxes for navigating to specific important places (posts or pages, incl. the home page), and, 

(Table of Contents 2018, Posts and Pages.. (publ. 24Mar2019, short-link ends ‘9y7’)


(** other versions you may see have same content but the light-green background.  I made this one light-pink for contrast with existing post). Thanks for understanding.  //LGH Sept. 1, 2019 update.


Again, the title of this post: 2018 Blog Posts and New Pages (Full List with Titles) in Standard TOC Format [provided March 24, 2019] (Shortlink ends “-9y7”; about 4,000 words. )

NOTE: This post updates a previously published Table of Contents called 2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019] (Short-link ends “-9p3”) ” //LGH 3-24-2019.

[[LGH, shortening sticky post intro’s, I noticed this one has somme exchanged comments below. Most posts don’t, so these may be of interest to some people: it deals with an appeal to join a class action suit re: (as I recall) the family courts. I did not join and was dealing with housing issues, my exchange indicated, at the time…//May 18, 2021.]]
Read the rest of this entry »

Don’t like long, convoluted post titles? Don’t shoot the messenger: Did I conceive, gestate, give birth to, nurture and L.A.U.N.C.H. these “Great Ideas” ? (Started mid-Dec., 2018; Publ. “WYSIWYGG” March 15, 2019).

leave a comment »

Post Title:Don’t like long, convoluted post titles? Don’t shoot the messenger: Did I conceive, gestate, give birth to, nurture and L.A.U.N.C.H. these “Great Ideas” ? (Started mid-Dec., 2018; Publ. “WYSIWYGG” March 15, 2019). (Short-link ending “-9md.”)

(Started mid-Dec. 2018, worked on periodically in January and February, 2019, and parts split off into another post, “Simply Parent” still also in draft.  Published as-is (WYSIWYGG) March 15, 2019 and just under 12,000 words including the WYSIWYGG intro.  Note:  This post has many images.  If your viewing device doesn’t allow manual expansion by some form of a finger-swipe, a double-click on image may have the same effect.  Not really recommended for viewing on cell-phone or other small screens).

“WYSIWYGG”  — “What You See (so far) Is What You’re Gonna Get.”

Its sections are far from seamless, but each section on its own makes points worth pondering with the usual links to think (read) some more. Within the section, Show-and-Tell alternates with conversational mode, my responses, on each topic. For me, “conversational mode” means longer sentences which is how I think.

The post ends a bit abruptly.  Like I said, WYSIWYGG.

This post most directly connects to this topic’s subject matter through a parent education non-profit business run out of Cuyahoga County, Ohio (with obvious AFCC influence and personnel) which continues to post its “NREPP” credential.

I begin showing how NREPP has been shut down or frozen for replacement by a new acronym, EBPRC, which (to locate) requires showing several more archeological/archival digs, most residing somewhere under the umbrella of the United States Department of Health and Human Services.  The basis of pushing parent education comes, generally, from social science theories related to welfare (administered ℅ HHS/ACF/OFA) and mental health prevention and services (incl. but not limited to under HHS/SAMHSA), so a rapid expansion, that is “LAUNCH,”comes under that very large conceptual tent under SAMHSA — all of which connects to departmental budget requests…. some of which I link to.  I unearthed “LAUNCH” looking up the NREPP credentials of the parent education course.

For an AFCC-conference sponsor, that is, the owner/s of “Center for Divorce Education” to have figured out where to tap into HHS-budgeted funding streams about to go national (or having already done so) should by now be no surprise — but it should also be shown.  Incorporating a reference to “LAUNCH,” once I understood it in the SAMHSA context in what was intended to be more focused on the “Family-Court-Fixers” who ignore another part of HHS administering welfare services (i.e., primarily the OFA) was probably too much payload for one post.

This post achieved my WYSIWYGG status officially March 12, 2019, after I admitted I’ve run out of time to keep my head into this material and wrangle the formatting  into a better place. Having so categorized it, I’m going to also publish it this day.  Well (as you can see), Friday, March 15.

WHY PUBLISHING “As-is”:  As of today, it’s “evident” (speaking of “things “evidence-based”) personally that I am moving into another season of self-defense of housing and privacy in the form of litigation, as occurred June 2014 — Jan. 2016.  I do not know how long it will last, or whether it’ll be the intended “Pyrrhic Victory” (look it up)** if I win, or a rout, if I do not, closure from further dealings of this kind in a way which does not “kick the can down the curb” further.  I have reached out (that’s been part of the delay on this post also) to qualified sources (both legal, and dealing with/aware of elder abuse situations), which requires also ongoing time and focus.


**Phrases.uk.org but “JSTOR Daily” says maybe we’re reading it wrong, and anyhow most of that battle was told from the Roman point of view (to save face).  (How “Pyrrhic Victory became a “Go-To” Metaphor Feb. 7, 2019 by Farah Mohammed, and referring to  how long Brexit is taking, Bloomberg’s use of that metaphor and, at the end of the day, “there’s still a continent of people to govern.”  Apparently Pyhrrus was a despot, and his battles didn’t better the people’s condition.  Certainly could be said of those I’ve been battling (not winning much) over the past decades, that is, if the banners (causes) they were initiated under were ever stated in good faith, i.e., sincere and genuine.))

To comment on this, I’ll bet, common situation: Ever heard of the cycles of domestic violence (escalate, explode, plateau until the next incident) within personal relationships?  They do not go away with separation automatically.  After one leaves abuse, depending on the level of other invested parties wanting to engage, target, continue to control, and/or stalk a separating, domestic-violence-protection-seeking spouse or intimate partner with children in the family courts,  the cycle becomes wider in scope, maybe longer in time, but identifiable “seasons” continue to show up with cumulative impact.

To outsiders and most of the public, the separation is assumed to be complete and violence and coercion with potential to go imminently violent (life- and health-threatening, sudden) at any point to have subsided 100% if it’s less overtly dramatic.** It may not have.  Abusers may obtain sufficient influence to engage in a relay race; they get time-off, or just (as seems to have happened here) drop out of the race, while others carry the “baton” of destruction, but the target does not, turning life into a basic marathon — in order to stay, ALMOST in place. When it does continue and expand, lawyers and their mental health counterparts taking court referrals want their piece of any visible resource, too, regularly, until that source is dry, or about to run dry, at which point they’ll seek to jump/dump to other associates (good to maintain those business networks, trade favors, etc….).  My case in point THIS time…

**In my experience, not so — the coercion and pressure did not subside and has not subsided; it is just less “in your face“! We’re already multi-generational over just my ONE decision years ago to get legal intervention, and insist on as many proper legal boundaries as I could at any point in time, ever since.  I sent this message clearly, and did not make exceptions for my immediate family members who showed (early on) they were not going to even respect the initial DVRO.  Until just a few months ago, everything I did was within close driving distance of at least a few of those individuals.  Putting some geographic space inbetween, while not the complete solution was a major accomplishment, and I had to do it without advance notice to almost anyone, and like a fugitive.

In reviewing my own post-separation timeline, which is getting longer on the back end, and frighteningly shorter looking forward if the practice continues, the cycle seems to be about every two years; whether in family court or now, as it happens, probate. I’d like to see ANYONE sustain a living with 15-20 years of that (it’s pushing 20 years for me  after about 10 years of the more overt, direct, assault-and-battery, garden-variety serious domestic violence  that was the real substance of my own “marriage,” as I know it is and was for many.

As these things tend to go, now again I’m in dealing with both PTSD and “Pissed-Off” modes, neither of which is conducive to best writing, or help-seeking. No matter how righteous my cause for maintaining distance, separation, and privacy, the timing of (very recent development) pending open litigation back in California to maintain it could not be worse, or should I say, could not have been targeted bettter to prevent that distance, separation, and privacy long enough to generate new lines of work greater than even the recently greatly (by about two-thirds) reduced living expenses.  See my sporadic comments on this blog, or Twitter (@LetUsGetHonest) about a recent interstate re-location into better (and less expensive) living circumstances with real hope for a personally sustainable future, away from the Gold-Digging, excuse me, Golden State. //LGH 3/12/2019.

Published:  March 15, 2019.  Below this line, most content written between Dec. 2018, Jan. and Feb. 2019; some in early March.

Again, the question is: “Don’t like long, convoluted post titles? Don’t shoot the messenger: Did I conceive, gestate, give birth to, nurture and L.A.U.N.C.H. these “Great Ideas” ? (Started mid-Dec., 2018; Publ. “WYSIWYGG” March 15, 2019).

No I did not, but if you want a list of who did, look through this blog’s Table of Contents, follow me on Twitter and watch the hashtags used, or survey the landscape yourself. Meanwhile, for now, it’s long, convoluted post titles to tag several elements of each longstanding convoluted situation I’m taking a core sample of for that post…  (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?)

A nearby post (mid-December, I did not know whether I would publish first this one or that one.  On Dec. 25, I published “that one”):

Checking out just one foot-noted claim on the home page of just one of the (entities/web pages) led me down another rabbit hole (with new ones being dug) at SAMHSA and involving Mental Health – State Prevention Grants (“MH-SPG” in budget justifications shorthand), with the point of reference cited as proof of being an “Evidence-Based Practice” having just been moved in 2018, by SAMHSA from “NREPP” to simply EBPR (or similar name) …

on which website I got to hunt and dig for ANY reference to the program being pushed (and having been developed) by the private owner/s of “Family Works, Inc.” at 92 Van Ness Avenue, Ashland, Oregon — with no corresponding “Inc.” showing as currently registered in Oregon to do business under that name at the state department’s database recording such things…. “Go figure…”  {{My post-publication follow-up back in Ohio showed there was one in Ohio** — but the entity’s address is still shown as Oregon. So are we to presume that there is no revenue exchange (commerce) taking place IN Oregon still? And if I, with NO comparable source of ongoing revenue from any public source for my private enjoyment, take time to follow-up with a BLOG post stating this, why hasn’t the other entity’s owner (it turns out to be one person on the record as I recall) taken a few minutes to update company web pages referencing a government entity which no longer exists, the NREPP, and re-directing readers to the updated evidence?}}   (**I’ve now added links and images to the OHIO corporate filings for Family Works, Inc., to my “Assembling the Pieces” post (intro), as I was the one saying I couldn’t find its incorporation…]  

But it was “illuminating” to find out under what rationale such programs are encouraged —  Mental/Behavioral Health — and how rarely they are independently evaluated.  An ever-expanding, increasingly centralized Mental Health Archipelago as a Public Service, i.e., as U.S. Federal Government (Executive Branch-administered) policy has become a Personal Private Bonanza for those who got in on it early.

WHY I MENTIONED “L.A.U.N.C.H.” IN THIS CONTEXT:

(This extended section is in a different background color to distinguish from the rest of the post.  Its complexity comes from tangling with the US Government’s HHS “OpDiv” called “SAMHSA” (which came into being 1992) and its budget justifications, funding streams, and “data repositories” as in “NREPP” (National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices), essentially a website/electronic library, which only came into being 1997).

I used the word “L.A.U.N.C.H.” because it’s an acronym, however you’ll find “Project LAUNCH” (without the extra periods) in SAMHSA’s FY2012 Budget Appropriations Committees Justifications as planned to be continued ($25M) this year, then submerged under MH-SPGs and “launched” this construct nationwide, total grants $90M.  (Click on that link and use the search function for 10 occurrences:  Here’s an image from the page dedicated to it (not including the chart at top with the $$ amounts):

  • | * | * |  [IMAGE TO BE INSERTED HERE.  Maybe (but links already provided)]

Got your Acronyms straight yet? The above link’s main domain name on its url is simply “SAMHSA.gov.”

The url to an article about the suspension of the NREPP domain name alone has four acronyms ( in reverse order, NIH, NLM, NCBI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6013894/), + the final portion of the url, “PMC,” each of which part of (HHS) has a history, as does the article itself, which holds an opinion on the suspension of NREPP (in 2018) and replacement of it by, it seems, an EBPRC…

Good Grief. Talk about a major, over-arching infrastructure in HHS!!

In the next home-made, that is blogger’s table, not one quoted from another website,** the first five rows (LAUNCH, NREPP, EBRC, PMC®) are not parts of HHS by division, but (as best I can understand it as a layperson), its PROJECTS.  Below these first five rows,  I’ve listed rows for NCBI, NLM, NIH and SAMHSA) To better distinguish a project which may have a web page also named (in part) after it from an official subdivision of HHS, see its webpages!   (This page, “Appendix B” is dated 2015.  (i.e., pre-Trump but still up!) Websites change, so I recommend just searching for HHS Organizational Chart, Operational Divisions (OpDivs) or similar term.  Program Offices are underneath “OpDivs” in the nomenclature, last I looked.  SAMHSA is at the same heirarchical level as ACF and NIH; there are eleven (11) OpDivs listed currently.  {{**If such a table were made prominently available throughout HHS pages, or its OpDiv pages, I wouldn’t need to construct one just to keep it straight, and to be able to talk about the programs versus the parts of HHS!}}

LAUNCH, as in SAMHSA’s
“Project LAUNCH”
Linking Actions for Unmet Needs in Children’s Health” (2008ff)
NREPP National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (suspended in 2018, has a certain history since 1997)
EBPRC Evidence-Based Practices Resources Center (replaces NREPP?)
PMC® PubMedCentral® = a digital archive launched in 2000(see nearby images “PMC Overview” & “Disclaimer”; managed by NLM’s NCBI.  (There is also a PMC International)
NCBI National Center on Biotechnology Information
NLM National Libraries of Medicine (under NIH)
NIH National Institutes of Health
SAMHSA Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (under HHS) started in 1992?

(Click image to enlarge) ##1 of 3: HHS 11 Operating Divisions (“OpDivs”) shown on the right column. These OpDivs are listed (as are Program Offices) as optional filters (select) or fields to display (column heads for search results to check that category off or on)  at “TAGGS.HHS.Gov” (Advanced search). ACF (top), NIH and SAMHSA (near the bottom) are all at the same organizational level.

##2 of 3: HHS Agencies & Offices, showing the first OpDiv (they’re listed alphabetically) “ACF” with its logo. ACF administers Social Security Act (“Welfare”) funds, as I understand it; it has smaller “Program Offices” underneath).

##3 of 3: HHS OpDivs NIH and SAMHSA described briefly from HHS website.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, ….

This “PMC” article  (same url here as shown immediately above the table of acronyms), Suspension of the National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: the importance of adhering to the evidence” also talks about 1997, 2007 and 2015 standards, and expresses disagreement with the suspension  (4-image gallery below contains the citation reference and Abstract).

The author Sharon G. Hennessy (“SGH”) discloses that she is the former collaborator and widow of the person who developed the NREPP:  “SGH is the former collaborator and widow of the late Dr. Kevin Hennessy, the developer of the 2007 version of NREPP.”  Footnotes to this article may be helpful; I noticed one of them refers to “ActiveParenting.com”.  Also, looking for “Dr. Kevin Hennessy, NREPP, 2007” I found him quoted in a full page of a Sept/Oct. 2008 SAMHSA Newsletter (found on a wordpress website).  Just a reminder:  “evidence” means different things to different people” and “

NREPP is a voluntary, self- nominating system, and developers choose to present their programs for review

Therefore I have to assume that the developer/s of “ParentingWisely®” also submitted their program for review, rather than had grassroots (or other NIH employees) knocking on their doors to submit their program.  If unaware of this, the implication otherwise is that SAMHSA sought them out as obviously appropriate for the listing.  Apparently, SAMSHA did not; it’s SELF-NOMINATING process.

This (published online 2011) Brief Review by both Hennessy Ph.D.s reiterates that the proprietary (i.e., trademarked) programs show as lower quality in research, but more prepared for dissemination, and more aimed at younger people (especially) youth.  “A Review of Mental Health Interventions in SAMHSA’s [NREPP]” (published on Psychiatry Online.  I think it’s well-written and informative).
Read the rest of this entry »

2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019].

leave a comment »

Post Title: 2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019] (Short-link ends “-9p3.” This post is under 4,000 words).

This post lists, links to, and thereby publicizes, one year’s worth of posts.  It’s an informal TOC. By “informal” I mean you’ll be seeing my Administrative Dashboard versions of post titles (with published dates), by Quarters (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, 2018).

It does this in two different layouts.  Both Layouts follow short Introductions I and  II only because this ended up being the top “sticky” post on the blog (…which it no longer is // LGH July 28, 2020; it’s one of 13 sticky posts).

Layout by Date Only {{Short Form, no titles: Links by date only (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)}} precedes Layout by captioned images displaying full post titles & published dates {{The image captions show only dates published; click on the date wanted to read the associated post}}. 

Read the rest of this entry »

How Relevant is AFCC — and Who, UNLIKE many ‘Crisis in (or ‘Enhance/Reform’) the Courts’ groups and associated professionals who won’t, in public or on-line — Acknowledges Its Existence and Significance? (started May 7, 2018)

leave a comment »

Post title: How Relevant is AFCC — and Who, UNLIKE many ‘Crisis in (or ‘Enhance/Reform’) the Courts’ groups and associated professionals who won’t, in public or on-line — Acknowledges Its Existence and Significance? (started May 7, 2018) (Case-sensitive shortlink ending “-91l”; that’s two numbers, as in the year “1991” and a lower-case “L”) (Posting “as-is” about 5,680 words on Mothers’ Day (USA) May 13.  Subject to later updates for clarity and/or towards bottom of the post).

(I was also active on Twitter today with more links, documentation and as ever, reminder of terms in use in current fatherhood policy, particularly as involves Temple University-housed, Center for Policy Research-organized “FRPN.org” (also previously posted herein).  http://bitl.ly/2KVQHOi)

This post will illustrate both those who won’t (while talking on the same topics) and those who, obviously do acknowledge AFCC when presenting at its conferences or listed among its ongoing board of directors or other activist members (i.e., on individual C.V.s)…

There are many organizations in the country aligned to specific professions, or a few different but related ones, so what’s so relevant and significant about this one, especially as it’s not that large (at least on paper! and if assets and revenues are the measure? (searchable on this blog and see short illustration below).


DEFINITIONS (outside organization self-reporting, some standard has to be applied. A few words on that…)

“AFCC” in this usage doesn’t mean its legal business name (USA) has only those four letters, but does refer to the “mother ship” organizations whose full name (for decades now) has been “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.” and as a nonprofit has an EIN# 952597407, a business address, a legal domicile (Wisconsin’s listing says “not in our state” and Illinois’s says “has been in our state since…” while AFCC on its IRS returns both FY2008 and 2016 (and inbetween) say legal domicile “WI” in fact, Madison, Wisconsin.

While legal domicile was probably buried further within the IRS forms (which changed in 2008), it was not asked on the page 1 header information. Why it matters?  Competence & truth in filing.

SEE ALSO (but not in detail on this post) AFCC’s main and state chapter [in the USA] IRS Tax Returns, i.e. do some Form990s searches (accounting for some wrongly-labeled at this 990-search site, which is another consideration in tracking organizations, or government funds to them..). Whatever else is said by itself, or others about the generic term “AFCC” (including, on its conference agendas), business-wise it is a tax-exempt entity in the PRIVATE sector, with Board of Directors typically including judges or justices inside and outside the USA (i.e., Canada, New Zealand..) and others working as “civil servants” in the public sector, i.e., government employees, along with those who are not government employees (but typically will be doing referral business with the courts, or (some) in law schools…  


It is NOT part of government, and to do business legally with government institutions (such as the State itself, or state government-funded institutions, such as the family courts) it MUST register as for-profit, or not-for-profit.  

It also has chapters, but these are not linked to each other at the IRS level (as returns will show) as “related” organizations, complicating fact-check with the AFCC website’s own claim of how many chapters (and where they are) it has at any point in time. See next images from a recent searches (to illustrate this point, and to raise related important questions about how we might obtain tax returns of nonprofits with national court-reform goals (such as AFCC in its chapter capacities) when relying on private sector database providers (like the Foundation Center, used here) that don’t even get the organization’s NAMEs right in search results?..and have no direct accountability to taxpayers, being in the private sector?

Certainly not by relying on “name searches” only!  (Next display is  in “gallery format.” Click on any image, the navigate to others.  They take readers through name search (written out, alternate wording, and acronym) searches, and then EIN# search on the main organization in WI (showing another result) and on California Chapter.  I also did an EIN# search on the Massachusetts chapter to verify there was only ONE full-sized Form 990 on record, although a short-form (990EZ) filing.   

 


If you consider how many universities with their law schools, or just law schools:

Harvard (!), Boston University, Boston College (Jesuit orientation), Suffolk University, New England School of Law (in Boston) and no doubt some others)

and the former Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology (now called “William James College”) and which specific AFCC leadership make their professional and/or their “spin-off” court-connected nonprofits (i.e., tax-exempt ways to handle business referrals from the family courts) call Massachusetts “home,”) it’s “interesting” that the Massachusetts Chapter of AFCC, Inc. (EIN# 22388 2533 as shown above) is opting to keep a REAL low profile fiscally — I just checked the IRS “Tax Exempt Organization Search (note that url: “APPS.IRS.gov/APP/EOS”) and confirmed [MA AFCC] is mostly filing just electronic postcards, Forms 990-N asserting no revenues over $50,000.


While I mention that, nearby Connecticut, as far as its AFCC chapter, which had been “outed” ca. 2011 (I caught it; separately and working independently from me at the time, so did investigative reporter Anne Stevenson, living closer to the “scene of the crime” than I was in California!) for operating illegally (unregistered) RIGHT FROM the state judicial department (apparently for decades!) — Connectictut chapter filed briefly in ?2012, but I see is showing up as a Form 990PF and (FY2015) says it’s “terminating.”

Think about it: Connecticut is home to, among other universities (such as Fairfield (founded 1942 w/ 303 male students — also Jesuit, (see its Wikipedia) admitted women in 1970, soon after started a school of nursing; has no law school, but does have a pre-law program), Quinnipiac School of LawYale.. yet AFCC’s chapter doesn’t want to show its financial dealings within the state. Hmm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_School_of_Law, although flagged for “needs citations”

Quinnipiac U School of Law <==(school website) “Wiki” is strongly flagged, but I think it relevant to mention it was only ABA accredited in 1995, and was in part the result of a fiscally UNsound “University of Bridgeport” having been “bailed out” by an entity known to be associated with, well, Rev. Sun Myung Moon (i.e., the Unification Church,” causing some serious upsets.  A decision was made to associated with a number of bidders (including Fairfield), but they went for “Quinnipiac University.”  Per this “Wiki.”

In its own words, after main white-on-navy blue large-font intro, references (“naturally”) a “dispute resolution center..” where students can get coached, and get BA/JD or BS/JD in six yrs (“3+3”):
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 13, 2018 at 8:44 pm

Evidence of ONGOING Censorship by Omission from “Crisis in the Courts Crowd”: From 2010 (book), 2014 (conference), an info-laden “minor omission” from 2006 (newsletter) in addition to historic “minor omission” of the TANF-based, 2006 $150M/year federal department grants stream)

leave a comment »

This post’s title: Evidence of ONGOING Censorship by Omission from “Crisis in the Courts Crowd”: From 2010 (book), 2014 (conference), an info-laden “minor omission” from 2006 (newsletter) in addition to historic “minor omission” of the TANF-based, 2006 $150M/year federal department grants stream) Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8ZJ.”

This post supplements (and by being here also condenses) a Page published April 26, 2018, which page’s title also includes (and starts with) the phrase “Censorship by Omission“:

which itself goes with a related (originating) “sticky” post which will be permanently (insomuch as anything on a blog can be called “permanent”) stuck to the top position on the blog, so I’m adding its title here…

Although the sticky post just above features this topic in its long title, that post originally had more to say on the extent to which public policy in this country has become public relations (i.e., propaganda) and where certain major professions sit in that national climate.

That title arose (see the post) because of the current “House Concurrent Resolution No. 72” being pushed through federally and I understand in several states also, by the collaborating “coalitions” (official, unofficial) referenced in it.

I am opposed based on the information I’ve been blogging for nine years, now, and personal acquaintance with the element of obsessive if not paranoid determine to control the public discussions of “family courts” by those involved.  It seems that the only hope of keeping a containment lid on the truth is:  new generations being born continually, older generations how went through the family court gauntlets (after in-home battering, another one of its own gauntlets) burning out, dying off, or being so homeless or bankrupt there’s no breath left with which to talk) — in combination with reaching overseas to (hopefully) engage personnel in the “cause” which may be less familiar with the workings of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and its historic embedding of sexism and racism (BOTH!) into social services, not to mention the philanthropic sector’s involvement.


I anticipate below three separate sections reviewing three specific pieces of evidence (and/or a bit more if I go into more detail on “NCADV” — not for the first time — which has a cameo appearance in this first section as an Executive Director endorses the 2010 book).

“Exhibits Discussed” (One item each for the years referred to in the title. The “thumbnail”  images here just as visual (color) cues for each section, where they will be larger):

2010-2013 website announcing new bk ‘DomesticviolenceAbuseandChildCustody’com’ (viewed) 2018Apr22

For 2010 — publication of book “Domestic Violence, Abuse and Child Custody,” an event I was around for and remember.  I do not have the book, but do have a complete table of contents (first edition) and have had my hands on it through others willing to cough up the (at the time) $100 for hardback version.

For 2014 — one of a series of BMCC Mothers’ Day Rallies (apparently) as blogged on website “Mothers of Lost Children.”  I’d printed it in 2014.

For 2006 — not by “Crisis in the Courts Crowd,” but instead symbolic of key information in two key categories** the Crisis in the Courts Crowd” ignored and historically will not## teach or take into account, call consistent attention to, or encourage followers to think about or explore..just one newsletter or “gazette” produced by Kids’ Turn, Inc.[** listed just below to include several related phrases, searchable on this blog or outside it.] [## parenthetical phrase just below].

KT Gazette 2006 outside (for mailing) area (note return address, and names at top, which’d be bottom of the gazette!) Click image to enlarge.

KT Gazette 2006, short description of the classes, “Bay Area” reference is to San Francisco Bay Area. Click image to enlarge.

Significance of Kids’ Turn, Inc.: an organization whose founding is intricately linked to AFCC membership (along at least four fronts — family court judges, family lawyers, custody evaluators (mediators, parenting coordinators, etc.) and family court administrators) — which I’ve established often enough in this blog to not repeat it again here. However my home page (if you scroll down) deals with the shape-shifting SF version of Kids’ Turn, as it merged into another corporation which then (recently) changed ITS name, but continued running the classes.

**[1] FEDERAL INCENTIVES: 1996 wfare Reform (PRWORA-related) overt sponsorship of fathers’ rights throughout social services, regarding child support, and with intent to favorably influence fathers (as opposed to mothers) in custody outcomes, through HHS funding streams under [at a minimum] two different + complementary titles (IV-A, IV-D) of the Social Security Act.  Fatherhood.gov.  HealthyMarriage.org.  Oklahoma Marriage Initiative (1999ff) and its connection to mass-marketing curricula trademarked and owned by individuals, to welfare populations, through churches, through child support agencies, etc.,  and

**[2] PRIVATE PROFITS ORGANIZED & STEERED THROUGH FAMILY-COURT SPECIFIC PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION/S: The existence, nature, activist membership categories, and agenda of the IL-based nonprofit, “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (“AFCC” for short), with tax return claiming (year after year)  instead Wisconsin legal domicile.

## including until now, in vast majority of public, on-line rhetoric, newsletters, published articles on the problems in the courts, and in general, on organization websites, on individual participants on-line (*.org *.com or other or blog) websites, and when they conference, generally, as a workshop or plenary topic at  conferences too.  Most of the key leaders over time are (I checked, over the years) aware of and a few groups I know, have been specifically informed by myself and other individuals of this information and are reasonably knowledgeable about how significant it was to the problems they were reporting on and proposing solutions for, early on in their existence….solutions which did not take into account the existence of the AFCC or Welfare Reform marriage/fatherhood or access visitation grants and the impact of both on the family court landscape. In light of the existence of these two (not the only two, but a significant two) realities, the solutions make no sense, and are in essence, a pretense (a selling of “hope” at the cost of the truth).

MY 2006 CHOICE — somewhat arbitrary except it also matches the year those $150M annual HMRF (<=gov’t. website.  Gives some basics & timelines) started.

  • Kids’ Turn  (inc. 1989 in San Francisco) and Kids’ Turn San Diego (inc. ca. 1996) symbolize the field of court-ordered, i.e. “force-fed” parent education (or “divorce seminars”) as a condition of custody modification.  Fees-based and embedded in the legal process, sometimes by administrative rulings by presiding judges (who — guess what — may just happen to be AFCC members), essentially this ongoing income stream (“Do the math – how many couples are divorcing or involved in custody modification processes, within the geographic range where Kids’ Turn (N Calif, S. Calif. or, other entities running it in the MidWest, and it’s said, the UK)?)

ALSO in 2006 (timing…)

URL label includes the phrase “TANF HMRF Integration”. 3/20/2018 OFA (Office of Family Assistance) ‘Dear Colleague’ Letter.

2006 – NOT on this post (at least for now) also relevant, a major round (10 years after PRWORA of 1996) of $150M/year marriage/fatherhood + incarcerated fathers’ re-entry funding). The related post to this one (“In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform…” also top “sticky” post on the blog) provides more details, including the nearby image of a very recent “Dear Colleague” TANF letter. //LGH 4-25-2018.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 11, 2018 at 8:47 pm

Eight Posts Published in October, 2017 (Informal TOC Update @ March 6, 2018). [Short-link ends ‘-8Kh’]

leave a comment »

Title: Eight Posts Published in October, 2017 (Informal TOC Update) @ March 6, 2018. (short-link ends “-8Kh”). This post is only about 3,150 words.

Two similar posts for November and December,* 2017  were published later this month and because they too were marked “sticky,” they now display above this one on “Current Posts, Most Recent on Top”. (*holds access to another new page with more extended “abstracts” (post excerpts, summaries) for December 2017 only)  ~~~ Together with the main Table of Contents “2017 [TOC] continues themes from 2016” post, link shown immediately below, that makes four several separate ones held in the top position on the blog.  [Strikeout added June 30, 2019.  Even I’ve lost count.. WYSIWYG! //LGH].

I’m adding this preview (ivory background, blue borders) section just today (June 30, 2019):

Click image (this time) to access full newsltr., 16pp

To clarify, the NCJFCJ gets paid to do this newsletter, by the public (HHS Grant# shown)

Value-added on most Tables of Contents:  even short ones like this often have extra material, mostly because I can’t keep my mouth shut about whatever I am investigating and writing up at the time.  These two images are a sneak preview.

Also a new page announced below is still useful:

“…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″)”

I also want to call attention to the post on anti-smoking (Tobacco Litigation) revenues which are still influential in subject matter areas overlapping with the family courts, and the one on “Chatham House Rule” (<~~a good concept to understand).

Tobacco litigation (master settlement agreement — billions over the years) and added-tax revenues are indeed also being used nationwide to continue promoting increased father-engagement (because of the focus on Zero to 5, The First Five Years, and/or Early Childhood Development).  They are well known about, I imagine through most state-level social services systems, so we might as well learn about it too and they are combined at the program level with existing HHS-sponsored incentives. I read tax returns EVERY day, and I’m telling you, there are (from what I’ve seen so far) MILLIONS of dollars slipping through the cracks, let alone used for dubious-based programs to be forced on parents when what they may need instead is food, clothing or transportation — not preaching and attitude adjustments!) in combination with chameleon corporations as service providers.  But that’s more current writing, so enough on that now…//LGH.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 6, 2018 at 4:02 pm

‘Human Ecology’ (Colleges of), Psychology, and Cornell. Why The History of the American University System Still Matters.

leave a comment »

Post title with shortlink, started Feb. 17, 2018, published March 4:

‘Human Ecology’ (Colleges of), Psychology, and Cornell. Why The History of the American University System Still Matters. (shortlink ending “-8F5”)   Post is short (about 6,100 words — can you believe it?!)

Subtitle: Some Historic Problems and Design Flaws — or Inherent Design Genius, depending on one’s perspective — with The American University System.


Post Viewing/Navigation: Images which may extend beyond the right margin are probably part of an image gallery.  Click on any one and use the navigation keys.  Unless otherwise notated in a caption and unless your viewing device does this better (as might an iPad or cell phone with touch/swipe functions), outside the galleries, click individual images to enlarge.
Content notes: I show some images or sets of images in more than one section of this post.  Related links: This post came from Where ‘First Five Years’ and the Manic Push for  ever more: Universal Preschool/EARLY Head Start meets the National Fatherhood Initiative’s purposes within TANF …” (a LONG post) and a separate SHORT”preface” page Understanding University Models...”. Those references will be posted again as they come up in their context.

Here, I discuss where “Colleges of Human Ecology and the intent to “develop” human beings from the start,” based on theories from high-profile psychologists such as the late Urie Bronfenbrenner (whom Cornell University’s center named in his honor credits for having founded, or inspired the massive “Head Start” programming itself), funded through their faculty positions meets “the imported university models” meets the “current US size and tax system” (university financing).


Tags:  I added labels (“tags”) for topics in this post, and included this one — though it’s not discussed below — because the post discussing it is related: “FAF Financial Accounting Foundation (estab. by AICPA ca.1971 Norwalk CT set up GASB+FASB who set the guidelines=acctg rules)(see also “CAFRs”)


Regardless of one’s perspective, the American universities both private and public still have a basic design. That design for each has been historically based on a certain model espoused by their founders, reflecting their values and what kind of economic infrastructure those founders wanted for the country.

MORRILL LAND-GRANT ACTS

(Reference added March 5, 2018): Why the Morrill Act Still Matters, July 16, 2012 by Christopher P. Loss in The Chronicle of Higher Education.  Added here because it’s a short narrative and for the 19 comments below arguing pro/con the whole situation.  The comments are generally well-written and interesting.

Basics: Please read (for review, or if it’s not review) Wikipedia on the Morrill Land-Grant Acts.  These involved federal lands to establish state college right about the time of the Civil War (!) and after the Confederate states had seceded (although they later got theirs, too).  On that article, Cornell’s situation is in paragraphs 7 and 10.  Paras. 6, 7 and 10 quoted here.  Relates to Cornell and MIT.

Under the act, each eligible state received a total of 30,000 acres (120 km2) of federal land, either within or contiguous to its boundaries, for each member of congress the state had as of the census of 1860. This land, or the proceeds from its sale, was to be used toward establishing and funding the educational institutions described above. Under provision six of the Act, “No State while in a condition of rebellion or insurrection against the government of the United States shall be entitled to the benefit of this act,” in reference to the recent secession of several Southern states and the contemporaneously raging American Civil War.

After the war, however, the 1862 Act was extended to the former Confederate states; it was eventually extended to every state and territory, including those created after 1862. If the federal land within a state was insufficient to meet that state’s land grant, the state was issued “scrip” which authorized the state to select federal lands in other states to fund its institution.[7] For example, New York carefully selected valuable timber land in Wisconsin to fund Cornell University.[8]p. 9 The resulting management of this scrip by the university yielded one third of the total grant revenues generated by all the states, even though New York received only one-tenth of the 1862 land grant.[8]p. 10 Overall, the 1862 Morrill Act allocated 17,400,000 acres (70,000 km2) of land, which when sold yielded a collective endowment of $7.55 million.[8]p. 8

…With a few exceptions (including Cornell University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology), nearly all of the land-grant colleges are public. (Cornell University, while private, administers several state-supported contract colleges that fulfill its public land-grant mission to the state of New York.)

To maintain their status as land-grant colleges, a number of programs are required to be maintained by the college. These include programs in agriculture and engineering, as well as a Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program

This situation, as Wikipedia tells it, also supplanted a more egalitarian (among the states) and earlier “Turner Act,” giving preference for the then more populous eastern states.  Overall, the federal lands represent land grabs from Native Americans originally, anyhow, so a case could be made that the entire situation is based on theft and land-grabs.  Anyhow….
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: