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

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

Archive for the ‘1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)’ Category

Arizona! (Career AFCC Academics’ Self-Disclosure Habits, Home Habitats/Economic Niches, cont’d.) [Started Nov. 13, 2019, Publ. only Jan. 3, 2010].

leave a comment »

This is: Arizona! (Career AFCC Academics’ Self-Disclosure Habits, Home Habitats/Economic Niches, cont’d.) [Started Nov. 13, 2019, Publ. only Jan. 3, 30]. (short-link ends “-bAu,” under 5,000 words, with Extended Footnote Just a Few PRWORA-Explaining Posts from my Blog,” about 6,700 words, and an added comment near the top, around 7,000. I found some incomplete sentences and so am copyediting it post-publication Jan. 6).

As 2019 entered its last two days, I wanted to post any remaining “In the Pipeline, Arizona” posts promised in November, although my head was into different subject matter by then as relating to my blogging, USA and global current-events, and personal life perspective (long-term goals haven’t changed; short-term options have).  Out of many drafts, this one just under 5,000 words and speaking plainly seemed viable..//LGH


THIS POST IS FOLLOW-UP with PRACTICAL ADVICE:  LOOK IT UP FIRST.  UNDERSTAND WHO YOU’RE DEALING WITH OR SEEING QUOTED MAY TALK EMPATHETIC/SINCERE (ABOUT HARM TO WOMEN AND CHILDREN FROM “DOMESTIC[1] VIOLENCE [2]. etc. [3])**

** [1,2,3] Added to here to highlight the variety of terms.  Terms vary by country, proprietary terms, and type of government funding sources, AND  they also evolve with the speed of collective dissemination as they have been for decades.  That “evolution” is also its own roadmap...for those who read the signposts and notice who’s erecting [publishing] them… to who’s co-opted the public-square conversations** and are (plural) in no mood to relinquish those strongholds. (**Basically, through access to funding for media propagation and sponsored chairs and/or research at universities; in various professional journals named by subject matter, etc.)

[1] Domestic, Family, Intimate Partner.  [2] Violence, Abuse, “Maltreatment”; increasingly specialized terms such as [3] Coercive Control, Justifiable Estrangement (vs. parental alienation),  or DV by Proxy.

When you follow the entities (and maintain some awareness of which specific “professionals” (whether in practice, public office, or academia) belong to which ones) which have built wonderful venues (financial/access to real estate infrastructure and administrative/operational resources) for private-value propagation at public expense, it’s easier to see changes in motion.

Understanding that the family courts themselves and the programs run through them represent a built infrastructure, in individual counties, states (US) provinces (Canada, Australia) and in some places, countries. The “Public/Private Enterprise” is key to success:  Private individual resistance to “harmful practices within it” isn’t enough to breach those built walls.  The public leverage — at least in the USA — comes from governments’ dependence on all our tax receipts to fund the ongoing debt, leaving other resources already available (collectively through government operations at all levels) to, as they have been, self-fund.**

**Those last two sentences referring to realities that only reading the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (“CAFRs”) can really drive home, but those CAFRs give fantastic overview — at any level, understanding all levels interact with other levels of government — of the relationship of individuals to our (respective) country/countries (if dual citizenship) effective “coercive control” of our lives.//LGH Jan. 6, 2020.

This post also contains preliminary info on the Flinn Foundation which later posts may handle in more detail, as a supporter (with another private foundation in Arizona) of the “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior at the University of Arizona.”

Why I was looking at Arizona psychologists and people talking, “Brain and Behavior” — I suggest, take a look at the post this came from:Blurring Boundaries Between: Nations, Sacred and Secular, Public and Private; Continually Infusing More Social Science into (=Diluting) Law. For example ℅ Nuffield Fndt’n, or Oxford Univ. Press’s ‘International Journal of Family Law, Policy and Social Science’ (Nov. 8, 2019).” (short-link ending ‘-bxq’).

Right after publishing a post (Blurring Boundaries…, short-link ending “-bxq“,) I found myself looking for “just one more” fine-print reference associated with Robert Dingwall’s reference to divorce mediation, which find inspired this post.  I hope writing this follow-up on that “find” will be a quick task, but still it’s going to entail providing (or describing) a number of screen prints showing word-counts on just two LONG documents to make its point.  [<==Just quoting this post, further down as first drafted//LGH Dec. 30, 2019]

I will repeat this paragraph and link (with shortened title) near bottom of this post. “Blurred Boundaries” takes a larger view but ties it to current people, organizations, trusts, and a specific academic journal, with USA advisors from Arizona.  I’ll bet many readers were unaware of some of the (global) connections involved so deeply embedded with those fighting for ‘family values’ in the ‘family courts’… You’ll see if you read that post…(one contains the word “Pontifical”)…Food for thought…

Another quick quote from this post, below:

Personally, I found it amusing, but not so funny as to miss the opportunity to make my point:  UNLESS YOU CHECK, You’ll NEVER KNOW how often authors who are constantly quoting other AFCC authors are themselves AFCC.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 3, 2020 at 7:25 pm

‘Family Court Matters’ Issues Summary, At This Time: Right Sidebar ‘GO-TO | Current Posts’ Widget (Publ. Dec. 21, 2019 as 13th Sticky Post).

leave a comment »

Post Title: ‘Family Court Matters’ Issues Summary, At This Time: Right Sidebar ‘GO-TO | Current Posts’ Widget  (Publ. Dec. 21, 2019 as 13th Sticky Post). (short-link ends “-bUM,” about 4,300 words with 12/22 update; section (2) of (3) additions bring this to about 8,000 words as of 12/25/2019. (Detailing some footnoted organizations on the featured page… explained in context as it comes up). Though short, Section (3) was the main part — listing text boxes on Sidebar Widget for easier access.

This post further advertises the updated top right sidebar widget of my blog (by posting all its contents and marking the new post sticky) and features one of the pages which caught my attention during the update. The post was edited and/or copy-edited post-publication, adding mini-sections to the middle part, so while it no longer qualifies as “short” it still qualifies as I believe relevant.


For the straightforward list of Ten text boxes from the top right widget (titles and links) scroll or page-down to Section (3) of (3) announced by:

(3) (Lists Text Boxes;in diff’t background color):

However if your intention is to eventually read this blog, what comes before it –sections (1) and (2)  — shows what you’re in for and where I’m coming from.  Expect to be challenged and to exercise reason (plenty of reading), comparison, probably some basic vocabulary development (unless you’re an accountant or financial services advisor — and even then… the perspective differs) and to acquire non-partisan insight into how our country is run.

WYSIWYG: At this point, I don’t do consulting, conference circuits, presentations, webinars etc. so what you see here (and on my Twitter account) is what you get from me, except for any personal contact, which I generally keep to a minimum, in part because of what I have to say about the system and in part for how personal privacy relates to personal safety as it has for years…  If you want more or appreciate what’s here, please consider that DONATE button (suggested minimum: $10.00).

//LGH Dec. 25, 2019 update…  


(Filename: “LGH|FCM Go-To Widget Update (images 1,2) + ‘More Resources’ Widget (Img3, just to reference ‘Widget’ Definition) ~~3 SShots 2019Dec21 Sat..” 

This “GO-TO | Current Posts” widget provides handy links to other parts (Pages or Posts) of the blog in the form of ten custom-html (specially formatted by me) text boxes.  Each contains a link to another page or post with basic identifying detail (title, date published, shortlink, some, a bit more).  Because widget contents are not pre-set, I get to name the widget and add text boxes (with or without links — for this widget, I featured WITH links) to other parts of the blog.  Its updated label now reads:

“GO TO” Widget for: Current Posts (12 Sticky on top:–>incl. Tables Of Contents and Other Featured Posts marked ‘Sticky’) (This one “Widget” holds Ten Boxes=Doorways to other posts or pages). Last Updated 21 Dec. 2019.

See nearby image, with bright-yellow background, which only shows the above widget title, the first text box and just part of the second one, which together represent the two “Static” pages on this blog.  There used to be just one static page, around January, 2018, I restructured to separate the home page from the one were posts appear, requiring some basic navigation pointers, such as this Go-To widget.

Of this post: Sections (1) and (2) state why this post at this time; (2) describes a certain page (“For example, National Children’s Alliance…”) I felt appropriate to advertise again.  In this section, the longest on this post, I get on the soap-box, with megaphone, to re-state some principles that page illustrates and say why they matter so much to such things as “informed consent” in “government of, by, and for the People,” (USA).

[Adding a few paragraphs to characterize Section (2), Dec. 22]

Understanding even just a few basic principles [I address two:  “A Program is not a Person,” and “A Budget is not a Balance Sheet,” encourages fact-checking, which leads to understanding (seeing) where the most basic “understanding” has been systematically derailed to substitute the rhetoric of sales/propaganda for the basics of accountability and transparency.  Knowing to look for the “entity” in any claimed services (which will entail financing) alerts us to where the promotion of the same services attempts to distract from following the finances by concealing the name of the involved entities.

The page I featured (shown below in colorful text and an image) dealing with the basic topic of Child Abuse Prevention and Child Advocacy Organizations by name, including one with historic association with M.D. Eli Newberger who (years ago) became involved as an expert witness (if I recall it right) in protesting the confirmation of a Connecticut GAL as judge on the basis of extreme child abuse (sexual abuse of a minor by the father, with medical evidence); the mother had been put on supervised visitation specific to some shady people/groups, and was both traumatized and, understandably, broke.  The year was about 2011-2012, I posted it actively at the time, with others, and the venue (if I recall it right) was a certain court known as a “high-conflict” one (cases could be referred to it from anywhere in the state) with known AFCC officials.  I was not the only blogger or reporter involved in calling attention to this scenario .

You cannot get much more relevant to the issue of “Family Courts” than this situation … however my featured post doesn’t talk about that — it talks about two different nationally networked “child abuse prevention” nonprofits and their self-descriptions as opposed to their financials.  It also so happened that a known AFCC-member-originated nonprofit called “Kids’ Turn” which I’d been tracking had submerged itself under one of the nationally networked child abuse prevention nonprofits, “SF CAPC” which then suddenly changed its name again to “Safe & Sound” in 2017, and continued running the trademarked curriculum, featuring “parental alienation prevention.”  This topic is also referenced on my Front Page at some length. //LGH Dec. 22, 2019.

Below that, Section (3) just lists the ten text boxes in wider format.  It’s a straight copy except brief labels to each of those boxes, and here, enlarging the font size which on the sidebar I miniaturized to take up less space.  Section (3) has a certain border and background color:  Look for this, which marks the start of it (as well as a very large “(3)” heading):

(TEXT BOX 1 – CURRENT POSTS (Static “Posts Page” of this blog).


Sections (1), (2), and (3) begin here:


(1)  WHY THIS POST AT THIS TIME

This post addresses a technical difficulty I’ve noticed:  when accessing this blog through a cell-phone (at least the version I have), the right sidebar is hard to find.

The right sidebar provides basic navigation and featured post links and short-bursts of content for overviews of the materials I blog. I’d just been updating it, again with considerable effort detailing the format html (size, style, border, background color, etc.), adding another information box (post reference) for TOC 2017 which somehow had been bumped off the top 12 sticky posts, and in general, administrative house-keeping for clarity.  For the extra effort put in to things not cell-phone friendly (readily accessible or even visible only to people with laptops or computers) made no sense and a post to correct the situation did make sense.

(Image filename only): “LGH|FCM Go-To Widget Update (images 1,2) + ‘More Resources’ Widget (Img3, just to reference ‘Widget’ Definition) ~~3 SShots 2019Dec21 Sat PST @ {exact time, “NOYB”}.png”

Because this post adds a snapshot (version as of this date) of my top-right sidebar “GO-TO” widget, it complements two other July, 2019, posts shown within a different sidebar widget, which I named “More Resources.”**  Those two posts (as displayed within that widget) have similar functions, but off-ramped different parts of my sidebar.  The purpose of “More Resources” was to fully delete more text and link widgets; the overall purpose was shortening that sidebar, but the purpose here of posting contents of the “GO-TO” sidebar widget and all ten of its text-boxes (contents) isn’t off-ramping (those contents remains in place) but another way to publicize them and navigate the blog.

**Full widget title (See nearby image):  “More Resources (a.k.a. Former Sidebar Widgets (FULL of Show & Tell Texts, Links, Key Posts and a few “DONATE” Buttons too).”

Like those “More Resources” posts, this one also expands margins from sidebar widths. Being marked sticky, it’s now become topmost on the blog, as #1 of 13 sticky posts, to provide extra navigation help for people with viewing devices which may not be able display that sidebar so easily, including navigation to things fundamental to the blog purpose, feature a certain page, and restate a few basic principles as I just described above.

My updated label to the GO-TO widget makes it more specific, by mentioning that it contains (currently) TEN text-boxes, the term also echoed in the Section (3) list below by simply calling them “Text Box 1” etc. Otherwise one might think each text box was its own “widget.”

(2) Featuring a Certain Page’s Drill-Downs

Which page (with its two related posts) drilled-down certain child-abuse prevention nonprofit networks, emphasizing two basic realities (principles).

[Section (2) continued to grow after I published the post, mostly to cover claims I’d made or satisfy further my own curiosity on some of the quotes.  Some readers may be interested in the references to tobacco-tax revenues-based public/private enterprise which was referenced, in passing, on that featured page (California’s “First 5” promotion of MIECHV-funded (universal ideally) Home Visitation). Explained when I get to that part…]

While fine-tuning this particular “GO-TO: CURRENT POSTS” widget, I saw one of its text boxes referencing a certain page (“For example, National Children’s Alliance…”) published Jan. 2, 2018, nearly two years ago, was missing the standard “short-link ending” phrase.

Clicking through to grab those characters and add them to the text box, I skimmed the page again and realized and was personally reminded: <>it’s still a good example of drill-downs on connected, shapeshifting, shady-language-using websites; <>it connects to two other posts, which deal with national response to “Child Abuse” issues; and <>how these networks tend to operate vs. how they tend to speak of themselves on the websites.

While here, I’m also re-publicizing that Page (accessible/shown in “Text Box 8”) as it supplements two related posts (shown in “Text Boxes 9 and 10” of 10) which represents a major drill-down,  I also talk up current principles still important as applied to specific  named organizations still impacting the “Child Abuse Prevention” and ‘Child Advocacy” fields (and influencing dyanmics of the family court systems) something of deep concern to, I believe, most people.

Much of this represented years-earlier work I felt important enough in January 2018, to feature on that GO-TO widget, but supplemented for this post (as I recall).


Once published and marked “sticky” this post (“Family Court Matters’ Issues Summary, At This Time: Right Sidebar ‘GO-TO | Current Posts’ Widget  (Publ. Dec. 21, 2019 as 13th Sticky Post). (short-link ends “-bUM,”..),” not the following page I’m showing) becomes (by virtue of date created) the top post on the blog (the ‘Posts’ page), making any references to “12 Sticky posts” outdated as it becomes the 13th.

This is the particular text-box within this particular top-right sidebar widget that inspired this post.


This Page (shortlink ends “PsBXH-8iP”) holds detailed drill-downs and supplements the next two POSTS (‘Chasing Down Corp + Charitable Registratn’s’…Pt. 1, Pt. 2) shown next (below) on this text widget)


This Page: is still relevant, a good read; deals w/ AFCC-member- (Judge-Lawyer-Court Services Administrator-) founded Kids’Turn, (and) Internat’l Parental Kidnapping as regards the Hague Convention; and shows HOW specific non-profit coalitions organize to trademark programs + obtain federal grants, while using mis-leading language, (several) name-changing rapidly (SFCAPC became ‘ Safe+Sound,’ etc.) and more..)

Because I’m listing all ten text boxes on this widget, the above paragraphs show up in order (#s 1 through 10) below on this post…..

How that now looks on the sidebar (except the red rectangle, added to the image to show which page I’m referring to).  The two related pages also show below it (Text Boxes 8, 9 and 10 below):

TOPICS on this (again, recommended reading) page include showing, with exhibits, how although “A PROGRAM =/= A PERSON,” public/private enterprise often talks as though it were, both individually (at the nonprofit website, at the government website) and as mutually referring to each other.

I noticed among this  January 2, 2018 “For example, National Children’s Alliance, Alabama-based (legal domicile) and its network of CACs and Statewide CAC Coalitions…” page’s many drill-downs (annotated images of screenprints from entity websites and from the associated tax returns, including showing how a single year’s grants were distributed nationwide to similarly-named organizations) it explains and illustrates the deceitful “summary” practice many organizations use of referring to a PROGRAM being run**  “anthropomorphically,” that is, as if it were a live corporate (business, i.e., private-sector) PERSON, actor, or (in effect) business.

**The obvious selling point of the entity to the public are the programs, often technical-assistance and trainings, often trademarked too, but to the operators and owners, the selling point is the funding streams with roots in public funds, sold under a cause anyone would be hard put to protest aloud.

Try it on for size (state as your position, using the pronoun “I,”) without backing it up by a presentation of how funds are in fact being utilized: how socially acceptable or politically correct do these statements sound? Could you sign on to these statements?

I am opposed to child abuse prevention and efforts to help children who have been abused, or to determine — on behalf of those accused of abusing them — whether or not and how much they have been abused.

Try that with almost any other popular cause:

I’m opposed to government helping prevent violence against women… I’m opposed to government helping promote responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage as a public norm.

There seems to be a bit more support for:

I’m opposed to single-mother (or “female-headed”) households as a public danger. …. I’m opposed to permitting divorce… and believe the public (i.e., local governments nation wide) should invest heavily in preventing it through extra counseling.

Unfortunately, that’s also often where we should not just turn off the investigative or inquiry mode when it comes to specific organizations and programs entrusted with (basically) stopping bad things and promoting good things socially. We should remain aware that human temptation and corruption does, indeed, exist in a variety of places: “high” (in the power structures that exist) was well as low (in the same). If directly questioned on this, who’d deny that these things can exist?

But what about when it comes to challenging specifics of entities entrusted with, or flying the colors (flags, banners, etc.) of noble causes like those administered above?  Is challenging individual systems of networked public/private operations as the same as challenging the banners under which they fly, as ideas?

BASIC REALITIES ARE OFTEN LOST IN TRANSLATION. THIS BLOG IS A CONTINUE CALL TO ATTENTION OF THE PROCESS OF TRANSLATION, and HOW WE MIGHT TRANSLATE RHETORIC from SPECIFIC GROUPS (websites, organizations, professional advocates in certain fields handling these issues, etc.) INTO OBJECTIVE, MEASURABLE TERMS:  SPECIFICALLY CASH FLOW (Finances).  Accounting for Accountability.

PRINCIPLE: A PROGRAM is not a PERSON!  

In basic grammar, the PROGRAM is the thing acted upon, launched, or run by a PERSON or PERSONS.  

Its position would be direct object of a transitive verb; not the subject of a sentence with a transitive verb taking a direct object. 

The subject of a sentence with main verbs like “launch, initiated, started, run, founded (etc.) is NOT the direct object.  A PROGRAM being by definition in the category of things launched, initiated, started, run, or founded***, does not have a life of its own. Being by category in any description of its launch (etc.) is the object acted upon, some person, entity or other acting force (in the position of subject of a sentence) caused the program to run, even as no software program, however tooled to, in chain reactions or otherwise, continue replicating itself, IS the same as that program’s designer.##

Paragraph footnotes: (***as are corporate filings to form business entities which DO qualify as “persons”) (##Considerations of “Artificial Intelligence” not addressed in this discussion:  I’m talking about FINANCIAL transparency vis-a-vis the taxpayers here…and ways to throw them ((us)) off-track in seeking it, or even knowing where to look)

Think about it: A “program,” not having a life of its own as a “person” it cannot be held legally responsible.  Substituting one for the other (grammatically, in sentence usage, if not directly, calling a “program” seeks to avoid legal responsibility, and no other legitimate (ethical) purpose…).  What kind of mentality is behind conflating one with another while talking about nationwide altruistic and abuse-preventative (in this example) activities under the tax-exempt status?

When the program is described as running, starting, launching the program activities, in effect, the identity of the PERSON in that sentence is hid.  In a narrative context where usage flows from truthful to untruthful, extra effort to decipher is required IF any intent to follow the finances and economic energy keeping that program going.

The two terms [PROGRAM vs. PERSON] are mutually exclusive and using ONE as if it was the other, where no “dba” (registered trademark or “doing business as” indicator) exists without telling the viewers serves little other purpose than to derail look-ups of who’s behind that usage (dba, tradename, etc.).  In these subject matters, that “WHO” is likely to be either privately funded seeking to influence public resources, or public-funded (through grants or contracts) but operating privately as a nonprofit, which reduces accountability. If you read (all of) that post, you’ll see my explaining this on an annotated image from the website.


STAYING AWARE THAT “A PROGRAM =/= A PERSON” KEEPS ONE AWARE OF USAGE, WHICH AWARENESS IS VITAL FOR SEEKING ACCOUNTABILITY, CONNECTION OF CLAIMED EXPENDITURES TO CLAIMED RECEIPTS FOR THE SAME IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE.

Without understanding the basic reality that a “program” is not a (corporate) “person” unless registered separately under nearly the exact same name in the same legal domicile (in which case, that spoken of is in fact two different things — with the ENTITY being the most important one for fiscal transparency) we do not understand basic operations of government itself, especially government dealing with the private, non-profit sector.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 21, 2019 at 8:17 pm

Three Tax-exempt Cummings Entities (Inc. 1994 and 2004 (co-located) in Reno, NV, and 2014 in Phoenix, AZ) and Their Family-Controlled Personal Agenda: Taking Former Arizona State U’s ‘DBH’ Accreditation International, Con’td. (#2 in a Pipeline, Publ. Dec. 16, 2019).

leave a comment »

CGI-BHS (or “CummingsInstitute.com” ‘History’ page, shows Husband, Wife, Daughter; this is Nicholas A. Cummings only.  More below on this post… (SShot 2019-12-16)

While  the three Cummings Foundations (or “tax-exempt Cummings entities”) do not connect directly to AzBio roadmap I’ve been blogging recently, they are, generally, in the same business of which healthcare is a large part, and one of them, as it happens for this post series, also active in Arizona.  Two are in Nevada: See map of western United States.

Also, family court concerned parents and domestic violence  survivors, protective parents and others concerned about child abuse (including sexual abuse of children, treatment for which comes up here), keep in mind that the influential NCJFCJ* is located at the University of Nebraska-Reno, a longstanding chapter of AFCC** (providing more work for psychologists etc. via family court systems) is in Arizona. (New Here? If so, know that: *stands for “National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Inc.”  a key nonprofit in the family court biosphere…**stands for” Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.“).

I had to flee California a year ago (had been trying to leave for years) and in doing so, one fine, Sunday, late-summer evening, I drove first to (and after a quick overnight, through) Reno, which is just a very few hours (if that) away from the San Francisco Bay Area, also a known location for AFCC influence.  Dr. Cummings, above, seems to have practiced in the SF Area for many years also.

The AFCC and the field’s (and family court systems’) tendency is to view and discuss criminal behavior as the perpetrator’s treatable, manageable, maybe even preventable psychological or psychotherapeutic issues.  This approach also involves treatment of (and gaining access to) victims of the same perpetrators– in fact, the more treatment all round for everyone, the better, it seems.  So much of public policy deals with this kind of population management and behavioral health/modification interests… an enduring line of work supported by public resources.

Co-locating/integrating mental healthcare (referrals and interventions) at the medical level likely works great as a career curve for those providing the mental/behavioral health interventions, as professionals in specific “psych-related” fields.  I’m not so sure how it works well for the funding public, or patients funneled through the various centralized, coordinated, systems of care, either as effectively reducing crime and violence, OR economically.

Again, look at your maps for California, Arizona, and Nevada

The AFCC-collaborating NCJFCJ has been located for decades at the University of Nevada-Reno which, despite being in a different state, is still near the UK CAFCASS-collaborating AFCC strongholds in San Francisco (although origins and strong connections still exist in Los Angeles),  and as I’ve been saying recently, the attempts to regionalize and market Arizona internationally as a great pharmaceutical and behavioral health entrepreneurial hub, even down to upgrading the airports.  [“CAFCASS”  Children and Family Court Advisory Support and Services, est. about 2000]  That’s one reason examining the filing habits of the financial backers is so important.(While it’s still there..) see my Twitter account profile (home page) for a long, pinned Tweet (thread) showing this, both in descriptions with links and some of the attached media, naming also how domestic violence specialists with the health (vs. criminality) focused professionals such as Jeffrey L. Edleson (with strong ties to both University of Minnesota and the University of California-Berkeley (both, Schools of Social Work), and is now working separately on Hague-related international (parental abduction) issues in the same field.  {{Paras. edited to correct a misplaced phrase and give definition of the acronym CAFCASS and directions to why I connect the three bodies (CAFCASS is not a private organization; AFCC and NCJFCJ are, but membership features (espec. the latter) judges and other civil servants)Different “rules of engagement” apply for government entities vs. private corporations, nonprofit or otherwise, which is the point, and those private corporations’ leverage when they overlap in membership with civil (gov’t) employees in positions of high authority.  This leverage being exercised through private memberships can also be operated, where it suits the groups’ purposes, privately — away from the prying eyes of the (paying) public.  //LGH Dec. 19, 2019 edit.


Other major themes are regionalization, nationalization, and internationalization, of course (as ever) coordination of services to integrate cross-sector while maintaining close access to U.S. federal grants to states from HHS and its many parts.

What Cummings (the family line) may lack in billionaire wealth like some others in the USA, they seem to (primarily he seems to, his (sic) women’s voices and another male Cummings (son? former son-in-law? “Andrew” rarely seen on-line in their own words) more than make up for in aggressive self-promotion, branding, storytelling (rarely matches the withheld financials), spin, and marketing.

Historically he is also well aware of the power of degree-granting independent nonprofits, having started up, it says, some of the earlier independent professional schools of psychology in California in the late 1960s, at a time when the field was just “coming into its own…”

Overall, this drill-down is long overdue.

Post Title: Three Tax-exempt Cummings Entities (Inc. 1994 and 2004 (co-located) in Reno, NV, and 2014 in Phoenix, AZ) and Their Family-Controlled Personal Agenda: Taking Former Arizona State U’s ‘DBH’ Accreditation International, Con’td. (#2 in a Pipeline, Publ. Dec. 16, 2019). (Short-link ending “-bLg,” about 12,000 15,000 words, some overlap with prior post. Last update/tags added and I discussed (multi-screenprints posted) also on Twitter, Dec. 18, concerned about subcontractor “Benevity” and related chameleon-like corporate filings in California, Florida, and run it seems from Canada).


This post adds drill-downs on these entities and looks at the organizations’ self-descriptions in contrast with tax and state-level filings). It also profiles two other involved people (besides quoting the self-profiling of namesake Nicholas A. Cummings in the process of quoting websites).  For further follow-up, I’d recommend (someone else!) further follow-up, among other things (such as “Sun Corridor, Inc. entities and developments), on the Columbus, Ohio’s American Endowment Foundation’s free-wheeling “DAF” model and the Tobin Family behind them. Tags coming soon. Post may be partitioned after publication; it certainly needs it, but for now, I want it published…It’s possible or probable that a Cummings may be handling one of the donor-advised funds there (in Ohio) as it shows as a major contributor to one of the entities in Nevada… //LGH

This post exists to supplement my #2 post in the Arizona Pipeline, now published, accessible at:

Wm. O’Donohue, UN-Reno PsychProfessor 20yrs or so (or Wm. T. O’Donohue) (from faculty page, viewed Dec 16, 2019)

Wm. O’Donohue (from Sage Publications author website, viewed Dec. 16, 2019

In the process, besides the family named, I also ran across and briefly profiled an early CEO of one of the entities (which showed up on its tax return), when his name also came up as frequent co-author on an earlier (2008) find (two nearby images): William O’Donohue, sometimes “William T. O’Donohue,” a professor of psychology at University of Nevada-Reno.

He directs a “Victims of Crime & Integrated Healthcare Research Lab” there, and part of his vita (only current to Jan. 2010 available at university faculty page) shows one professorship sponsored by or named after Cummings (image top left on this post), with whom he has also authored several (papers, books chapters, etc.).

(Chair of California’s First-5 Commission since 2013; see under CCFC.ca.gov (California Children & Families Commission is also called “First-5” and has a statewide as well as (58?) county commissions; parallel to this there are similarly named and connected private non-profits. Together, they push certain types of programming using Tobacco Tax Revenues obtained through a (passed 1998?) Prop. 10 Californians voted through. I’ve blogged it and how it intersects with “family court matters” under posts with the title “Tobacco.” (Health Systems Flush with Cash, etc.)

Later, mostly because Nicholas Cummings continually references his own background at Kaiser Permanente as either “Chief Psychologist” or “Head of Mental Health” (1959-1979), and Kaiser is so closely associated with promotion of universal healthcare in the USA (“Obamacare,” etc.) — while Cummings’ main business model (“BioDyne”) is pushing to locate psychologists alongside doctors as beneficiaries of that funding stream  — I also looked at the former head of Kaiser Permanente in California, George Halvorson, who since 2013 has been appointed Chair of California’s First 5 Commission, and whose bio blurb there cites to a strange nonprofit which bears his name legally, but not as divulged on the website — anywhere — while it’s clearly promoting NINE of his books (and no one else’s books)…


Below, I’ve linked to and summarized foundation data for CFBH and its related or main contributing businesses: another, earlier Cummings Foundation (“N&DCF,” as mentioned on the website) in Reno, Nevada, and somewhere between those two, taking contributions from at least three businesses (an LP, an LLC, and an “Inc.”) all labeled NDC, and (largest amounts at least in one year I viewed) a two-plus-billion-dollar-assets entity, American Endowment Foundation (“AEF”) based in Ohio, as mentioned in at least the first version of post title. Partway through this post I also ran across the “CGI-BHS” which accounts for the post title’s listed years: about one every ten years it seems…

Pardon the long sentence in the next paragraph.  The subject is the longest part.  The predicate is the main point:  Why have we as a nation tolerated putting tax-exempt foundations, private and/or so-called “Community,” effectively on steroids, incentivizing development of bad accounting practices within the sector; that is, we have, being ourselves taxed almost every time we “twitch,” justified as supporting government services for our own welfare and paying off long-term (forward-projected) pension liabilities across-the-board, continued to tolerate (by ignoring, or failing to report as they exist: comprising an identifiable sector) private interests spreading roots (fiscally) and continuing to develop business relationships involving public institutions underground in such a way that most of the public, who reside mostly above-ground fiscally as employees (through tax-withholding, fees-based public services such as access to the courts, or receiving food to eat when work is not available) just cannot, realistically, see each new round of the same types of entrapment coming?

That was a very long sentence too, introducing this one:

Having just a few foundations, backed by wealth from prior corporate profits in the pharma-medical-mental-healthcare, transportation, and internet/info/communications infrastructures (themselves all closely connected) plotting together to control the economy of an entire state as a regional hub — marketing THEIR private roadmap internationally through additional multi-partner entities (like Arizona’s “Sun Corridor, Inc.”), often with overlapping leadership, and at least one of them (sector: USA’s burgeoning Mental Health Archipelago) taking major funding from an out-of-state, out-of-region, tax-exempt foundation featuring Donor Advised Funds (“DAF”) administrative services — specializing as a “concierge service” to financial advisors themselves managing clients’ donor advised funds) seems like putting the inherent obfuscation of the DAF (let alone tax-exempt) sector on steroids.

SUN CORRIDOR searched at Arizona Corporation Commission, came up with several entities; one Sun Corridor, Inc. (reg. 2008 for-profit, line of work “business consulting”) was administratively dissolved for non-filing as of 2014. Somehow (I still don’t see “how..”) a pre-existing (2005ff) identically named — but NOT for profit “Sun Corridor, Inc.” formed in 2005 (in a different county) is still active.  Sun Corridor Subsidiary, Inc. (also non-profit) still exists active; Sun Corridor Metropolitan Planning Organization, Inc., NONProfit, still exists.  And lastly, applied for in July 2015 only, the trade name “Sun Corridor” was applied for by Sun Corridor, Inc. — hopefully the legitimate (nonprofit) not the administratively dissolved one.  I’ve pasted here as active links and in table format; links may or may not remain active.  If not, repeat the search at the link given below under mini-section FOUR HELPFUL LINKS to VALIDATE OR FACT-CHECK THIS POST

SEARCH RESULTS (no column for “founding date” which sure would be nice! I’ve typed them in after “Entity Name,” row by row, in these results)
Entity ID Entity Name Entity Type Entity County Agent Name Agent Type Entity Status
S627242 SUN CORRIDOR               {appl. July 2015} Trade Name Active
18813950 SUN CORRIDOR METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION    {8/20/2014} Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Pinal IRENE HIGGS Statutory Agent Active
20109206 SUN CORRIDOR SUBSIDIARY, INC.  {6/8/2015|Bus. Type: Business League} Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Pima ROCKWELL AGENCY LLC Statutory Agent Active
11804156 SUN CORRIDOR, INC.                         {2005} Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Pima LAWRENCE M HECKER Statutory Agent Active
14963961 SUN CORRIDOR, INC.          {2008/Adm Dissolved for non-filing by 2014} Domestic For-Profit (Business) Corporation Maricopa KEVIN PASCHKE Statutory Agent Inactive

Statutory Agent Rockwell Agency LLC (L19182049) was formed only April, 2014, its agent Lawrence M. Hecker and some other principals including one added 2015, T. William Pew, entity address in Tucson).  (See the link provided or repeat the search if needed).


It really is JUST A FEW FOUNDATIONS, but COORDINATING ACTIVITIES

WHILE FAILING TO “TELL-ALL” ON WEBSITES

& WITHHOLDING SUFFICIENT AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FAIR ANALYSIS.

 


Total results: (here, just 1)Search Again.  (American Endowmt Fndtn, EIN# 341747398, YEDec, FY2017 Only)

(The last three years’ returns shown in a table much further down on this post).

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
American Endowment Foundation OH 2017 990 2085 $2,001,944,686 34-1747398

Started only in 1993, this Columbus, Ohio-based “AEF” says it’s now approaching $3 billion assets.  Its latest tax return gives just a whiff of the size (but not rate of expansion; a three years-worth table is further down in this post). Also involved in this same AzBio roadmap is another Ohio-based, well-known entity, ‘Battelle Memorial.”

Like the Cummings Foundations, my background reading on the AEF (only discovered within the past month) shows many family relationships among the own board; a key indicator of purpose may be found in the background of Thomas J. Tobin (briefly touched on here in context of the tax returns).

Other than I was personally busy and writing on other urgent topics, I am now wondering how it is I failed to look up the EINs of the Nicholas and Dorothy Cummings Foundation (est. 1994 in Nevada) and  Cummings Foundation for Behavioral Health (est. 2004 in Nevada) and keep monitoring them year by year after I first noticed the founder(s)’ stated goals and behaviors OVER SEVEN YEARS ago (in 2012). Early 2012 puts awareness of this connection to the ‘Battered Mothers Custody Conference’ regular and vocal presenters (at least one in psychology, another in law) early on in the course of this blog.

Debts and liabilities relating to some real estate among the Cummings-controlled entities, which  are housed or held in at least three other entities which aren’t labeled non-profit  (shown below).  


FOUR HELPFUL LINKS to VALIDATE OR FACT-CHECK THIS POST:

1), 2) These two links may prove handy in follow-up or following (fact-checking) this post.  Nevada Business Entity Search: https://esos.nv.gov/EntitySearch/OnlineEntitySearch, branded “Silver Flume,” and the Arizona Corporation Commission’s version of a similar but (as ever) not identical search interface, at: https://ecorp.azcc.gov/EntitySearch/Index.

3) Other than specific organizations’ own websites, I also, as usual, did many searches at Candid.org (new branding of Foundation Center after purchasing “Guidestar.org”), exact url: https://candid.org/research-and-verify-nonprofits/990-finder.  You’ll find this often in my posts when showing tax return tables with this phrase, which Candid.org generates:  “Total Results: [number]  Search Again.

4) Another website I use often to locate an EIN# where organizations are being especially vague, coy, or otherwise secretive about their own — and sometimes to locate a tax return more current than what Candid.org can (or does) produce, which returns are (as I understand it) obtained from the IRS anyway: http://apps.irs.gov/app/eos

Post-specific: Later on in the post I looked for Psychology Licensing Boards in both Nevada and Arizona.  Nevada’s seems functional; Arizona’s does not.


The general theme of my current posts is Arizona, specifically “AzBIO” and behavioral health ecosystem build-ups (this century, and the last decade of the 1900s).

I already showed an AFCC connection to a University of Arizona’s “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior” (through Connie J.A. Beck expounding upon mandatory mediation with IPV (Intimate Partner Violence) involvement), and previewed other major foundations behind turning at least Southern Arizona into a regional BioScience economic hub.

There’s open admission that this has been coordinated in large part by the Flinn Foundation in association with Battelle Memorial  out of Columbus, Ohio.


Flinn Foundation has no problem publicizing its roadmaps, and progress towards the private collective goals targeting an entire state ecosystem, whether by state, by year and quarter, or part of Arizona (Southern, Northern), or by metropolitan area.

What it does, obviously, have a problem with is posting any of its own financials ANYwhere on the website https://flinn.org/bioscience/

Having seen this BioScience / Behavioral Health (related) sponsored drive for the State of Arizona, I then felt it necessary to include and remind us of the role of the Cummingses (elder:  Nicholas A. and Dorothy) and dedicated daughter (Janet L.), (and (relationship?) an Andrew Cummings in Greenwich, CT, not usually mentioned on the websites but showing in the tax returns).

Nicholas A., throughout seems well aware of (and typically found citing to) his prior leverage as former President of the APA (American Psychological Association) and for twenty years (1959-1979) Kaiser Permanente  HMO (“Health Maintenance Organization”) or its predecessor, as Chief of Mental Health, following the famous LSD-dispensing Timothy Leary.

For example in one of the three featured Cummings-named non-profits on this post (more details below), despite how small, recent, and specifically tailored to his own business model it is, the “history” page casually calls it a “university” and cites its inspiration from a meeting of Silicon Valley Tech entrepreneurs who dropped out of college — because they knew more than their teachers — and “revolutionized society.”  The text then goes on, citing his own credits, to state his plan to revolutionize the healthcare sector…. Talk about “grandiose” — while casually deficient in basic state-level compliances, sloppy in providing specifics on the descriptive websites, and tax returns in poor format, once a person can locate them (off-site):

Our History (url: https://cummingsinstitute.com/history/)**

Founded in 2015, the Cummings Graduate Institute for Behavioral Health Studies is one of a handful of universities worldwide that grant the distinguished Doctor of Behavioral Health (DBH) degree,*** and is the only university that exclusively focuses on the growing field of integrated healthcare. CGI credits its origins to the work of Nicholas Cummings, Ph.D, Sc.D (1924 — ), an American psychologist, author, and former president of the American Psychology Association (1979)….

[all emphases mine, quote continued below]

**The word “graduate” not included in web domain name; it could’ve been — why not? the word “institute” without further definition is just about meaningless).

***This’d be a great place to list or link to ANY others in the handful to support such a statement, but it seems the sentiment was why bother?  It just keeps on talking…. and assumes the reader is content to be a passive consumer of the storytelling.  Where’s any respect for the intended readers?

Grouping this degree-granting nonprofit set up only a few years ago the designation “university” seems to be grasping at importance:  Typically university websites at least in the USA as we commonly understand them carry the suffix “_____.edu” whether public or private, and the term “university” hasn’t yet been fully degraded to “anyone who can pull a nonprofit together and get accreditation for granting a few degrees…”

Who and What this nonprofit (and family line) is may be better viewed by looking closer at the various financial (tax) and corporate filings it doesn’t care to post in between the news on its achievements.

Actually — see nearby image or its website — having just in June and September 2019 obtained certain kinds of accreditation, it announces the launch of a “CGI.EDU” website in January 2020.  (The full legal name is CGI in Behavioral Health Studies” which’d be a more honest representation of what it’s doing; retaining the reference to “Cummings” and losing the references (BHS) to what it’s actually promoting).

CGI-BHS announces ‘CGI.edu’ is ‘Coming soon’ (Jan 2020) ~~Screen Shot 2019-12-16

The text then launches a recitation of his brilliant innovation, and eventually only in passing and never separately from HIS accomplishments mentions his own daughter,  Dr. Janet L. Cummings.

Janet L.’s voice is not expressed here as in any way distinct from his, nor anything she did separately from him, although it’s likely she’ll be outliving both him and his wife Dorothy M. Cummings, not mentioned either, here, as actually DOING anything. Janet L. will be with other leadership (few outside Cummings on the various entities show up — you’ll see, below) “carrying the torch” on this enterprise.  It doesn’t specifically mention a father/daughter relationship and I don’t know whether Dr. & Mrs. Dorothy Cummings is Janet’s (or Andrew’s) biological mother, stepmother, or not.  It could be found out, I just do not know presently.  Judging by the photo, she resembles Nick Cummings and looks a whole lot younger. Was that a graduation photo?

(Nevada Board of Psychologist Licensure look-ups:  Janet L. (“..rID1064”) has a 1992 Psy.D.  from Wright State University, but is not active in Nevada because “Registration status:  Closed.  Incomplete Application.”  Psychboard.Az.Gov searches Behavioral Analysts and Psychologists separately. I couldn’t get the search to load currently, but before doing so, a pop-up message warns it directs away from a government site to a non-government site.  Therefore, the process of looking to a government site (and the licensing board at Arizona) seems to simply direct away from it; disclaimers beyond that warning are not mentioned in the pop-up.

Our History (url: https://cummingsinstitute.com/history/), cont’d.

… In the early days of the technical revolution, Dr. Nick Cummings was invited as the CEO of American Biodyne to attend a luncheon*** where he would meet innovators and entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley, including Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Dr. Cummings was inspired by the brilliance of these entrepreneurs, and was struck by a similarity he noticed among the group: a particularly high college dropout rate. The tech giants of Silicon Valley had either enrolled in college and quickly dropped out after learning they knew far more than any of the faculty, or never enrolled at all; choosing instead to spend all of their time inventing the new technologies that would absolutely revolutionize our lives. Dr. Cummings realized that what healthcare needed was a similar revolution, and he saw an opportunity to teach behavioral health providers to disrupt the ineffective, fragmented healthcare system from within. There was only one problem: no university existed that was out-of-the-box enough to create both the curriculum and the environment that would stimulate the kind of innovation that healthcare needed. The choice was clear.

In some world views, anything “fragmented” is bad or regrettable, although the purpose here is to “fragment” (disrupt) from within to shift the paradigm for the “entrepreneurial” among the behavioral health practitioners (and psychologists)…  [I noticed the State of Arizona has separate licensing links and presumably requirements for behavioral health analysts and psychologists.]]

In 2014, Dr. Cummings along with his daughter, Janet L. Cummings, Psy.D, created## the Cummings Graduate Institute for Behavioral Health Studies  to fill the educational gaps for innovative and entrepreneurial healthcare professionals wishing to disrupt healthcare from within or for those looking to launch new ventures. Drs. Cummings designed the DBH program at CGI to address three critical needs behavioral health providers would need to be successful in this aim: medical literacy, efficient and effective delivery of behavioral health interventions in medical settings, and entrepreneurship and innovation in the healthcare marketplace.

[all emphases mine, end of this quote]

## “CREATED…”: The word “created” is generic, however, the links I gave above to Nevada and Arizona business entity search sites lead to documentation of who actually ‘created’ as in ‘incorporated,’ and Nick C’s name isn’t on the filing paperwork.  As I recall from recent lookups (but, you have the links)…hers and one non-family member’s, Brett Sabatini, is.

*** “A LUNCHEON…”: Conveniently vague and no context given:  approximate year (even decade), geography (which state), ANY name of “luncheon” other than “a luncheon” and how many other innovators were involved, or special invitees.  Was this within a conference, at a pay-per-plate fundraiser, or what?  We all know luncheons can be “tete-a-tete” (intimate, small) or parts of any hotel- or resort-based conference with up to a thousand or so attendees.  With no other info, the statement is basically just boasting.

The carelessness of the text so few internal links or footnotes to validate any claim, and such vague language as to make fact-checking most claims tricky, assumes a storytelling, “take our story on faith” approach.  Though no Ph.D., I never put out posts with so few links and so little supporting evidence.  Even children listening to stories — which readers shouldn’t be treated as — should get to ask questions.  Yet the dynamic here is, DON’T ask questions, and avoid direct connectings to anything which might show the fiscal, corporate, or anything more than the most basic summary of who they (the Cummings entities mentioned) are and what they are doing.

From another part of the site, a sense of how many degrees granted so far:  As of Sept. 2019, only TEN:

As of September 2019, CGI has graduated ten Doctors of Behavioral Health who are located across the United States practicing in a variety of capacities including healthcare leadership, private practice, and university education.

cummingsinstitute.com/contact-us/ (Viewed Dec 6, 2019. History page says the CGI was started in 2015, a spinoff from a DBH program (but privately controlled) at Arizona State Univ.; Nicholas Cummings (bottom left) was born 1924 so would be about 95 yrs old now…

When and by whom were its various accreditations granted? (Stated on-site HERE)

AZ-SARA (State Authority Reciprocity Agreements with other states, which then apparently lets it be a member of the National Council (“NC”)-SARA:  Sept., 2019.

DEAC ( a Washington, D.C., nonprofit referring to post-secondary education) — only June, 2019.

A large banner announces that its “CGI.EDU” website will launch in January 2020 despite having only granted ten graduate degrees so far, total. (It seems that an undated (and no-names) photo I show again below, may show the first three, or possibly four.  They may be staff, but they’re wearing robes, and three of the (standing) four, caps…

TWO EXISTING BLOG MEDIA LIBRARY PDFs (2013, 2008) LEAD TO MORE VITAL INFO: 

The next two pdf links come from this blog’s existing “Media Library” and were not created from scratch during my current investigations (look-ups) for this post.

I include the first (May, 2013), because it reflects Cummings stating his own qualifications for legal expert witness-type purposes in a specific civil case; I include the second, (2008 and a J Contemporary Psychotherapy article), a short piece ‘…Our Inadvertent Vow of Poverty..‘ because it reflects intention to build the financial resources for the field. It’s well-written.  Of course it also ignores entires fields of basics on the family court system and how the Dept. of Health and Human Services runs specific legislated funding streams to impact outcomes in family courts, although those courts are under state, not federal jurisdiction.  The desired impact includes increased “noncustodial” (primarily fathers’) time and settling differences out of court, i.e., steering litigants away from normal civil or criminal courts where specific rights and procedures exist, or that overall,** this family court system is having a “field day” providing revenues for those in the fields of psychology, psychotherapy, etc.  It also shows two co-authors (daughter Janet and William O’Donohue).  [[**Sentence in this color added post-publication 12/17.]]

On researching tax returns for this post, I’d noticed that William O’Donohue also shows up as a CEO on one of the Cummings foundations. Presumably he is or was a colleague and/or business partner of like mind on the enterprise/s, the footnote shows he was (and seemingly still is) a professor in the University of Nevada-Reno Psychology Department with a specialty interest in treating children adults who have been sexually abused, and has been supported (per a vita with footer stating only “January, 2010” posted on his U-Nevada Reno, faculty page now, Dec., 2019, and that he’d had significant, ongoing grants supports from the NIJ, since degrees obtained (up through PhD) in psychology in the 1980s, and one, in “Philosophy of Science” in mid-1990s.

(The link’s label is mine; it’s a short read, makes 30 statements in as many numbered paragraphs, and the case –in Hudson County, NJ, with defendants in California — possibly deals with the issue of characterization of sexual re-orientation therapy as legitimate (vs. “de facto” unethical) where those engaging in it are fully-informed.  My main interest here, however, are his stated credentials.  Why, as late as 2013, no supporting links or footnotes are included to his claims (such as might be find in any article in, for example, a law review) I do not know.  It was a random internet find.   But, Please read!)

Looking for who was on (as it claimed to have been on) President Kennedy’s Mental Health Task Force (no year mentioned on the Certificate above), I found this page at the JFKLibrary.org which, being a brief summary, doesn’t name those on the Taskforce, but does describe how many (27) when they met with him at the White House (Oct. 18, 1961) and the context of constituting it (as supported by his sister Eunice Shriver Kennedy and in light of “Mental Retardation” (now, “intellectual disabilities,”) being an issue directly affecting the Kennedy family — his own sister, Rosemary, less than two years younger than himself).  This links to CarterCenter.org (associated with Emory University in Atlanta), “Mental Health TaskForce“, but reflects a 501©3 and doesn’t readily lead to identification of who was on the Carter Task Force while he was in Office.

References from this (I took some screenprints of a word-search) show lots of Cummings quoting Cummings over a period ranging from 1968 – the 2000s.  Just one sample (References are of course alpha by last name).  I encourage you to read this pdf (it’s not that long either).

 

ALSO AT THE UNIVERSITY of NEVADA-RENO is, with similar fields of concern, the National Council of Family and Juvenile Court Justices.

Re-reading this five years later (my pdf is dated 2014) I see that Wm. O’Donohue is listed there (and still) as a Professor of Psychology a University of Nevada-Reno, with an interesting specialty focus (integrated healthcare isn’t primary) and directing a ‘Victims of Crime & Integrated Care Research Lab” with, apparently (by pronoun usage, not all photos are clear and photos are not definitive anyway) four female assistants (who hold 3 M.A.’s and a single B.S. — in Psychology from Portland State University, last name “Cummings” — and a lone male, with a B.A. — or is it ” B.S.”?  (Label says one thing, contents the other, on the brief description available on this lab’s website), from University of Utah.


(Link in nearby text, my post short-link ending “-bLg” publ. Dec. 15, 2019) Caroline S. Cummings, B.S. of Victims of Crime & Integrated Healthcare Lab at University of Nevada-Reno, directed by Nicholas A. & Janet L. Cummings frequent co-author (and psychologist/professor, William O’Donohue. I have no idea whether or not she is related, but did notice.

O’Donohue’s vita is presented in doc, not pdf format; hard to open at first. Wm T. O’Donohue, WTO VITA ‘updated Jan 2010’ (Accessed from UNR website 2019Dec14, context post -bLg, Cummings associate) (39pp printed Doc to pdf, ca 4.5pp of this Educatn thru NIJ Grants, the rest, publicatns)

No products (publications proceeding from the lab, i.e., what does it do? are even listed.  Some of individual participants’ publications are, but not as associated with the lab.  He has a Wikipedia, all websites I’ve seen so far show the same headshot only photograph (with blank (solid-color, no context) and I found a single post (at least pertaining to him), seems inactive, called “http://williamodonohuephd.com“), one of just three external links on the Wiki page.


SEPARATELY, his LinkedIn (#8606726),judging by education profile, it’s the same person) shows a Nevada LLC active since 2011, “OneCare Health Solutions, LLC”  Judging by the “Silver Plume” Nevada registration this was NV20101695484, Formed 9/10/2010 and “Annual Report Due” 9/30/2015; apparently not provided as it remains (despite the LinkedIn’s characterization) “status revoked.”  The only other manager listed was an “Ed Edghill” in West Chester, Pennsylvania. I’m not a private investigator and chose not to go further looking to validate who is or isn’t this Ed Edghill (there are several by this last name listed in Sanger, California: may be entirely unrelated, or not, I DNK).


O’Donohue At Sage Publications:  (link to “author’s Website” from SAGE is, however, broken):

William T. O’Donohue is a licensed clinical psychologist, professor of psychology and adjunct professor in the Department of Philosophy at University of Nevada, Reno, and a faculty member of the National Judicial College. He is widely recognized in the field for his proposed innovations in mental health service delivery, in treatment design and evaluation, and in knowledge of empirically supported cognitive behavioral therapies. He is a member of the Association for the Advancement for Behavior Therapy and served on the Board of Directors of this organization. Dr. O’Donohue has published over 50 books and 150 articles in scholarly journals and book chapters. For the past 14 years, he has been director of a free clinic that treats children who have been sexually abused and adults who have been sexually assaulted.

(FURTHER LOOKUPS on my CELL PHONE SHOW BOOKS PUBLISHED BY SAGE and SAGE PUBLICATION’s AUTHOR SUMMARY.  For Further Exploration).


Nicholas Cummings’ background is in both: psychology and psychoanalysis. His enthusiasm for psychology seems directly related to awareness that most people can’t afford psychoanalysis, so they’re not reaching enough of the total human population who might become clients or, his preferred term, “patients.”  Key to reaching more is getting the profession (of psychology) mainstreamed directly with primary healthcare, a.k.a., that which public funds will back on the premise that more prevention (“Brief Intermittent Psychotherapy throughout a lifetime”) earlier saves costs later.

“Incidentally” this also helps preserve his chosen profession. Kaiser Permanente HMO and its (many) associated nonprofits, including foundations, especially in California but not limited to it, have also been closely engaged this century in pushing for universal healthcare (“Affordable Care Act” 2010, aka informally as “Obamacare.”).

 

 

 

http://www.ccfc.ca.gov/about/organization.html#members, he chairs First5 California, appointed in 2013. Click on name to read bio blurb, which references his prior background (and maintains connections still) to Minnesota.  This is the full quote:

George Halvorson was appointed by Governor Jerry Brown to chair the First 5 California Children and Families Commission in May 2013. He also is the chair and chief executive officer (CEO) of the Institute for InterGroup Understanding.*** In this role, Halvorson is focused on putting processes, teaching materials, and learning programs and approaches in place to help people deal with issues of racism, discrimination, intergroup anger, and intergroup conflict. He currently is authoring three new books that will serve as the core teaching curriculum for the Institute.

Prior to taking on his new roles focusing on children and intergroup conflict, Halvorson served for more than 11 years as the chair and CEO of Kaiser Permanente, retiring from that position at the end of 2013. Prior to his tenure at Kaiser, he was the president and CEO for Health Partners in Minnesota, serving in that position for 17 years.

Earlier in his career, Halvorson started health plans in Uganda and Jamaica, and helped start health plans in Chile, Spain, and Nigeria – most of which continue to operate. He has advised governments in Great Britain, Ireland, Germany, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Russia on health care issues and has been featured as an educator for national health ministries at the European Union Health Summit in Brussels.

“Peace Thoughts, Truth and Honesty,” of course… except in business dealings, judging by quick fact-checks on this entity….See footnote below. (Posted Dec. 16, 2019, short-link ending “-bLg”)

***This sounds like the name of a nonprofit of uncertain legal domicile (not shown here; we’re supposed to just “know” — or be impressed?). I looked for it years ago, DNR results…

<~~There is a website; it is in Sausalito, CA (a quaint niche/tourist? town known for its harbor and many houseboats, just north of San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge) and seems to be well-geared to sell Halvorson’s (nine, pictured) books and push First 5, Conflict Resolution, and how to “trigger” a sense of group, that is, an “us” versus a “them” mentality, etc.  …  Nice bold graphics (black on white), just no financials: www.intergroupinstitute.org/about.  Very “California”…Look at the “books” page and a few of the blog titles….  I have a KAISER | FIRST5 | George Halvorson Footnote; more FnAQs* on this Intergroup Understanding Institute on that footnote. *FrequentlyNOT-AskedQuestions,  like “what’s your EIN# and why haven’t you been filing appropriately according to state laws, year after year?”


I’d be interested to know his academic background and how he got into all this before working to promote and administer “universal healthcare” in the US in (at least) two different states, prior to now working to (so says the CCFC website) regionalize pre-school and early care, including for reimbursement rates, to better socialize (reduce inequities based on household income) the care and rearing of VERY young kids, starting at (if not before) birth…

Halvorson has authored eight health care-related books, including Strong Medicine; Epidemic of Care; Building Health Co-ops in Uganda; and Ending Racial, Ethnic, and Cultural Disparities in Health Care. He has also written four books on instinctive intergroup behavior and one book, Three Key Years, that deals with brain development and emotional needs for very young children. Additionally, he has served on more than 30 boards and commissions, and has chaired more than a dozen – including the American Association of Health Plans; the International Federation of Health Plans; the Partners for Quality Care Board; the Health Governors for the World Economic Forum in Davros, Switzerland; and the Health Plans Committee for the Board of the American Diabetes Association.

He and his wife, Lorie, have five sons, two daughters-in-law, and five grandchildren. While they reside in the San Francisco area, they continue to have strong ties in Minnesota

More at Footnote: Universal Healthcare | Kaiser Permanente | First 5 California and George Halvorson 


The next two images, from either my Table of Contents 2012-2016, or from one of the posts shown on it, voice just some of my prior concerns I already raised about this particular family’s role which also intersects with my “Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson” post which got me looking at the history of psychology (professionalized or otherwise) and psychoanalysis (a.k.a. “Freud et al.”) more closely than awareness of AFCC’s typical membership categories already had.

These just two images are fine-print/colorful (annotated or background) and intended to supplement, not replace, the information on this post, best after reading the rest of it:

Find FamilyCourtMatters.org prior, related posts: two-image gallery.  Find by dates or from within sticky post “Table of Contents 2017” either as pdfs (with active title links: best) or from that page linking to direct displays of those TOC’s as separate posts.  Next quote (from my “Table of Contents 2017 continues themes from 2016…” contains a link to a pdf containing the images shown just below, but explains that’s a 37-pager.  (Second click on blank page icon probably required to open).

PDF #3: Table of Contents, June 29, 2014 reverse chrono to Sept. 24, 2012 (37 pages, about 140 posts), … (pdf format, showing in 8X11 page installments).  This being so much longer, has different sections. . . The table of contents (therein) is on pp. 4-20. FYI. The front and end matter contain narrative (blog) substance, not just “navigation” instructions.  …

[No posts published from June 29, 2014 – January 22, 2016.] {{i.e., last half of 2014 throughout all 2015,  I did publish before Sept. 24, 2012, but have no manually created “Table of Contents” for them; see “Archives.”}}

The post containing the same (long: 140 posts) list of TOC, June 29, 2014…to Sept. 24, 2012 (all titles with active links, shortlink ends “-2rW”)  is here, but I recommend viewing it as pdf with 8-11 display from the above link.   A post containing links (pdf & post) to this, and to TOC 2016 and 2017 is here (short-link ends ‘5qZ’).  That post is complicated, so the next mini-section in this background-color (inside black bordered box) summarizes….

There are hundreds of posts (my admin dashboard shows 839 posts as of mid-December 2019). They are also points of reference for key topics within this field from a consumer’s AND investigator’s (tracking the nonprofits and how they hook up with federal grants, as by now you know) and domestic violence/family court survivor (mother)’s point of view, trying to keep it objective but not ‘dispassionate’ where there are such huge accountability loopholes throughout.

QUICK REVIEW:  HOW TO ACCESS FAMILYCOURTMATTERS TOC POSTS.

This MINI-Section, except label and last three links, covers access to MOST of this blog’s titles one way or another! I took the time to review because the titles themselves are like a table of contents to under-reported topics within this field which shed major light on the ones typically being publicized in MSM or by specialty (niche) advocacy groups.

It contains descriptive text, title with link from the top of my Comprehensive (Sept. 2014 – Sep. 21, 2017) TOC post.

Below, in this background-color, I added links to three posts finishing the list  for 2017 (Oct, Nov & Dec).  For 2018 and 2019, see other Sticky Posts near the top of the blog or (probably quickest route) links provided on blog right sidebar widget.

SIX separate (all “sticky”) posts provide lists of all post titles through Oct. 31, 2019:  1 (next, below) + 3 (to complete Fall 2017) + 2 (two versions of 2018) + 1 (2019).  PAGES: ’58 Essays’ lists all Pages (vs. Posts) through that date; itself a top sticky post.

This (next) post** presents three different ways to view three different time spans’s tables of contents…. This post pulls it all together and puts links in one place to older tables of contents direct from here (in 8X11) or directly on their original posts…


It’s actually current through Oct. 8, 2017.  The pdfs take so long to make, I hadn’t updated them… Therefore posts for Oct, Nov, and Dec. 2017 are presented in separate posts, all marked “Sticky” within the top dozen links, so easy to find, and I’m posting them also right below here:

(In grabbing those titles to paste in here, I added the short-links to the actual post titles for all three for future, easier reference//LGH Dec. 15, 2019).

The “Giant post ending “-2ug” (June 29, 2014, first TOC image above, left) I’m thinking about how to re-write with graphics, cutting it down to flow-chart size with a basic “legend.”  Don’t hold your breath, but it’s on my “to-do” list being such a key point for this blog. It was also my last post before taking a (basically, forced) one-and-a-half year break posting here, to protect my own housing options from specific family-oriented obstacles to the same (forum:  probate court, topic: trusts).  Most of the organizations listed on it haven’t gone away yet, or changed behaviors.  It’s still basic information


Compared to Flinn.org:

When it comes to the various Cummings Foundations, ALL their Board of Directors  or Foundation Managers represent far fewer individuals (at least one of them in his mid-90s by now), which makes me wonder how old is the one daughter involved (Dr. Janet L. Cummings), and probably (even taken as  a whole with other related for-profit entities, i.e., some holding real estate) far fewer resources.  All three websites are even less interested than “Flinn.org” in revealing their EIN#s or financials, while posting glowing descriptions of their own disruptive innovations (links below, see for yourself).  So I decided to take a closer look.

Having now taken that closer look, I can see why they might not want people to get a closer examination* of the books! (*..of even tax returns up through Dec. 2017: I don’t have; websites do not volunteer any audited financial statements so far…)


My prior attempted titles for this post reflect its complexity as I progressively uncovered one red flag connection or omission after another.  Included here for extra preview:

4th attempt, variation on the 3rd: Three Tax-exempt Cummings Entities (Inc. 1994 and 2004 (co-located) in Reno, NV, and 2014 in Phoenix, AZ) and Their Family-Controlled Personal Agenda: Taking Former Arizona State U’s ‘DBH’ Accreditation International, Con’td. (Publ. soon after Dec. 9, 2019). (short-link ends “-bLg”)

3rd title attempt:  Why I Still Notice the Cummings Family and Their Respective Operations in Reno, Nevada and Phoenix, Arizona (establ.1994, 2004 and 2014), some funded in good part from a $2 to $3B Foundation set up 1993 in Ohio

2nd Title attempt: Who??  are the Cummings: (Nicholas&Dorothy + Daughter Janet L. in Reno, Andrew in Greenwich,CT) and Why?? Their Three Nonprofit Entities (N&DC 1994 in NV: 990PFs; CBFH 2004 in NV: 990PFs; CGI-BHS 2014 in AZ: Files 990s and Grants Doctoral Degrees 100% On-Line) (Publ. Dec. 7?, 2019)

First title attempt/this Post is (however titled, it’ll be available when published at this link)Cummings Fndtn for Behavioral Health (EIN# 300163951, NV), Major Contributor American Endowmt Fndtn (OH) and a few others co-located with CBFH, per its 990PF Roadmaps (Publ. Dec. 5?, 2019) (shortlink ends “-bLg” started Dec. 4, 2019)

THIS POST exists to link to for further drill-down (supporting information) linked to my #2 post in the Arizona Pipeline, now published and accessible at:

There seems to be sharing of debts and liabilities relating to some real estate among the Cummings-controlled entities.  

Viewing only the total Form 990-reported assets (once each EIN#s has been looked up and verified) and the (Cummings-controlled) entities’ websites’ brief summaries give only a fraction of the picture and as such are mis-leading.  

The 1993-founded AEF (in Columbus, Ohio) being the major contributor a certain year, I looked it up and found what looks like a new species of “community foundation” retaining some of the (in my opinion) worst characteristics of Donor-Advised-Fund tax-exempt foundations while losing even a pretense of the “local” part expressing concern for the region in which it’s geographically or legally domiciled.  In fact it advertises how its donor-advised funds can be used to contribute to individuals favorite community foundations, with their donor-advised funds, too. Its stated tax-exempt purpose, in all caps, is, in just seven words:

To Expand the Capacity of American Philanthropy.”

(FY2017 (YE Dec) Form 990, Pg. 1, Part I, Summary, Line 1)

Part VIIB (sole independent contractor paid anything over $100K) was a Gift Admin/Software provider from Canada — which was paid $2.4M for its services.  2017 (Part VIII Line 1 Revenues were about $684M) and its Investment Income about $41M).  The software provider was called Benevity, Inc., 1812 4th St. SW, # 300, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.   I could say a lot more here (after looking it up), “I get it,” but this post is already too long!

After about 20 minutes of lookups, quick summary:  This part on “BENEVITY” qualifies as an “aside” but is included because the 1993ff “AEF” here chose to use it for a subcontractor in 2017, which gives at least some idea where its (AEF’s) “head” is at…

Benevity, Inc. (that $2.4M paid FY2017 subcontractor helping AEF, above) has a “contact us” page showing three offices in Canada (not at the address shown in the FY2017 return above, which address was interesting in its own right (building owned by W. Chan Investments, Ltd., at least in 2018 and with 11 spaces still for lease) in Calgary, Victoria, and Toronto + one in the UK (Cirencester/Gloucestershire), and two in the USA: one in San Mateo, California, and one in Clearwater, Florida.  They focus on employer giving, contributions managed in 17 languages, one of the first “Certified B” corporations in Canada.

The address in San Mateo, California (get this:  a “Burt Cummings” was involved) is a $1.8M home sold (recently); the “Benevity” in California existed for less than a month in 2018, apparently for the purpose of merging into Versaic, Inc., a California Corporation of which two versions exist, one with multiple strange filings (several “Restatements,” an agent Resigned in 2006, name change from “SponsorWise” (Up til then) to “Versaic, Inc.” a California Stock Corporation in 2011 (what happened during those 5 years, then?), and within one month (actually a half-month) after Benevity Mergersub, Inc. (existed for a only few weeks in March, 2018 as a California Stock Corporation) it merged into Versaic, Inc. (Calif. Corporation), Versaic, Inc. (California) then merged into Versaic, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, address, ℅ Benevity International, Inc. in Calgary–and that’s just looking into ONE of the two USA addresses of Benevity, Inc. in Calgary, Canada.


See “Footnote: Benevity, I mean Versaic, Inc., I mean American Online Giving Foundation,** in Canada, The UK, California — I mean, Delaware, and Florida — (from the State of Georgia), I mean… (ad infinitum)…” for my brief follow-up for this insanity, a.k.a. “business model” (which reminds me of the “JustGive” going “JustGiving” I blogged in much detail several years ago — same general idea.  Start in the USA, featuring on-line transactions, move out of the country… I’ll add a Footer, but I need to talk to someone else (who, not sure yet!) about this… Oh yes — and the Florida Address AOGF shows legal domicile Georgia.  Get the general idea? ! ! !

**I’m not saying AOGF is “Benevity,” although tax returns show it’s paying Benevity as a Part VIIB Subcontractor for administrative services, and although Bryan de Lottinville is President of AOGF##  and leader of Benevity… In fact AOGF in 2015 showed only 3 board of directors and ZERO employees (it being “online giving” while claiming $127M of contributions most of which it gave away — but provides no Schedule I listing of.  Now, I wouldn’t like to be responsible to itemize over $100M of micro-donations (or large ones) on a Form 990 Schedule I, but that IS the IRS requirement (unless “micro” somehow avoids compliance).  This money could easily also be going to “domestic” (USA) governments as happens under AEF, above, which chose Benevity.

((AOGF is EIN#810739440; FY2016 viewed; table of last three Form 990s is in the footnote) (AOGF legal domicile FL, has had two addresses in Florida already, the second of which shows up as one of just two “USA” offices of Benevity — same street address) and files in many different states within the USA)

[Dec. 17, 2019 added comments]:

This should be blogged.  I’m just spreading some breadcrumbs here and in the footnote below after another day (Dec. 17) looking at this, I have a better understanding of “standard operating procedures…”  There are many accountability problems.  I’d also like to point out that, while registered in Georgia (why Georgia), the word “American” could refer to all of North America, not just the USA — and again, Benevity.com IS a Canadian, not US, organization.  Market niche is “world’s largest employers…” and they’re moving that money FAST while failing to provide full, and visually readable, records of it for the public, esp. in the USA…

For AEF to be mixed up (utilizing) AOGF and promoting the Cummings (as just one of millions of dollars of donations in a certain year, but still the bulk of the Cummings’ entity’s contributions for that year) reflects negatively on AEF.  I also note that one of the Cummings entities below seems to be adopting the similar model — citing $40M of assets in the form of “pledges.”  The whole situation needs a real “plumbline” of accountability which I don’t see it’s likely to get anytime soon.



For FY2018, AEF also turned out to have MAJOR “Schedule B” contributors, contributing millions of dollars, EACH and OVERALL, of noncash (i.e., public-traded securities, it seems), which the entity then can sell at a loss, as often happens on tax-exempt community or other large foundations.  Sometimes they seem to be in effect dumping grounds for non-producing assets while contributors (donors) get nice federal income and/or excise (state-)** tax-reduction, the entity continues to function (often by taking more grants) (**I’m not a tax professional… for the finer points, ask one!)

Add the six amounts shown on images 1 & 2 above to show about $279.4 Million (out of total contributions that year shown on page 1, over $1 billion) were “Schedule B,” i.e., larger. One wonders who the owners were.  Because AEF describes itself as “concierge donor-advised funds-service, targets services especially towards other financial advisors, I’m wondering who would have that kind of money to donate in a single year to this Ohio nonprofit, and why one of them decided that $90 of US Treasury Bonds should be donated.   Interesting situation …


Grant-making, as I’ve reiterated recently and even copied screenshots of my recent post to Twitter to say it again, is not necessarily the primary purpose here. 

I also give both Cummings Foundations a failing grade for [A] seeking to exploit and target access to public healthcare funds (a massive enterprise field) while, [B] disrespectfully to the public who’ll pay for this, failing to even divulge their own EIN#s, let alone financials for any year.  

The respective foundation assets as of FY2017 are shown:  $40.9M (CFBH, files 990PF so founding year NS on face page), $27.2K (N&DCF CFBH, files 990PF so founding year NS on face page)) (co-located), and $2.0B (AEF in Ohio). (AEF’s website now claims $3 billion).

and nonprofit “CGI-BHS” (My acronym for  Cummings Graduate Institute for Behavioral Health Studies” (granting DBH’s on-line), which files Forms 990, starting only in FY2015.  Total Gross Assets (2017) $306K.  This one’s not self-supporting, or even close to it

Read the rest of this entry »

Look Who’s Been Building Arizona’s BioScience/Behavioral Science ECONOMIC, ACADEMIC & COMMUNICATIONS Ecosystem | ‘School of Mind Brain and Behavior’ at Univ. of Arizona, (cited in an NIJ Report by AFCC-Loyal Associate Prof. Connie J.A. Beck, Ph.D. (Psych.) (Started Nov. 13, Publ. Dec. 11, 2019).

leave a comment »

My prior post,most of it with this dark yellow background,

basically listed upcoming ones, with today’s post,

as #2 in the pipeline.  Today’s post generated another one (“Three Tax-Exempt Cummings Entities,” link provided at the bottom of this one) which isn’t on that list, as I took a closer look.

Today’s post gives more details, like EIN#s and links to more information, on a certain Flinn Foundation and the Thomas R. Brown Foundations’ (plural) plans for Southern Arizona — commenting on how that seems organized — and checks back in on the “Nicholas A. Cummings” connection to Arizona Behavioral Health “stuff” as well as to fixing (sic) our (sic) family court systems, adding key details to what I’d blogged (about seven) years ago.

Today’s post also contains some reminders on the necessity for high-speed internet infrastructure, who’s been investing in this, and an example from California (“CENIC”) of how wealthy individuals or entrepreneurs (there, a medical doctor) can and sometimes do take control of an infrastructure, set up multiple nonprofits to which their own profits are donated, and seek to construct regional hubs, planned development, for their personal priorities and projects, involving universities, foundations, federal funding, of course high-capacity, high-speed communications (internet and other).

ANY post (or page) may be further edited (as in, condensed, or expanded, or both) after publishing. Blogger’s privilege! This one will have (soon) some tags, and a few more images referenced in the text, but not included yet.  That said, I do provide links throughout.

//LGH Dec 11, 2019

 For the Southern Arizona region, I found one long-term CEO of a major community foundation (J. Clinton Mabie) ALSO on a separate entity, “Sun Corridor, Inc.” [About, Investors-Partners page] (I’ve seen but not yet researched) which its websites say are also working on an airport [see “TUS Blueprint” link] to access the region.  From what I can tell on the entity’s website, this is functioning as a type of “business roundtable” for regional planning, where the top infrastructure owners meet among themselves, claiming to represent “the people” when it comes to development. The total planning of course involves many nonprofits, energy companies, and healthcare providers… This then brings up (to me) the concept — if these leaders are representing all those (85,000 was the number claimed here) employees and the government funds associated with them and infrastructures they use — then who do the state legislators and county supervisors, municipal leaders (mayors, boards, etc.) represent — really?

While I’m not covering it in this post, I am flagging it here for future reference  and FYI.

TheECONOMIC, ACADEMIC & HIGH-SPEED INTERNET” phrase in my post’s of its long, winding title, signals more specifics of this “AzBio” ecosystem and source of some of the sponsoring wealth involved here.  Along with the “health/pharmaceutical/bio-science” parts (intersecting with medical or other doctorate-level scientists — PhDs and MDs– working at universities or corporations) such an ecosystem is going to involve major communications infrastructure and computer databases to hold and crunch the data, especially when this gets into the fields of genomics, epigenetics, and personalized medicine based on that.  This post provides points of reference for that infrastructure, in body text and more details as a footnote.

Separately, this phrase in my post’s title “(..|cf.  ‘School of Mind Brain and Behavior’ at Univ. of Arizona,** (see 2011 NIJ-Grant-Funded Report by AFCC-Loyal Assoc. Prof. Connie J.A. Beck, Ph.D. (Psych.)refers to a mixture of career psychologists** whose collective attempts seek to affiliate with anything “neuro-” or some better respect for their work derived from the innate respect granted scientists and doctors, AND to provide some scientific basis for their accessing the primary healthcare infrastructure with its mainly medical/ surgical/ pharmaceutical basis. It’s about perception and co-location for professional (business) reasons.

I’ve covered the Arizona/AFCC/psychologist-behavioral health connections at length in recent posts, but this post also brings in, specific to the state of Arizona, a set of family-controlled foundations (most, but not all located in nearby Nevada) with (lifelong, it seems) specialization in mental health/behavioral health fields and promoting opportunities for professionals in that field, in addition to belated (2012ff) involvement in the family court systems also, including with supposed advocates for battered mothers…

Generally, the mixture of career psychologists’** collective attempts seek to affiliate with anything “neuro-” or anything producing by association better respect for their work can be seen in choice of “lingo” jargon, or specific vocabulary to reference their own work, as exhibited often by AFCC members in academia or outside it:  clinical, forensic, etc. and sporting extra certifications and accreditations as post-degree acronyms.***  For the latter, proliferating sub-specialties and associations to promote each of them (i.e., publishing, conferencing) seems essential to the professions; producing more “cites” for members.

**(Including many who will be AFCC loyal and interested in the family court systems & abuse prevention — but also able to get federal grants by virtue of their stated research, testing, or evaluation interests).


***(Itself a whole tax-exempt-association, cross-country professional sector within the field, promoted in part, I found again, by the APA (American Psychological Association) itself).  cf. “ABPP” and the “specialty of “CFP” (Couple & Family Psychology), one among many, I found.  With any specialty, there’s often an associated training or licensing organization, which I gather is where AACFP (“The American Academy of CFP”) comes in…

A doctorate level achievement is one thing; but extra certification by private membership organizations set up to promote and elevate specific specialities within psychology takes group self-promotion to a whole new level.

Among those promoting the practice (of adding doctorates, adding specialties within psychology) originally and (I see, now again, separately — based on his own model) is Nicholas A. Cummings (b. 1924). He describes being conscious of helping (his colleagues) getting the doctorate level degrees (back in the late 1960s forward) through independent schools of professional psychology set up to do just that, as well as some of the certifying associations.  See images in this section, and I have more at the bottom of this post.   (Cummings Foundations are addressed in this post, and in the updates (there’ve been new ones since) I found it necessary to add a spin-off post on what wouldn’t fit onto this one.


So overall, we have here a mixture of major need for money, smart people, capital, ongoing access to public resources, and of course super-power internets and computers.  THAT’s why I put the words “internet” in there, and because one of the [actually, all the TRB] foundations (Thomas R. Brown) providing some of the private capital here got its wealth from the field of transistors and semiconductors in the first place and has tag-teamed with the Flinn Foundation (basis of wealth, medical/cardiologist) to work through the community foundation (CFSAz.org) and the University of Arizona, to turn “Arizona” into a thriving “bioscience”  economic infrastructure.

Economic (in the post title) is of course, public/private and while the public is tax-exempt as government, the private sector major wealth often seeks tax-exempt or tax-accountability-avoiding places to stow its money. In our age, we know also that much of this wealth comes specifically with the engineers of the current age of internet and communications infrastructure in the first place:  those who own the assets get to charge and determine how much to restrict access for them. A footnote here gives more specific context.

As I said above, then Today’s post gives more details, like EIN#s and links to more information, on a certain Flinn Foundation and the Thomas R. Brown Foundations’ (plural) plans for Southern Arizona — commenting on how that seems organized — and checks back in on the “Nicholas A. Cummings” connection to Arizona Behavioral Health “stuff” as well as to fixing (sic) our (sic) family court systems. It adds follow-up from when I blogged it many (about seven) years ago.

WHY CUMMINGS? Nicholas A. Cummings is in his 90s now and probably no billionaire like other involved famous private foundations or community foundations nationwide.

The “Cummings connection,” besides linking to Arizona generally also links specifically to the family court systems which, overall, are intent on integrating behavioral modification ecosystem and getting the public to fund it also.  The Cummings Foundation also connects historically since at least as far back as spring 2012 to the still-active coalition of “Fix the Flawed Practices / Handle Domestic Violence IN the (Broken, Unsafe, etc.) Family Courts” self-selecting professionals and their ragtag (for the most part — if you look and list ’em all in a row) nonprofits which provide media sound-bytes to make them sound more important.  So yes, this topic is a “Family Court Matter.”

As a whole, this Ecosystem, like air and water quality, should be monitored and noticed, not just inhaled and drunk indiscriminately. HOW individuals setting it up choose to reveal or conceal their own financials is a key to the character and intents of the same.  Altruistic?  Hardly.  Transparent? Not at all.  Accountable to the public? How could they be, in this manner?

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 11, 2019 at 2:30 pm

Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is No Accident | Noticing/Naming The Foundations..(Next Posts in This Pipeline) (Nov. 15, 2019, Publ. Dec. 1).

leave a comment »

You’re reading:  Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is No Accident | Noticing/Naming The Foundations..(Next Posts in This Pipeline) (started Nov. 15, 2019, Publ. Dec. 1).  (Case-sensitive short-link ends “-bCC”, about 2,500 words only).


This post exists only to identify and provide post titles (with links active when each is published only), specific points of reference (names of centers, tax-exempt foundations involved, etc.) and brief descriptions/abstracts of what they already hold in their draft status.  You don’t need to wait for me to publish to look anything referenced up; but I already know most people don’t get quickly (by digging for where not shown voluntarily on the websites) to the financials of such situation, where character and structure (and age of existence) tend to show up.  But if you want to get a head start on this in the public interest…

More Posts In This Subject Matter Pipeline:

(Subject Matter: Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is no accident.)

Or, Behavioral Health Strongholds, Conflict-of-Interest Investors & their reporting behaviors in Arizona, (my) Recent Finds correlate to Earlier Ones)

“In the Pipeline” in my world means, in draft status as posts.  They are more than “in the works” or wouldn’t be listed, but they have not yet (as of this date) been published.

Specifically, my prior post, publ. Nov. 25, updated (tags added, footnote and sections added Nov. 26), seems to have opened some of my “Let’s explore-and-examine on these foundations’ coordinated influence” floodgates.  I began devouring available information and it quickly started falling into categories of operations.  Link and mini-description of my Nov. 25 post, which was just a start (and more focused on the AFCC participation aspects):

My Prior Post: Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019(short-link ends “-bzx”) (#1 one in a pipeline with, so far, 3 and probably there will be 4 more posts). Tags  added later.  This is a long post and there are some internal section/explanation overlaps.  Read with patience (last update Nov.26, total 12,400 words includes a few extended footnotes)!

It could’ve been easily subtitled: “TO SHOW or NOT TO SHOWSHOULD AFCC’s INFLUENCE be SUBMERGED or FEATURED?” 


I remember having gotten back to Arizona through reading about a co-editor (in chief) of an international journal based in England; that journal already had an Overseas Editor from Arizona (Ira Mark Ellman), but the co-editor (in chief) Robert Dingwall also had been writing on mandatory mediation as it intersects with domestic violence, which brought up the USA (NIJ)-grant-funded project involving an AFCC-connected psychologist  (as recent posts detailed).

I drafted this “what’s in the pipeline” post (Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is No Accident, short-link ends “-bCC”, the one you are now reading) because of the background information I kept discovering* on who’s been backing the “Behavioral Science Biosphere” in Arizona, and how this was being engineered and coordinated.

Obviously that biosphere will involve a heavy dose of career psychologists and/or psychotherapists, some ensconced within universities and (as it happened here) chances are, some of those will have strong, career-long connections to the AFCC (“Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.”) which tends to promote the same fields and obtains court-connected and court-ordered funding for their professionals and networked nonprofits.

Chances are, and I’ve also identified within this post pipeline, a heavy dose of USA’s responsible fatherhood promotion via Social Security Act funding (i.e., “welfare reform”) has also been alive and well in the State of Arizona  since at least the early 1990s, and beyond Arizona due to the nature of the multi-society behaviors of behavioral science professionals (in their mutual field- and career-building interests), to international privately organized interests, journals, and/or associations. These two conditions seem to be mutually favorable to expansion of the field of behavioral health and justifying of existing power structure which happens in this country to identify as patriarchal, i.e., “father-focused.”

*I kept discovering because and as I kept looking.  Like finding the definition of a word one hasn’t seen before, it began just looking up one reference in the (2011) document I wished to blog where one of the author’s references was to a  “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior” at the University of Arizona-Tucson. The follow-up came from looking at when this School of Mind, Brain and Behavior was first established (it seems, only about 2009) and by whom (which led to the Flinn and Thomas R. Brown Foundations, articles talking about it).

For length and better flow, I’ve moved the material to a number of different posts by main subject matter.  With “Oh Arizona…” as (#1), they are:

Read the rest of this entry »

Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019

leave a comment »

This post is:

Post Title: Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019 (short-link ends “-bzx”) (#1 one in a pipeline with, so far, 3 and probably there will be 4 more posts). Tags  added later.  This is a long post and there are some internal section/explanation overlaps.  Read with patience (last update Nov.26, total 12,400 words includes a few extended footnotes)! (and Jan. 14, 2020, just to move this title to the top of the post; I’m getting ready to publish a sequel on earlier, related study to one featured here..//LGH.

TO SHOW or NOT TO SHOW?



RESEARCHING AND REPORTING ON BRAINS, MINDS, BEHAVIORS and HOW TO MODIFY (IMPROVE) HUMAN BEHAVIOR WHILE LEARNING WHAT MAKES US TICK IS BEYOND FASHIONABLE NOW: IT SEEMS TO BE MAINSTREAM PUBLIC POLICY.


My Ten Most Recent Posts, include one on the National Science Foundation (“NSF”) which is actually part of the US government (not a private entity) funding a “Brain Initiative” as well as at least a few recommending, for a starting place, screen for AFCC among authors, references, cites and BOTH sides of any pro/con debate involving the usual topics in the family courts — including domestic violence issues.

[Correcting an image annotation error: My inserted yellow comment on #5 actually belongs with the 10th most recent (not imaged) post. The sidebar widget “More Resources” also links to it, that link is 1. Really Want Systems Change?, |2. ‘LGH. There’s STILL No Excuse. But…,’ |3. ‘To Support and Visually Upgrade,’ and, |4. ‘The “Technical Training and Assistance Excuse” ‘[Started Oct. 3, Publ. Oct. 4, 2019] ( “-bcv”).  Images take a while to make and upload, so I’m correcting it here instead. BMTP/Wellesley narrative and links are on the above Oct. 4, not the Oct. 27, post.  CLICK ON EITHER IMAGE TO ENLARGE AS NEEDED).//LGH]


Speaking of “MINDS, BRAINS and BEHAVIORS”… what about the behaviors of those involved in promoting this field and working for decades in it? Specifically, what about the level of transparency and honesty in disclosing any conflicts of interest while reporting from within the field?

Why such consistent withholding of basic, key affiliations among authors at times taking public funds to write reports and who have resumes also showing public (NIH, NIMH, or NIJ, etc.) grants?

This systemic withholding of disclosing probable conflicts of interest is unlikely to change anytime soon, but it should be noted when reading or consuming the constant information output aimed at policymaking…

This withholding is also predictable in certain fields and when dealing with certain topics.

In ARGUING PAS: For example,  what I call “Arguing PAS” is one of those topics where AFCC affiliations are often unacknowledged by proponents on either side of the argument.

 

In Parenting Coordination: The presence anywhere** of “Parenting Coordination is another easy “tell” (sign, or should I say “symptom”?) of AFCC affiliation among those promoting it and/or those mentoring those promoting it, often professionals already working in the family court system in any of a few different countries.

** Parent Coordination Instances may include (& I’ve seen throughout the USA, several different states, and for many years):  In judicial administrative policy, as legislated in or out of existence, on websites of nonprofits, and especially where referenced in academic (journals, etc.), and of course in individual divorce, custody, or family court cases involving court-mandated parent coordinators … in these situations, probe the surface; AFCC involvement or leadership in setting it up, administering funds to support it, or running the programs (and training/certifying others to get on on it too) will not be far away or even distant history.

A few images to illustrate more recent PC-promotion here (mini-section with images and explanations).

Notice that three fields covered within these inter-relationships include Reunification Programs or Camps [1], Parent Coordination [2], and Mediation [3] (not only services, but also “training and consulting” in at least the last two).  The “reunification” provider here [not the main topic of this post] was the clearest link to AFCC — if you follow its professionals’ over-arching agenda as reflected in these (and some other) fields…

[1] Families Moving Forward [2] (FLiP), Ltd. [3] Riverdale Mediation (there are other businesses listed in association with its leadership (Riverdale Mediation image caption [below] shows one of the principals(?) also references “Mediate Dispute Resolutions” and “Mediate393.com“) (1) and (3) are in Canada, (2) in the UK.  I have not found (1) or (3) listed as business entities in Canada, but am not really adept at the various places to look there yet. It’d be interesting to know whether they are business names or registered trade names and if the latter, for whom.  As I recall from writing an earlier post on this (but don’t claim perfectly!) Mediate393.com had an arrangement with the family courts for referrals.).

‘UK Parenting Coord (PC) Roadshow’ image (see also pdf) by Jared Norton (AFCC-Ontario Bd Direc?) but @ Riverdale Mediation | Screen Shot 2019-11-25.. (=Image filename: Screenshot taken from pdf already on this blog & previously posted).

I recently publicized how a Canadian-based young man (Jared Norton, AFCC-mentored) took up with two UK-based women (Gillian Bishop, Felicity Shedden) first in Canada, then for a “Parent Coordination Roadshow” to the UK to promote the practice there.  Look for “FLiP” (Family Law in Partnership, Ltd., British) and/or Riverdale Mediation (Canadian) on this blog [Labeled “#3” in image of my Last Ten Posts at the top of this post; published Oct. 31 as “Part 2″…] or my social media.

(AFCC helped sponsor and expand the field and push for legislation to allow judges to order it).  The larger context was probably Board of Directors of AFCC-Ontario; I didn’t recognize the young(er) man so looked him up and found descriptions on both sides of the Atlantic on the trainings and shared purposes. UK Parenting Coordination (PC) Roadshows | Riverdale Mediation (June 19, 2017) this pdf 2019Oct28

“Riverdale Family Mediation Services” (Hilary Linton (Pres), Eliz Hyde (Medius Dispute Resolutions, Mediate393), Clifford S Nelson, Ret’d Judge) Screen Shot 2019-10-27



In Mandatory Mediation with IPV: Another such field and favorite pro/con/what-if topic for public and academic debate for decades! has been on mandatory mediation within divorce where domestic (or intimate partner) violence (or abuse) is alleged and may have occurred. Have you any idea how often those arguing for extra stipulations or trainings within mediation, i.e., showing awareness of the associated problems —  might be or are loyal followers or members AFCC whose careers and resumes have been bolstered by citing to it, but somehow by agreement do NOT typically reference it much in the debates?

Here’s another “case in point” of withholding (though shown in other contexts) an author’s AFCC affiliation I ran across on that sub-specialty within the family courts.

Post Title: Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019 (short-link ends “-bzx”) (#1 one in a pipeline with, so far, 3 and probably there will be 4 more posts). Tags  added later.  This is a long post and there are some internal section/explanation overlaps.  Read with patience (last update Nov.26, total 12,400 words includes a few extended footnotes)!

TO SHOW or NOT TO SHOW?
SHOULD AFCC’s INFLUENCE be SUBMERGED or FEATURED?

Maybe a public task force should be appointed to convened a private roundtable on behalf of conflicted (bipolar?) AFCC-loyal — and AFCC-conference/trainings-sustained — career PhD’d psychologists (or lawyers, but the example here features a psychologist working at a public university) to establish model practice guidelines for in what context it’s “OK” (safe for the future of the field) to acknowledge one’s close affiliation with and dependency (for citations) on AFCC.

I’m thinking based on more evidence I discovered recently here, among the membership it must be either a tacit group dynamic just absorbed through association or perhaps the result of previous explicit group tactics. Did some roundtable already meet? Were private guidelines circulated to warn AFCC-affiliated academics: “When writing for even potential public consumption, don’t disclose AFCC — it might lead to questioning your neutrality, of possible conflicts of interest and it would alert more non-professionals to our existence?”

“Especially if that writing involves any federal funding…”

Not being a member, I don’t know, I just know what I’m seeing of the pattern of withholding in some contexts, and featuring openly in others, something I’ve observed for years now.


Let’s compare an NIJ-funded report on a certain topic with the lead co-author’s own faculty page and resume to see whether the AFCC influence is submerged (visible only if key authors or verbiage is already known to readers as “AFCC” standard) or featured as a credit to the individual’s career curve and expert status.  I’ve provided both links and images so you can.

In doing this I also show how and why I ran across this information through basic follow-up practices which illuminate family court function/dysfunctions and the behaviors of academics and/or professionals writing constantly about them.

These professionals are often focused on researching and developing practices to modify it seems everyone else’s behaviors when it comes to handling criminal behavior (acts)** which the family courts continue to handle and which family court-focused professionals continue for decades to research and to report on conditions under which it might continue be handled, allegedly appropriately in that forum (jurisdiction, venue, etc.) — with better trainings, screenings, and modifications to accommodate them. (** reference is below the next image; look for the blue font).


The NIJ report admits (claims) that mediation was mandated in one jurisdiction specifically so they’d have some data to study its impact on domestic violence when there was no grassroots or voluntary demand for it

“Why is mediation often legally mandatory?”

In other words, in order to test a theory, if subjects wouldn’t volunteer for the study, they should instead just be forced to participate, facilitating the study (!!).  (Nearby annotated image from the NIJ report; this image is also posted below in context).

Is that not a high-risk, potentially lethal situation to socially engineer? For the sake of more reports like these to fund, build resumes, and speculate on “what works better IN the family courts” when lives are at risk?

Is it possibly relevant that those helping run the courts are part of a membership association (<~link) which, from the 1970s and 1980s focused heavily on promoting mediation, and that in California by 1981 mediation became basically mandatory for modifying (not just “establishing”) any child custody /access or visitation order, and that by 1984 the U.S. Congress had enacted into legislation the “access and visitation” concept, to then be funded starting 1988, and substantially increased in 1996 with authorization of “welfare reform” PRWORA, to ten million dollars a year nationwide, an amount continued to this day, i.e., for a full generation (about 23 years now).  

And that by definition grants go to a specified single agency at the state or territory level within each state’s or territory’s government — never directly to any private nonprofit? (However, once there said agencies can certainly subcontract to private organizations). 

How might exposing the presence of this association (and the lead (first listed) author’s long-term involvement in the same association) in a report offering answers on why mediation legally mandatory (and how to adjust for the related criminal behaviors which somehow continue to be involved) shed a different light on those explanations offered?


**Specifically the criminal behavior labeled “IPV” or “IPA” “DV” or “DA” where “IP” means “intimate partner,” “D” means “Domestic” (with no reference to partner, spouse, relative, or the other parent), “V” means “violence” and “A” in the context, “Abuse.” In other words, usage and terminology varies.


In looking at this situation, and from the cover page of this report, another topic comes up: the behaviors of major foundations and leading personalities which chose and are still choosing to sponsor (in a collaborative, coordinated, regionally-planned manner where tracking the private interests becomes a major maze) such things as “Schools of Mind, Brain and Behavior” in — for this example — Arizona. I say this up front because without a network and backing, a single faculty member (or four Ph.D.s and an M.S.) would not have that much influence. I’ve done some drill-down and have two (or three) posts in the pipeline on those funders within Arizona.


The NIJ-Funded Report on IPA in Divorce Mediation:

Intimate Partner Abuse in Divorce Mediation: Outcomes from a Long-Term Multi-Cultural Study (<~link to this doc’t. “236868”) found at NCJRS, described as NIJ-funded, Grant 2007-WG-BX-0028; Report is 2011)  

This small-ish grant was awarded to the Regents of the University of Arizona (& Cal State Fullerton?). Four of the five authors occupied at the time different two places within the University of Arizona and a fifth was from California State University, Fullerton. All those with PhDs at the time (four out of five) seem to be psychologists.

From what I can see, one only is most closely citing AFCC on c.v. and faculty page, however, that person was the lead author.  In addition (on the faculty page) her sole “community” contact person listed was the daughter of another well-known AFCC individual (Philip Stahl’s daughter Rebecca Stahl). What struck me most was the absence of references to AFCC in the long report, and the presence in the (also long — but not THAT long!) c.v., both linked to below.

This seems to be just a belated 2018 description of the 2011 study; the page (several paragraphs long) contains no other links. As the older study shows, they’ve been debating this topic since the 1980s (!!)..”Are we done yet?”

About seven years later a single, short (about 2-page) review of this long (238pp) study shows up at the NIJ.

See Footnote: “Incredible How Gullible” (Why is there no functional public-access & publicized to us USDOJ Database of Grants Awarded?)

Apparently two other shorter (17pp, 19pp) reports were written off the same NIJ 2007-WG-BX-0028 grant award for about $319K.  One is only available through SAGE now (expensive!) and for the other one, I found no actual link on the part of page labeled “Download paper”), which leaves us with a few abstracts, the long one, and the short summary seven years later….

The lead author’s cv shows another NIJ grant, similar theme, over twice is large (over $700K), has been awarded since.

WHICH AUTHORS HERE? (BACKGROUNDS).

From three authors [Image, FN1] at the “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior…” under the Department of Psychology, one [image, FN2] at a (named after sponsor or other respected figure) “Institute for Children, Youth and Families” at a (named after sponsor or other respected figure) School of Family and Consumer Sciences all at the University of Arizona, and one author [Image, FN3] at simply “Department of Psychology”, California State University (“CSU-Fullerton”)…

Read the rest of this entry »

“AFCCnet.org/About/About-AFCC” is (Still) Long on Labels, Short on Content, Cleverly Obscuring What Its (Only Eight) Featured  Collaborators Have in Common… (Publ. Nov. 23, 2019).

leave a comment »

As a blogger, I more typically referenced the “History” page of the AFCC.  This time I’m talking about another, shorter, secondary page accessible from its “About” page drop-down menu.

Per The Wayback Machine (Archive.org : “archive” is singular), this “About-AFCC” page has been around in its present format  and with it seems the same text since at least August 26, 2014.  It easily may have been around earlier, unnoticed by the WayBack machine. That page was crawled by The Wayback Machine 31 times since 2014, the “History page 48 times since 2012, and the main page (AFCCnet.org) only 488 times since 1998.  That’s (488/21 yrs) an average of only 23 times a year, less than two times a month.  Somehow I think the website isn’t being publicized much to family court litigants!

AFCC Website, WayBackMachine (EARLY!) ~~>2019Nov22 Fri PST #1 of 3. Notice the street address at the bottom!

Here are three AFCCNet.org images from  the very early years. From looking at the earlier versions, I also saw that the original “Family Court Review” (produced then and now by Hofstra University but controlled by, and it is the journal voice of, AFCC, not the university) was at first called, like the organization AFCC and like my own blog “motto”, The Family and Conciliation Courts Review (“FCCR”).

Of these three images my only annotated one (#3, mostly text not pictures) is from a very early FCCR.  Those facts and features can be found at Archive.org by copying in the url as a search string; they are time-consuming to display, and being such fine print don’t display well, so, except for these three images, I leave it up to readers to repeat the search if they are curious. Along the very top of the images you can see a sideways bar graph and time-line.  That’s from the Archive, not the old web pages. I happen to think the theme “Kids COUNT on Us” is a bit narcissistic, and a call to a “rescue / intervention” mentality.

AFCC Website, WayBackMachine (EARLY!) ~~>2019Nov22 Fri PST #2 of 3 (redirect to Hofstra.edu upon click on previous link to ‘AFCC Journal’ as shown in Image #1

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE.   AFCC Website, WayBackMachine (EARLY!) ~~>2019Nov22 Fri PST #3 of 3 (I annotated with 3 comments in yellow, two others not highlit, and any arrows, underlines or ovals you may see! About “Family and Conciliation Courts Review” (See Image #2).

I trust this post’s breakout of labels and claims from AFCC’s self-description on its own website will reveal some less obvious traits of the organization, as judged by having allowed this type of self-description to be posted on-line for now at least five years with the same words.

Given the high level of authority in decision-making over families’ lives AFCC’s “interdisciplinary” membership taken as a whole holds (individual types shown in an image below), the sloppy, incomplete list, incomplete description of activities, and poorly sorted single-paragraph summary of “Collaborative Leadership” organizations is disturbingly “off”  which my post title reflects:

AFCCnet.org/About/About-AFCC. (This time I’m focused on the fourth heading, although only the first one shows in expanded” format. I do quote “History” paragraph, but my interest is “Collaborative Leadership”)  LGH 2019Nov20.

TITLE: “AFCCnet.org/About/About-AFCC” is (Still) Long on Labels, Short on Content, Cleverly Obscuring What Its (Only Eight) Featured  Collaborators Have in Common… (Publ. Nov. 23, 2019).. (short-link ends “-bFi“). . [Tags and AFCC’s latest (available, that is) Forms 990 added w/ commentary Nov. 24, now about 11,700 wds (incl all captions for its many images).

See nearby image with “The AFCC Membership Network” as the first of the four headings expanded to show its two paragraphs.  The image caption holds link to the same page (url also as shown in the post title).


These headings all presumably refer to “in the family courts” or (judging by the organization’s motto) anywhere internationally “family conflict” needing resolution may exist, worldwide… providing substantial business opportunities for AFCC’s membership.

My post focuses on the single paragraph under the fourth section, describing  its “Collaborative Leadership.” That paragraph basically just lists with whom AFCC collaborates “To Improve (sic) Practice and Policy.“##  

To Improve” or do anything else indicates only intent, not necessarily accomplishment!  Like many other public policies, in a nonprofit organization such as AFCC’s home page no actual improvements seems necessary, just statements of shared good intentions to do so.  That’s implicit in the word “to,” which indicates purpose (as in “in order to _______”).

I noticed this from other descriptions of legislated public policy for some of the family courts programs (such as “increase noncustodial parent contact” or “prevent abuse before it occurs” etc.  Policymaking and public funding of each policy is full of such phrases which show intent but are not held responsible to produce results as a condition of continued appropriations…).  Here, AFCC on its self-description page takes credit for the good intentions behind its collaborating in order to lead behaviors. It also in the motto claims intent to “improve the lives of children and families.” (See Footnote “To Improve” or do anything else indicates only intent, not necessarily accomplishment at the bottom of this post, the first one there.  Each Footnote has light blue background, orange borders.)

The Mission History and Values page, though short, also uses the word “collaborate” in three different forms (adjective, adverb and noun) to describe how it intends to “improve the lives of children and families…”  (Collaborative approach, work collaboratively, collaboration and respect — among the professionals involved if not particularly with the parents themselves…)


For this post I also quote but don’t focus on the one-paragraph “History of Innovation and Positive Change.”  Both sub-titles (the second and the fourth on “About-AFCC” page) embody claims some of us parents subjected to that leadership and aware of these changes believe might well be challenged as being neither positive nor improvements.  To some of us parents (aware of AFCC) the means used to justify this “improvement” compromises due process, legal rights, and — the results seem clear — personal safety where violence and/or abuse have been involved. It is a form of “therapy” as in “threat therapy” (coercive control by the court-connected networked professionals) very much reminiscent of what we refused to put up with, at some point, from the other spouse, partner, or parent.

Whether or not it was “positive” or “improvement” dodges the obvious: both those words are broad, vague and subjective: the opinion rests in the eyes of those making value-judgments against a standard without openly stating the standard in plain words, where it might be compared with existing law and any rights under (typically, for the USA) state constitutions — which handle such matters, not federal.  Basically it’s just self-promoting “PR.”


The “About-AFCC” page is so short — five very short paragraphs and the following short introduction — that subtitles aren’t really needed:

AFCC is the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts – the premier interdisciplinary and international association of professionals dedicated to the resolution of family conflict.  AFCC members are the leading practitioners, researchers, teachers and policymakers in the family court arena.


‘PRACTITIONERS, RESEARCHERS, TEACHERS, POLICYMAKERS  — in the FAMILY COURT ARENA.’

I’ve added this next part post-publication.  I was going to add it at the bottom, but might as well remind us of it here:

True as this is, AFCC is a private business corporation with limited funds, limited (through international) representation on its board of directors (compared to entire states, regions, or countries) and operating tax-exempt, meaning it is required to file tax returns the public can read with the Internal Revenue Service to give an account of itself.  These can (and should) be found, but the entity certainly doesn’t make it easy.  AFCC functions like many other tax-exempts as a “society.”  Private societies and corporations should be clearly differentiated from any forms of legitimate government to which any people are by agreement as willing (naturalized) or (born-there) citizens subject for mutual benefit and welfare.

As usual, it took two searches at Candid.org to get three results because the two most recent tax returns for AFCC had been, somehow, mislabeled (a function more likely of Candid.org than AFCC).  My three screenprints here show that.**  Always locate the EIN# and repeat a search for this particular database, although it’s a pain in the neck.  The three images** are followed by an interactive table which I create (throughout, on this blog) by simply selecting the table (which picks up the links to underlying tax returns) and copying it into the blog so I can discuss or at least show it for readers:

(**The second/by EIN# search I marked up a  lot, so I provided a clean copy as well to show the typos, probably by Candid (not AFCC) which complicate even the most basic look-ups on this database, at least for non-subscribers which I am… I wonder if a paid subscription would result in greater accuracy, but don’t feel like taking that chance, and I doubt it). 

AFCC NameSearch (its EIN# is 952597407) at Candid.org brings up older return only ~~> Screen Shot 2019-11-24 (see two nearby images of EIN# search)…


Total results: 3Search Again.  AFCC is EIN# 952597407.  After some preliminary comments.

The latest year’s tax return shows only 7 employees, but 19 board members.

There are some internal inconsistencies between supporting details page and statements (Part VIIA total vs. Part VIII).  The 7 employees, judging by total “Salaries” would be paid about $100K each except Exec Director (ONLY Pt. VIIA Paid person) got $230K (+ benefits) for FY2017 (top row).  Also, as I’ll continue to point out, it claims to be, but most likely still isn’t, a Wisconsin legal domicile entity, nor did this particular entity start in 1963.  That’s two, continuing, wrong claims on the Header alone.  One mis-states geography as out of state, the other exaggerates by about a dozen years when it actually started.  Again “it” means the reporting entity — not a predecessor entity which was suspended for non-filing and skipped legal domiciles to start up again elsewhere before it got caught (non-filing) again.  

This aspect of the current entity AFCC has been researched  and documented before I came around and is one very disturbing character trait, i.e., lying to the public about itself and maintaining the lie for decades.

I’ve post that before on this blog, but this last time I went to look and found the CyberdriveIllinois.com has been set up differently and is missing a link to search exclusively the business registry (which I complained about on Twitter and posted as a footnote below, yesterday Nov. 23).

Another minor (?) detail I’d like to mention is that it’s listing substantial income (as I recall $913K) on its “Statement of Revenues (also reflected on Page 1 summary, and reflected historically on “Schedule A” making Line 2, “Program Service Revenues” appear to be about double what it really is — for the past five years (which Schedules A show).  Line 1, “Contributions” has a category for “Membership Dues.”

There may be a legitimate excuse for this practice (I’ve seen it before), however it makes the organization overall seem as though it’s main function is providing services, as a 501©3 when in fact its main function is charging fees to its members and charging (next big expense) fees for its conferences, which include trainings for some of its members and others of similar professions (i.e., lawyers, judges, psychologists, etc.).  AFCC is not claiming tax exempt as a “Business and trade” organization (501©6?) which it probably should, but a 501©3 non-private foundation (i.e., public charity).  Entering such a large source of revenues as “Program Service Revenues” rather than what it is, Member Contributions in exchange for privileges of membership, I believe imbalances the profile and is misleading.  That said, I’m not an accountant.

Given WHO its members tend to be, most of these fees are going to be passed on to the public one way or another anyhow…

Total results: 3Search Again.  AFCC is EIN# 952597407 and its fiscal year ends June 30.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR ending FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Association of Family and Conciliationcourts WI 2018 990 37 $4,332,375.00 95-2597407
Association of Family and Conciliationcourts WI 2017 990 38 $4,137,304.00 95-2597407
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts WI 2016 990 33 $3,731,286.00 95-2597407

(My copied table’s different color scheme, besides being irrelevant (it doesn’t change the numbers), just comes from an older version of the same provider color scheme which I made boilerplate html to add the (same, i.e., older) colors, making these tables easy to identify no matter what year’s post on FamilyCourtMatters.org you’re reading.


From its tax returns (the “mother ship” with a Madison, Wisconsin, USA address) one can see that it basically runs conferences and trainings, and promotes the interests of its members.  The conferences switch locations (even countries) from time to time, meaning that interested parent litigants for the most part couldn’t afford to attend most or all of them, unlike our representative forms of government which have elected persons and must maintain local offices. As such it’s intentionally elitist and offering privileges to its members that people who are forced (often by the judges or by administrative rules of practice) to sit through its programs and sometimes PAY its professionals (beyond any pay they may already have a civil servants), cannot partake in.  This encourages arrogance among the membership and group loyalty while building relationships with each other and those in power locally, not “constituents.”  (Parents run through the courses and courts aren’t AFCC’s “constituents” either; it does not own us — just seeks to exercise ownership control over us and our youngsters and extended families in the name of a particular blend of shared values.  

AFCC may have members in every state but it certainly doesn’t have a chapter or a street address in every one…


It seems like they have also, with outside help from other nonprofit associations and to a degree, government funds, figured out an arena where they are “premier” and on top of the decision-making heap – – – the leaders.  Given that AFCC represents a limited number of professions compared to the number of professions, practices, and “arenas” people operate in nationwide (and worldwide), I’d say that designating or facilitating this subset of people with a shared mindset does NOT represent the best interests of society as a whole, or any nation in particular, based on that shared mindset that “we are the ones…”   When it comes to kids or individual citizens with civil rights — no they aren’t!


If somehow the acronym “AFCC” representing the business name “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.” is unfamiliar to you, you’re a very new reader of this blog!  Go back to my front page, sticky posts, or blog sidebar for more information on it; some recent links  here:

For more on who/what is AFCC from this blog:

Several sidebar links (further down on it) also feature  earlier (1980s – 2003) newsletters across the organization’s history and in a few recent posts I mentioned how it’s been claimed in a document commissioned by the Ohio Supreme Court (1997, in surveying) as a contributor and possible creator of the family courts themselves in the first place, which document also shows how the family courts as separate jurisdictions and dockets are still a recent development.

Here’s that Sept. 15, 2019, post and a related one addressing current “family court reform” movements and buzz-words, key themes, specifically the “protect children.”  They ask, if family courts were designed with the purpose of “protecting children” then what was the purpose of dependency/child welfare courts (and legislation to go with)?  Why criticize family courts’ failure to do things they weren’t initiated and never claimed to be organized to do in the first place?

This “Builders and their Blueprints” post

Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, How, and Since When? (“The Evidence Speaks”) [Started Aug. 17, 2019, Published Sept. 15].(short-link ends “-aI6” — the middle character is capital “I” as in the personal pronoun or “Idaho; with post-publication addition, 8,800 words.

….explains a key theme of an earlier one,

Reform, Solutions, Enhancements, Adjudication Improvements Built on WHAT? (Unproven Because Unspoken Assumptions about the Deliberate Design = the Deliberate Purposes of the Family Courts in the USA)., (short-link ending “-9PC” started May 2, 2019, revisited and expanded June 6-8, “sure hope to publish soon” status, Aug. 6-7,  and finally (!) published August 29 ,

i.e., common sense says, before choosing Reforms, Solutions, Enhancements or Adjudication Improvements, ask, and find out who were the builders and show the blueprints which show purpose/design, intent.

(end, mini-section “For More on Who/What is AFCC from this blog.*”

(*My blog consistently provides links to sources outside the blog, so what I say will not be just opinion or hearsay, i.e., unsupported.)

One of my key exhibits in my ongoing assertion what family courts were NOT designed to do for historically in this blog came from the entity Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.’s own “About Us/History” web page, along with ongoing publications of its own prominent or not-so-prominent but devout  excuse me, devoted and loyal members.

The History page features sections “Divorce with Dignity” and “Mediation Explosion,” and commented on the improvement of introducing the new words of “behavioral science” to replace the old words of “criminal law,” although the family courts aren’t designed to handle or prosecute criminal behavior.  As I recall this is shown on the Front Page or linked to from that page.

In fact one unique quality of family courts (USA at least) is that being accused IN them (unlike when accused of crime and being prosecuted for it by the state) a litigant is NOT appointed a defense counsel when he or she cannot afford one — after all, it’s a problem-solving, dispute-resolving conflict between citizens, not “the state and the accused.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 23, 2019 at 7:07 pm

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

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

%d bloggers like this: