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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Archive for the ‘AFCC’ Category

The amazing Suspended, Dissolved, Terminated, Forfeited, Delinquent, perchance Active-Status (re)Incarnations Family Court Stakeholders (Phew!)

with one comment

Well, I’m breathless keeping up with them.  Someone very, very tech-savvy should design a 3D chart.

The X-axis could be years, the Y axis perhaps States of incorporation.  A 3rd dimension could be either $$, or Board of Directors Personnel in common Profit/Nonprofit or perhaps %/# of public law & court-related employees among incorporating personnel.

Actually no matter how I look at it, the human mind can’t keep up with such level of detail, and I don’t see any databases that are, although there are plenty of databases that track almost every other level of detail, including books signed out from local public libraries by users.

My cursor / fingers are so trained they can get on auto-pilot, or otherwise just about effortlessly over to the state (usually my state’s) “Business Corporations” search page, and then the “Registry of Charitable Trusts” search page – in approximately 5 seconds or less, without bookmarks.  The computer is trained to go there also.

Business Entities (BE)

To spice it up a bit, I took a little detour to the link underneath “Business Search” — and to “Disclosures.”  (California Secretary of State link)

No, this isn’t the judges’ statements about their financial holdings (Form 700s in my state — what about in yours?) — but Public Traded Stock corporations doing business in (my state).   This is another angle of the child support enforcement (and other) businesses we tend to overlook.

There are shareholders – not just employees — invested, literally, in the success (profit) of for-profit organizations whose business is to put liens on your assets and garnish your wages if you’re a delinquent in support payments person.  Or, sometimes, when you aren’t.  Or sometimes, as it comes to certain groups, when you don’t even have a minor child by the name they are putting into the system.  Or paid already (and so forth).

So, before posting Maximus’s disclosures (speaking of which) my Secretary of State site very helpfully posts the relevant business codes for anyone – meaning any foreign (out of state) corporation doing business “intra” (within) the state.  These are for the protection of the stockholders, and us.

For example:

2105. (a) A foreign corporation shall not transact intrastate business without having first obtained from the Secretary of State a certificate of qualification. To obtain that certificate it shall file, on a form prescribed by the Secretary of State, a statement and designation signed by a corporate officer stating:
(1) Its name and the state or place of its incorporation or organization.
(2) The address of its principal executive office.
(3) The address of its principal office within this state, if any.
(4) The name of an agent upon whom process directed to the corporation may be served within this state. The designation shall comply with the provisions of subdivision (b) of Section 1502.
(5) (A) Its irrevocable consent to service of process directed to it upon the agent designated and to service of process on the Secretary of State if the agent so designated or the agent’s successor is no longer authorized to act or cannot be found at the address given.
(B) Consent under this paragraph extends to service of process directed to the foreign corporation’s agent in California for a search warrant issued pursuant to Section 1524.2 of the Penal Code, or for any other validly issued and properly served search warrant, for records or documents that are in the possession of the foreign corporation and are located inside or outside of this state. This subparagraph shall apply to a foreign corporation that is a party or a nonparty to the matter for which the search warrant is sought. For purposes of this subparagraph, “properly served” means delivered by hand, or in a manner reasonably allowing for proof of delivery if delivered by United States mail, overnight delivery service, or facsimile to a person or entity listed in Section 2110 of the Corporations Code.
(6) {{[(a)??}} If it is a corporation which will be subject to the Insurance Code as an insurer, it shall so state that fact. (b) Annexed to that statement and designation shall be a certificate by an authorized public official of the state or place of incorporation of the corporation to the effect that the corporation is an existing corporation in good standing in that state or place or, in the case of an association, an officers’ certificate stating that it is a validly organized and existing business association under the laws of a specified foreign jurisdiction. (c) Before it may be designated by any foreign corporation as its agent for service of process, any corporate agent must comply with Section 1505.
 

This is going to become VERY interesting when it comes to nonprofits with the word “COURT” anywhere in their name.  The ethereal re-incarnations and multi-state addresses are really hard to keep up with.

But, thankfully, MAXIMUS was forthcoming and disclosed, twice, in California (remind me to check EVERY state):

Corporation Number
Corporation Name
Disclosure Filing Date
C1618100 MAXIMUS, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS VIRGINIA MAXIMUS, INC. 07/17/2006
C1618100 MAXIMUS, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS VIRGINIA MAXIMUS, INC. 03/05/2004

Sorry to give it that ugly format, but the more picturesque versions (which drag an image) tend to not show in different browers.  So you get the warhorse version, with live links (I hope).

I then went right back to the “Business Search” (as in yesterday’s post) and typed in “C1618100” (easier than the whole name), remembering to check “Entity#” and got this:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1618100 06/30/1988 ACTIVE MAXIMUS, INC. CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS CSC – LAWYERS INCORPORATING SERVICE

Well perhaps THAT’s why we can’t keep up with all these stakeholders in the mediation (etc) and businesses of law — they have a faster than light incorporating service. . . . . .

CSC LAWYERS INCORPORATING SERVICE

8040 EXCELSIOR DR, STE 400
MADISON,  WI  53717-2915

Also at that address:

VELOCITY INVESTMENTS LLC, 8040 EXCELSIOR DRMADISONWisconsin 

 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS LLC. 8040 EXCELSIOR DRSTE 400MADISONWI 53717-2915 
Maximus (see narrow bar, above) has been doing in business in california since before welfare reform, and was in fact involved in it.  I think that a contract with Los Angeles was one of the earliest one’s in the company’s history in this business.

Benefit from our Child Support Expertise

MAXIMUS professionals manage 40 percent of the privatized child support caseload in the United States and Canada today. All our services are supported through a team of CSE experts, which includes former state and local IV-D directors and others with significant child support legal, policy and operations experience. Our more than 660 CSE specialists have a shared passion and dedication for helping children and families obtain the resources they need.

As the local IV-D directors also (through fatherhood grants, etc.) have some say in child CUSTODY matters, this can get fairly interesting . . . ..

Child Welfare

MAXIMUS is committed to improving the welfare of the nation’s most vulnerable children by providing SSI Advocacy Services for children in foster care and providing Title IV-E, TANF, and Adoption Assistance Eligibility services for our government partners.

We partner with government clients and tailor our services to meet child welfare program goals. We are passionate about advocating for vulnerable populations, and our team brings a unique blend of knowledge, skills, and experience, which is unmatched by any other firm.

And partnerships with various regional nonprofit child support directors associations (see my recent posts for who is paying for that . . . . . )

Extending our reach through our valued partners (Affiliated Associations)

As a corporate member of several civic associations across the nation, MAXIMUS is dedicated to the business areas and communities in which we operate.

Child Support

Eastern Regional Interstate Child Support Association   (ERICSA)
National Child Support Enforcement Association   (NCSEA)
Western Interstate Child Support Enforcement Council  (WICSEC) (active in California also, although our state one is “CSDA”)

About that 1988 incorporation date in California:

From wikipedia (just a reminder), Maximus started in 1975, in a garage in McLean Virginia:

History

MAXIMUS was founded by David Mastran, a Vietnam veteran and former government worker, in 1975 and was first incorporated as a privately held company in 1975. Mastran founded the company from his garage in McLean, Virginia.[10]The company eventually went public on June 13, 1997.

So, it incorporated in California probably in order to do this:

Employment services

MAXIMUS began providing welfare-to-work services in 1988 with Los Angeles County’s decision to award the first welfare-to-work privatization contract in the nation. Today[when?]MAXIMUS operates TANF programs in Los Angeles County; Alaska; San Diego; Orange County, California; Wisconsin; Maricopa County, Arizona; Nashville, Tennessee; and Cleveland, Ohio.

The company also runs One Stop Employment Centers, Veterans Employment Programs, and WIA Summer Youth Programs.[14]\


Public obviously meaning it trades its stock, “MMS,” openly, and not just restricted to shareholders.  Right now, that’s worth about . . . .

Last Price $37.69  Day Change (up) 0.89|2.42 %  that’s literally 8/23/2011 1:19pm, thank you “Quote.morningstar.com/stock/s.aspx?t=MMS

(. . No, I don’t know stocks either, just looking)

However, in 2007, it apparently was doing better, until it had to pay that $30 million in settling a whistleblower lawsuit from one of its own employees.  This is a whistleblower law blog:

Maximus, Inc. pays $30.5 Million to settle False Claims Act Case

“Helping the Government serve the People” is the tagline of Virginia based Maximus, Inc., latest corporate citizen entangled in a Medicaid fraud scam.

Unfortunately, this company needs a new tagline. The DOJ announced today that Maximus has agreed to pay $30.5 Million to settle qui tam lawsuit. The company admitted to their part in submitting fraudulent Medicaid claims for children who may not have received foster care services. Last September, at the end of their fiscal year the company reported earning $700 million in revenueand predicted a rosy forecast for 2007. Today the Maximus stock closed at $42.05, only down a slight 5% from earlier trading.  I wonder, how they will project next year’s forecast, in wake of this scandal.  It is a scandal, because the good name of this organization has been tarnished due to a few “greedy” and “unscrupulous” workers.

Thanks to the brave whistleblower, Benjamin Turner, a former division manager at Maximus, the acts and deeds of the corporate wrongdoers, did not go unpunished. In recognition for his efforts, Mr. Turner will receive $4.93 million as a result of filing a qui tam or whistleblower lawsuit under the provisions of the False Claims Act. There are times when a whistleblower gets compensated for his brave actions. And there are times when the whistleblower gets nothing, even after going to the Supreme Court, as in the case of Rockwell v. United States, as mentioned here previously on the Whistleblower Law Blog.

I’m just putting that in for reference, before posting this Disclosure from my state.  I was talking about what it takes (financially, salaries) to run the SF Superior court a post or so ago.  Well, here are some of the profits — including in both salary and “options” (that’s stock options, which have higher leverage and potential profits than plain stocks) for the executive directors.

California Secretary of State site shows:

Corporation Number
Corporation Name
Disclosure Filing Date
C1618100 MAXIMUS, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS VIRGINIA MAXIMUS, INC. 07/17/2006
C1618100 MAXIMUS, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS VIRGINIA MAXIMUS, INC. 03/05/2004

The first filing showed one set of Executive Directors:

CORPORATION
Corporation Name: MAXIMUS, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS VIRGINIA MAXIMUS, INC.
Corporation Number: C1618100
Document Number: 0990969
Disclosure Filing Date: 07/17/2006
Bankruptcy: NO
Legal Proceedings: Material pending legal proceeding(s) – YES
Legally liable in any material legal proceeding(s) – NO
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR
Prepared most recent auditor’s report: ERNST & YOUNG
Employed by the corporation as of the date of the statement: ERNST & YOUNG
DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
Name Title Compensation Shares Options Bankruptcy Fraud
BELIVEAU, RUSSELL A. DIRECTOR $ 37,500.00 0.00 16,823.00 NO NO
HALEY, JOHN J. DIRECTOR $ 45,000.00 0.00 16,823.00 NO NO
LEDERER, PAUL R. DIRECTOR $ 55,500.00 0.00 1,823.00 NO NO
MONTONI, RICHARD A. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
POND, PETER B. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 12,570.00 NO NO
RUDDY, RAYMOND B. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 8,519.00 NO NO
SEYMANN, MARILYN R. DIRECTOR $ 56,500.00 0.00 16,823.00 NO NO
THOMPSON, JAMES R. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 4,954.00 NO NO
WEBB, WELLINGTON E. DIRECTOR $ 43,500.00 0.00 2,141.00 NO NO
FRANCIS, DAVID R. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 425,120.00 2,413.00 80,000.00 NO NO
MONTONI, RICHARD A. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 565,000.00 6,500.00 15,000.00 NO NO
WALKER, DAVID N. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 218,500.00 0.00 280.00 NO NO
LOANS TO MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Name: NONE

and the next filing, a bit earlier, a different set, with the exception of Mr. Montoni is still there, showing the increase in salary in just a few years.

CORPORATION
Corporation Name: MAXIMUS, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS VIRGINIA MAXIMUS, INC.
Corporation Number: C1618100
Document Number: 0655844
Disclosure Filing Date: 03/05/2004
Bankruptcy: NO
Legal Proceedings: Federal security law violations – NO
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR
Prepared most recent auditor’s report: ERNST & YOUNG
Date of last report: 12/16/2003
DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
Name Title Compensation Shares Options Bankruptcy Fraud
BELIVEAU, RUSSELL A. DIRECTOR $ 101,612.00 0.00 15,000.00 NO NO
DAVENPORT, LYNN P. DIRECTOR $ 426,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 NO NO
HALEY, JOHN J. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 3,899.00 NO NO
LEDERER, PAUL R. DIRECTOR $ 30,000.00 0.00 5,656.00 NO NO
MASTRAN, DAVID V. DIRECTOR $ 395,155.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
POND, PETER B. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 9,083.00 NO NO
SEYMANN, MARILYN R. DIRECTOR $ 30,000.00 0.00 2,068.00 NO NO
THOMPSON, JAMES R. JR DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 3,475.00 NO NO
WEBB, WELLINGTON E. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
BOYER, JOHN F. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
FALLON, ROBERT J. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 390,000.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
GRISSEN, THOMAS A. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 414,500.00 0.00 5,000.00 NO NO
JOHNSON, DAVID M. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 511,523.00 0.00 100,000.00 NO NO
MONTONI, RICHARD A. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 374,333.00 0.00 15,000.00 NO NO
LOANS TO MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Name: NONE

I may have posted this before, but a brief bio of Mr. Montani is here from people.forbes.com

Richard A. Montoni

Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

Maximus, Inc.

Reston ,  VA

Sector: SERVICES  /  Business Services

Officer since March 2002
59 Years Old
Richard A. Montoni has served as Chief Executive Officer, President and a director of MAXIMUS since 2006. Previously, Mr. Montoni served as our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer from 2002 to 2006. Mr. Montoni served as Chief Financial Officer for Towers Perrin, a global professional services firm, during April 2006 before rejoining MAXIMUS and his appointment as Chief Executive Officer and President. Before his employment with MAXIMUS, he served as Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President for Managed Storage International, Inc. in Broomfield, Colorado from 2000 to 2001. From 1996 to 2000, he was Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President for CIBER, Inc., a NYSE-listed company in Englewood, Colorado where he also served as a director until 2002. Before joining CIBER, he was an audit partner with KPMG, LLP, where he worked for nearly 20 years. Mr. Montoni holds a Masters Degree in Accounting from Northeastern University and a Bachelor of Science degree in Economics from Boston University.
(notice, steadily increasing, and the stock awards also.)
Salary $700,000.00
Bonus $0.00
Restricted stock awards $1,800,000.00
All other compensation $58,409.00
Option awards $ $0.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation $700,000.00
Change in pension value and nonqualified deferred compensation earnings $0.00
Total Compensation $3,258,409.00
Just for a point of reference.

Faster than thought:  AFCC, in Illinois, Los Angeles, and Colorado (simultaneously):

NOW IT’S A LITTLE LATE IN THE DAY, BUT JUST FOR REFERENCE:  At the end of the last post, I was re-posting some comments about what (the heck) is going on at 111 Hill Street in Los Angeles, and what has been — regarding the history of the AFCC.
If someone would like some proof or what is said at “Beware AFCC” (google it) and that Jessica Pearson, of Center for Policy Research, has organizational connections to the AFCC, which itself has direct connections of SOME sort, to the Los Angeles County Courthouse (at least the one at 111 Hill Street), I’ll give you this one:
Entity Name: ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS 
Entity Number: C1091990
Date Filed: 10/01/1981
Status: SURRENDER
Jurisdiction: ILLINOIS
Entity Address: 1720 EMERSON ST
Entity City, State, Zip: DENVER CO 80218
Agent for Service of Process: MARGARET LITTLE
Agent Address: 111 N HILL ST
Agent City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90012
Margaret Little (Ph.D.) in 2006 shows up on a Judicial Council Task force report (about abuses in probate conservatorships!) as this title:

Dr. Margaret Little

Family Law and Probate Administrator Superior Court of California,

County of Los Angeles

Topic of the report (which I just linked to), dated 9/18/2007 about how the courts responded to  not internal controls, or complaints from litigants, but an expository (series?) from the Los Angeles Times!  May there be a similar one on these topics in my lifetime!  . . .   Notice how “lack of resources” (rather than, say, corruption and inappropriate alliances between probate judges and public guardians) is cited as a cause of the troubles.  I hope that by quoting this you don’t lose sight of the tri-state corporate identity of (AFCC), above, or its significance:

Final Report of the Probate Conservatorship Task Force (Action Required)

Issue Statement

The administration and management of probate conservatorship cases in the state of California was recently placed under scrutiny through a series of Los Angeles Times articles that raised concerns that some conservatees were being subjected to abusive practices. Of particular concern were the inappropriate granting of temporary conservatorships on ex parte petitions, lack of proper oversight of accountings, abusive practices of private professional conservators including improper billings, lack of sufficient notice to conservatees and their families, and inadequate protections of the rights of conservatees. Although there are courts and counties with exemplary programs, many others do not appear to be able to provide the services and oversight necessary to ensure that conservatees are protected and receive proper care and treatment. This inability is often due to a lack of resources and, in some cases, gaps in existing statutes, rules, and guidelines.

Recognizing these challenges, in January 2006 the Chief Justice established the Probate Conservatorship Task Force and charged it with conducting a top-to- bottom review of the probate conservatorship system in California

Dr. Margaret Little is involved in Family and Probate Courts, and was the registered agent (if anyone had started a lawsuit, she’d have received the paperwork) for ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS with ILLINOIS jurisdiction and DENVER place of business, probably while back then also on the public payroll for the County of Los Angeles.   Makes you think, huh?  Since then (2010) she was a member of the “Elkins Family Law Task Force” as Senior Administrator (in the same area), and was cited by a 2001-licensed Child Forensic Psychologist (Marlene Valter, Psy.D.) as having conducted the following training (it’s a “vita,” I searched for “Margaret Little”).  Note the following seminar listed, same year and who sponsored it!:

2003 Domestic Violence Training for Child Custody Evaluators and Mediators; Los Angeles, CA; January 23; Coordinator: Margaret Little, Ph.D.; Sponsored by Los Angeles County Family Court Services. (4 hours)

2003 Managing Parent-child Reunification in Alienation and Abduction Cases. Burbank, CA; September 25; presenters: various; Sponsored by Judicial Council of California Administrative Office of the Courts. (3 hours)

If we look at this Pepperdine-trained person, it’s clear a lot of her work life has been in the los Angeles County System, not to mention around AFCC, heavily so:

CHILD CUSTODY FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY SPECIALTY TRAINING:

2008 AFCC-CA Annual Conference: Abduction, Risk, and Response; Ethical and

Effective Coaching of One Parent During a Child Custody Evaluation; Domestic Violence;

MARLENE W. VALTER, PSY.D.

PAGE 2Private Life, Public Parenting-Is a Parent’s Sexual Behavior Relevant?; The Impact of Celebrity

on the lives of Children; Therapeutic Interventions. Santa Monica, CA; Sponsored by AFCC and Los Angeles County Superior Court. (12 hours)

2008 Domestic Violence Training for Child Custody Evaluators; Santa Monica, CA; In collaboration with AFCC/CA Chapter. (4 hours)

2007 Annual Update for Custody Evaluators: The Steve Frankel Group, June 19. Online Presenter: Philip Stahl, Ph.D., ABPP. (8 hours)

(Philip Stahl is straight PAS-promoter, and quite AFCC, currently in Arizona…)
As far back also as 1991, here is an article by Margaret A. Little, funded in part (it says) by a grant from the “California Judicial Council” (too bad the TAGGS.hhs.gov database doesn’t go  back that far), published in the “FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS REVIEW.”  Other than giving a background history of Hofstra University in NY which helps publish this with AFCC, I don’t know how much more plainly I could point to who is running the family court services basically around the country..
The Impact of the Custody Plan on a Family:   A Five-Year Follow-up
(for what Trish Wilson has to say on this, in 2002 (the 11-year followup?) see HERE at “The Liz Library” it appears to be commenting on the same article, in re: joint custody.)
1991 – 5 = 1986 – 5  = when the above-listed California “foreign” corporation, predecessor of AFCC, had to surrender its business license.  I imagine these people know exactly what they are doing corporately in moving fro in-state to out of state.  I can’t say the same for every young proselyte that graduates into the system, whether through Fuller Theological Seminary,** in the area, or Pepperdine, also in the general area (Malibu) or wherever
(** this mini-section added 8/25, and I am posting some material on Fuller today as well.  Both are Christian-oriented groups who have really pushed into the business realm surrounding the courts, through graduate psychology, marital studies, and as to Pepperdine University School of Law’s emphasis on Dispute Resolution, churning out professionals at a high rate that my research keeps running into as I chase down nonprofits, delinquent and active both).
Think of the ramifications if AFCC is indeed the shape-shifting, tax-evading, court-controlling group it certainly appears to be!

SO WHEN MARV BRYER RAVED ABOUT AFCC’S ROAMING INCORPORATION HISTORY . . .

So when Marv Bryer, raving almost, states “incredulous” things (like, over a decade ago) like this (quoted from Liz Richards NAFCJ site this time) . . . .

In 1981 – I presume their bank account was still open and they created a new identity called the Association of Family Conciliation Courts. This time – Margaret Little – FAMILY COURT SERVICES for LOS ANGELES, and a Colorado individual named Jessica Pearson orchestrated yet another version of the LOS ANGELES COUNTY COURTHOUSE SCHEME. Pearson borrowed the EIN of the WISCONSIN AFCC and claimed her office was in Colorado as an ILLINOIS corporation. The LOS ANGELES COUNTY COURTHOUSE became PEARSON’S and Dr MARGARET LITTLE’S California – FOREIGN – CORPORATION.

. . . He’s not nuts.  I just showed you.

Also, looks like they had to give it up.
NB:  i showed you the Los Angeles County Judges’ Association last post.  Wasn’t it still out of 111 Hill?
Jurisdiction, Illinois (OK . . . . . )
  1. Endnotes – The Future of Children –

    futureofchildren.org › Home › Publications › Journals – Cached

    by JR Johnston – 1994 – Related articles
    May 17, 2011 –  is presently under research in a multisite national study (J. Pearson, Center for Policy Research, 1720 Emerson St., DenverCO 90218). 

  2. Colorado Model Office Project EVALUATION OF COLORADO’S DRIVER’S 

    ancpr.com/myth.htm

    Center for Policy Research 1720 Emerson Street DenverColorado 80218 303/837- 1555. Quotes from this study indicate clearly that so called “Deadbeat Dads” 

  3. Evidence in child abuse and neglect cases – Google Books Result

    books.google.com/books?isbn=0471167525John E. B. Myers – 1997 – Family & Relationships – 600 pages
    Center for Policy Research, 1720 Emerson StreetDenverCO 80218. Phone: (303) 837-1555) [hereinafter Tjaden & Anhalt]. 332 Tjaden & Anhalt at 1. 
  4. 2309 Emerson StDenverCO 80205 Directions, Location and Map 

    http://www.mapquest.com/maps?…2309%20Emerson%20St…DenverC – Cached

    Our interactive map lets you view, print, or send to your phone directions to and from 2309 Emerson StDenverCO 80205, and view the location as a 

  5. CHILD SUPPORT IN THE UNITED STATES: THE EXPERIENCE IN COLORADO 

    lawfam.oxfordjournals.org/content/6/2/321.abstract

    by J PEARSON – 1992 – Cited by 2 – Related articles
    Center for Policy Research1720 Emerson StreetDenverColorado 80218, USA. The research reported in this article was developed under grants from Hunt 

  6. Child Support Improvement Project: Paternity Establishment; Final 

    by J Pearson – 1995
    Sponsoring Agency: Colorado Dept of Social Services United States. Sale: Ctr for Policy Research 1720 Emerson Street DenverCO 80218. United States 

Of course it’s now moved — and shows up at 1570 Emerson Street:
Center For Policy Research
1570 Emerson Street  (google maps view)
Denver, CO  80218
Phone: 303-837-1555
Fax: 303-837-1557
And legally registered as a trade name and nonprofit at http://www.SOS.state.CO.us:
Found 2 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1.
# Name Address Type Count
1 PEARSON, JESSICA 1570 EMERSON, DENVER, CO
80218-1450, US
Trade name Registrant 1
2 PEARSON, JESSICA S. 1570 EMERSON, DENVER, CO 80218, US Registered Agent 1
Also in Denver, NCADV Main Headquarters (the other office listed being in Washington, D.C.) which apparently just moved here, no kidding, on April 1, 2011:
NCADV’s Main Office (as of April 1, 2011)
One Broadway, Suite B210
Denver, CO 80203
and

1899 Wynkoop Street # 300

Denver, CO 80202-1092 map

(personnel in common, and often publishes under HHS grants with CPR).
Also (note address):

COLORADO CHILD HEALTH PLAN PLUS-ANTHEM

1899 Wynkoop #300
Denver, CO 80202
(800) 234-5147
Company Website: www.chpplusproviders.com

In fact, trade names for PSI, I should probably just list here — there are plenty for this 1984-incorporated organization, several of which relate to this blog:
Found 12 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 2.
# ID Number Document Number Name Status Form Effective Date Comment
1 19951078593  19951078593 COLORADO CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES Effective DPC 06/16/1995 12:00 AM
2 19961012292  19961012292 PRIVATIZATION PARTNERSHIPS, INC. Effective DPC 01/29/1996 12:00 AM
3 19961012293  19961012293 PSIBER TECHNOLOGIES INC. Effective DPC 01/29/1996 12:00 AM
4 20001166186  20001166186 CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES OF COLORADO Effective DPC 08/25/2000 12:00 AM
5 20001209751  20001209751 TELLER COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT Effective DPC 10/27/2000 12:00 AM
6 20001209752  20001209752 EL PASO COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT Effective DPC 10/27/2000 12:00 AM
7 20011022445  20011022445 PSI INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND JUSTICE CENTER Effective DPC 01/31/2001 12:00 AM
8 20011022446  20011022446 PSI HEALTH Effective DPC 01/31/2001 12:00 AM
9 20021117260  20021117260 CHILD HEALTH ADVOCATES Effective DPC 05/03/2002 12:00 AM
10 20021159702  20021159702 PSI ARISTA Effective DPC 06/12/2002 12:00 AM
and the last two, Parent Opportunity Programs, you “know” are going to show up fatherhood-hhs-sponsored:
Found 12 matching record(s).  Viewing page 2 of 2.
# ID NumberClick here to sort in ascending order. Document Number Name Status Form Effective Date Comment
11 20021223054  20021223054 BOULDER COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP) Effective DPC 08/13/2002 12:00 AM
12 20021223055  20021223055 EL PASO COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP) Effective DPC 08/13/2002 12:00 AM
From fatherhood.hhs.gov, the descriptions:

Colorado

Noncustodial Parent Programs

  • Boulder County Parent Opportunity Program (POP) Policy Studies Inc. has operated a Welfare-To-Work (WtW) program for non-custodial parents (NCP) in Boulder County since 2002. The program helps NCPs who are unemployed, underemployed, or having trouble meeting their child support obligations. The POP helps these parents overcome barriers to employment by linking them with services in the community or through allowable WtW funds. The program has been instrumental in helping clients increase their wages, child support payments, and visitation with their children. Primary Contact: John Mahaney, .
  • El Paso County Parent Opportunity Program (POP) This program is in its seventh year of operation. During the first three years, it operated under a federal grant to develop an innovative approach to create a strong community effort serving noncustodial parents who lacked the means to support their children. The POP now operates as a partnership between the El Paso County Department of Social Services, Policy Studies Inc. (PSI), the Center on Fathering and Goodwill Industries. These partners work in coordination with other community agencies to provide services including employment and training, mediation, parent education, child support assistance and community referrals to unemployed and under-employed non-custodial parents and their families. Recently, POP has partnered with the Pikes Peak Workforce Center to help them serve noncustodial parents eligible for WtW services. An evaluation of the first three years of the program is available upon request. Primary contact:Chad Eddinger, Project lead, El Paso Department of Human Services .
Guess who was probably paying (now that I’m on that web page, which comes generally speaking under HHS == tax distribution agent of the U.S. Government) for these:

Faith-Based and Community Organization Activities

  • On October 1st and 2nd, 2004, The Colorado Collaborative for FatherHood and Families, and the Fatherhood Coalition of Metro Denver co-sponsored a kick-off training conference called Journey to Manhood, attended by nearly 30 local fatherhood providers and fathers interested in training. Presenters included James Rodriguez of the Arizona Fatherhood Collaborative and ACF staff. This was the opening session of a one-year certificate program in Fatherhood to be offered by Red Rocks Community College.
  • Also on October 1st, 2004, the Fatherhood Steering Committee of the Colorado Department of Human Services, with support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, held a Stakeholders Forum. Many excellent presentations were offered by local fatherhood experts on how to make organizations more father-friendly, and how to address barriers that keep fathers from full participation in child welfare organizations.
  • The 14th Annual Expanding the Visions Conference was held on March 20, 2004. This event, sponsored by the Denver African-American Leadership Conference, was attended by approximately 1,000 boys and their dads. Several hundred packets of ACF-related information were distributed to attendees. This information focused on how to be a great dad and strategies for avoiding divorce.
  • Colorado Springs, Colorado: Approximately 200 dads and daughters participate annually in the Father-Daughter Purity Ball. The centerpiece of this evening of formal dinner and dancing is always the reading of a pledge by the dads to model purity and integrity for their daughters and to do all they can to protect their purity.
  • In Douglas County, Colorado, Extension Agent Rich Batten has established a monthly e-mail letter for those interested in fatherhood advocacy and committed to increasing the probability of every child being intimately connected to an involved, responsible and loving father or father figure.
  • The Denver Indian Family Resource Center has begun a Young Men’s Sweat Lodge project, which includes fathers and male mentors. Seven sweats have been held so far.

For a REAL eye-opener, go to the SOS Colorado business search page, click on “Advanced Search” and then type in “Fatherhood”!

Sorry, this post was less about the title’s Suspended, etc. — but bet it was informative.  Namely, the appearance of detachment and belonging to separate entities (when one awards and compliments the other) dissipates when the connections between associations are traced at the corporate level.
Since then, AFCC has straighted up and incorporated in a California Chapter.  At least the “incorporated in California Chapter” part I can vouch for:
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1587819 05/15/1987 ACTIVE ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER LULU L WONG
C1091990 10/01/1981 SURRENDER ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS MARGARET LITTLE
Entity Name: ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER
Entity Number: C1587819
Date Filed: 05/15/1987
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 1336 N MOORPARK RD #185
Entity City, State, Zip: THOUSAND OAKS CA 91360
Agent for Service of Process: LULU L WONG
Agent Address: 1303 JEFFERSON ST STE 710B
Agent City, State, Zip: NAPA CA 94559
NAPA is wine country, just north of San Francisco.  Remember Karen Anderson’s grants money was used to host an art & wine seminar up there? (see johnnypumphandle’s account, I DNR exact details…..).
Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 068671 Charity Current THOUSAND OAKS CA Charity Registration Charity
1
Too bad I wasn’t checking here in 2010 and earlier; looks like they got their 2011 warning letter too!  if it doesn’t show here, go to the site and read it, bottom document under “first delinquency notice.”     Cute!

It got slapped up on the site crooked.  Looks like someone was in a hurry!
Just a reminder:  They are addressing an organization comprised of judges and attorneys, etc.  Isn’t that sweet, reminding them of the law?
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Full Name: ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER FEIN: 770238347
Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 1587819
Registration Number: 068671
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/2012
Registration Status: Current Date This Status: 2/7/2011
Date of Last Renewal: 3/3/2011
Address Information
Address Line 1: 1336 N MOORPARK RD #185 Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: THOUSAND OAKS CA 91360
Annual Renewal Information
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-04
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-04
Total Assets: $23,332.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $59,598.00
RRF Received: 01-FEB-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-05
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-05
Total Assets: $28,259.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $62,923.00
RRF Received: 10-FEB-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-06
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-06
Total Assets: $25,101.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $66,748.00
RRF Received: 10-FEB-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-07
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-07
Total Assets: $31,241.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $106,426.00
RRF Received: 16-MAY-08
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-08
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-08
Total Assets: $76,048.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $135,317.00
RRF Received: 13-MAY-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-09
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-09
Total Assets: $73,765.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $120,592.00
RRF Received: 26-FEB-10
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-10
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-10
Total Assets: $80,200.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $103,725.00
RRF Received: 11-FEB-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Related Documents
00003B29 Founding Documents
00003B2A RRF-1 2009
00003B2B IRS Form 990 2009
00003B2C RRF-1 2008
00003B2D IRS Form 990 2008
00003B2E RRF-1 2007
00003B2F IRS Form 990 2007
00003B30 RRF-1 2006
00003B31 IRS Form 990 2006
00003B32 RRF-1 2005
00003B33 IRS Form 990 2005
15310 1st Delinquency Notice
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data
Founding documents, 1987 (AFCC began apparently in Los Angeles somewhere around 1962?) are full of love and appreciation for children and conciliation, etc.
Notice the inclusion of “BEHAVIORAL SCIENTISTS.”   Got to get them in there.
Notice (below) the span of the state (in fact, west coast) represented in directors, starting with a LA County Judge at 111 Hill Street, San Diego, Santa Barbara, and up north, our beloved San Francisco:
\

HAVE A SWEET DAY….

Planning Professional Niches, Rehearsing Terminology Changes, Profiting from Trainings, — How does AFCC DO this?

with one comment

And dropping nonprofit / for-profit legitimacy along the way. . . . .

(NOTE: I am using a different input computer, so DNK how this will display. For now, this means no difference in font sizes as I can normally do in wordpress). It’s missing half the formatting buttons, not to mention a scroll bar. I suspect it may come up without paragraph breaks either, but we shall see…. Mastering html input to compensate for this is not on the agenda…)

GEORGIA, PENNSYLVANIA, (TEXAS), ILLINOIS — it’s all in an AFCC practitioner’s lifestyle:

Which will include collaborating to figure out which terminologies to use around the family law business — incorporating (where absolutely necessary only), maintaining corporate and nonprofit status (apparently optional, when it comes to doing business — case in point, has any one stopped the parenting education profession at 1242 Market Street 2nd floor, SF yet?, Because its business license in my book –and on the California Secretary of State site — still reads “Suspended.”) Like some of the courthouses in the area, that were closed because of the budget crunch. Perhaps if fewer parents were left alone to work, versus constantly fight for their basic rights, only to be assigned some federal-grants-incentive-program participation — there might be more income tax to spread around, and we’d also (on the sly) buy a few things that produced local sales taxes for the city, too, like clothing, etc.

ANYHOW, this 2001 brochure (among many other things) shows how Parenting Coordination was being planned, promoted, and explicated at least 10 years ago, in AFCC circles. The term “Collaborative Law” was also being presented (see page 1). . .. Which is now all over the internet….
http://www.afccnet.org/pdfs/AFCC%20Fa2001.pdf

Please note #1 (topic) assessing and addressing ALLEGATIONS of sexual abuse.

  • Collaborative Family Law
  • High-Conflict Families (the family is labeled, not individuals.  No reference to what the conflict might be about, for example — sexual abuse or allegations of it?)

and an all-time favorite AFCC topic, alienation.

  • The Alienated Child within an Alienated Family System”

finally, the words “domestic violence” are allowed in — in this context:

  • “Domestic Violence, High-Conflict Families, and the Courts.”

These are the groups talking about how mothers coach their kids into reporting abuse — well, here is an AFCC coaching session in how to (re)frame the topics.

Notice the involvement of the NY Office of Court Administration (probably had some AFCC member highly placed in it then, and for sure by now), and the business development plan here:

A “Judicial Leadership Institute” to DEVELOP and IMPLEMENT court & community-based programs.   Help “build model courts” introduce “therapeutic justice” and of course ADR, “family services” and learn about how divorce affects kids from the good guys.  (Gee, domestic relations Judges probably had no idea about that).

The next year’s conference, Aloha!, will be in Hawaii


with the combo of presenters from:  Judges, professional educators, psychiatrists most likely, and a JD or two.  Unsurprisingly, the same type of topics will be covered.

Robert Emery, Ph.D. — directs a University of Virginia School of Law “Center for Children, Families, and the Law.”  This probably complements the one at University of Baltimore School of Law, (CCFC) and a portion of the  California Judicial Council’s “AOC”/CFCC portion of government.  Similar terms in the courts, and the schools of law, promoted and pushed by activist judges, mediators, and attorneys — not demanded by the public…

It’s no accident that AFCC has been so active in schools of law in consultation with existing judges and courts — and to spread the idea of Centers for Families & Children + therapeutic jurisprudence, problem-solving courts, Unified Family Courts, and in general soaking up the purpose of the criminal law system to within the family law system (where it’s denatured, defanged, reframed, and the responsibility for it spread to both parents, whether or not both parents have committed domestic violence or other crimes).     However that’s another topic, how it happened.

About Robert E. Emery, Ph.D. – Divorce Mediation Expert

Robert Emery, Ph.D. is Professor of Psychology and Director of the Center for Children, Families, and the Law at the University of Virginia. He also is an associate faculty member in the Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and Public Policy, and was Director of Clinical Training from 1993-2002. He received his B.A. from Brown University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Stony Brook in 1982.  He has served or is serving on the editorial board of eleven professional journals, and he has been a member of the Social Sciences and Population grant review study section of the National Institutes of Health (NIH, part of HHS) . . .

Dr. Emery’s research focuses on family relationships and children’s mental health, including parental conflict, divorce, child custody, family violence,

(not “domestic violence,” the whole family (grammatically at least) is responsible.  NOtice that’s the last topic, even though it’s a hot topic and often precipitates: conflict, divorce, and custody battles.

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts presented the “Distinguished Researcher” and “Myer Elkin Address” awards to Dr. Emery in 2002.

…Dr. Emery has lectured extensively on his research across the United States and in numerous countries throughout the world. In addition to his research, teaching, and administrative responsibilities, Dr. Emery continues to engage in a limited practice as a clinical psychologist and divorce mediator. He also is the father of five children.**

**how many women are involved in this?  Is there a wife or mother somewhere in the picture?  Surely there must be – look at the schedule; who else would raise them?  Perhaps being such a successful person, his “about me” page might want to give some female a little credit?

Here’s a Robert E. Emery testimonial for a Richard Warshak Book, Divorce Poison, along side some Richard Gardner, etc.  Standard fare in the field; in fact the group Kids First of pennsylvania markets it as I’ve noted before:

“Divorce can be ugly, and in the ugliest divorces, one parent destroys children’s relationships with their mother or father.Divorce Poison offers clear, practical, and even-handed advice on this incredibly difficult problem. The first step? Look inward. Protect your children by finding an antidote for your own poison and by swallowing a little more from your ex.”

–Robert E. Emery, Ph.D.,
Director of the Center for Children, Families and the Law,
University of Virginia,
and author of Renegotiating Family Relationships


Other AFCC 2002 (HAWAII) keynote presenter (hardly a surprise) for 2002 was going to be Joan Kelly, Ph.D. Interesting logo at “Mediate.com” — 3 units inextricably bound together, when the process of separation is supposed to include, like, SEPARATION.  Who is the 3rd unit — the court professionals that are going to glue together divorcing parents?  Or does this represent the 3-fold AFCC grouping:  Judge/Attorney/Psychiatrist or Psychologist?

Mediate.com - Complete information about mediation and mediators

Joan Kelly is a Psychologist — not an attorney!  Notice the “parenting coordination” emphasis and two decorations from AFCC.

Joan B. Kelly, Ph.D. is a clinical psychologist and former Executive Director of the Northern California Mediation Center in Corte Madera, CA. Dr. Kelly received her Ph.D. from Yale University and her research, writing, practice and teaching over 38 years has focused on children’s adjustment to divorce, custody and access issues, using child development research to develop parenting plans, divorce mediation, and Parenting Coordination. She has published more than 85 articles and chapters, and a classic book, Surviving the Breakup: How Children and Parents Cope with Divorce. Joan is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, received the Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research and the Meyer Elkin Awards from AFCC, was a member of the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination, and has been appointed to an APA Task Force on Parenting Coordination.

Notice the full complement of Joan Kelly products for sale on the link.  Being in the sales and conferencing business is apparently good business; see “mediate.COM”

While I’m at it, I typed in “Mediation” under the registry of charitable trusts (No name of dba came up for the Northern California Mediation Center” showed up under organization name or dba — so I gather it’s a for-profit outfit, perhaps.  However, these MEdiations Centers no longer are, whatever they may wish:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
MEDIATION CENTER Charity Not Registered SANTA BARBARA CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION CENTER OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 091306 Charity Delinquent STOCKTON CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION CENTER OF THE NORTH VALLEY 082863 Charity Revoked CHICO CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. 106201 Charity Delinquent OAKLAND CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION SERVICES OF SOLANO COUNTY, INC. 078299 Charity Delinquent VACAVILLE CA Charity Registration Charity
1
Corporations search on the 4th one, here brought up 4 more:
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1873900 09/29/1994 DISSOLVED ARBITRATION RESOLUTION MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. DAVID W PIES
C3094518 03/05/2008 SUSPENDED ELLIS MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. CHRISTINA L ELLIS
C2249692 06/19/2000 SUSPENDED MEDIATION ARBITRATION RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. STANLEY LAWRENCE REISCH
C2004504 02/13/1997 SUSPENDED MEDIATION RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. BRENDA M. GASPAR
All I typed in was the word “MEDIATION”!
The address on Ms. Gaspar’s organization is an Oakland PO Box, she also shows up owning a nice home in the area, which was apparently sold to another? marriage therapist, who turned it around quickly (within a year).  As it’s not my business to put people’s home addresses up here (when the corporation listing doesn’t) let’s leave it at that.   ANother person by same name had a bank win a judgment against her in Idaho.
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1865067 08/24/1993 ACTIVE MEDIATION CENTER OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ROSALIE GATES
(I searched the street address.  This one doesn’t seem to focus so much on family law situations, but note):
The Mediation Center of San Joaquin County is a not-for-profit organization funded by the county (under the Dispute Resolution Programs Act), income from training services, case development fees, and donations. Services are provided by trained neutrals
And indicates they work with “Superior Court of San Joaquin County” DRPA funding/advisor line/courtroom mediations.
Funny, Rosalie Gates is listed as registered agent, but new Board Member as of 2008:

Please welcome new board member Rosalie Gates, E. A. Rosalie has experience working with nonprofits and overseeing the accounting and financials. We welcome her and her expertise to our Center.

AND hopefully they will resolve their “delinquent” status!


.

This one actually functioned for quite a while.  statement from 2008 IRS form:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1693905 08/12/1991 SUSPENDED MEDIATION CENTER OF THE NORTH VALLEY MICHAEL SHEPHERD

 

( Chico, CA, stil listed on the state site of “Consumer Agencies” under Butte County – search address)(NOT family law related)

However, he is an ADR professional with a solid resume here, and although his primary field isn’t family law, it would seem he might keep the corporate registration current:

ADMITTED TO PRACTICE
U.S. District Court, California 1990 U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1983 State Bar of California, 1981 U.S. District Court, Southern District, 1974

EDUCATION
Pepperdine University School of Law / Straus Institute For Dispute Resolution 2010
Hastings College of Law,University of California, J.D. 1973
University of Santa Barbara 1968

Mr. Shepherd has tried over 50 civil jury trials including trials in the United States District Court for the Eastern District (Sacramento), Los Angeles County, Santa Barbara County, Butte County, Tehama County, Shasta County, Glenn County, Sutter County, Yuba County and Mendocino County Superior Courts. Mr. Shepherd is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He is admitted to practice before all courts of the State of California, the Central and Southern District Federal Courts for California, the Ninth Appellate Federal Court and the United States Supreme Court.

…Upstanding Citizen

From 1988 to 2000, Mr. Shepherd served on the Board of Directors for the Chico Area Park and Recreation District, twice serving as Chair of the Board and also is Past President of the Board of Directors of the Mediation Center For The North Valley, a non-profit corporation involved {briefly??!}}in alternative dispute resolution. In 1995 Mr. Shepherd was nominated for “Citizen of the Year” by the Chico Chamber of Commerce.

Guess just too busy with all the other professional responsibilities and courts…..

(LOOK at all these mediation centers — just imagine how many websites link to groups with suspended business licenses!  North Valley is on this one.  Moreover, with all this mediation going on, shouldn’t the world be less violent by now?)

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1664678 05/08/1990 SUSPENDED MEDIATION SERVICES OF SOLANO COUNTY, INC. CARL J DEBEVEC

Address of that MEDIATION CENTER appears to be public facilities of some sort.

Mr. Debevec (courtesy “Mediate.com” as above…..)

Carl J. Debevec



Carl J. DebevecCarl J. Debevec is an attorney practicing general civil law in northern California. His practice includes business, trusts and estate planning, real property, elder law issues and mediation. He is a graduate of the Ohio State University college of law, a former Air Force judge advocate, and holds a post-graduate certificate in conflict resolution from California State University at Sonoma.As an active mediator and trainer, he has chaired the ADR committee for the Solano county Bar Association for 7 years, and was recently named attorney of the year for his work in that program. He has extensive experience in court-referred and community-based mediation and conflict resolution processes, and organized the county bar Dispute Resolution Service, a community-based mediation programstaffed by dozens of dedicated volunteer mediators.

And an upstanding community member: (in fact, it turns out he was a board of directors of this foundation that gave him the glowing recommendation:

Vacaville Public Education FoundationBuilding Community Through Education

Posted on March 16, 2010 by VPEF

debevec@debevlaw.com

Carl has resided and practiced law in Vacaville since 1979. A native of Cleveland Ohio, he is a retired AF reserve judge advocate. He previously served as president of the Vacaville Museum, treasurer of the Solano County Bar Association and worked on the board of the Solano Land Trust. As a co-founder of the Solano Conflict Resolution Center, he is a professional mediator. His support of the Vacaville education community springs from his family: his wife of 40 years, Barbara, is a literacy coach for the VUSD, and his daughters Jenny and Elie are successful alumni of the Vacaville school system.

Speaking of THIS California Public Benefit Corporation, which purpose was to raise money for the school district and preserve some of the educational programs:

 

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
VACAVILLE PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION 4258-2007 Raffle Expired VACAVILLE CA Raffle Registration Raffle
VACAVILLE PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION 4258-2005 Raffle Expired VACAVILLE CA Raffle Registration Raffle
VACAVILLE PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION CT0164604 Charity Delinquent VACAVILLE CA Charity Registration Charity
1

 

(of which, incidentally, the IRS shows Carl Debevec is a board member, so it might make sense for the public compliments).

The top two entries are RAFFLES.  Fundraising by raffle-organizations are required to file forms, as well as certifications by the officer of the charity for which they are fundraising that it actually got those funds.  SO this is legitimate.  however, there is no paperwork at all under either of those raffles.

There were some difficulties filing.  I think Mr. Debevec was busy mediating, or he’d have advised them of the regulations about filing, being an attorney himself:

This one — the IRS form shows its purpose is to raise money for the school district to preserve educational programs.  Its main source of REVENUE is a $220K grant — from the school district.  Notice the $6,000 appreciation dinner, $7,000 “accounts receivable”, $12K advertising and promo, and $120 for Corporate FIling fees, if these were ever turned in….not to mention the grants not received yet.

The address of this foundation (sic) is a local sports club:

Direct Contributions – Send checks or money orders to:

Vacaville Public Education Foundation
c/o Millennium SportsClub
3442 Browns Valley Rd., Suite
400Vacaville, CA 95688

The site states:  “The Vacaville Public Education Foundation was formed in 2003 by a determined group of parents, community leaders, elected officials, senior citizens, and businessmen and women. They came together to address the crisis in public education funding that grips California every year and is most severe when the sales taxes and capital gains taxes fall.”  and “In their tenure, they have raised and allocated over $1.8 million for the children of our schools. The money has been used for specific programs in the following general areas: academics, athletics, music, library, health and safety, counseling and the GATE program. They have received over a thousand testimonials from parents, teachers and students about how these grants have made a direct, positive impact on students of the Vacaville Unified School District.

AMONG the board of directors, (according to the site) is someone who should’ve been on top of this charity & raffle registration process, one would think!

Constance Pedron – Corporate Secretary

Board of Directors - Constance Pedron

constance@millenniumsportsclub.com

Constance Pedron has been a resident of Vacaville since 2001. As Vice President, Dir of Human Resources and Chief Technical Officer of Salutary SportsClubs, Inc. (Millennium SportsClub) and is the corporate Administrator for the Millennium Child Development Center.

Constance consults with businesses in Solano and Sacramento Counties in the areas of Human Resource Management and Accounting Management. She has taught employment law at UC Davis Extension providing a solid foundation in current federal, state, and local regulations, emphasizing compliance and maintaining management control. In addition, she is a certified mediator for the Solano County Bar Association, Dispute Resolution Service.

With no children of her own, the community of Vacaville is her family. “The efforts we give today to empower our children in Vacaville will reward us as a community exponentially in the future.”

This “Millennium Child Development Center” (part of a chain) was recently taking over by another international group, per ITS site:

International Child Resource Insitute

child care

ICRI operates and/or oversees six child care and early childhood development centers in the San Francisco Bay Area. Each center incorporates unique curricula and learning environments, and employs talented and dedicated staff. Our goal is to develop a range of outstanding early childhood centers that are models in their communities, and provide study and learning exchange opportunities for educators from around the world. . . . Millennium Child Development Center – ICRI was recently invited to take over the operation of this center in Vacaville, California and create a model early childhood facility at the site. 

(this board & staff a seriously packed with high-profile people, incl. one with SF Government Ties:

Beyene Negewo

Beyene is the former Ethiopian Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland. He is also a retired Senior Policy Advisor for the City and County of San Francisco, and served as a Senior Advisor to the World Bank on economic development in Papua New Guinea. Beyene holds a Doctorate in Public Policy from Stanford as well as additional degrees in the fields of political science, educational planning and international development. Beyene has more than 25 years of professional experience tackling complex social and policy problems throughout North America, Africa, Europe, and Asia.

(WONDER IF ANY HHS grants behind that one …..)

No relationship, presumably? (searched “millennium Children’s”)

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
MILLENNIUM CHILDREN’S FUND 115820 Charity Delinquent BEVERLY HILLS CA Charity Registration Charity
1

Results of search for ” MILLENNIUM CHILDREN’S ” returned 3 entity records

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2090377 07/21/1998 SUSPENDED INTERNATIONAL MILLENNIUM CHILDREN’S FUND JAMES I. BANG, ESQ.
C2225206 02/16/2000 SUSPENDED MILLENNIUM CHILDREN’S FUND DOUGLAS H PIERCE
C2608199 03/12/2004 SUSPENDED THE NEW MILLENNIUM OUTREACH CHILDREN’S CENTER DESENTRIE ANTHONY ALLEN

However, the INSTITUTE is operational in California

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1085046 07/31/1981 ACTIVE INTERNATIONAL CHILD RESOURCE EXCHANGE INSTITUTE KENNETH JAFFE

 

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
INTERNATIONAL CHILD RESOURCE EXCHANGE INSTITUTE 045583 Charity Current BERKELEY CA Charity Registration Charity
1

 

And it IS filing its charity reports and apparently IRS’s.  Mr. Jaffee is paid $140K, and the goal is “starting children’s programs around the world” with a view to preventing abuse.  Revenuves ca $4.8 million (2009), Program expenses, over $4 million, assets well over $1 million.  Program Purpose and Accomplishments are the same:


Mr. Jaffee got his child development training from Sweden:

Ken Jaffe, President & Executive Director

Ken is the founder and leader of ICRI. He started the organization in 1981 to improve the lives of children and families throughout the world, through technical assistance and consultation, resource dissemination, and the establishment of model projects.

Ken received his child development training at the University of Uppsala in Sweden and his Master’s Degree from the University of California, Berkeley, where he conducted comparative research in international child care and development practices. He earned a Juris Doctor degree from John F. Kennedy University, where he studied juvenile justice and children’s rights. Ken is the author of numerous articles on international early childhood education, child advocacy, program management and work and family policy issues.

Ken served as Chair and member of the California Governor’s Advisory Committee on Child Development for nine years. He has worked extensively on family child care issues and was a founding member of the International Family Child Care Association and the World Forum on Early Care and Education. Ken was the Vice-Chair of a statewide commission to formulate a strategic plan for child care development in California.

Ken has assisted in the improvement or establishment of more than 300 child care, child health and child abuse prevention programs worldwide. He has been a consultant to the Children’s Defense Fund in Washington, D.C., and has advised the governments of Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, China, Sweden and Ecuador on child and family issues. In addition, Ken has presented over 300 keynotes and seminars to policy makers, executives, and non-profit professionals worldwide.

Sweden, unlike the U.S., is a constitutional monarchy; it revised its constitution last round, this “state.gov” site says, in 1975.

Sweden has an extensive child-care system that guarantees a place for all young children ages two through six in a public day-care facility. From ages seven to 16, children participate in compulsory education. After completing the ninth grade, 90% attend upper secondary school for either academic or technical education.

Swedes benefit from an extensive social welfare system, which provides childcare and maternity and paternity leave, a ceiling on health care costs, old-age pensions, and sick leave, among other benefits. Parents are entitled to a total of 480 days’ paid leave at 80% of a government-determined salary cap between birth and the child’s eighth birthday. The parents may split those days however they wish, but 60 of the days are reserved specifically for the father. The parents may also take an additional 5 months of unpaid leave.

For curiosity, I typed in “Dispute Resolution.”  After all, Dispute Resolution is such a huge field, and there’s even a county employee (Superior COurt) to promote and coordinate “Alternate Dispute Resolution” to  . . . everyone.  The position has 5 steps, and the highest salary level is $86,000 (below, Classification 444 in SF).

SEARCH ON “DISPUTE RESOLUTION” under California Charities:

I found ONE by this title under charities — the Blumbergs of Mammoth Lake, CA.  Filed in 1990, name change in 1994, and finally in 2011 (this past May) the OAG caught up with them:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER OF CALIFORNIA 063535 Charity Delinquent MAMMOTH LAKES CA Charity Registration Charity
1

Possibly there is a pattern going on here?

You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Full Name: DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER OF CALIFORNIA FEIN: 770131252
Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 1295640
Registration Number: 063535
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/11/2004
Registration Status: Delinquent Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: P.O. BOX 2535 Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: MAMMOTH LAKES CA 93546
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
0001BA6D Founding Documents
12961879 1st Delinquency Notice
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data

with them and said, “you’re delinquent!”  It appears they NEVER filed a tax return (at least, none up here) as charities are required to.

Kamala Harris’ office is appropriately indignant and threatening (although the amount hardly seems to match the millions  per state held in undistributed child support collections nationwide).  Maybe the founders of this group had nothing to blackmail anyone with, for example, knowledge of what someone else was doing illegal also.  Although I can hardly condone starting a charity and then simply failing to dissolve it on purpose if one has no plans to file tax returns:


and page 2 warning:

I googled “Myron Blumberg” and the city he was in, and found out that as of 2008, he’d passed away, and had had Parkinsons, had been a brilliant attorney.  This still doesn’t explain what happened between 1990 and 2008 that didn’t involve charitable registrations (or from whatever year this became a requirement for California charities).  Perhaps the organization never earned income?  How does this figure with “brilliant attorney?” as described below.

http://understandingpersonalitytypes.com/2008/08/17/memories-of-myron-blumberg,%20parkinson’s-diseases-mammoth-lakes-california-eastern-sierra-jewish-community.aspx

Memories of Myron Blumberg

This morning Jordan and I learned that our dear friend, Myron Blumberg, passed away.

When Myron’s daughter, Deborah, called, I said, “You called to tell me something sad. Didn’t you?”
“Yes,” she said, “My father passed away.”

The news of Myron’s passing was very sad, but not surprising. He had suffered with Parkinson’s disease for many years.

Jordan and I met Myron, a brilliant attorney and WWII veteran, and his wife Shirley, a talented poet and gardener, in 1981, soon after we moved to Mammoth Lakes, California.

So, about some of those MEDIATION GROUPS, above

. . .OF THE NORTH VALLEY

The third one down (North Valley) was in Chico, and IRS forms show it started out with a bang (revenues $200K), then within 3 years was down to $76K.  The public benefit it provided reminds me of the account of the Los Angeles County Judge’s Slush Fund — mediation training was a factor mentioned.  This appears to be small fry, though, compared to others.

FIRST Form 990 filed – REVENUES: (if this is unclear, go to original site).

the public gave them $135, government grants $24K, and business from Government $16K for fees and contracts.  I guess there was a government connection somewhere here, eh?  The government gives and the government revokes your nonprofit status a few years later.  I know people that could live, with a family, on $16K, let alone$24K….

Somehow they managed to spend nearly everything, which again is what nonprofits supposedly DO, right?

1st year of form 990 filed:

2nd year of form 990 filed:

a statement (of which this is just a sample) shows that at least two of the directors were doing Superior Court Mediation:

3 board of directors got $24K salary — although who got how much, omitted.  I guess (despite 3 different addresses) they cooperatively figured out or mediated who got how much, or whether it was a 3-way even split:

Revenues included a City & a County Grant.  Earned revenues included court-referrals, and training fees.

THE MEDIATION CENTER — SANTA BARBARA (not registered yet.  No documents there yet.  Street address searched showed:

J. Paul Gignac, Esq.
ARIAS, OZZELLO & GIGNAC, LLP
1231 State Street, Suite 206 Santa Barbara, California 9310
as attorney for where to file documents in a class action suit for shareholders, regarding a real estate merger.  He shows up under American Arbitration Association (“http://adr.org”) listing.   

MEDIATION RESOLUTION SERVICES  – OAKLAND.

Incorporation?  1997

Taxes filed?  Zero.

Street address not possible to check it says:

(sigh….)  Secretary of State search on “MEdiation” comes up with 189 search results.  I guess, if one took out all the “suspended” Delinquent” and “revoked” one might come up with a number PROBABLY larger than the few listed above as charities.  Of those, how many are stating that they are charities in public, but functioning as non-tax return filing private corporations in reality.  Does anyone care?   I would hope so.  Clearly Mediation is a HUGE field to get into (thanks to decades of promotion by certain parties):

Results of search for ” MEDIATION ” returned 189 entity records.

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2991184 06/19/2007 ACTIVE A FAIR WAY MEDIATION & DIVORCE W ROBERT WELCH
C2420517 06/17/2002 DISSOLVED A MATTER OF MEDIATION, INC. FRANCINE SCHLAKS
C3344261 01/19/2011 ACTIVE AARON’S MARBLES MEDIATION, INC. JULIUS JONES
C2931143 09/25/2006 SUSPENDED ABLE MEDIATION AND COUNSELING SERVICES, INC. CHAROLETTA J. RANSOM
C3018080 07/06/2007 SUSPENDED ADVANCED MEDIATION CORPORATION SEAN COLLINSON
C3098214 04/30/2008 ACTIVE ADVANTAGE ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. MICHAEL DILIBERTO
C2460808 08/01/2002 SUSPENDED ADVOCACY AND MEDIATION GROUP INC. RODERICK D GAULMAN
C3061573 01/02/2008 ACTIVE ALAN SALER MEDIATION SERVICES ALAN G SALER
C2614627 05/28/2004 SUSPENDED ALL FOR ONE MEDIATION AND BUSINESS SERVICES, INC ZENDA ABBOTT
C1686037 04/29/1991 DISSOLVED ALTERNATIVE CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND MEDIATION CENTER OF MERCED COUNTY BARBARA THELEN
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1811897 12/13/1991 CANCELED INSTITUTE OF MEDIATION & ARBITRATION MICHAEL A. BROOKS
C1478676 03/19/1990 SUSPENDED INSURANCE MEDIATION & ARBITRATION, INC. STANLEY HASSAN
C1586574 05/04/1987 SUSPENDED ISLA VISTA MEDIATION PROGRAM GEOFFREY WALLACE
C3358999 02/10/2011 ACTIVE JEANIE CHA A LAW CORPORATION & MEDIATION FIRM JEANIE CHA
C1919800 01/02/1995 SUSPENDED JENKINS & ASSOCIATES MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. SUSAN OLMO
C1611145 03/24/1988 SURRENDER JUDGES MEDIATION CORPORATION MYRON H MARSHALL
C1061099 12/03/1981 MERGED OUT JUDICIAL ARBITRATION & MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. LINDA H. CROCHET
C2912540 02/13/2007 DISSOLVED KOREAN AMERICAN ARBITRATION & MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. HANNA KIM
C1962924 02/28/1996 ACTIVE LAW & MEDIATION OFFICES OF BARBARA J. KUEHN, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION BARBARA J KUEHN
C1062290 12/18/1981 DISSOLVED LAW & MEDIATION, INC. PAUL COOKE WILKINS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 

(I should point out that probably several of these are small claims, not all in the family law field…..)

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C3299178 06/29/2010 ACTIVE LAW AND MEDIATION OFFICE OF DIANE M. GOODMAN, APC DIANE M GOODMAN
C2010728 05/14/1997 DISSOLVED LAWYERS ARBITRATION & MEDIATION SERVICE ROBERT H BOHN
C2528156 11/05/2003 SUSPENDED LOS ANGELES MEDIATION PROJECT, INC. RANDOLPH DOBBS
C3135779 12/02/2008 ACTIVE LYDIA S. GLASS, PH.D., PSYCHOLOGICAL & MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. LYDIA S G;ASS
C3324991 10/20/2010 ACTIVE MANDELL MEDIATION, INC. ABIGAIL JONES
C1244960 04/24/1984 ACTIVE MARIN COUNTY MEDIATION SERVICES BARBARA KOB
C1908994 07/02/1997 ACTIVE MARKUS MEDIATION SCOTT SLATER MARKUS
C1107945 03/31/1982 SUSPENDED MARRIAGE MEDIATION/ARBITRATION CENTER CLAUDE E WHITNEY
C2249692 06/19/2000 SUSPENDED MEDIATION ARBITRATION RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. STANLEY LAWRENCE REISCH
C1276351 05/10/1985 DISSOLVED MEDIATION ASSOCIATES, INC. RONALD L CLAASSEN
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2689706 10/15/2004 DISSOLVED MEDIATION ASSOCIATION, INC HOLLY BANAFSHEH
C1583722 03/30/1987 SUSPENDED MEDIATION CENTER GAIL RAPPAPORT
C1865067 08/24/1993 ACTIVE MEDIATION CENTER OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ROSALIE GATES
C1693905 08/12/1991 SUSPENDED MEDIATION CENTER OF THE NORTH VALLEY MICHAEL SHEPHERD
C2170001 07/02/1999 SUSPENDED MEDIATION CENTER OF THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY, INC. JEFFREY MELCZER
C2895761 05/26/2006 ACTIVE MEDIATION LAW GROUP, INC. WMO GREG BENNETT
C1291763 11/18/1985 SUSPENDED MEDIATION MASTERS, INC. RUTH JACOBSON
C2630475 01/24/2005 ACTIVE MEDIATION OFFICES OF CALIFORNIA, PC. UNMANI M SARASVATI
C3368744 03/23/2011 ACTIVE MEDIATION OFFICES OF FLOYD J. SIEGAL, INC. FLOYD J SIEGAL
C2744558 05/01/2005 ACTIVE MEDIATION OFFICES OF LISA KRAKOW, INC. LISA KRAKOW
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1650327 09/29/1989 SUSPENDED MEDIATION PROJECT, INC. BRENDA GOTTFRIED
C2004504 02/13/1997 SUSPENDED MEDIATION RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. BRENDA M. GASPAR
C2336362 03/15/2001 FORFEITED MEDIATION RESOURCES, INC. ** RESIGNED ON 05/30/2002
C1664678 05/08/1990 SUSPENDED MEDIATION SERVICES OF SOLANO COUNTY, INC. CARL J DEBEVEC
C2387846 01/08/2002 SUSPENDED MEDIATION SETTLEMENT CORPORATION PETER J SEARLE
C1746697 06/29/1994 DISSOLVED MEDIATION SOLUTIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION KURT GROSZ
C0508442 05/02/1966 ACTIVE MEDIATION SPECIALISTS, INC. JEFFREY P. PALMER
C1456763 02/23/1989 DISSOLVED MEDIATION, INC. THOMAS P PRITCHARD
C2972559 03/07/2007 ACTIVE MICHAEL ALLEN MEDIATION INC. MICHAEL ALLEN
C1015482 01/19/1981 DISSOLVED MONTEREY BAY RENTAL INFORMATION AND MEDIATION SERVICE MARY JAMES
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Must be professional burnout, working with flawed parents and highconflict families, among other things:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2129651 01/06/1999 DISSOLVED MOSTEN MEDIATION CENTERS CORPORATION FORREST S MOSTEN
C1290492 11/14/1985 SUSPENDED NAPA COUNTY RENTAL INFORMATION AND MEDIATION SERVICES MICHAEL LIVINGSTON
C1244149 04/12/1984 SUSPENDED NATIONAL DIVORCE MEDIATION COUNCIL IRIS HICKS
C0688402 08/29/1973 SUSPENDED NORTH COUNTY MEDIATION ANN BILODEAU
C3168928 10/30/2008 ACTIVE NORTH COUNTY MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. JAMES L FREDERICK
C3370708 04/01/2011 ACTIVE OFFICE OF RECONCILIATION AND MEDIATION, INC. CURTIS MAY
C1041123 04/08/1981 DISSOLVED ORANGE COUNTY FAMILY MEDIATION SERVICE, INC. JERRY SCHIPPER
C1221839 01/20/1984 SUSPENDED PACIFIC MEDIATION CENTER, INC. PHILIP M ROSTEN
C3250618 07/06/2010 ACTIVE PACIFIC MEDIATION PROJECT LEEANNE EAGLESON
C2656383 06/09/2004 ACTIVE PEACE TALKS MEDIATION SERVICES, INC. DIANA L MERCER
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

 

But this main one is still going, Dr. Joan Kelly’s outfit:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1049143 07/10/1981 ACTIVE THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA MEDIATION CENTER NANCY J. FOSTER

 

Entity Name: THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA MEDIATION CENTER
Entity Number: C1049143
Date Filed: 07/10/1981
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 175 NORTH REDWOOD DRIVE, SUITE 295
Entity City, State, Zip: SAN RAFAEL CA 94903
Agent for Service of Process: NANCY J. FOSTER
Agent Address: 175 NORTH REDWOOD DRIVE, SUITE 295
Agent City, State, Zip: SAN RAFAEL CA 94903

Events: Collaborative Council of the Redwood Empire: collaborative 

Joan B.Kelly, PhD : NCMC:175 North Redwood driveSuite 295, San Rafael; September 19 2011: Civility Matters III (SCBA); September 19 2011: Dept 14 


divorce legal advice healdsburg cloverdale

The Collaborative Council of the Redwood Empire (CCRE) is a group of professionals interested in avoiding court battles and power struggles to resolve conflicts. Our group consists of family, probate and civil attorneys, mental health professionals, financial planners and others professionals.
non-traditional nontraditional divorce
Although we are primarily located in Sonoma and Napa Counties our members include professionals from throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.

I find it just “astounding” that among the Board of Directors is also a Kids Turn founder, Jennifer Jackson:

Charity began ? (here we go again — charity site, incorporation site):

Secretary of State site FIRST:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2654097 05/07/2004 SUSPENDED COLLABORATIVE COUNCIL OF THE REDWOOD EMPIRE RANDELL J CHEEK

 

 

Entity Name: COLLABORATIVE COUNCIL OF THE REDWOOD EMPIRE
Entity Number: C2654097
Date Filed: 05/07/2004
Status: SUSPENDED
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 111 LIBERTY ST
Entity City, State, Zip: PETALUMA CA 94952
Agent for Service of Process: RANDELL J CHEEK
Agent Address: 111 LIBERTY ST
Agent City, State, Zip: PETALUMA CA 94952

 

SUSPENDED!

Perhaps this is why.

 

Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.
Registrant Information
Full Name: COLLABORATIVE COUNCIL OF THE REDWOOD EMPIRE FEIN:
Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2654097
Registration Number: EX558676
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/1991
Registration Status: Exempt – Active Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: 111 LIBERTY ST Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: PETALUMA CA 94952
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
No Related Documents
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data

 

NO related documents?  Should I be holding my breath on this one?  111 Liberty Street, Petaluma is a VERy busy street, when it comes to therapy and counseling at least two LMFT’s and more….

Do you think we should inform prospective clients?  Because it seems to me they still think they are quite a going concern!

I’m not quite sure what the “1990” issue date means at the Attorney General’s site is (PERHAPS IT’S A COMPUTER DEFAULT?)  Around 2004 (see AFCC article on “Collaborative law, dated 2001, above) they got around to incorporating in California.  So far, no registration of any sort as a charity.  Are they a definitely for-profit concern?  What got their license suspended?

You’ve just “got” to read Randell Cheek’s Curriculum, which is all “Collaborative Practice.”  He’s also been a psychotherapist since 1983.  Among his professional credits are working for/with this organization which doesn’t comply with state corporate or charitable organization laws.  My favorite parts, not including Clinical Supervisor at “St Vincent’s Home for Boys,” Program Director at a Children’s Home, and apparently some Hypnosis work with a David Cheek, M.D. (relative?):

In 2007 “August 14 Legal Ethical Issues in Collaborative Practice, Marin, CA with Karen Hendrickson, JD”

and:

(Conference Presentations) Oct. 2006

CA. Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, (AFCC) Sonoma, CA

Introduction to Collaborative Practice with Catherine Conner, JD, and Susan R. Berg, MFT.

A tribute to Dr. Cheek’s hyponosis work.  Apparently he died suddenly in 1996 of a fatal cancer misdiagnosed as an ingrown hair (??).  How nice the collaborative council of redwood empire, prominent attorneys and lots of therapists, have input, or at least registered agent status, for this corporation in Randell Cheek:

 Doctor David B. Cheek, my very dear friend of many years, passed away three years ago in Santa Barbara, California, where he lived with his wife, Dolores. David had a pimple on his jaw and went it got quite inflamed, he went to a doctor, who told him it was an ingrown hair. Sadly, it turned out to be a fatal cancer and he passed away in a hospice just weeks later. With his death, the world, in general, lost a great humanitarian and hypnosis, in specific, lost a friend, teacher and pioneer. David was a colleague of the late Milton Erickson and a past-president of ASCH, which denounced him because of his advanced thinking. He and Leslie LeCron, who passed away many years ago, made many discoveries, including the use of ideomotor signals and the fact an unconscious person continues to hear and respond at a subconscious level. Despite criticism, David was fascinated with past life regression and spirits (not the liquid type). I learned much at his knee and even had the honor of hypnotizing him at a Texas conference when he was suffering from a painful hip problem. I miss him sorely and often feel his guidance when working with clients.

. . .

Psychoanalysts state that a patient undergoing hypnotherapy becomes extremely dependent on the therapist, with a greater transference developing. It is true that there may be a great dependence initially, but this is of advantage to both the patient and the therapist. As progress is made and the illness or condition responds to treatment, dependence dwindles away. A large part of hypnotherapy is the building of ego strength in the patient. Hypnosis facilitates this and then dependency needs are ended or modified. It could be pointed out that anyone continuing in analysis for three or four years with little progress certainly is displaying great dependence on the analyst.

A little disturbing when it comes to the family law field in particular:

I should stop (adding this the day after initial post) — but it’s too “funny.”  Having their corporate licenses suspended by the Attorney General’s Office hasn’t slowed down this bunch of attorneys, therapists and financial coaches one iota:

EVENTS AND TRAININGS:

  • August 19 2011: FAMILY LAW SECTION PICNIC: Galvin Park (SCBA)
  • August 30 2011: Nuptial Agreements: A Family Law Perspective for Trust and Estate Lawyers (SCBA)
    Peter Rubin, Jennifer Jackson
  • September 16 2011: Child Alienation & Relocation
    Joan B.Kelly, PhD : NCMC:175 North Redwood drive, Suite 295, San Rafael**
  • September 19 2011Civility Matters III (SCBA)
  • September 19 2011Dept 14 12:15-1:15: Supervised Visitation (MHLS)
  • September 23 2011: Non Verbal Communication (SCBA)
  • September 28 2011: Taxation Seminar (SCBA)

! ! !

** Isn’t Joan Kelly worried about her association with such scofflaws? Is this an honorarium, a for-profit appearance, or what?

Mr. Cheek (Randell, not David B., obviously) has some good support to further develop his resume:

Collaborative Practice Trainers

Offering collaborative training for legal, financial and mental health professionals

Margaret L. Anderson, Barbara Bowen, Susan J. Campbell, Randell J. Cheek, Catherine Conner

LIKE, how to overcome a high-conflict relationship with the local attorney general’s office and avoid paying taxes — or registering as a charity?

Under training section, I cannot help noticing there are trainings in GERMANY and HONG KONG.    WHo, exactly is training?

  • List of Conferences, members of Collaborative Practice Trainers as presenters:
3 different entities, probably all of them AFCC members.

COLLABORATIVE DIVORCE SOLUTIONS, INC.

I thought after yesterday’s post, someone might want a sample page of how nonprofits are getting shut down, or at least verbally spanked, from the State’s Attorney General or Secretary of State offices, and why.

I was mistaken in citing a $50.00 fee. Here’s one that didn’t get a $25 fee in on time, and is getting scolded for it. I thought (see “collaboration”) several heads were better than one. Let’s see if we can wrap our head around how this one happened:

Here (as of an informal site which says it’s current as of March 31, 2011):

Collaborative Divorce Solutions, Inc. has a location in Irvine, CA. Active officers include Jan Mark Dudman. Collaborative Divorce Solutions, Inc. filed as a Articles of Incorporation on Tuesday, December 09, 2003 in the state of California and is currently active. Jan Mark Dudman serves as the registered agent for this organization.

Filings: Articles of Incorporation (CA – Active)
State of Record: CA
State Reference ID: 02568651
Registered Agent: Jan Mark Dudman
File Date: Tuesday, December 09, 2003
Active: True
Filing Type: Articles of Incorporation

Source:   California Secretary of State last refreshed Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Company Reports from Dun & Bradstreet

While this organization has maintained its “active” status at both corporation and charity level, it didn’t register as a charity until someone apparently notified the Attorney General, who then wrote a letter dated 12/29/2009 (that means, it existed for six years. Only research — which I’m unlikely to do for this amount –would show whether this group received enough income to half to (by law) file tax returns. Moreover, he/she is probably a divorce attorney). Three months later (finally), it appears the group did register (again, this typifies the history of AFCC as I’ve come to understand it through a number of sources. They belatedly register — IF caught — and then do a number of shape-shifts and corporation changes, often across more than one state. IN other words, they cheat and evade taxes. But want to teach US how to parent!). There was also a Delinquency notice, a bounced check, notice, etc. You can see actual notices on-line, but here’s the list of them:

Related Documents
1058588 First Notice to Register   (12/29/2009)
1058589 Confirmation of Registration   (3/9/2010 confirmed)
1058590 IRS Form 990-EZ 2007  
00000155 Letter of Delinquency 1st Notice  ((9/23/2010, the attorney general respectfully (demands) charity registrations for 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008, and the fees to go with them ($25/year) and mentions that failing to file timely is a violation of Government Code xxyyzz. Anyone want to place a bet whether Jan Mark Dudman is an “esq.”??)
1058591 Return Check Letter   (9/23/2010, the attorney general respectfully (demands) charity registrations for 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008, and the fees to go with them ($25/year) and mentions that failing to file timely is a violation of Government Code xxyyzz. Anyone want to place a bet whether Jan Mark Dudman is an “esq.” who might reasonably have known this?)
00000160 Return Check/Incomplete RRF-1 Letter  (9/29/2010 — “your check bounced” my mistake — see letter, & my same-day correction in Comment to post. They returned the check, not a bank….)
53102 IRS Form 990-EZ 2008  (“besides which, you sent the check without the forms”)
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information

Actually (between bouncing back and forth between screens), I’ve probably not labeled the entries too well — but they are public information. Basically (from the one 990 I looked at), they got $2k contributions and $30K “membership fees.” Program services accomplishments, one sentence basically, is probably boilerplate from an AFCC conference — they offer a “healthy divorce alternative” and divorce coaches, including a financial consultant! Approximately $14K was spent on conferences and trainings (was it fun?) making eventually for $23K deductibles. And the public benefit was WHAT?

(and yes, he is an attorney — B.A. political science, Los Angeles, J.D. Pepperdine.) and your basic boilerplate website, no graphics. Maybe the membership dues provided privileged linking to description of collaborative divorce? And on the site he is listed as Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County, which is I guess a dab. Why wouldn’t they just go by “Collaborative Divorce Solutions, Inc.”? because they don’t want to step on collaborative divorce professionals from other areas? Again, here are the 24 attorneys (not including divorce coaches, child custody specialists and financial professionals) that couldn’t collectively figure out that their parent organization they pay ought to register as a charity in this state; dues must be fairly low because it’s bringing in about $30K per year from membership among all these (assuming they all pay up).

Name City Phone Email
Terri Breer Irvine
Bart Carey Anaheim
John Denny Newport Beach
Jan Mark Dudman Santa Ana
John Ellingson Newport Beach
Therese Fey Orange
Barbara Fritz Newport Beach
Elizabeth Jones Irvine
Rosemarie McElhaney Anaheim
Brian Levy Covina
Sara Milburn Irvine
Leslee Newman Orange
Glen Rabenn Seal Beach
Helen Rasner Irvine
Jennifer Webb Newport Beach
Judy Williams Irvine
Delilah Knox Rios Diamond Bar
Sherry Graybehl D’Antony Costa Mesa
Bart Carey Irvine
Brian Levy Santa Ana
Rosemarie McElhaney Irvine
Diana Martinez Chino
Carrie Block Irvine
Suanne Honey Newport Beach

At “collaborative.com” or thereabouts, you can find the group’s own histories. I like to read these, because it gives me an idea whose idea it was. For example, this segment shows me at least one Kids’ Turn organizer was involved (Jennifer Jackson, who I believe on her site takes credit for incorporation the group):

…and then there was the American Institute of Collaborative Professionals
As Collaborative Practice in its many forms began to develop in several areas of the San Francisco Bay Area, it became clear that collaborative practitioners should work together in order to promote and improve the process. [AKA their businesses] The concept was to share what they were learning, to explore the processes that worked and those that didn’t, and to share resources.

Pauline Tesler, Peggy Thompson, Nancy Ross, David Green and Karen Russell began to meet monthly in 1997. They were soon joined in 1998 by Gene Seltzer, Jennifer Jackson, Catherine Conner, Linda Seinturier and James Sheehy. Their vision was to form an umbrella networking organization to serve Collaborative Practice in its many forms.

Initially called the American Institute of Collaborative Professionals (AICP), the group’s activities included local networking meetings, a newsletter meant to be a voice for the collaborative movement (now known as The Collaborative Review) and an annual networking forum. AICP was incorporated in 1999 as a 501 (c) (3) non-profit corporation.

… and now we are International
In May of 1999, the first annual AICP networking forum was held in Oakland, California. The following year, a meeting was held in Chicago to discuss the state of Collaborative legal practice across the country. The nearly 50 practitioners who attended this meeting agreed that AICP should serve as the umbrella organization for our rapidly-growing movement. At the same time, they recognized that since Collaborative Practice was also developing exponentially across Canada, the organization needed a broader, more inclusive name and mission. Thus the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals was born in late 2000, officially changing its name in 2001.

HOW NICE!

This coming week, two individual women originally from Texas (but one now from Georgia) are going to be running yet more Parenting Coordination Training sessions — this time in Chicago.

. For quite a pretty penny, not including the hotel stays. I’m sure that for those consuming the courses, the expenses may be tax-deductible, or possibly paid for unwittingly by some county who is also paying the salary of the employee attending.

Here’s that link:

http://www.cooperativeparenting.com/pctraining.html

Just take a look at the page, notice locations, prices, and people. For a jumpstart — and I”m picking on this group this week because it’s THIS WEEK they are training in Chicagoland: Anne Marie Termini & Susan Boyan.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ (pasted from the site) _ _ _ _ _

                 The FIRST and ONLY Comprehensive Parenting Coordination Training Program!

The Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI) is an internationally recognized leader providing high quality parenting coordination training programs.  Since 1997, the CPI has dominated the field of parenting coordination by creating the only comprehensive step-by-step PC training model. The Institute offers 20-24-26 hour parenting coordination/facilitation training opportunities each year.  A 12-hour advanced training is available for the experienced parenting coordinator. The training programs meet the requirements established by state statutes.  In addition, the presenters are available for custom designed training in your local area.

Susan Boyan, LMFT and Ann Marie Termini, LPC are recognized leaders and innovative trainers.  As skilled parenting coordinators, since 1991 and 1993 respectively, Ann Marie and Susan have facilitated many complex and highly conflictual divorce cases.  They have drawn on their extensive experience, research and interactive approach to prepare professionals for the challenging role of parenting coordinator. 

2011 Basic Three-Day Training Dates/Location
May 12-14:  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania | 24-Hour Program | Trainer:  Ann Marie Termini
June 16-18:  Atlanta, Georgia | Trainer:  Susan Boyan
August 18-20:  Chicago | Trainer:  Susan Boyan
September 15-17:  King of Prussia, Pennsylvania | 24-Hour Program | Trainer:  Ann Marie Termini
October 20-22:  Dallas, TX | 24-Hour | Coordination/Facilitation | Louisiana (26-Hour) at Texas | Termini
November 10-12:  Atlanta, Georgia | Trainer:  Susan Boyan

August 18-20, 2011 :  Chicago
Contact:  Susan Boyan ((tel & email contacts….))
Oak Brook Hills Marriott Resort
3500 Midwest Rd, Oak Brook, IL  60523
Reservations:  800-228-9290
Sleeping Room Rate – $129.00

September 15-17, 2011:  King of Prussia (24- hour program)
Contact:  Ann Marie Termini ((tel & email contacts…..))
Dolce Hotels & Resorts – Valley Forge
301 West DeKalb Pike, King of Prussia, PA  19406
Reservations:  1-800-TRY-VFPA
Sleeping Room Rate – $109.00 (room block released August 23, 2011)
Specifically request the rate for the Parent Coordination Training sponsored by Cooperative Parenting Institute
Click here for additional details on the September Training

October 20-22, 2011:  Dallas, Texas (24 & 26-hour program)
Contact:  Ann Marie Termini ((tel & email contacts…))
Courtyard Dallas Addison/Quorum Drive
15160 Quorum Drive, Addison, TX, 75001-4630
(972) 404-1555
Reservations:  1-800-228-9290
Sleeping Room Rate – $55.00 (room block released September 29, 2011)

Specifically request the rate for the Parent Coordination Training sponsored by Cooperative Parenting Institute

Click here for additional details on the October Training

November 10-12, 2011:  Atlanta
Contact:  Susan Boyan
Doubletree Hotel
2061 North Druid Hills, Atlanta, 30329
Sleeping Room Rate – Special $84.00
Specifically ask for KT Edwards at kt.edwards@hilton.com

Click here for Basic Three-Day Training Registration Form

2011 Advanced Training Date/Location
July 22-23:  Atlanta, Georgia | Trainers:  Susan Boyan & Ann Marie Termini
Click here for Advanced Training Overview | Objectives | Outline
Click here for Advanced Training Registration Form

See below for information on fees, CEUs, objectives and course outline

Endorsements
“The presenter was sensational with an awesome sense of humor and gave great practical examples that brought the content to life! I really appreciated the opportunities to discuss clinical and ethical issues!  Over a long three days Susan held my attention, taught me a great deal, and entertained me!  This was a great experience in every single way!”
Miriam Drummonds, PhD. | Alabama

“The presenter was very knowledgeable, talented and inspired!  She has contributed an invaluable service to lessen the pain of divorce for adults and to increase the emotional health of children through successful co-parenting.”
Mary Dean, MFT | Georgia
“The training was dynamic and extremely informative; excellent use of real world examples  to illustrate the key content.  Susan presents well with an entertaining style that brings the  concepts to life.  I learned so much and would definately recommend this training to anyone interested in becoming a parenting coordinator!”
Tracy Masiello, PhD. | North Carolina
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
One incentive to give a good review is the significant upfront $$ investment in training. However, I’ll assume for the sake of argument it was indeed a great training in how to coordinate parents (see PCANH.org handbook for what that’s all about, or my four-part series for the field in general, from a mother’s point of view….)

COSTS:

Training Fees
12 Hours – Advanced Training
Two-Day Training:  $350.00 Full Fee  |  $325.00 Early Bird (3-weeks prior to training date)
Day One Only:  7 CEUs – $185.00
Day Two Only:  5 CEUs – $165.00
20 Hours – Basic Three-Day Training
$450.00 Full Fee
$425.00 Early Bird (3-weeks prior to training date)
24 Hours – Basic Three-Day Training
$475.00 Full Fee
$450.00 Early Bird (3-weeks prior to training date)
26 Hours (Louisiana Requirement | Available at the Texas Training) – Basic Three-Day Training
$490.00 Full Fee
$465.00 Early Bird (3-weeks prior to training date

Refunds, less a $25 administrative fee, will be made for cancellations received three weeks prior to the training date. You may, at any point, designate a substitute to attend a training session. If a session is cancelled or postponed, the CPI will refund registration fees, but cannot be held responsible for any related costs, charges, or expenses.

Pennsylvania Training | 24-Hours – Basic Three-Day Training
20-hours parenting coordination process | 4-hours domestic violence

Domestic Violence from an AFCC-style point of view is likely to include a hefty section on false allegations of it. However, as it’s something which could potentially cost children or adults their lives, it’s reassuring to know that at least 1/4 of the time spent training parenting coordinators at least mentions this. It’s known that the VAWA block has to at least get a token acknowledgment in these circles.

Now let’s go FIND that nonprofit “Cooperative Parenting Institute” if possible — what state is it hanging out in? As advertised above, it seems to span Texas, Georgia, and Pennsylvania (plus Chicagoland, which Oak Park, IL is part of). I’ll start with Georgia, where Ms. Boyan appears to have been from, at least recently:

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I’ve not met them, it’s just that someone asked me to look up a few things in Georgia, and mentioned having a hard time in particular with Susan Boyan. Being curious (and knowing a few places to look), I simply looked her up. I also seem to remember having run across them, or their work (typical AFCC strategy) in Texas a while back, probably in relation to some access visitation funding…

State of Georgia, “Boyan” (you can search by last name for businesses):

(a handy note on Georgia’s Secretary of State site reminds people that their fees are going down – a flat fee of $250 to file whether for-profit or not-for profit. See this link:

The organization is “Cooperative Parenting Institute.”

From The Georgia Secretary of State site (and better seen on the site, obviously). Also note the Disclaimer. What we see on-line may not be accurate, and as I am not ordering everyone’s certificates of filing what we see is what we get, and I trust if the Secretary of State site is SOMEwhat reliable, it may be taken as an indicator, til further verfication. The indicator here is that “Cooperative Parenting Institute, Inc.” in Georgia, if the same one referred to above, lasted less than three years, and has no names on file tying it to the Boyans:

Please note: The documents displayed on this page are made available solely for the convenience of our customers and may not represent the complete and official record for this entity. If official records are needed, certified copies may be ordered by using the “Order Certified Documents” link on the bottom of the left-hand menu.

Date: 8/21/2011

Current Name: COOPERATIVE PARENTING INSTITUTE, INCORPORATED
Image  Date Document

2/6/2008 New Filing

9/16/2010 Administrative Dissolution

AND (details):

Search Type: Starting With Search Criteria: Cooperative parenting
Search Date: 8/21/2011 Search Time: 17:21
Click on the Business Entity Name or Control No to view more information.
Records Found:1
Business Entity Name Control No Type Status Entity
Creation Date
COOPERATIVE PARENTING INSTITUTE, INCORPORATED 08010511
Non-Profit Corporation
Admin. Dissolved
2/6/2008
Records Returned 1 of 1 total 1

However, this nonprofit Cooperative Parenting Institute, which lasted from 2/6/2008 – 9/16/2010 in Georgia (under three years) shows no “Boyan” or “Termini” but only one person, a Mr. Purcell.

Searching (Georgia site) by the name “Boyan,” there are plenty, including BOYAN & BOYAN, Inc.” (noncompliant, currently) but also another Parenting Coordination outfit:

Susan Boyan BOYAN & BOYAN, INC.
SUSAN BOYAN BOYAN & BOYAN, INC.
NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC.

This is the NON-profit (apparently from year 2002 – 2008) at the same street address as the for-profit Boyan & Boyan, Inc.: (perhaps I may reformat this information on another date);

Date: 8/21/2011   View Filed Documents
(Annual Registration History etc.)
Business Name History
Name Name Type
NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC. Current Name
Non-Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: 0207284
Status: Admin. Dissolved
Entity Creation Date: 2/11/2002
Dissolve Date: 5/16/2008
Jurisdiction: GA
Principal Office Address: 2801 BUFORD HWY NE STE T70
ATLANTA GA 30329-2146
Registered Agent
Agent Name: SUSAN BOYAN

Office Address: 2801 BUFORD HWY., SUITE T70
ATLANTA GA 30329
Agent County: DEKALB
Officers
Title: CEO
Name: SUSAN BOYAN
Address: 2801 BUFORD HWY NE STE T 70
ATLANTA GA 30329
Title: CFO
Name: ANN MARIE TERMINI
Address: 2801 BUFORD HWY NE STE T 70
ATLANTA GA 30329

Title: Secretary
Name: HELEANN SHARPIO
Address: 2801 BUFORD HWY NE STE T 70
ATLANTA GA 30329

Article 7 of incorporation states briefly that the corporation is for forming a membership organization of professionals involved in Parenting Coordination and any other purpose lawful for a GA nonprofit. That’s ALL it says (on-line, at least). It’s not that hard to incorporate — pay the fee, and file the report. What I don’t get is why it’s apparently so hard for these groups to STAY incorporated, particularly in states they are operating out of. Notice that while this one dissolved in May, 2008, an overlap (related or not?) in GA called — who is co-sponsoring these ladies’ workshops — called “Cooperative Parenting Institute, Inc.” — was formed, at least until 2010. I can’t wait to find out in what state these workshops are legitimately. doing business… Maybe they are, but I can’t seem to keep pace… Can you?

I figured why not go to the website — for some more advertising, and I guess it’s now incorporated (but as a FOR-profit?) in Pennsylvania: http://www.cooperativeparenting.com/

First, I searched on two good sites for nonprofits, nationwide: Nccsdataweb.urban.org & where they get their information from, called the “foundation finder” (google: 990 finder, it comes up) and nothing under the name came up. A group (by different name) from North Carolina did.

I also just searched the Pennsylvania Secretary of State site, which tells me, nope, not in PA:

Search Type: Exact Match Search Criteria: Cooperative Parenting
Search Date: 8/21/2011 Search Time: 18:30
No Records were found for the search criteria ‘Cooperative Parenting’ on 8/21/2011 6:30:05 PM

May want to bookmark this if you’re from (or interested in) Pennsylvania and want to search their registered nonprofits — like California, it offers several fields to search by, including EIN#.
http://web.dos.state.pa.us/cgi-bin/Charities/char_form.cgi

This group (searched “Cooperative Parenting” only) does not show as a registered nonprofit (charity) in Pennsylvania, if I am understanding the requirements properly. Nor does it show in the national searches. If it is a fictious name, I would just like to know what state the organization is incorporated in (assuming it’s a U.S. corporation) and who are its officers.

Charities OnLine Database

I’m sorry, but your request did not find any selections.
Please choose the ‘BACK’ button and try again.

You entered the following criteria:
NAME: COOPERATIVE PARENTING
If you are a Pennsylvania resident and were solicited by an organization whose name was not found, please contact the Bureau to determine whether the organization has since become registered, is registered under another name, is exempt or excluded from the Act’s registration requirements, or is engaged in unregistered solicitation in violation of the Act. You can contact the Bureau by calling toll-free within Pennsylvania, 1-800-732-0999 or by e-mail. Your name will not be shared with the organization under any circumstances.

(continued from the Georgia site):
— and I’m wondering where it’s legitimately registered NOW — because the two outfits (for-profit, and non-profit) naming one of the trainers, Susan Boyan, in Georgia are as follows (I’ve included the detail screen to show names — possibly “Jack Boyan” is a husband, I DNK — and street addresses. And of course the “Noncompliance” status, a little disturbing in that these are training others how to handle parents in the courts:

Business Name History
Name Name Type
BOYAN & BOYAN, INC. Current Name
Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: 0315327
Status: Active/Noncompliance
Entity Creation Date: 3/12/2003
Jurisdiction: GA
Principal Office Address: 2801 BUFORD HIGHWAY, STE T-70
ATLANTA GA 30329
Last Annual Registration Filed Date: 2/26/2009
Last Annual Registration Filed: 2009
Registered Agent
Agent Name: JACK BOYAN
Office Address: 2801 BUFORD HIGHWAY, STE T-70
ATLANTA GA 30329
Agent County: DEKALB
Officers
Title: CEO
Name: SUSAN BOYAN
Address: 2801 BUFORD HIGHWAY, STE T-70
ATLANTA GA 30329
Title: CFO
Name: Jack Boyan
Address: 2801 Buford Hwy
Ste. T-70
Atlanta GA 30329
Title: Secretary
Name: Susan Boyan
Address: 2801 Buford Hwy
Ste. T-70
Atlanta GA 30329

OBVIOUSLY, I can’t keep this up all day (and have done more research than shows here on related groups) but sooner or later it will show a pretty clear pattern — the AFCC-type groups are apparently so busy running pricey trainings (or, for all I know, reasonably priced trainings — if you’re in the field of running trainings all over the map, and I do mean globally) – – – and lobbying the legislature to change the laws to accommodate their habits, as I caught them doing with both Kids Turn and Family Justice Centers in California, and with Kids First in (as I recall it was Pennsylvania) where the direct service provider name was actually written into the rules of court.

BUT FOR A LOOK — a TEN-YEAR-RETROSPECTIVE — at a typical AFCC conference, I suggest this newsletter from Fall 2001. It was scheduled in New York City. Obviously (see “9/11”) they had to reschedule.

However, in this one article — if you read it cover to cover — you can see that Parenting Coordination is discussed (among AFCC folk) as a “done deal” although it took a few more years to get it forced through Florida. It helped having at least three major AFCC personnel also active in Florida — with each other, a Judge Hugh Starnes, an attorney Shelly (“Sheldon”) Finman, and an educator, Linda Fieldstone. Starnes and Finman share the founding of a nonprofit, Association of Family Law Professionals, as well as helping push for both a chapter of AFCC in Florida (Hugh Starnes shows as a member of the national AFCC Board here, in the 2001 flyer) and so forth. In my articles on Parenting Coordination, I probably covered some of this.

The language of Parenting Coordination — like Parental Alienation — and “False Allegations” (typically anywhere near any begrudging acknowledgement of, say, “domestic abuse” or sexual molestation — and other words like Collaborative Law Practice – show up YEARS ago as planned professional niches for members of this group.

I was looking at some material in the creation of the Unified Family Court System, and so forth, in Florida — it was definitely pushed. I noticed that a current (I think, still) State Supreme Court Justice — Justice Barbara Pariente (herself a stepmother and on second marriage) to be either AFCC< or definitely keynote presenter at their conferences.

I think it’s time we started demanding some of these groups: (1) incorporate properly (2) if nonprofit, file as required at the state level, and maintain current, legal status with both incorporations and nonprofit status and (3) file timely and accurate tax returns so we know that there is NO chance of kickbacks, bribes, or case-steering among their ranks, and (4) that any JUDGES at least, who are required to file financial disclosures — keep theirs current, and be put on notice that citizens are going to start watching.

I have before indicated that I, personally, believe that the most appropriate paradigm for the family law system, despite all the noble proclamations — has to be basically, RICO. it’s a “legalized” form of racketeering. Not only are the laws, and forms of justice consistently and INTENTIONALLY altered AWAY from safeguards of due process (possibly a done deal since the Patriot Act anyhow….)(at least) — but also when we see the individuals staffing the courts, or ancillary services to the courts — cannot themselves keep even the most basic of responsibilities — you want to be a nonprofit? Then REGISTER, FILE your 990, and KEEP YOUR BUSINESS LICENSE CURRENT!

As Cooperative Parenting Institute (whatever CORPORATION this be) shows clearly on its site — it’s a marketing outfit. Here’s some of the product (not including the trainings, above).

CPI offers a wide range of valuable divorce products for parents and professionals such as the award-winning Cooperative Parenting and Divorce: A Parent Guide to Effective Co-Parenting and the highly praised Cooperative Parenting and Divorce Group Program. To order or learn more, click here.

The founders of CPI co-authored the only complete parenting coordination text entitled The Psychotherapist as Parent Coordinator in High Conflict Divorce: Strategies and Techniques. To order a copy, click here.

To view and download “The Divorce Rules” click here.

DISCLAIMER: I’m neither an attorney or accountant, and may be missing some filing sites which might record business names, and/or unaware of particular state’s requirements. For reference (and one can look these up by site) here’s a paragraph on business names from “SBA.GOV”:

A fictitious name (or assumed name, trade name or DBA name, which is short for “doing business as”) is a business name that is different from your personal name, the names of your partners or the officially registered name of your LLC or corporation.

For example, let’s say Mary Smith is the sole proprietor of a catering company she runs out of her home. Mary wants to name her business Seaside Catering instead of using her business’ legal name, which is Mary Smith. In order to use Seaside Catering, Mary will need to register that name as a fictitious business name with a government agency. The appropriate government agency depends on where she lives. In some states, you have to register fictitious names with the state government or with the county clerk’s office; however, there are a few states that do not require the registering of fictitious business names.

Use the following chart to find out the requirements for fictitious name filing in your state and to access more information on the process.

Again, for reference, here is that 2001 AFCC newsletter, with the (egotistical, I say!) motto: “KIDS COUNT ON US!” For WHAT becomes the question — to deplete one or both of their parents assets?

http://www.afccnet.org/pdfs/AFCC%20Fa2001.pdf

Things that make you go “Huh?”

Below here is narrative, general discussion only:

How is that more people haven’t been simply reading the AFCC conference brochures, not to mention looking at the AFCC’s own conference brochures, and connecting the dots with their local judiciary, mental helah professionals, and family law attorney activity? I mean, it’s not that hard a roadmap to follow, once one gets the basics. I suppose in part because that’s “just the way it is.”

It is impossible to have in-depth (or even bas-relief) perception of anything, almost, without two viewpoints. Ask any optometrist, look at the difference between predator and prey animals, and eye placement (I’m just speculating on that one, but think about it — humans, eyes face forward, deer & sheep, one on each side). Or simply try going through life with one eye, if you’re normally using two.

People, (people concerned with fiscal crises, or your kids’ safety, or the devolution of due process in the courts year after year) — there have been basic roadmaps laid out in previous years. I’m not the originator of many of these ideas, I simply checked them out and studied them some more, on behalf of sanity and my progeny, and the local communities I’ve been traumatized around and repeatedly lost work in while deciphering the local family court system’s insanity. There’s nothing “insane” about it — it’s a functional system with a specific purpose, which is to bring as many “mental health professionals” into your life as possible, for profit to them and their associates, and possibly for sheer ego.

The “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts” has an organizational history that at least appears to have begun in a Los Angeles County Courthouse as a private organization utilizing the public EIN# for YEARS, i.e., as a slush fund. Google “Beware AFCC” or look again at my site (I bring links to others) for a chrono outline. The organization is a tax-evasion setup designed to claim jurisdiction over California’s children (and thereafter, make it national) initially, and set up a system of courts which are neither criminal, nor civil, but “courts of equity” (hear tell) and among themselves, “problem-solving courts.”

A fair translation of that term would be to simply read it, and the reverse the meaning 180%. They are problem-CAUSING courts to the extent they undermine cognition, and counter the deliberate balance of powers built into our justice systems, intentionally. This term holds throughout the system, and with the various entities involved in it. FOr example, “Child Support Enforcement” is sometimes enforcing, and sometimes not — and this is unpredictable. It has however, developed all kinds of ways to track and invade custodial and noncustodial parents lives both (although clearly some people are ahead of the game at evading it), and COLLECTING it. Sometimes.

Child Support Enforcement is supposed to get people OFF welfare — that’s why the laws were passed to set this up. However, I have credible proof and it’s now clear (and in some places legislated) that the purpose of the child support system is to get more people ON welfare, including middle class parents and upper class — not OFF it.. Nor is it only about child support, but about an “evolving” purpose.

One of the funniest things I found recently was a LONG, fine-print, multi-page list of “vexatious litigants.” I had to laugh — I went into these courts (actually, was dragged there) believing I was indeed a litigant — after all, here was the pleading, here was the motion, we had certain laws we wanted enforced, and court orders written. That’s ‘litigation.”

But not so when more closely examined: In fact, throughout the dialogues about the (litigants — who are parents), the talk is constantly about “parenting” and “families.” They do not exist as real people, from what one can read in the conferences, but actually as a sort of “substance” to be manipulated by the handlers, as in “what to do with High-Conflict Parents.”

Who in the world ever used the term “high-conflict” before this group came around? What’s a low-conflict parent, and is that OK? . . . . Guess what — a subdued or dominated person, who hsa become a doormat in a relationship through habit, or for survival — would not be a “high-conflict” parent. The violence and conflict would be internalized; in (her) soul. To this crowd, that’s value = GOOD. However, being too “good” according to unhealthy definitions in place by others can be extremely bad “parenting” behavior, because one of the chief functions of a GOOD parent (MY definition) is to help growing children understand and value highly the difference between true and false, right and wrong, destructive or creative & upbuilding, and of all thing to clearly understand, at least the difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL for basic citizenship as an adult. This includes in the financial field.

There is a protective function for a mother OR a father. And there’s a reasoon that the policymakers in this country have pre-determined that these functions are to be allocated by gender, now — which is exactly what the “Fatherhood” movement claims, falsely. It reduces people to their basic biological functions, defining and restricting those — while in clear conflict with the reality of animal, and human life: A mother can protect! The Biblical proverb about beware a mother bear has some reality to it: “Better to meet a bear robbed of her whelps than a fool in his folly.”

I’ve seen such folly (illogic) in these circles for years, of course it grates on me, when this affects my civil rights and my kids’ futures. Once you see the degree of falsehood, pretense, and simple cheating — systemic, not occasional, not incidental — but systemic practices that promote falsehood, pretense, and cheating — one has to determine where YOU (oneself, I mean) stands in regard to it. Are you going to speak up, shut up, or work to obtain some leverage for making a change of direction, even if a slight one.

AFCC members plan their profits ahead of time, from the inherent conflict in the ffamily law system, which they continue to strategize how to change, expand, and alter according to the company plan, clearly stated on the home page, around 1963, 1973, as getting rid of the “old language” of criminal law.

I can even point to a Bay Area (California) practicing attorney, and parent coordination promoter, in fact, who refers to the Constitution (openly) as “antiquated” and suggest it’s time to rewrite it. He (this one’s a “he” but female attorneys do this also) protests how unfair it is that fathers don’t get equal custody more often; the U.S. is far off base in that matter, it’s gone off the deep end (from Iran, was the reference) in compensating. Otherwise, the website involved seems progressive, social justice emphasis, etc. But not in this matter.

By setting parents against each other through the courts ,then distancing themselves as professionals handling these unruly (adult) children called “parents” — and discussing privately how to manage the incredible hostility they come into the courtrooms with — by taming, training, and controlling them, conveniently prolongs parent’s years in the court system — and profits them, and through exactly what most working parents do NOT have after years in court — through MULTIPLE streams of income, and a captive, literally, clientele.

I have finally begun to associate with some women who are NOT Tea Party candidates or conservative Christians (that I can tell) who are smart enough to understand what exactly some of us have in commmon with men who are self-described fathers’ rights activists — while we are sometimes domestic violence survivors, or having children with molestation issues in the courts, or simply under a custody challenge by someone who doesn’t want to pay child support, and has figured out how not to.

I believe we will change this system, and there is some evidence of it. Why? Because “fathers rights” groups who are not on the inner circle (i.e., NOT the “Fathers and Families Coalition” group, hobnobbing with HHS/ACF officials such as David Hansell, or Ron Haskins affiliates, or Child Support-connected groups) and women leaving very abusive relationships, or trying to protect their children from (sorry to be so blunt); rape, molestation, or “lesser” forms of abuse including neglect and assault & battery, who are NOT on the inner track with the multi-millionaire domestic violence professionals on the HHS — AND – – DOJ grants faucets – – we are starting to communicate and learn each others sets of information, not to mention viewpoints.

Basically, for women this is going to mean understanding the child support system, and (I say) the grants system. For men, this means, we will “out” our DV professionals who sold us down the river for one cause or another, but will not listen to you complain about them while pretending there is no fatherhood movement of at least equal force, or that one even comes close to justifying the other.

And we will agree to leave each other’s values aside while dealing with concrete information such as I and others have put out here, and some have gone to jail for it, others been disbarred, and at least one prominent legislator, I am going to say I believe was murdered for it (Nancy Schaefer and her husband. I don’t buy the official version of her death, nor do many people). We are also going to be fearless in demanding an explanation of why something so hostile to justice as “parenting coordination” even exists to start with — we are not dogs, and we exist as separate individuals.

And we (I hope) will start to look into the real estate records, for example, WHO (which corporation,a nd who is on its board) literally owns the real estate in which justice is ttaking place, or allegedly is.

I have begun this, it’s fascinating and the knowledge has made me a more responsible and valuable member of any community, as I will definitely share this skill with others and talk about it.

OCSE: Child Support Enforcement/Federal Grants to States: Let’s Look at the “TAGGS” HHS Charts (CFDAs 93.563 & 93.564)

with 5 comments

(POST is incomplete — but I’m going to post anyhow for a sample of some of the funding for child support, and how one can look up Who’s Who when a nonprofit exists to take some of that extra-special “child support research and demonstration” (etc.) grant monies, especially when it is combined with other money in fatherhood initiatives to help men with their child support and custody issues (i.e., taking TANF money to promote fatherhood to encourage child support payment in hopes that it will trickle down to less overall TANF $$ == huh?)

I realize that few people are going to get through 20K words of text from my last post. However, it should be clear by now that a lot of child support COLLECTED simply ain’t reaching the customers, although that was the ostensible (as opposed to “evolving”) purpose of child support enforcement, to start with. Today, I am providing some visuals, from the Grants to States for Child Support Enforcement, culled from the “TAGGS.hhs.gov” database I keep yakkin’ about.

2016 update: Database TAGGS.hhs.gov has recently got a “facelift” on its search pages.  It generates a re-usable link (“url”) for any report — among the options on the top right of a generated report, you’ll see buttons for “Export to Xl,to pdf, to text, and furthest right, will generate a “tinyurl” link to copy and save.  This

CFDA 93.593, “CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT” Grants to States — selected Years 2010 & 2011

These are the columns one can select for any Advanced Search on TAGGS: “OpDiv” would be for example, “ACF,” Program Office — in these cases — would be OCSE, Office of Child Support Enforcement.

Grantee Institution Grantee Address Grantee City Grantee State Grantee Postal Code Grantee Country Grantee County Grantee Type Grantee Class Fiscal Year Operating Division Program Office Grant Title Award Number Award Code Budget Year Action Issue Date Principal Investigator Award Action Type Award Class Award Activity Type CFDA Number CFDA Program Title Award Abstract Text Recovery Act Indicator

I learned yesterday that a Supreme Court Case had verified that a man (or woman) about to be incarcerated for FTP (failure to Pay) child support does NOT have a constitutional right to a public defender — because it’s a “civil” right involved. That’s official now. Center for American Progress

Families Lose in Child Support Case

By Joy Moses | June 22, 2011

The Supreme Court’s Recent Decision in Turner v. Rogers Suggests More Work Ahead

There were no winners in the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Turner v. Rogers. The Court decided that the appointment of an attorney is not required when parents, who are typically fathers, face jail time for not paying child support. This decision means more fathers will likely end up in jail. The Court required some lesser protections that could help fathers avoid jail time, but more action is needed from outside the courts to help these families. Fathers obviously lose since their freedom is on the line when they’re unable to launch the best possible defense. For many, there is a legitimate defense that they are simply too poor to pay. Half of all child support debtors are the poorest men in society, and 70 percent of past due payments are owed by those making $10,000 or less. Some men are more at risk than others because they have the highest unemployment rates, including those who are black (17.5 percent), Latino (10.1 percent), and/or have limited education and skills (13.7 percent). But mothers lose, too. The Court says {broken link} men can’t be guaranteed attorneys because women may not have them. This is certainly fair—unless you focus on the fact that women may not have attorneys. Equalizing this disadvantage is better than some other options. But what if both parents had the help they needed? . . . Children lose as well. Court and child support systems that are meant to serve their best interests will continue to fail far too many, reaching some issues beyond those that were before the Court. When their dads refuse to pay, punishing them with jail time is helpful. But what about the children with fathers who can’t afford to pay, have difficulty representing themselves, and end up in jail? For them there’s now zero chance that their dad will work and pay support, and it’s much harder to see him behind bars. Importantly, an opportunity is lost to help the child through more family-friendly child support policies that increase the ability to collect via help with employment and fostering father-child connections.

This author has  a B.A. from Stanford and a J.D. from Georgetown and is a Senior Policy Analyst at a Progressive organization. Joy Moses

Senior Policy Analyst with the Poverty and Prosperity program at American Progress. Prior to joining American Progress, she was a Children and Youth Staff Attorney at the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty. The majority of her practice focused on the education rights of homeless students, 

Therefore, I allege that, although she has been focusing on different (and quite valid) issues she is smart enough to figure out what’s up with the child support & access visitation grants system (among others), and how fathers are already having grants-funded free legal help to “facilitate” their family connections.   It seems she has come to a decision that the Fatherhood Policies are needed, and working — as seen by her other articles, and publishing one with Jacquelyn Boggess, co-founder of CFFPP (search my blog) and also a member of Women in Fatherhood, Inc. (A recent nonprofit profiting from HHS fatherhood grants). . . . . CFFPP, as we may recall, is a nonprofit that changed its name to remove the word “Father” from the title and use instead “Family” to be less obvious about how “fatherhood” they actually are in practice, and focus.

Sisters Are Doin’ It for Themselves, But Could Use Some Help: Fatherhood Policy and the Well-Being of Low-Income Mothers and Children (2010) by Joy Moses (Center for American Progress), Jacquelyn Boggess, and Jill Groblewski >>

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE ASKS and ANSWERS its own question: The tension between progressive notions about strong independent women and the benefits they get from help with child rearing is just one philosophical question underlying the debate about the relationship between women and fatherhood policy. Others include:

  • Do policies that promote responsible fatherhood fail to recognize that women also face significant financial hardships and structural barriers on the road to self-sufficiency?
  • Do all women and families have the same stake in fatherhood responsibility policy without regard to differences associated with socio-economic status and race?
  • Do discussions about fatherhood amount to attacks on single mothers?

Although the authors understand the underlying concerns giving rise to these questions, we would answer all of them with a “No.” First, we contend that it’s not necessary to pit fatherhood responsibility policies against the interests of women, especially low-income single mothers who rely on federal social services programs. Rather, fatherhood policy is family policy that benefits all family members, including mothers. Suggesting the need for social services programs that encourage and facilitate fathers’ economic and emotional support for their families need not equate to a lack of recognition of the challenges faced by these women or an indictment against single mothers.

I deduce that Ms. Moses has not participated in a custody war against a former abuser and been baptized in the fire of this process, post-1994….  First of all, those questions, while nice philosophically — were not asked here in an open format Notice, the link to the post has no COMMENTS format, typical).     The detached tone and generic terms, asserting that Fatherhood Policy benefits all family members — is simply false; TANF funds are diverted to fatherhood projects on the presumption that there is a trickle-down benefit.   Abstinence Education (still going on), Marriage promotion, and increasing and expanding the child support enforcement apparatus into “family-friendly” ever-evolving programs DOES help provide jobs — for those administering the programs and evaluating them, that is.   I found this site, the other day, chasing down a multi-million $$ organization called “MDRC” (or “Manpower Research Development Corporation”) which puts the giant (as to funding, in the DV prevention arena) “Minnesota Program Development, INc.” (MPDI), a.k.a. the outfit from Duluth which is pushing supervised visitation so hard, and collaborating (or one of its subsidiaries / offshoots, Battered Women’s Justice Project, “BWJP”) with the AFCC (my favorite acronym for this blog, I guess — it comes up nearly every post) — to undermine the language defining crimes as crime, re-characterize individuals as family members, and both responsible for criminal activity by one of them, and so forth  The Child Support Enforcement in Kentucky (Family) Courts has a nice little extortion unit for fathers found in arrears — either go (back) to jail, or get a “get out of jail free” pass if they will participate in a court-favorite program Turning It Around (how to be a man, a father, and other things probably aimed at the 6th grade level, although it’s to men who have sired children)….. the kicker in this one being that it probably also gets grant funding — and if Dads participate, there’s an incentive for the states to get supportive grants. “Turning It Around ” works with the “Home Incarceration Program, yes:

“Turning It Around” is a collaborative effort, which works in conjunction with the Home Incarceration Program, with most of the attendees coming from contempt proceedings in Family Court in non-support cases. The purpose of the program is to increase the collection of child support payments, reduce recidivism in contempt cases, and encourage and increase cooperative parenting. Turning It Around may be offered as part of a plea agreement for those facing sentencing. Compliance with the program requires making weekly child support payments as well as attending a twelve (12) week class.

It appears that in 1975, Kentucky restructured its courts.  This 2002-2003 Report on the courts has a flowchart showing when a Family Court was added, and describing some of its programs, including “Turning It Around”:

In 1975, Kentucky voters supported a constitutional amendment to the Judicial Article that provided for a unified, four-tiered judicial system for operation and administration, called the Court of Justice. Judicial power of the Commonwealth of Kentucky is thus vested in one Court of Justice, which is divided into the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, trial courts of general jurisdiction known as Circuit Courts, and trial courts of limited jurisdiction known as District Courts. In the 2002 general election, Kentucky voters overwhelmingly approved passage of the Family Court Constitutional Amendment, thus creating a Family Court division of the Circuit Court tier. . . . In FY 2002- 2003, the average number of cases heard by family court judges was 1,477 per judge  {X 33 judges in this court}, representing cases originally within the jurisdiction of the circuit and the district courts.  {And it says approximately half the citizens in the state…?} … the Department has coordinated training for family court judiciary and staff, disseminated information via development of a quarterly newsletter, website, a family court benchbook and various reporting materials. The coordination of legal and social services and the provision and support of many programs, including but not limited to divorce education, Families in Transition, Turning It Around, Domestic Violence Information Sessions and truancy court projects have had a significant impact on the citizens of Kentucky

YES of course it has.  This report is actually some good reading, including relating how it was in 1996 that the JURISDICTIONAL basis for Family Court was established in 1996 (odd, funny, how that dates to WELFARE (TANF) REFORM year and the addition of access visitation grants to help support programs such as they mentioned above — divorce (parenting) education, and so forth.   This report shows NINE new justice centers being built (mostly in 2000ff) and notes that:

In the 2002 general election, Kentucky voters overwhelmingly approved passage of the Family Court Constitutional Amendment, thus creating a Family Court division of the Circuit Court tier.

{{NOTE:  In 2001, then-President George Bush initiated — by Executive Order — the OFFICE of FAITH-BASED AND COMMUNITY etceteras, aggressively helping put faith-based organizations, including plain old churches — on the federal grants stream and interspersed throughout government, meaning that they could also apply for funds to teach:  Parent Education, and “How to be a Man” etc…}}

Family Court. With ratification of the Family Court Constitutional Amendment in all 120 counties, the Kentucky Constitution has seen the most sweeping change in the structure of our court system since we adopted a unified four-tier court system in 1975. This historic moment came during the 2002 general election when more than 75 percent of Kentucky voters approved passage of the Family Court Amendment. This mandate permanently added Family Court to the state’s court system and proved that the people of Kentucky have overwhelmingly embraced the concept of “one family, one judge, one court.” Family Court, which is involved in {{I.E. NOW REGULATING AND AFFECTING..}} the most intimate and complex aspects of human nature and social relations, provides a court devoted exclusively to the needs of families and children. It currently serves 2 million people in 42 counties — nearly half of Kentucky’s population. My goal is to see that within 10 years every family in the state has access to a court that makes families and children the highest priority.

Kentucky’s court pages has one of the most active set of programs for kids, Moms, Dads, of any states that I’ve seen.  It was here I found a parenting education class (Kids First) which led directly to a nonprofit (I’ll say it:  “Front Group”) in PENNSYLVANIA — of course AFCC in origin and intent.  I wonder if some double-billing goes on (and how much) as has been discovered already in other programs around the country, in custody cases. In 2002 also, an “Alternate Dispute Resolution” Department was added (like many others nationwide).  While this may be appropriate in many types of situations, this process is unfair and DANGEROUS to parents, I’m referring primarily to mothers, whose custody case stems from violence issues.  It dilutes protections, attorney-client confidentiality,and to the extent mediators are court-paid (and/or AFCC-trained, meaning they are going to be hostile towards mothers) it is a bad deal for everyone involved.  I obviously am opposed; in what other areas of crime is a victim MANDATED to mediate with the perp, leaving the decisions to be influenced by a person whose very position has a built-in motive to extend the litigation?  Here it is:

Chief Justice Joseph Lambert approved the creation of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Services Department in April 2002. The mission of the Department is to promote, facilitate, and maintain the effective use and growth of alternative means of resolving disputes. Initiatives include mediation training for general civil and family mediators, small claims mediation programs, and guidelines for mediators and mediation training. The AOC-sponsored training program is the most thorough alternative dispute resolution initiative to date. Several week-long seminars are designed to train lawyers, judges, educators, mental health and human resource professionals, family court staff, pretrial mediators, and AOC management. The proliferation

FEB, 2011 article by this justice defending himself against a newspaper attack:

n any event, let me set the record straight. In my 10 years as chief justice, I established family courts in Kentucky, and those courts now serve 75 percent of our population. At my request, the General Assembly authorized construction of 50 or more judicial centers, almost all of which are located in rural counties that often get little attention from state government. Those court facilities provided thousands of jobs for Kentuckians who needed work, and they were built with money to be repaid over 25 years borrowed at historically low interest rates. I was also instrumental in establishment of the senior judge program, which has resulted in far greater efficiency than ever before in Kentucky courts. Hardly ever is a court day lost because the judge is unavailable. When judges are ill or must attend to family matters, as in the federal system, a senior judge is available to fill that seat for the day or week of the regular judge’s absence. Jurors, witnesses, and others don’t have their time wasted. I also established nearly statewide drug courts, whereby non-violent offenders are given treatment and are closely supervised by judges and caseworkers. Drug court have been about the only significant progress made in recent years in combating the scourge of drug abuse.

He complained that he was not given (by the senior judge) leave to run for Attorney General while in his position as family judge; this JAN 25, 2011 (blog quoting said )article mentions some of the financial conflicts of interest — and the major court-house construction projects in some detail:

Lambert established guidelines for leaves of absence in 2005, a time when he was rumored to be considering a run for governor in 2007. Minton has not granted any judge a leave from the program. Lambert apparently only granted one, for a judge to complete an advanced degree at Yale University. It comes as no surprise that Lambert’s decision about running for public office is so closely tied to his financial planning. As chief justice, he designed the senior judge program that will provide him, and others, a generous retirement. Lambert also conceived the widely criticized $880 million courthouse construction program and hired the residential architect who designed his own home to oversee it. The firm that sold the bonds on the lion’s share of the courthouse projects employed Lambert’s son for a time. And the construction company that got more than half the courthouse business contributed generously to the judicial campaigns of Lambert’s wife, Debra.

Here’s a nice 2007 Continuing Legal Education Commission schedule, from the Kentucky Bar, giving thanks for contributors:

ABOUT THE HANDBOOKS AND PRESENTATIONS ␣ Handbook materials are the result of the combined efforts of numerous dedicated professionals from around Kentucky, and elsewhere. The KBA gratefully acknowledges the following individuals who graciously contributed to this publication: AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination  (the link is a Google search, it brings up my posts on the topic as well as of course a course selling information at a discount to AFCC members on how to implement “parenting coordination” (translation — how to steer a family court case against mothers, I kid you not….), how to basically CHANGE courts, and a potpourri of other AFCC agendas  They really are a marketing outfit….  Parenting Coordination Task Force (a concept pushed by this group) consisted of:   The members of the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (2003 – 2005) were: Christine A. Coates, M.Ed., J.D., Chairperson and Reporter; Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Secretary; Barbara Ann Bartlett, J.D., Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D., Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, J.D, Philip M. Epstein, Q.C. LSM, Barbara Fidler, Ph.D., C.Psych, Acc.FM. Jonathan Gould, Ph.D., Hon. William G. Jones, Joan Kelly, Ph.D., Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D., Robert N. Wistner, J.D.

Overview and Definitions

Parenting coordination is a child-focused alternative dispute resolution [ADR] process in which a mental health or legal professional with mediation training and experience assists high conflict parents to implement their parenting plan** by facilitating the resolution of their disputes in a timely manner, educating parents about children’s needs,*** and with prior approval of the parties and/or the court, making decisions within the scope of the court order or appointment contract.
 

3 para. of rant, here, plus come copyediting notes: [**”assists . . . .. to” is a grammar mistake!  “Assist” is a transitive verb that takes a direct object.  They wrote the sentence without one.  It’s “assist in implementing/implementation” or “Help Parents implement.”  And these are the perpetual teachers…The task force boasts TWO “M.Ed.”s, a JUDGE, a JD, and a bunch of Ph.D.’s — did they do this on their dissertations?][***”EDUCATING PARENTS ABOUT CHILDREN’S NEEDS” already has a cash-supported grants stream dedicated to it, called access and visitation ($10 million/year nationwide, and California, where some of these are, gets about $1 million of that still).  Maybe what the parents need, instead, is lower legal bills — and fewer AFCC personnel on their case, particularly the ones that double-bill the grants program, and the parents, and/or are affiliated with the SF court system and Kids Turn (which is trading funds [i.e., a lien!], or was, with the SFTC, Trial Courts, system mysteriously….). Labeling parents “high-conflict” when one parent may or may not be having a “conflict” with the law-breaking, or child-endangering behavior of the others, is a word-trick used by such professionals to place themselves as the supposed “adults” in the matter, reframe what may be some VERY serious issues as “disputes” and sometimes reframe actual domestic violence, threats to kidnap, etc. as “conflict” — squarely blaming both parents for the behavior of ONE.  There are very, very few truly neutral individuals in this world — EVERYONE has a viewpoint.  However, few parents, particularly mothers, are aware of the influence and viewpoints of this organization and how neutral it is on pedophilia and abuse, and how activist it is in preventing women from leaving such situations with their children safe.   I seriously doubt that many people outside some of us mothers who have been diligently blogging this, in recent years (following upon NAFCJ and a VERY few others original exposures of the origins of the AFCC) understand how VERY large a part of the AFCC is #1.   Driven by simple greed — the money motive to market their own materials, and have a monopoly on the marketplace; #2.  Unbelievably activist, narcisssitically so — they position themselves to, and do, re-write laws (or add new ones), or by PRACTICE simply undermine and reverse existing state codes; #3.  Improperly continue to handle CRIMINAL matters in the FAMILY context — pleading caseloads all the time.         I have been systematically looking up (researching, if you will) AFCC individuals, task forces, memberships (i.e., who are judges where) nationwide as part of advocacy for noncustodial mothers in shock (including myself, initially) at what happened to our civil rights?    The behaviors and patterns of AFCC are very predictable, and their rhetoric uniform — rarely does an actually new IDEA come up — just a new market niche.  SImilarly, the nonprofits formed by man of the AFCC-personnel have a few commonalities — namely, they are geared to get court-referred business, they take sometimes grants monies, and they relentlessly conference, publish and collaborate to change the language and practice of law to a direction that this group, in particular, likes.  They are inbred with bar associations, the APA and several other groups as well — I know this because I look, closely The success of this organization which began as a SLUSH FUND IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY COURTHOUSE (from the best I can tell, and others — in articles written about this in the 1990s; don’t take it on my word — go to “the money trail” in Full Disclosure.net which follows Richard Fine’s case and work) depends upon inherent greed and egotism.  Parents are perceived as a PROBLEM, and they are the SOLUTION.   The success — besides who is positioned where in the judicial and court-referral professions — is also demonstrated by the total silence of domestic violence groups on this one.     To take the “veil” off — combine some listening, some reading, and then go check the financials!   Ask, how long are adult mothers and fathers supposed to be forced into educational materials designed at the FIFTH GRADE level (I found one today, may blog it tomorrow)???      The people most qualified to help their children, for the MOST part, are the parents — they live with them, they know them!   With this court system having been around now for several generations, many of the troubles we are seeing — like familicides, terrorism, fatalities on court-ordered exchanges, and/or kidnappings by parents to avoid payment of child support ! ! – or to get even — are now elements of the difficulties single mothers face.     I do not believe that the family court system (which exists primarily because of these individuals — some still practicing — to start with) is reformable, and I DO not believe it is broken — I believe it is doing exactly what it was designed to do — provide steady income growth for an otherwise low-paying field (psychology, absent the Ph.D.s), and a cult-like evangelizing of products (parent education, batterers intervention, supervised visitation, etc.) — which will provide secure retirements for the people who (a) designed and/or (b) parroted and helped affiliate-market them. )      

OK, I know that was 3 LONG paragraphs, but at least I kept it to only 3!
 
Parenting coordination is a quasi-legal, mental health, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process that combines assessment, education, case management, conflict management and sometimes decision-making functions.

Correction:  It is an all-expenses paid (to the coordinators) method of engaging in dubious QUASI-LEGAL and so-called “MENTAL HYGIENE” processes which BECAUSE OF THIS have ZERO business in OR around the courtroom UNLESS the parents opt for it — BOTH of them, and WITHOUT court coercion. Do they expect, in the cases of impoverished parents, to take some of their fees from the already compromised TANF funding, or what? ALSO — PARENTING COORDINATION is yet another tool of the trade of playing the PARENTAL ALIENATION card in a custody hearing and calling for “intervention” (a la Dick Warshak or Matt Sullivan, Ph.D. & Friends) “reunification.”  In other contexts, this would be called deprogramming, a practice which in the 1970s was played on some young adults by their parents, and was criminal — because it involved kidnapping.   It’s claiming that brainwashing happened (whether or not it did, and without true discretion) and so justifying coercive, “INTERVENTIONS” “Intervention Strategies for Parenting Coordinators in Parental Alienation Cases” (AFCC author Susan Boyan and probably the other one also) Divorce Wars: Interventions With Families in Conflict Ms. Ellis’ book, above is Copyright 2000 by the APA, and has of course a chapter on “Parental Alienation Syndrome:  A New Challenge for Family Courts (p. 205)” and by the end, p. 267, she gets around to “Evaluation of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Child Custody Cases.”  (Note:  PAS is real — see chapter title; but Sexual Abuse apparently is not, because it only surfaces next to the word “Allegations” emphasizing doubt (like Sexual abuse just doesn’t happen in families, or in divorcing families?) — and in the context of how to EVALUATE . . . . ALLEGATIONS.     Typical AFCC priorities…..”Lead” with PAS, and then — if forced to — say “sexual abuse” but never as if it were truly an issue.) It is a MAJOR issue….. (The Franklin Coverup)  Click on the link summary — the material is very disturbing, though…. Now, let’s reconsider why the AFCC, with it UNTRACKED and EVER-EXPANDING FUNDING AND REVAMPING OF THE LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS emphasizing instead PROGRAMMING activities (endless trainings……) IS SO URGENT TO DESTROY ANY LEGITIMATE DISCUSSION OF THE HORRORS OF THIS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN, AND AGAINST ONE (OR MORE) OF THEIR PARENTS WHEN THEY ATTEMPT TO STOP IT. https://events.afccnet.org/store/online_bookstore Susan M. BoyanAnn Marie Termini: The Psychotherapist as Parent Coordinator in High-Conflict Divorce: Strategies and TechniquesDecember 2004 Cooperative Parenting and Divorce: A Parent Guide to Effective CO-Parenting   August 1999 WELL, this post was to be a little sample — only — of some places that “child support enforcement” monies (grants/which are incentives) are going to the states.

 BACK to Ms. Moses’ article though:

To be fair, the Supreme Court decision did include some important protections the Obama administration suggested in its brief to the Court. The Court required safeguards that are alternatives to an appointed attorney such as telling men that they can avoid jail if they can’t afford to pay and providing them with an opportunity to demonstrate that they can’t pay.

The man in question from South Carolina did time for failure to pay amounts less than $60/ week. I’m so glad to know that our country is willing to go after the “real” culprits and thieves in lifes — people who cannot afford defense attorneys — and just SO “uninterested” in actually distributing money garnished (improperly and sometimes, in excess of court orders) from parents amounting to, sometimes, millions of dollars per state. SOME CHARTS: I did a basic search on the CFDA category “93563” which is Child Support Enforcement, plain and simple — and I selected only the years 2011 and 2010. I’d like this to exhibit how in different states (and tribes) different agencies collect, and how much money is spent on this. By publishing the street addresses fo the state (or tribe) designated agency, people can then search on-line for those addresses and see what else is going on at that street address. Although this is more helpful for private companies or nonprofits, it’s a good habit to develop. For Year 2010 only (seeing as we are not through with 2011 yet), this is the report:

FY 2010 Grants to States, Tribes, and D.C. for Child Support Enforcement

CFDA Prog. No.

OPDIV

Popular Title

Number of Awards

Number of Award Actions

CAN Award Amount

93.563

ACF 

Child Support Enforcement (CSE)  

180

1,037

$3,604,010,339

Page Total

180

1,037

$3,604,010,339

Report Total

180

1,037

$3,604,010,339

 

Same category, FY 2011:

CFDA Prog. No.

OPDIV

Popular Title

Number of Awards

Number of Award Actions

CAN Award Amount

93.563

ACF 

Child Support Enforcement (CSE)  

170

713

$3,258,225,288

Page Total

170

713

$3,258,225,288

Report Total

170

713

$3,258,225,288

(So, one can see where I got my “$6.8” billion figure  from by adding the totals, there). USASPENDING.gov (year, 2010, same code) shows:

Total Dollars:$3,604,010,339 (probably includes some contracts, not just grants….)

NOTE:  these are GRANTS only — for contracts, plus grants, plus loans, plus (etc.) one would have to hop on over to another database, such as USASPENDING.gov.  however (the thing is) with both of those, the amounts are provided from the agencies themselves; there might be a better way to actually see what went out (like the individual state grants received documents, etc.) There are also SPECIAL PROJECTS for Child Support — CFDA 93601…

CFDA Prog. No.

OPDIV

Popular Title

Number of Awards

Number of Award Actions

CAN Award Amount

“2010”

93.601

ACF 

Child Support Enforcement Demonstrations and Special Projects  

118

257

$17,306,652

93.601

CDC 

Child Support Enforcement Demonstrations and Special Projects  

1

1

$601,234

Page Total

119

258

$17,907,886

Report Total

119

258

$17,907,886

NOW, what exactly are those projects?  I decided to take a look (FY 2010) and recognize quite a few names – especially the first one here:

Program Office

Grantee Name

{Yr “2010”}

City

State

Award Number

Award Title

Budget Year

CFDA Number

Principal Investigator

Sum of Actions

Award Abstract

OCSE 

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

2

93601

JESSICA PEARSON 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

3

93601

JESSICA PEARSON 

$50,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

Circuit Court for Baltimore County 

BALTIMORE 

MD 

90FI0057 

OCSE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 5 

1

93601

PETER J LALLY 

-$1,215

View Abstract

OCSE 

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

CLEVELAND 

OH 

90FI0093 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

93601

KENT K SMITH 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

93601

BEN LEVEK 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

93601

BEN LEVEK 

$24,300

View Abstract

OCSE 

Florida State University 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

90FI0107 

USING FLORIDA???S SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAMS TO INCREASE ECONOMIC SELF SUFFICIENCY FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES 

1

93601

KAREN OEHME 

$100,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0095 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

93601

JOE FINNEGAN 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0095 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

93601

JOE FINNEGAN 

$25,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0097 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

93601

PHYLLIS NANCE 

$25,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 

MILWAUKEE 

WI 

90FI0103 

IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

2

93601

JANET NELSON 

$25,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0082 

2005 SIP GRANT 

2

93601

JOY LYNGAR 

-$1,203

View Abstract

OCSE 

NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

93601

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

93601

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

3

93601

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$24,170

View Abstract

OCSE 

STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

HERNDON 

VA 

90FI0102 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

93601

DAVID P POPOVICH 

$22,816

View Abstract

OCSE 

Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

SAN JOSE 

CA 

90FI0101 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

93601

RALPH MILLER 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

SAN JOSE 

CA 

90FI0101 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

3

93601

RALPH MILLER 

$25,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

Summit County Child Support Enforcement Agency 

AKRON 

OH 

90FI0109 

OCSE DEMONSTRATION 

1

93601

JENNIFER BHEAM 

$83,330

View Abstract

OCSE 

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

93601

MICHAEL HAYES 

$0

View Abstract

OCSE 

The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

COLUMBIA 

SC 

90FI0105 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

2

93601

PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

$50,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. 

TUSCALOOSA 

AL 

90FI0108 

CO-PARENTING WITH RESPONSIBILITY 

1

93601

TERESA COSTANZO 

$100,000

View Abstract

OCSE 

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

BOSTON 

MA 

90FI0106 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

93601

DENISE M FITZGERALD 

$48,995

View Abstract

OCSE 

URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0096 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

93601

SANDI CRAWFORD 

$33,052

View Abstract

I’ll look up a few (that I know less about, for example, Karen Oehme in FL is a known position….): MICHAEL MAGNANI in NY (apparently relates to a Drug Court): Michael Magnani Director Division of Grants and Program Development New York State Unified Court System 25 Beaver Street, 11th Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: 212-428-2109 Fax: 212-428-2129 Email: mmagnani@courts.state.ny.usFor example:

Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc.  EIN#63-12904,

I looked this one up at NCSSDATAWEB.org — revenues showing over $2 million. 990 nonprofit purpose:

“TO EMPOWER FAMILIES BY PROVIDING SUPPORT SERVICES THAT DEVELOP SKILLS AND RESOURCES TO IMPROVE THE FAMILY’S QUALITY OF LIFE, PREPARE THEIR CHILDREN FOR SUCCESS IN A COMPETITIVE SOCIETY, AND ALLOW EACH INDIVIDUAL TO REALIZE HIS OR HER POTENTIAL FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY”

With this nonprofit purpose, I shoulda been a nonprofit as a mere parent — this is what parents generally do!   They basically want to be some other family’s “family.”     So at what point is this outsourced to nonprofit organizations instead, supported by federal grants?   ‘Howsabout’ empowering parents by consistently refusing to violate their fundamental rights as individuals and help keep YOUR local neck of government honest and accountable for its use of OUR money (via IRS, or wage-garnishments in child support programs, or sales taxes, etc.) and your officials, accountable for its use of all program funds? Their 2010 IRS filed Form 990 shows program income revenues ZERO; contributions and grants, $2,082,707 — considerably higher than last year (which was $1,917,454) of which $2,5K (roughly — and lower than last year’s which was over $6K) INVESTMENT income.  There are 17 officers and directors… Part III, #4, they are required to report have a ‘Statement of Program Service Accomplishments” (with  expenses and revenues — and this section is blank.!  This is th section that justifies the tax-exempt purpose.  Instead, they simply re-stated their purpose (not what they actually DID)… and claimed that doing (whatever) cost “$1,968, 563” “All Other Achievements Description” — (after a number of blank pages of the form — and this is a statement, not an “achievement”) reads: FORM 990, PAGE PART I,LINE4D (the part I just noted was blank, but shouldn’t have been……)

“CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND OF ALABAMA AND DHHS GRANT AND FAMILY RESOURCE PROGRAM GRANT USED TO PAY SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF DHR CASE CONTRACTS FOR THE COUNTY AND CITY OF TUSCALOOSA AND TO PAY TFRC SALARIES AND EXPENSES RELATED TO CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION PROGRAMS” “Organization’s process to review Form 990″:  ” NO REVIEW WAS OR WILL BE CONDUCTED”  (that seems obvious.  AFter all, it’s only $2 million, right?) “GOVERNING DOCUMENTS DISCLOSURE EXPLANATION FORM 990, PAGE 6, PART VI, LINE 19 NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC” Here are a bunch of directors:   “

  • TONYA ADAMS-NELSON DIRECTOR
  • CARLA BAILEY DIRECTOR
  • AVANTI BAKER DIRECTOR
  • ELIZABETH BEEMER DIRECTOR
  • MARY BETH CAVERT DIRECTOR
  • ROBERT WHALLI JR DIRECTOR
  • HELENE HIBBARD DIRECTOR
  • ALISON HUDNAIL DIRECTOR
  • TOM LEDBETTER DIRECTOR
  • AMANDA MULKEY DIRECTOR
  • SANDRA RAY DIRECTOR
  • MIKE RUSSELL DIRECTOR
  • TAMMY YAGER DIRECTOR
  • KIM THOMA BAILEY PRESIDENT
  • DEBRA NELSON -GARDELL VICE-PRES
  • STEVEN K CASE TREASURER
  • LESLIE GUY SECRETARY

(Alabama has been dealing with tornado damages…) solicitation (same address) from a group dealing with youth homelessness:There’s a blog and this shows a history — of TOP spot Family Resource Center.  It began (like many nonprofits) with someone formerly in government social service work, and a grant of $80,000 — not bad for a startup:

In 1999, a group of concerned community members came together to create the East Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. The goal was to create a place where underserved members of the Tuscaloosa community could come to gain access to services that were already available in other parts of town. The board of directors hired as the agency’s first executive director Teresa Costanzo, a social worker with management experience as the director of the Hale County Department of Human Resources. The budget in that initial year was $80,000; there were three employees.

Teresa’s Vision:

Very soon, Teresa’s vision began to exceed the limits of east Tuscaloosa, so, in 2001, the board of directors decided to drop the “East” from the name, making it the Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. The agency [TECHNICALLY, it’s a “nonprofit” not an agency] continued to grow, as did the array of services provided. Soon, the community began to think of the agency as a “one-stop-shop” for a wide array of family needs. In an effort to reflect this perception of the agency, the board decided to begin operations under the business name Tuscaloosa’s One Place, a Family Resource Center.
{{More likely, this was a phrase promoted by the management, similar to the One-Stop-Justice-Centers started on the West Coast and encouraged in part by faith-based grants funding availability}}
Through the years, many of our services have changed. We now offer many school-based programs, several career-development programs, an on-site adult education program, an English-as-a-second-language program, healthy relationship programs, a juvenile detention alternative initiative, a Hispanic outreach program, and home visitation programs, to name a few of our services. We press approximately 800 volunteers, from all walks of life, into service for our community every year, and that number is growing. Our budget for the most recent fiscal year was approximately $1.5 million; we now have approximately 25 full-time employees and 80 temporary or part-time employees. To say that we’ve changed would be an understatement.Through all these changes, though, the agency’s constant has been its executive director. Teresa continues to be at the forefront of everything TOP does. Her oversight has been and still is the key factor in the agency’s place in the community.

And she got $100K of “Child Support Special Resource & Demonstration” project funds.  Recently. ALABAMA UNDISTRIBUTED CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS(posted in an Iowa Fathers’ group), 2005:

ALABAMA $11,765,750 $8,271,986 70.3% $3,493,764 29.7%

(Columns:   NET, PENDING & % of NET (cols. 2&3) Unresolved & % of NET(last 2) Fatherhood Groups tend to be up on Where is the Money Going? — as here (but as we look below, TANF money IS being diverted to Fatherhood programs, at $30 to $50K a pop; and I have a 2011 list)  In that link, I see the group complaining that money was given to the Administrative Office of the Courts, and not “promoting responsible fatherhood”  (??the courts are where that promotion would be most likely to take effect!) MEANWHILE, this appears to be an outfit offering MARRIAGE CLASSES with a “Focus on the Family” (very strong) emphasis = NOT good.  See:

Marriage Classes/Curriculum 1. Classes Offered by Tuscaloosa’s One Place. http://www.etfrc.org, P.O. Box 40764, 870 Redmont Drive, Tuscaloosa, AL 35404 (205) 462- 1000 (Contact Wanda Martin, wmartin@etfrc.org Relationship/ Marriage Educator, Family Support Specialist; or D’Undray Peterson,

www.etfrc.org They have the solicitation part of the website all nicely set up:

We also accept monetary donations to support our programs. Because we are a non-profit social service agency, all donations are tax deductible. Please mail or deliver monetary donations to our offices, conveniently located in Alberta City or click below. Become a fan on Facebook!!

There’s the “Home visitation” services under “Parenting” and here is the “Let’s Help Dad with His Custody Case” (reduced or free legal fees) segment. Dads who are not actually getting legal results from these grants should complain to their local legislator, because that’s the purpose (also, for each State to conduct social experimentation at the direction of the Secretary of HHS, as 45 CFR 303.109declares): Apart from trouble with using the word “assist” or “assisting” correctly, this segment appears to have been part of the “special demonstration” funded program, above?  Tax-funded, so noncustodial MOTHERS can know that their tax dollars, if they are employed, are going to the good cause of a nonprofit organization taking advantage of its tax-exempt status to help connect the fathers with REDUCED-FEE OR FREE LEGAL SERVICES, no doubt to also help them with custody matters as well.

D.A.D.S. Program (Dads Are Dynamite)

The DADS program is designed to assist non-custodial fathers comply {{“in complying”}} with child support obligations. Participants in this program will receive job search assistance as well as learn skills to strengthen their relationship with their child and his or her primary caregiver. DADS participants receive individualized case management services, which includes assisting those fathers who are underemployed become {{“in becoming”}} gainfully employed.

One night per week, fathers will participate in a class/support session to discuss issues unique to non-custodial fathers. ** Legal services are also available to fathers at either a free or reduced fee.  Fathers interested in voluntarily participating in this program should contact Tuscaloosa’s One Place to schedule an initial intake. Call David De Shazo at (205) 462-1000 to sign up.

**if these are unique to noncustodial fathers, they do not apply to noncustodial mothers.  They are family court &/or child support matters.

HOPEFULLY no one providing such services has any inappropriate relationships with (a) any family court judges or (b) program disbursement authorities in any of the grants being used to assist the fathers, such as we found (1999) in the Karen Anderson, Amadaor County (CA) case, where her ex-husband’s attorney just so happened to also have authority over the A/V funds, and just-so happened to also be in business? with a little nonprofit outfit receiving those funds…..

$1,500 of Tuscaloosa’s 2011 proposed Community Developmt Block Grant going to this DADS program

However “DADs are DYNAMITE” got $50,000 — from TANF funds — in The CHildren’s Trust Fund in this (Alabama Dept of Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention )

THE LINK above IS LOADED WITH FATHERHOOD FUNDING (DESIGNATED “TANF” ON THE RIGHT COLUMN AS WELL)  — PLS. BROWSE.   Clearly the way to reduce childhood abuse and neglect is to dedicate public funds to fatherhood policies, including some that will provide legal help (reduce/low-fee) in their child support and most likely child custody/visitation cases — which the mothers do NOT have a source of legal help for, for the most part.  How does that work out when the reason for separation (or not cohabiting) was abuse to start with?

Other groups that received from this fund (dated March, 2011) include:

Grantee / Program / Source / $$

  • Baldwin County Fatherhood Initiative, Inc./ (same)- TANF funding – $50K  [for-profit, inc. 2004]
  • Alfred Saliba Family Services Center / Saliba Center Fatherhood – TANF funding – $40K
  • Autauga County Family Support Center / “DADS” / TANF – $40K
  • Family Guidance Center of Alabama / Fatherhood Program / TANF – $5oK
  • Family Services Center of Coffee County / Coffee County Fatherhood Initiative / TANF – $35K [Non-profit, reg. 1998, but no reports since 1999 and where is the EIN#?  Cotter R. Rainer, III, purpose “assist families in need of prevention” at 203 EAST LEE STREET

ENTERPRISE, AL (currently an attorney’s office, Tindol- M. Chad & Cotter- R. Rainer- III Attorney) ACTUALLY — here is a Youtube 41second blurbon this one (date?) — I think it’s being offered at the courthouse, a judge announced:

The judge says the program will help the non-custodial parent pay his child support and have a relationship with his child.

Coffee County District Court Judge Paul Sherling says the state court system has awarded grant money to the county for a fatherhood initiative. He says that when a person charged with nonpayment appears in court and says he can’t afford to pay, he’ll have an alternative.

The program will direct the parent to a 12-week seminar program designed to help him find ways to earn income and pay for his child. The fatherhood initiative will be offered through the Coffee County Family Services Center.

This “eprise” site is interesting — because along with this article, are several others involving, for example, child abuse, murder, and complaints that the courts are short of money: this site states who helped get this money.

County gets almost $45,000 for fatherhood program

  • A new program designed to help fathers help their children has received a financial boost. District Judge Paul Sherling announced that Coffee County has been awarded nearly $45,000 from the state court system to fund a fatherhood initiative.
    08/27/2010 6:00 AM
  • An Enterprise man was sentenced to 90 years in prison on six charges involving sexual abuse of three minor children.District Judge Paul Sherling sentenced Jack Ellis Hockemeyer, 54, to serve 15 years in state prison on each charge, with the sentences to run concurrently, meaning he will serve a maximum of 15 years.Sherling imposed the sentence Tuesday afternoon following Hockemeyer’s guilty plea on one count of sexual abuse of  child under age 12 and five counts of second-degree sodomy involving minors over age 12, but under age 16ENTERPRISE, Ala. —      The 12th Circuit District Attorney Office’s recent child support roundup was its most successful to date, collecting more than $25,000 for Coffee County families. Assistant District Attorney Chris Kaminski said, as of Friday, the office has collected $25,573.69. Five more people remained in the Coffee County Jail on cash bonds, which will increase the total, he added. Kaminski said Friday’s total was “by far the best we’ve had.” From late March until April 8, the DA’s office allowed anyone behind on child support payments to catch up or arrange a plan without a penalty. Twelfth Circuit District Attorney Tom Anderson said about 80 percent of this year’s collections were obtained during that period.

    Former Elba lawman {stepfather} charged with torture, willful abuse of child

    (and let out on $5K bail after THIS:)

A 3-year-old child is now in the custody of the Coffee County Department of Human Resources after his stepfather was arrested and charged with torture/willful abuse of a child.  {{WHERE WAS MOM!??!}} Coffee County Sheriff’s Office Chief Deputy Ronnie Whitworth said the child’s grandfather reported the incident to law enforcement authorities. Jeffery Hayes Fuller, 28, of County Road 349, Elba, was arrested and charged with the Class C felony Dec. 22. Fuller is reportedly a former Elba police officer and a former firefighter. Whitworth said the baby was found badly bruised in the buttocks region with blood coming from the wounds.   Fuller reportedly confessed to paddling the child with a hand-gripped paddle, then placing the child on a hot pad and then rubbing peroxide on the wounds. Fuller was released from the Coffee County Jail on a $5,000 bond and ordered by Judge Paul Sherling to have no contact with the child. Whitworth said the case remains under investigation. (SORRY about all those extra hyperlinks)…..

REPEAT THE MANTRA:  Fatherhood training will reduce child abuse and prevent it……  Here’s a 30 yr old Army Sgt caught with 18 videos of child porn (same judge, which is how it came up)  – he’s in jail. . . . .    “The child pornography evidence against Hogan includes 18 videos and pictures of him sexually assaulting 2 out-of-state girls, ages 8 and 10. Authorities arrested Hogan Jan. 28 on charges of second-degree possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and felony possession of a controlled substance.”

THIS “family services center” appears to be not just a regular nonprofit, but one of the many situations that appear to be a public/private project involving an actual building; it was dedicated in 1998, per this article (and also articles of incorporation):

Coffee County Family Services Center receives 2010-2011 Children’s Trust Fund grant funding

Check presented in the amount of $103,400

Linda HodgeThursday, Dec 02,2010

Elected officials, officials from the Alabama Department of Abuse and Neglect Prevention and the board of directors of the Coffee County Family Services Center all gathered Tuesday morning, Nov. 30, in Enterprise, Ala. for the announcement of the 2010-11 Children’s Trust Fund grant funding. Coffee County Family Services Center received $103,400 from the Children’s Trust Fund to be used for child abuse and neglect prevention programs. “I can not tell you how much we appreciate this money and their (Alabama Dept. of Abuse and Neglect Prevention) support of our programs,” said Judy Crowley, executive director of the Coffee County Family Services Center.

The Coffee County Family Services Center opened its doors in 1998, and Crowley said that also was the first year the local organization received grant funding from the Children’s Trust Fund for assessment referral, which remains a number one priority today as the programs most highly utilized area.  In regards to the 2010-11 grant funding announced Tuesday morning, Crowley said the monies will be used also to assist with all child abuse and neglect prevention programs, as well as, the Building Blocks program and the new Fatherhood Initiative program.

This is a listed nonprofit (Here’s the 2009 “990 “filing from NCCSDATA.org — though mostly blank, it confirms that it gets about $265K grants/contributions per yr and Judith Crowley earns only around $40K.  There is no description of services provided . . . . . it does have an EIN# (721374603 ) Heritage Training and Career Center, Inc / Faithful Fathers Fatherhood Program / TANF – $30K (THERE are 11 pages of this, and I don’t feel like going through all – -most pages have several, not just one or two, fatherhood programs on them) Any of these can be looked up (for example, the last one shows at the Alabama Secretary of STate site as existing, yes, as of 2007 — and as a nonprofit, but I don’t see any filings yet.   ”

Entity ID Entity Name City Type Status
565 – 632 Heritage Training and Career Center MONTGOMERY, AL Domestic Non-Profit Corporation Exists

This group (under a “Cynthia Brown”) when I looked up the street address, is a “New or Rejoined Nonprofit” member of the Montgomery chamber of commerce:

A “Billy W. Jarrett Construction Co., Inc.” at this address apparently got a contract (for a North Carolina Military project) …. There are also 5 entities, some LLC’s  incorporated (or registered agent) by a “Cynthia Brown,”(without middle initial)  not that this isn’t a common name…

EVERY/ANY one of these organizations (in whichever state) can be looked up as to:  Incorporation (Secretary of State) and any related dbas (other names it does business as), if nonprofit, the NCCSDATAWEB.org or other site showing some of the 990 filings for these groups; their websites, their directors, and other LLCs they form.  SOMETIMES these are front groups that exist ONLY to catch the fundings.

EVERY organization (for example) that is taking TANF funds in particular, can and should be looked up and checked up (especially for any Alabama residents with access to internet) — again there is a LOT of fatherhood funding showing up here:   http://www.ctf.alabama.gov/Grantees%202010-2011/2010%202011%20Grantees%20Funded%20as%20of%20March%2029%202011.pdf

AND, of course the “Healthy Marriage” part as well, right underneath help to enroll in Food Stamps.  (If you are Title IV-A, your Child Support qualifies for Title IV-D, and as such a diversion into marriage promotion will of course help establish the steady payments of fathers). (A LINK from the TUSCOLOOSA ONE-STOP group)

Alabama Community Healthy Marriage Initiative

AGAIN, here is the child support funding for “Regular” (not “research and special demonstration”) child support.  In each State, County — your county — what does this translate to, and who is watching?  Who is profiting — are the children subject to the child support order profiting, and is this consistently effective in reducing TANF expenditures?

CFDA 93.593, “CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT” Grants to States — selected Years 2010 & 2011

Also for scope, the chart should show how which agency gets this varies from state to state. The “activity type” is at all times described as “SOCIAL SERVICES” and note that the grants type is either NEW, or Administrative Supplement/Discretionary — meaning, they asked for more… I left blank the column Private Investigator — because it’s agencies getting the monies. Keep in mind also that some states farm out the responsibilities to private contractors, some of whom I have been researching, and the large ones of which have been in several cases caught in major money-laundering or fraud. This is good to keep in mind when considering how quickly one state (South Carolina) is to contribute (further) to the racial inequality in the US prison system by jailing low-income black males for nonpayment of child support — and then going to the public and complaining that the child support system is unfair to low-income black males (although the literature saying this typically calls the males “fathers” and the mothers’ households, “female-headed households” as if they were domesticated breeding stock (which, viewed in certain lights, they are…. being treated as). FOR A SAMPLE of this chart:

Grantee Name

Grantee Address

City

State

County

Grantee Type

Award Number

Award Title

Budget Year

Action Issue Date

CFDA Number

Award Action Type

Sum of Actions

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0804AK4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$217,656

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0904AK4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/07/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$471,245

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0904AK4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$154,695

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$1,435,990

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,971,304

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$873,529

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,370,981

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$113,038

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,857,781

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$423,527

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,558,010

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004AK4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$522,227

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$2,394,674

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$666,335

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,766,654

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$807,328

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,424,624

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,270,146

AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

ANCHORAGE 

AK 

ANCHORAGE 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104AK4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,564,608

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

0804AL4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$443,330

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

0904AL4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/24/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,870,128

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

0904AL4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,563,098

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,878,920

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,738,775

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,666,800

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$270,313

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,294,300

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$609,699

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,197,264

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004AL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$384,262

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$12,437,200

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$17,670

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,295,520

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,975

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,514,100

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$816,471

AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

MONTGOMERY 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104AL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,712,928

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

0804AR4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$606,262

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

0904AR4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$882,220

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$1,081,749

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,336,191

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$954,627

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,324,393

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$781,215

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,779,830

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,503,484

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$14,637,460

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004AR4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$75,008

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$9,824,903

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,897,250

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,537,998

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,644,995

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,733,689

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,761,165

AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

PO BOX 1272 

LITTLE ROCK 

AR 

PULASKI 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104AR4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,481,843

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

0804AZ4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$424,427

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

0904AZ4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$687,232

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$7,236,581

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,991,382

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,324,572

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,682,219

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,350,417

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,093,961

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,748,400

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1004AZ4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,547,956

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$10,840,894

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$4,085,910

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,450,246

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,402,213

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,570,129

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,960,501

AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

PHOENIX 

AZ 

MARICOPA 

Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

1104AZ4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,249,743

BLACKFEET TRIBAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT 

TRIBAL OFFICE 

BROWNING 

MT 

GLACIER 

Educational Department 

10IBMT4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$296,873

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

0804CA4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,520,413

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

0904CA4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,981,714

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$20,049,309

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$145,968,345

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$38,513,768

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$129,832,458

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$10,597,780

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$62,305,239

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1004CA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$107,984,151

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$125,931,992

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$9,448,771

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$122,438,508

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$20,997,400

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$129,166,305

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,142,721

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

SACRAMENTO 

Welfare Department 

1104CA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$94,719,355

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$695,218

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$579,348

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10TCOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$463,479

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10TCOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$463,478

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$634,920

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$529,100

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$529,100

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

POST OFFICE BOX 948 

TAHLEQUAH 

OK 

CHEROKEE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$423,281

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

10IAOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$659,158

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

10IAOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$549,298

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

10IAOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$136,183

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

10IAOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$336,160

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

11IAOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$476,612

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

11IAOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$397,177

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

11IAOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

03/31/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$97,022

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

11IAOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$397,177

CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 1548 

ADA 

OK 

PONTOTOC 

Other Social Services Organization 

11IAOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$608,870

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMT4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$194,631

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMT4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$162,193

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMT4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$162,192

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMT4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$129,754

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMT4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$208,457

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMT4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$173,714

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMT4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$173,714

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

BOX ELDER 

MT 

HILL 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMT4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$138,971

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

0804CO4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$271,490

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

0904CO4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$713,994

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$1,963,471

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,858,500

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$792,000

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,057,020

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$918,244

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,702,000

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,404,043

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,696,534

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1004CO4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,224,106

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$9,840,330

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$911,350

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,499,260

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$286,137

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,561,620

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$689,647

CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

1575 SHERMAN STREET 

DENVER 

CO 

DENVER 

Welfare Department 

1104CO4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,398,700

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAID4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/13/2010 

93563

NEW 

$177,492

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAID4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$177,492

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAID4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$152,137

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAID4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$221,058

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAID4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$184,215

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAID4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$184,215

COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 408 

PLUMMER 

ID 

BENEWAH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAID4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$147,372

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 150 

NESPELEM 

WA 

OKANOGAN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IEWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$397,415

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 150 

NESPELEM 

WA 

OKANOGAN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IEWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$331,179

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 150 

NESPELEM 

WA 

OKANOGAN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IEWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$331,179

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 150 

NESPELEM 

WA 

OKANOGAN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IEWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$264,942

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 150 

NESPELEM 

WA 

OKANOGAN 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IEWA4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$460,212

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 150 

NESPELEM 

WA 

OKANOGAN 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IEWA4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$383,510

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IFOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$134,424

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IFOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$112,021

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IFOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$119,314

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IFOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$91,440

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IFOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$159,310

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IFOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$165,209

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IFOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$132,758

COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 908 

LAWTON 

OK 

COMANCHE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IFOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$73,755

CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES 

P.O. BOX 278 

PABLO 

MT 

LAKE 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IDMT4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

12/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$238,765

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$143,989

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$119,991

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$119,991

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$95,994

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$147,185

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$133,983

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

P.O. BOX 638 

PENDLETON 

OR 

UMATILLA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$127,804

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

0804CT4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,790,720

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

0904CT4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$609,139

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,193,136

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,637,365

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,408,041

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,266,669

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,895,077

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$367,943

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,326,324

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1004CT4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,200,208

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$11,887,422

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,270,701

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,778,199

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$37,738

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,966,424

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$953,656

CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

HARTFORD 

CT 

HARTFORD 

Welfare Department 

1104CT4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,278,236

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

0804DC4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$83,962

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

0904DC4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

10/08/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$802,300

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

0904DC4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$136,662

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,593,280

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,241,838

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,604,840

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,217,637

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,100,520

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$971,680

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,123,940

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1004DC4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$563,656

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$4,032,033

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$301,643

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,597,460

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$961,498

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,479,620

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$69,798

DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

441 4th street, nw 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Welfare Department 

1104DC4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,672,240

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

0804DE4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$58,246

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

0904DE4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$276,175

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$4,373,359

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,935,571

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$201,342

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,532,156

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,306,420

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,179,132

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,635,337

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,889,253

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1004DE4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$4,432,595

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$7,499,212

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$5,070,262

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$7,503,364

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,450,993

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,230,650

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,116,225

DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

NEW CASTLE 

DE 

NEW CASTLE 

Health Department 

1104DE4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,056,512

EASTERN SHOSHONE TRIBE 

P.O. BOX 538 

FORT WASHAKIE 

WY 

FREMONT 

Indian Tribal Council 

08IBWY4004 

2008 OCSET 

1

10/19/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$401,375

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

0804FL4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,789,799

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

0904FL4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,159,234

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$22,719,061

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$56,042,541

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,179,266

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$53,033,364

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,227,388

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$38,803,054

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

05/18/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$17,299

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$48,079,001

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004FL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/30/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,556,024

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$56,287,376

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,588,919

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$52,482,981

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$8,808,111

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

03/17/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,677,187

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$46,465,236

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$9,538,373

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

LEON 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104FL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$51,635,458

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$165,653

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$171,413

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$143,054

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$92,097

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10ICWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/19/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$21,440

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10TCWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

06/05/2010 

93563

NEW 

$59,393

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

10TCWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

08/30/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$567,600

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$179,039

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$149,199

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$149,199

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

P.O. BOX 396 

CRANDON 

WI 

FOREST 

Indian Tribal Council 

11ICWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$119,359

FT BELKNAP COMMUNITY COUNCIL 

FT BELKNAP AGENCY 

HARLEM 

MT 

BLAINE 

Indian Tribal Council 

09ICMT4004 

2009 OCSET 

1

09/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$283,281

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

0804GA4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$370,916

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

0904GA4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,857,146

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$15,500,754

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$4,978,898

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$19,305,654

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$999,477

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$19,305,654

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$738,535

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

05/18/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,026

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$19,246,254

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1004GA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$4,015,821

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$20,496,254

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$7,174,590

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$16,496,254

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,008,830

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$16,496,254

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,049,097

GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

ATLANTA 

GA 

FULTON 

Welfare Department 

1104GA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$24,496,254

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

0804GU4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$41,400

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

0904GU4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$115,246

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$345,101

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$300,126

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

12/09/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$200,000

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$529,436

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$66,329

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$554,629

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,190

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

05/18/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$156

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$710,340

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1004GU4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$317,016

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$759,911

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$66,203

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$727,644

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$318,769

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

02/09/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$200,000

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$604,521

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$274,696

GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

AGANA 

GU 

AGANA 

Planning & Administrative Organizations 

1104GU4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$675,165

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0804HI4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$162,504

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0904HI4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$346,576

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$382,743

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,942,600

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,895,080

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$242,655

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,798,060

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,994,191

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,236,960

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$525,251

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004HI4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$982,476

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$3,090,400

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$948,371

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,962,200

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,092,179

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,530,200

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$713,234

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

KAPOLEI 

HI 

HONOLULU 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1104HI4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,001,440

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

0804IA4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,034,154

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

0904IA4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/24/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$8,750

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

0904IA4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,535,162

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$9,033,996

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$19,519,024

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,688,235

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,723,100

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,814,802

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,063,100

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,992,298

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

05/18/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,357

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,376,500

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1004IA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$5,392,854

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$11,526,500

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,266,820

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$7,076,500

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$5,690,379

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,213,200

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$5,496,825

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

1305 EAST WALNUT 

DES MOINES 

IA 

POLK 

Welfare Department 

1104IA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$10,776,500

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

0804ID4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$227,639

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

0904ID4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$207,448

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$1,282,527

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,403,756

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$423,956

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,987,028

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$471,286

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,325,460

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,925,578

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,861,854

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1004ID4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,715,774

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$4,235,706

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$954,759

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,504,043

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$679,903

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,467,225

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,180,751

ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

BOISE 

ID 

ADA 

Health Department 

1104ID4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,684,935

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

0804IL4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,048,070

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

0904IL4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/24/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$87,230

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

0904IL4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,727,004

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$30,172,273

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,235,953

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$31,611,964

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,853,722

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$34,984,718

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,780,679

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$34,504,934

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1004IL4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$4,040,629

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$28,644,219

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,935,737

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$28,382,830

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,077,767

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$37,210,017

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,258,566

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

SANGAMON 

Welfare Department 

1104IL4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$33,507,714

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

0804IN4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,046,221

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

0804INHMHR 

2008 HMHR 

1

10/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$198,000

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

0904IN4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/24/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$164,556

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

0904IN4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$8,868,855

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$14,487,923

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,041,143

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,324,023

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$3,952,413

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,629,715

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

05/18/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,602

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$14,137,408

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$8,314,548

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1004IN4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/13/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,242,000

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$13,396,113

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,293,314

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,961,368

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$9,942,425

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$16,775,367

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,624,634

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

INDIANAPOLIS 

IN 

MARION 

Welfare Department 

1104IN4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,090,305

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IGOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$102,908

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IGOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$85,757

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IGOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$85,757

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IGOK4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$68,604

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

11GIOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

NEW 

$73,145

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

11GIOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/12/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$73,145

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

11GTOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/12/2011 

93563

NEW 

$73,145

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IGOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$109,717

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IGOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$91,431

KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

KAW CITY 

OK 

KAY 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IGOK4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$91,431

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$78,498

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$65,415

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$71,606

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAMI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$42,261

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11AIMI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

NEW 

$16,660

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$78,904

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$71,035

KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

BARAGA 

MI 

BARAGA 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAMI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$75,727

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAKS4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$105,494

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAKS4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$87,912

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAKS4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$85,653

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAKS4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$63,551

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAKS4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$160,536

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAKS4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$133,780

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAKS4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$133,780

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

P.O. BOX 271 

HORTON 

KS 

BROWN 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAKS4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$107,025

KICKAPOO TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

P.O. BOX 70 

MCLOUD 

OK 

POTTAWATOMIE 

Indian Tribal Council 

09IIOK4004 

2009 OCSET 

1

06/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$263,587

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IBOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$95,783

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IBOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$79,819

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IBOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$79,819

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IBOR4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$63,854

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IBOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$104,487

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IBOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$87,072

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IBOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$87,072

KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

POST OFFICE BOX 436 

CHILOQUIN 

OR 

KLAMATH 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IBOR4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$69,658

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

0804KS4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$279,439

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

0904KS4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/24/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$72,200

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

0904KS4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$698,875

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$5,270,236

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,631,555

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,803,001

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,943,573

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$296,186

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$7,036,770

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,517,041

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

05/18/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,540

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,130,248

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1004KS4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$952,911

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$8,480,533

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$676,001

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,938,255

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,652,115

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$7,600,934

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$907,503

KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

915 HARRISON STREET 

TOPEKA 

KS 

SHAWNEE 

Welfare Department 

1104KS4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$7,238,308

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

0804KY4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$782,208

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

0904KY4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

05/11/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,296,286

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

0904KY4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,127,059

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$7,394,829

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,256,316

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$5,047,054

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$896,494

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,485,158

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,579,378

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$6,267,103

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1004KY4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,038,706

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$5,458,820

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,439,672

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,864,886

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$836,980

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,112,680

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$1,379,228

KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

FRANKFORT 

KY 

FRANKLIN 

Other Social Services Organization 

1104KY4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,229,773

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

0804LA4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$681,486

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

0904LA4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$4,929,044

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$8,336,935

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$15,790,604

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$4,964,952

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$19,915,563

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$2,040,488

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$16,164,782

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,715,603

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$16,778,349

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1004LA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

08/06/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,436,578

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$14,405,038

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

12/09/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$2,573,946

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$11,881,604

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

01/24/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$1,164,059

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,933,756

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

04/26/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$102,845

LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

EAST BATON ROUGE 

Welfare Department 

1104LA4004 

2011 OCSE 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,370,140

LAC COURTE OREILLES TRIBE 

113394 W. Trepania Road 

HAYWARD 

WI 

SAWYER 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IEWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/13/2010 

93563

NEW 

$242,207

LAC COURTE OREILLES TRIBE 

113394 W. Trepania Road 

HAYWARD 

WI 

SAWYER 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IEWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/12/2011 

93563

NEW 

$257,793

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$97,241

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$81,034

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$81,034

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

10IAWI4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$64,828

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$106,825

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$89,021

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$89,021

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

P.O. BOX 67 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

WI 

VILAS 

Indian Tribal Council 

11IAWI4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$71,215

LEECH BAND OF OJIBWE 

115 6th Street, NW 

CASS LAKE 

MN 

CASS 

Other Social Services Organization 

09IDMN4004 

2009 OCSET 

1

03/25/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$223,202

LEECH BAND OF OJIBWE 

115 6th Street, NW 

CASS LAKE 

MN 

CASS 

Other Social Services Organization 

11ICMN4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

NEW 

$81,077

LEECH BAND OF OJIBWE 

115 6th Street, NW 

CASS LAKE 

MN 

CASS 

Other Social Services Organization 

11ICMN4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

06/10/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$62,328

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

10ICWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

NEW 

$265,452

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

10ICWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$221,210

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

10ICWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$221,210

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

10ICWA4004 

2010 OCSET 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$176,967

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

11ICWA4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

10/01/2010 

93563

NEW 

$256,619

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

11ICWA4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

01/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$213,849

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

11ICWA4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

04/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$213,849

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

2616 KWINA ROAD 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

WHATCOM 

Community Action Organization 

11ICWA4004 

2011 OCSET 

1

07/01/2011 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$171,080

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0804MA4004 

2008 OCSE 

1

12/17/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$917,199

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

0904MA4004 

2009 OCSE 

1

12/21/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$3,032,452

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

09/23/2009 

93563

NEW 

-$3,734,789

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

10/01/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,308,292

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

11/23/2009 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$781,695

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

01/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$12,023,485

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

03/05/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,261,339

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$9,746,540

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

04/29/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

-$6,413,634

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

MIDDLESEX 

Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

1004MA4004 

2010 OCSE 

1

07/01/2010 

93563

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

$13,883,799

This is 500 names (at least, the search results were sorted to show 500 names at a time) of approximately 1,308 names.  I’m not sure why several years displayed, i.e., why a 2009 date would show up.  However, the point is to get an idea of where & how much money is hitting is inbound, at least the state level. As this is PUBLIC money, anyone has a right to find out what is the local public payroll, how grants are being spent, who is allocating them to whom (Subgrants).  Some of this can be looked up on-line and some can be formed in a FOIA letter, which by law, has to be responded to in a certain time frame.  It may not be, but it is a legal right to request public information. AT ANY POINT — it’s appropriate to ask what are these grants being used for  They are Smaller, but they are in positions of influence, including some courts. ALSO notice the ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT / DISCRETIONARY BLOCK category seems the main category (sometimes being adjusted downward).  If I looked only at “NEW” grants for (YRS — “All”, i.e., database goes back to 1995).  Notice how active Center for Policy Research is — hardly surprising:  JEssica Pearson was a co-founder of AFCC (Per Liz Richards) and this Denve

Grantee Name

City

St

Award

Award Title

Budgt Yr

Action Issue Date

Award Activity Type

Award Action Type

Principal Investigator

Sum of Actions

AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

90FI0047 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 2 

1

12/20/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ALICIA LUCKIE 

$200,000

AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

90FI0077 

FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

1

08/30/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MARIAN LOFTIN 

$100,000

AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

90FI0077 

FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

2

08/24/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MARIAN LOFTIN 

$100,000

AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

90FI0077 

FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

2

12/29/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

VICKI C COOPER-ROBINSON 

$0

AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

90FI0077 

FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

3

08/20/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

VICKI C COOPER-ROBINSON 

$100,000

AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

MONTGOMERY 

AL 

90FI0077 

FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

3

01/11/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

VICKI C COOPER-ROBINSON 

$0

Allegheny County Court of Commons Pleas 

PITTSBURGH 

PA 

90FI0065 

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHANY COUNTY 

1

06/23/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

PATRICK QUINN 

$99,978

BALTIMORE COUNTY HEALTH DEPT, PUBLIC HEALTH NURSES SVCS 

TOWSON 

MD 

90FI0057 

OCSE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 5 

1

06/16/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

PETER J LALLY 

$150,815

CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

SACRAMENTO 

CA 

90FI0008 

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE IMAGING SYSTEM AND DATABASE FOR VOLUNTARY PATERNITY DECLARA 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

 

$180,000

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0059 

EXPANDING CUSTOMER SERVICES THROUGH AGENCY-INITIATED CONTACT 

1

06/16/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DR JESSICA PEARSON 

$99,926

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0073 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

08/31/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$100,000

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0073 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

2

08/25/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$24,730

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0073 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

2

09/03/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/24/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$198,664

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/24/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$124,820

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

02/22/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DR NANCY THOENNES 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

06/26/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DR NANCY THOENNES 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/04/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$124,829

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

06/30/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DR NANCY THOENNES 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

02/15/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PHEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

06/15/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PHEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

4

09/01/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DR NANCY THOENNES 

$124,863

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

4

03/31/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PHEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0085 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

4

06/20/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PHEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

1

06/26/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$99,908

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

2

07/24/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$50,000

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

2

10/23/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

2

09/18/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$0

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

3

08/02/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$50,000

CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0098 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

3

09/25/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JESSICA PEARSON 

$0

CHANGE HAPPENS 

HOUSTON 

TX 

90FI0076 

FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

1

08/30/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

$100,000

CHANGE HAPPENS 

HOUSTON 

TX 

90FI0076 

FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

1

09/21/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

-$1

CHANGE HAPPENS 

HOUSTON 

TX 

90FI0076 

FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

2

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

$100,000

CHANGE HAPPENS 

HOUSTON 

TX 

90FI0076 

FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

2

12/06/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

$0

CHANGE HAPPENS 

HOUSTON 

TX 

90FI0076 

FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

3

09/20/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

$100,000

CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

GRAND RAPIDS 

MI 

90FI0087 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CANDACE COWLING 

$199,323

CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

GRAND RAPIDS 

MI 

90FI0087 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/20/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

CANDACE COWLING 

$124,898

CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

GRAND RAPIDS 

MI 

90FI0087 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

03/17/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CANDACE COWLING 

$0

CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

GRAND RAPIDS 

MI 

90FI0087 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/12/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

CANDACE COWLING 

$124,674

CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

GRAND RAPIDS 

MI 

90FI0087 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

4

08/29/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

KARROL MCKAY 

$124,938

CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0044 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 4 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$100,000

COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

NESPELEM 

WA 

90FI0006 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MARLA BIG BOY 

$32,800

COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, INC 

ALLENTOWN 

PA 

90FI0048 

SPECIAL INPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 2 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

PATRICIA W LEVIN 

$177,374

COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, INC 

ALLENTOWN 

PA 

90FI0048 

SPECIAL INPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 2 

1

05/04/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

PATRICIA W LEVIN 

$99,227

Christian Community Council 

ALBANY 

LA 

90FI0084 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/25/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CHERYL BREAUX 

$100,000

Christian Community Council 

ALBANY 

LA 

90FI0084 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/24/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

CHERYL BREAUX 

$50,000

Christian Community Council 

ALBANY 

LA 

90FI0084 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

01/24/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CHERYL BREAUX 

$0

Christian Family Gathering 

MILWAUKEE 

WI 

90FI0038 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ADVOCACY INTERVENTION TRAINING – SIPS 

1

02/09/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MARIA J JENKINS 

$99,895

Circuit Court for Baltimore County 

BALTIMORE 

MD 

90FI0057 

OCSE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 5 

1

04/07/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

PETER J LALLY 

-$1,215

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

CLEVELAND 

OH 

90FI0093 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/29/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

FRANCINE B GOLDBERG 

$100,000

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

CLEVELAND 

OH 

90FI0093 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/13/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

FRANCINE B GOLDBERG 

$25,000

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

CLEVELAND 

OH 

90FI0093 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

10/22/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KENT K SMITH 

$0

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

CLEVELAND 

OH 

90FI0093 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

09/07/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

KENT K SMITH 

$25,000

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

06/09/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BEN LEVEK 

$99,800

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

07/24/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

BEN LEVEK 

$24,300

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

11/18/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

BEN LEVEK 

$0

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

06/06/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

BEN LEVEK 

$0

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/02/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

BEN LEVEK 

$24,300

DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

DENVER 

CO 

90FI0094 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

06/16/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

BEN LEVEK 

$0

ECUMENICAL CHILD CARE NETWORK 

CHICAGO 

IL 

90FI0026 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (SIPS) PRIORITY AREA -1 

1

06/20/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DEBRA HAMPTON 

$50,000

EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT 

LAS VEGAS 

NV 

90FI0030 

CHILD SUPPORT & DRUG COURT PROGRAM 

1

06/27/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

KENDIS STAKE 

$50,000

Episcopal Social Services, Inc. 

WICHITA 

KS 

90FI0079 

RELIABLE INCOME FOR KIDS COALITION (PRIORITY AREA 1) 

1

08/29/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MR GAYLORD DOLD 

$193,600

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & REHABILITATIVE SERVICES 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

90FI0022 

FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

NANCY LUJA 

$79,495

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

90FI0009 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

 

$25,864

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

90FI0022 

FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

1

03/28/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

NANCY LUJA 

-$29,753

FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

90FI0022 

FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

1

09/15/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

NANCY LUJA 

-$280

Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

SAN ANTONIO 

TX 

90FI0086 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

1

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

$200,000

Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

SAN ANTONIO 

TX 

90FI0086 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

2

08/24/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

$125,000

Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

SAN ANTONIO 

TX 

90FI0086 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

3

08/11/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

$125,000

Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

SAN ANTONIO 

TX 

90FI0086 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

4

08/09/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

$125,000

Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis 

SAINT LOUIS 

MO 

90FI0070 

HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP SKILLS FOR FRAGILE FAMILIES 

1

08/09/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

HALBERT SULLIVAN 

$100,000

Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis 

SAINT LOUIS 

MO 

90FI0070 

HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP SKILLS FOR FRAGILE FAMILIES 

2

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

HALBERT SULLIVAN 

$100,000

Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis 

SAINT LOUIS 

MO 

90FI0070 

HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP SKILLS FOR FRAGILE FAMILIES 

3

08/06/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

HALBERT SULLIVAN 

$100,000

Florida State University 

TALLAHASSEE 

FL 

90FI0107 

USING FLORIDA???S SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAMS TO INCREASE ECONOMIC SELF SUFFICIENCY FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES 

1

08/30/2010 

OTHER 

NEW 

KAREN OEHME 

$100,000

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

ATLANTA 

GA 

90FI0074 

GA STATE UNIV. RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

1

08/19/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DOUGLAS G GREENWELL 

$100,000

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

ATLANTA 

GA 

90FI0074 

GA STATE UNIV. RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

2

08/24/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DOUGLAS G GREENWELL 

$25,000

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

ATLANTA 

GA 

90FI0074 

GA STATE UNIV. RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

2

12/18/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DOUGLAS G GREENWELL 

$0

GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF PITTSBURGH 

PITTSBURGH 

PA 

90FI0080 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

09/01/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ERIC YENERALL 

$200,000

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0095 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

06/24/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MARIE THEISEN 

$100,000

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0045 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 4 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MELINDA ROMAN 

$99,090

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0066 

CONNECTING CHILD SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY TO SECURE IMPROVED OUTCOMES FOR CHILDR 

1

06/22/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

KAREN FROHWEIN 

$100,000

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0095 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

09/01/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JOE FINNEGAN 

$25,000

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0095 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

10/26/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JOE FINNEGAN 

$0

IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

DES MOINES 

IA 

90FI0095 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/30/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JOE FINNEGAN 

$25,000

IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

SPRINGFIELD 

IL 

90FI0007 

IMPROVEMENT GRANT 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MARTIN D SUTHERLAND 

$149,686

Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program 

EL CENTRO 

CA 

90FI0051 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 1 

1

12/20/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MARY N CAMACHO 

$141,858

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0088 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/29/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JUAN VEGAS 

$100,000

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0088 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/28/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

PHYLLIS NANCE 

$25,000

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0088 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

09/07/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

PHYLLIS NANCE 

$25,000

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0097 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

06/23/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

PHYLLIS NANCE 

$100,000

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0097 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/18/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

PHYLLIS NANCE 

$25,000

Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

BAKERSFIELD 

CA 

90FI0097 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/30/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

PHYLLIS NANCE 

$25,000

LA ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

90FI0015 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

GORDON HOOD 

$50,000

LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 

FORT COLLINS 

CO 

90FI0014 

CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MYRNA MAIER 

$170,244

LARIMER COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

FORT COLLINS 

CO 

90FI0014 

CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

2

08/04/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MYRNA MAIER 

$248,972

LARIMER COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

FORT COLLINS 

CO 

90FI0014 

CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

2

08/08/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

MYRNA MAIER 

$0

LARIMER COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

FORT COLLINS 

CO 

90FI0014 

CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

3

08/27/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MYRNA MAIER 

$249,781

LIVINGSTONE COLLEGE 

SALISBURY 

NC 

90FI0025 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES AND PAYMENT COMPLIANCE 

1

01/03/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

WALTER ELLIS 

$49,668

LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

BELLINGHAM 

WA 

90FI0019 

LIBC CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DAVID BUNTON 

$129,181

Louisiana Family Council 

METAIRIE 

LA 

90FI0060 

LOUISIANA FAMILY COUNCIL 

1

06/23/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

GAIL TATE 

$100,000

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

90FI0024 

INCOME WITHHOLDING & ASSET SEIZURE STRATEGIES 

1

09/14/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DIANA OBBARD 

$544,500

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

90FI0024 

INCOME WITHHOLDING & ASSET SEIZURE STRATEGIES 

1

07/21/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

DIANA OBBARD 

-$469,500

MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

CAMBRIDGE 

MA 

90FI0024 

INCOME WITHHOLDING & ASSET SEIZURE STRATEGIES 

1

09/15/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

DIANA OBBARD 

-$38,000

MARRIAGE COALITION (THE) 

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS 

OH 

90FI0054 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 2 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

SANDRA G BENDER 

$199,994

MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

BALTIMORE 

MD 

90FI0010 

PATERNITY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

GINA HIGGINBOTHAM 

$100,312

MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

BALTIMORE 

MD 

90FI0052 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 1 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOHN LANGROCK 

$200,000

MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

BALTIMORE 

MD 

90FI0052 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 1 

1

08/19/2003 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

JOHN LANGROCK 

-$200,000

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH 

LANSING 

MI 

90FI0075 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/18/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JANE ALEXANDER 

$99,792

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH 

LANSING 

MI 

90FI0075 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/24/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JANE ALEXANDER 

$24,805

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH 

LANSING 

MI 

90FI0075 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

09/21/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TANYA LOWERS 

$0

MICHIGAN STATE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT 

DETROIT 

MI 

90FI0032 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

06/28/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

NANCY CHRIST 

$187,550

MICHIGAN STATE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT 

DETROIT 

MI 

90FI0081 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

2

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JOSEPH SCHEWE 

$37,500

MICHIGAN STATE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT 

DETROIT 

MI 

90FI0081 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

2

11/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JOSEPH SCHEWE 

$0

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

EAST LANSING 

MI 

90FI0071 

CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

08/22/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

RICHARD BRANDT 

$98,364

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

EAST LANSING 

MI 

90FI0071 

CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

2

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

KAREN SHIRER 

$99,996

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

EAST LANSING 

MI 

90FI0071 

CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

2

05/31/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DAWN CONTRERAS 

$0

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

EAST LANSING 

MI 

90FI0071 

CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

3

08/20/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DAWN CONTRERAS 

$99,952

MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT 

LANSING 

MI 

90FI0064 

OCSE’S SPECIAL IMROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

06/21/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BILL J BARTELS 

$100,000

MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 

MILWAUKEE 

WI 

90FI0103 

IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

1

09/01/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JANET NELSON 

$100,000

MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 

MILWAUKEE 

WI 

90FI0103 

IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

2

09/28/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JANET NELSON 

$25,000

MN ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

ST PAUL 

MN 

90FI0041 

INTERVENTION STRATEGIES FOR WORKING WITH LOW INCOME NON CUSTODIAL PARENTS – SIP 

1

02/01/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$300,000

MONTANA SCHOOL DISTRICT 

HELENA 

MT 

90FI0049 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 3 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BARBARA DELANEY 

$149,464

MONTEREY COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

SALINAS 

CA 

90FI0078 

MOBILE CUSTOMER SUPPORT 

1

09/02/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JAMES HANSEN 

$200,000

MUSKEGON COUNTY COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES BOARD 

MESKEGON 

MI 

90FI0050 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 1 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BRAIN P MATTSON 

$199,772

Massachusetts Probate and Family Court 

BOSTON 

MA 

90FI0106 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

03/23/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

DENISE M FITZGERALD 

$0

Milwaukee County Dept. of Administration Fiscal Affairs 

MILWAUKEE 

WI 

90FI0103 

IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

1

11/17/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

JANET NELSON 

$0

NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION 

BOULDER 

CO 

90FI0055 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 5 

1

12/19/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

VINCENT L KNIGHT 

$199,887

NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS 

WILLIAMSBURG 

VA 

90FI0034 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

02/09/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

KAY FARLEY 

$40,000

NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0017 

NATIONAL CERTIFICATION FEASIBILITY STUDY 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOEL K BANKES 

$48,548

NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0039 

CHILD SUPPORT CASEWORKER CERTIFICATION PLANNING PROJECT 

1

02/20/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

 

$74,900

NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0039 

CHILD SUPPORT CASEWORKER CERTIFICATION PLANNING PROJECT 

1

11/06/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

THERESA MOASSER 

-$20,982

NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0039 

CHILD SUPPORT CASEWORKER CERTIFICATION PLANNING PROJECT 

1

09/21/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

THERESA MOASSER 

$0

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0012 

JUDICIAL TRANING PROJECT 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOY ASHTON 

$36,125

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0012 

JUDICIAL TRANING PROJECT 

1

03/20/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

JOY ASHTON 

-$9,605

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0082 

2005 SIP GRANT 

1

08/19/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOY D ASHTON 

$150,000

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0082 

2005 SIP GRANT 

2

08/29/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JOY D ASHTON 

$37,500

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0082 

2005 SIP GRANT 

2

10/01/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JOY LYNGAR 

$0

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

RENO 

NV 

90FI0082 

2005 SIP GRANT 

2

03/31/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

JOY LYNGAR 

-$1,203

NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0023 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOAN ENTMACHER 

$50,000

NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0029 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT & SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

06/06/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOAN ENTMACHER 

$50,000

NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0029 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT & SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

11/20/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

JOAN ENTMACHER 

-$50,000

NC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

RALEIGH 

NC 

90FI0099 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

06/26/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

KRISTIN RUTH 

$78,842

NC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

RALEIGH 

NC 

90FI0099 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

03/16/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KRISTIN RUTH 

-$78,842

NC ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 

RALEIGH 

NC 

90FI0046 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 4 

1

12/20/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BARRY MILLER 

$200,000

NJ ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC WELFARE 

TRENTON 

NJ 

90FI0028 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

06/12/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ALISHA GRIFFIN 

$50,000

NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

08/06/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$99,830

NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

08/12/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$24,325

NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

03/03/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$0

NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

08/09/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$24,997

NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

10/23/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$0

New York State Unified Court System 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

11/30/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$0

New York State Unified Court System 

NEW YORK 

NY 

90FI0092 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

12/21/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

MICHAEL MAGNANI 

$0

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

1

06/23/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$100,000

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

08/24/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$24,170

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

12/15/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$0

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

04/07/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$0

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

3

08/20/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$24,170

OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

OKLAHOMA CITY 

OK 

90FI0100 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

3

04/14/2011 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$0

OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER 

FREDONIA 

WI 

90FI0067 

PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY & PROMOTING HEALTHY MARRIAGE 

1

06/09/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BERNADETTE W KARANJA-NJAAGA 

$100,000

OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER 

FREDONIA 

WI 

90FI0067 

PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY & PROMOTING HEALTHY MARRIAGE 

1

03/08/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

BERNADETTE W KARANJA-NJAAGA 

-$100,000

OR ST DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

SALEM 

OR 

90FI0104 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

09/01/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

BECKY L HUMMER 

$88,371

PHILADELPHIA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 

PHILADELPHIA 

PA 

90FI0083 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

RYLANDA WILSON 

$100,000

PHILADELPHIA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 

PHILADELPHIA 

PA 

90FI0083 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

10/14/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

RYLANDA WILSON 

-$47,438

PHILADELPHIA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 

PHILADELPHIA 

PA 

90FI0083 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/27/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

RYLANDA WILSON 

$50,000

PUYALLUP INDIAN TRIBE 

TACOMA 

WA 

90FI0001 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

WILLIAM VELIZ 

$69,531

PUYALLUP INDIAN TRIBE 

TACOMA 

WA 

90FI0001 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

03/31/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

WILLIAM VELIZ 

$69,531

Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe 

KINGSTON 

WA 

90FI0018 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DALLAS I DEGUIRE 

$50,400

RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

PROVIDENCE 

RI 

90FI0002 

DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT LIEN REGISTRY FOR RHODE ISLAND AND REGION 1 

1

09/18/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

 

$149,820

RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

PROVIDENCE 

RI 

90FI0013 

CHILD SUPPORT LIEN NETWORK (CLSN) 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JACK MURPHY 

$149,380

RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

PROVIDENCE 

RI 

90FI0013 

CHILD SUPPORT LIEN NETWORK (CLSN) 

2

06/28/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JACK MURPHY 

$41,472

RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

PROVIDENCE 

RI 

90FI0013 

CHILD SUPPORT LIEN NETWORK (CLSN) 

3

09/19/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

JACK MURPHY 

$40,840

SAN FRANCISCO CITY & COUNTY MAYOR’S OFFICE 

SAN FRANCISCO 

CA 

90FI0063 

INCREASE PARENTAL PARTICIPATION IN ESTABLISHMENT OF SUPPORT AND PATERNITY JUDGEM 

1

06/21/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MILTON M HYAMS 

$200,000

SAN MATEO CTY DEPT OF HEALTH SCVS 

SAN MATEO 

CA 

90FI0011 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION & SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ILIANA M RODRIQUEZ 

$97,437

SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

SAN JOSE 

CA 

90FI0101 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

1

06/26/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

RALPH MILLER 

$100,000

SC ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

COLUMBIA 

SC 

90FI0043 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A 4 

1

12/20/2002 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

THOMAS L CHRISTMUS 

$414,574

SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE 

TOKELAND 

WA 

90FI0089 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/24/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DEB DUNITHAN 

$99,896

SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE 

TOKELAND 

WA 

90FI0089 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/28/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DEB DUNITHAN 

$49,934

SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE 

TOKELAND 

WA 

90FI0089 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/29/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DEB DUNITHAN 

$24,991

SISSETON-WAHPETON SIOUX TRIBAL COUNCIL 

AGENCY VILLAGE 

SD 

90FI0020 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

B. J JONES 

$50,000

SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

90FI0069 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

08/31/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CAROLYN A MYER 

$99,703

SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

90FI0069 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

2

09/05/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

CAROLYN A MYER 

$99,962

SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

90FI0069 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

2

08/27/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CAROLYN A MYER 

$0

SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

90FI0069 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

3

09/20/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

CAROLYN A MYER 

$98,962

SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

BATON ROUGE 

LA 

90FI0069 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

3

06/12/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CAROLYN A MYER 

$0

SOUTHWEST DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

CALDWELL 

ID 

90FI0004 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CHRIS P NELSON 

$59,176

SOUTHWEST DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

CALDWELL 

ID 

90FI0004 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

12/02/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

CHRIS P NELSON 

$13,711

SOUTHWEST DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

CALDWELL 

ID 

90FI0004 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/15/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

CHRIS P NELSON 

-$48,235

STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

HERNDON 

VA 

90FI0102 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

03/16/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

VIVIAN L LEES 

$78,843

STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

HERNDON 

VA 

90FI0102 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

07/24/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

VIVIAN L LEES 

$60,082

STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

HERNDON 

VA 

90FI0102 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

07/30/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DAVID P POPOVICH 

$22,816

STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

HERNDON 

VA 

90FI0102 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

10/15/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DAVID P POPOVICH 

$0

STRIVE DC, INC. 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0035 

ASSIST EX-OFFENDERS OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT, COMPLY WITH THEIR CHILD SUPP 

1

02/20/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

 

$75,000

Sagamore Institute, Inc. 

Indianapolis 

IN 

90FI0090 

DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

07/25/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MR ALAN W DOWD 

$83,498

Sagamore Institute, Inc. 

Indianapolis 

IN 

90FI0090 

DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

07/15/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DR DAVID G VANDERSTEL 

$24,995

Sagamore Institute, Inc. 

Indianapolis 

IN 

90FI0090 

DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

08/09/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MR JAY F HEIN 

$24,995

Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

SAN JOSE 

CA 

90FI0101 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

09/07/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

RALPH MILLER 

$25,000

Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

SAN JOSE 

CA 

90FI0101 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

2

01/12/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

RALPH MILLER 

$0

Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

SAN JOSE 

CA 

90FI0101 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

3

08/20/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

RALPH MILLER 

$25,000

State of Connecticut Judicial Branch 

HARTFORD 

CT 

90FI0068 

STATE OF CONNECTICUT JUDICIAL BRANCH 

1

06/23/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CHARISSE S HUTTON 

$100,000

Summit County Child Support Enforcement Agency 

AKRON 

OH 

90FI0109 

OCSE DEMONSTRATION 

1

08/30/2010 

OTHER 

NEW 

JENNIFER BHEAM 

$83,330

THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF MICHIGAN 

DETROIT 

MI 

90FI0081 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

1

08/10/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

JOSEPH SCHEWE 

$145,950

TN ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

NASHVILLE 

TN 

90FI0058 

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

1

06/22/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$100,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0003 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

SCOTT SMITH 

$123,870

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0003 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

01/18/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SCOTT SMITH 

$30,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0003 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

1

04/04/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

SCOTT SMITH 

-$18,242

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0033 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (SIPS) PRIORITY AREA – 1 

1

06/20/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

GARY CASWELL 

$196,600

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0033 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (SIPS) PRIORITY AREA – 1 

1

04/23/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

JAMES MOODY 

-$90,218

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0056 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – P.A. 7 

1

06/21/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

HARRY MONCK 

$100,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0072 

NEW PARENT OUTREACH PROJECT: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, PATERNITY, CHI 

1

09/01/2005 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$100,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0072 

NEW PARENT OUTREACH PROJECT: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, PATERNITY, CHI 

2

08/17/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

NOELITA L LUGO 

$25,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0072 

NEW PARENT OUTREACH PROJECT: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, PATERNITY, CHI 

2

12/06/2006 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

NOELITA L LUGO 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

08/06/2007 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ANITA STUCKEY 

$100,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

08/08/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$25,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

12/11/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

2

06/14/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

08/09/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$25,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 

TX 

90FI0091 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

3

08/10/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$0

The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

COLUMBIA 

SC 

90FI0105 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

1

08/30/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

MRS PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

$90,429

The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

COLUMBIA 

SC 

90FI0105 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

2

09/27/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

$50,000

The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

COLUMBIA 

SC 

90FI0105 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

2

11/01/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

$0

Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. 

TUSCALOOSA 

AL 

90FI0108 

CO-PARENTING WITH RESPONSIBILITY 

1

08/30/2010 

OTHER 

NEW 

TERESA COSTANZO 

$100,000

UNITED MIGRANT OPPORTUNITY SERVICES, INC 

MILWAUKEE 

WI 

90FI0037 

LATINO/HISPANIC COMMUNITY CHILD SUPPORT OUTREACH PROJECT – SIPS 

1

02/09/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CHERYL COBB 

$142,626

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

BOSTON 

MA 

90FI0106 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

08/30/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CHRISTINE YURGELUN 

$99,581

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

BOSTON 

MA 

90FI0106 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

08/31/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DENISE M FITZGERALD 

$48,995

UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

DURHAM 

NH 

90FI0016 

CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES AND PAYMENT COMPLIANCE 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DR. WALTER ELLIS 

$49,668

UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

DURHAM 

NH 

90FI0016 

CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES AND PAYMENT COMPLIANCE 

1

01/03/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

DR. WALTER ELLIS 

-$49,668

URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0061 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – P.A. 6 

1

06/21/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

LAUDAN ARON-TURNHAM 

$100,000

URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0096 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

1

06/23/2008 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

RENEE HENDLEY 

$68,355

URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0096 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

2

07/24/2009 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

SANDI CRAWFORD 

$48,881

URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0096 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

07/25/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

SANDI CRAWFORD 

$33,052

URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

WASHINGTON 

DC 

90FI0096 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

3

07/29/2010 

DEMONSTRATION 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SANDI CRAWFORD 

$0

VT ST AGENCY FOR HUMAN SERVICES 

WATERBURY 

VT 

90FI0062 

PROJECT WEB-MED SUPPORT 

1

06/10/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ROBERT B BUTTS 

$100,000

WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

OLYMPIA 

WA 

90FI0005 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

09/17/1998 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ART HAYASHI 

$17,171

WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

OLYMPIA 

WA 

90FI0040 

OUTREACH TO YAKIMA CTY LATINO &/OR HISPANIC COMM. TO EXPLORE THE BARRIERS TO EFF 

1

02/15/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

CONNIE AMBROSE-SQUEOCHS 

$150,000

WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

OLYMPIA 

WA 

90FI0040 

OUTREACH TO YAKIMA CTY LATINO &/OR HISPANIC COMM. TO EXPLORE THE BARRIERS TO EFF 

1

03/12/2004 

DEMONSTRATION 

OTHER REVISION 

CONNIE AMBROSE-SQUEOCHS 

-$2,013

WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

OLYMPIA 

WA 

90FI0042 

NEW APPROACHES TO ENGAGE NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT OFFENDERS JOB PROG AND PAYMENT OF 

1

02/08/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

FRAN FERRY 

$175,000

WV ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES 

CHARLESTON 

WV 

90FI0027 

SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

1

06/20/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

SUSAN HARRAH 

$25,597

WY ST DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

CHEYENNE 

WY 

90FI0021 

FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

1

09/07/1999 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

DAVE SCHAAD 

$140,000

WY ST DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES 

CHEYENNE 

WY 

90FI0021 

FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

2

08/28/2000 

DEMONSTRATION 

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

DAVE SCHAAD 

$140,000

Womens Education & Legal Fund (CWEALF) 

HARTFORD 

CT 

90FI0036 

LOCAL NETWORKS – LATINO COMMUNITY – SPECIAL INITIATIVES PROJECT 

1

02/02/2001 

DEMONSTRATION 

NEW 

ALICE PRITCHARD 

$183,313

r-based organization is often working the Child Support Field.  The for-profit arm is Policy Studies, Inc. — CPR is the smaller, leaner, nonprofit…This table has 224 rows; I will also upload it here, for easier viewing: ///

My response to Wayne County, MI issues: Behind many issues is often an AFCC judge…. (and what “AFCC” entails)

with 4 comments

 

Review Time – who/what is the “AFCC”?:

“AFCC JUDGE” — Briefly, by this, it means all that AFCC believes, entails and habitually DOES.

  • What is AFCC?

AFCC is the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts – an interdisciplinary and international association of professionals dedicated to the resolution of family conflict.

This is not necessarily what the US Court systems are in place for, nor civil codes of procedure, nor the bill of rights, nor the criminal law.  AFCC views “conflict” as bad — seemingly worse than criminal behaviors by individuals in families towards others in the families.   I can’t think of any field of human endeavor or growth that doesn’t have some built-in conflict, which can be resolved either by reference to an agreed-upon-standard, or by separation.  However, in AFCC language, whoever has conflict (including with these dedicated professionals) is the bad guy, and court-ordered punishment can be meted out.

In this system, parents are required / forced to work it out being treated and viewed as a “family” whether or not they are one any more.  Even if one has threatened to kill the other, to kidnap the kids, has caused serious injury to the other partner and/or their children, or has interfered with court-ordered visitation, the problem is viewed of conflict PER SE as being wrong, rather than there being an identifiable position of truth (and from it, some justice) on various matters.

Naturally it also sees its membership as an association of dedicated professionals who are going to resolve family problems.

  • Who are AFCC members? – WHICH dedicated professionals, in what fields?

AFCC Members are:

Judges Lawyers
Mediators Psychologists
Researchers Academics
Counselors Court Commissioners
Custody Evaluators Parenting Coordinators
Court Administrators Social Workers
Parent Educators Financial Planners

It seems to me this list of professions keeps expanding, which is another thing AFCC as an association does.  We note that while there are some people as direct public employees/ servants who work in the justice system (judges, mediators, court administrators, court commissioners, and some categories of attorneys — i.e., child support attorneys, county-paid GALs, etc.) — some are not.  The category “researchers” & “Academics” is definitely broad.  Although many of these people certainly have been through divorce or custody issues, or are themselves parents please notice that “parents” is not a category.

In this worldview, then, the “PARENT” (regardless of what profession(s) any parent is in, including sometimes even some of the above categories) is the plebian, the novice, the uninstructed, the person that the professionals must handle.  One thing many parents are definitely “uninstructed” in is that this organization exists and runs conferences to strategize how to handle THEM and their flawed selves.

AFCC personnel, when judges, are often highly placed (including state supreme courts) and activist.  A look at the membership in this 2007 conference brochure shows an opening PLENARY session hearing;

The Presumption for Equal Shared Parenting: Pros and Cons There seems to be increasing support throughout the United States for a rebuttable presumption for equal shared parenting. Proponents say that such a presumption brings the best interest standard into comportment with parents’ protected and privileged status under the Constitution and will apply only to those situa- tions in which 1) parents cannot reach agreement; 2) both parents can present realistic parenting plans for the responsibility they seek; and 3) neither parent can present convincing evidence that the other parent is unfit. They say that this presumption will change litigants’ and practitioners’ expectation that gains are produced by proceeding to adversarial judicial hearings, will decrease post divorce conflict, and will uphold each parent’s fundamental liberty interest in the care and custody of his/her children. Opponents, while often sympathetic to shared parenting, argue that the presumption would seriously impede the Court’s ability to tailor custody determinations to the needs of each particular child.** Presenters: Michael McCormick; Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D.; Honorable Robert Schnider

 

[The 2003 link points to an article from a Journal of CFCC (Center for Families & Children in the Courts, put out by Ca. Judicial Council:    

Effective Intervention With High-Conflict Families / How Judges Can Promote and Recognize Competent Treatment in Family Court “The emotional and psychological risks to children resulting from conflicted custody disputes and the varied needs of separated families have led to the increased involvement of mental health professionals in child custody cases. …But though treatment services can be expensive, high-quality treatment may be a more cost-effective intervention than continued litigation. …   Courts can also maximize resources by appointing a forensically sophisticated therapist to fill a child- centered role (e.g., to provide the child’s treatment or child-centered conjoint or family therapy) and by allowing the therapist to confer with other therapists about the case. “

Sorry, but actually AFCC was founded to bring on the mental health professionals.  It’s typical to talk in passive terms of needs that arose and demanded their services, however, this is a very aggressive organization that lobbies for constant expansion of the involvement of its professionals, as does this particular article.  Some of the topics of conflict include economic depletion by constant involvement of custody evaluators and therapists to start with …

The Hon. Robert Schnider apparently one of the originals in Los Angeles area, born into a family law practitioner family — or at least working in his father’s practice.  Purely for entertainment purposes, here’s a 2004 article in which this judge was going to possibly unseal (unsavory) parts of a divorce record affecting an Illinois Republican Senatorial race — Jack Ryan against . . ..  Barack Obama.   The author questions why any judge would be allowed to do this for high-celebrity cases, and notes that “To Unseal or Not to Unseal” (My terms) would either affect a political race, and might be called “child endangerment.”  Jack Ryan was being compared to Bill Clinton as to his sexual habits at the time….]

((**including totally eliminating contact with the mother, in “interventions” when she has alienated the children — which would mean sole legal & physical custody to the father, i.e., “Tailored custody determinations” The fact that no opponents UNsympathetic to shared parenting (presumptions) are mentioned tells us how unlikely that either feminists or people advocating for domestic violence victims’ viewpoints were considered).

Many of the conflicts within marriages and sometimes causes of separation actually can come from violence by one partner towards another; it can be a dealbreaker in any relationship (and can and does sometimes turn lethal).  AFCC positions itself at the crossroads and in this little paragraph above, has borrowed? the phrase “rebuttable presumption for equal shared parenting” from the rebuttable presumption AGAINST custody going to a batter” legislative language in many states.

 

“Rebuttable Presumption” talk:

For example, a quick search comes up with Delaware Code.  Even this Delaware Code, as strong as it is, has several loopholes to allow joint or sole custody of a child to go to a perpetrator of domestic violence — but even so, AFCC and others wish to change this to presumption for equal shared parenting (see above):

DEL CODE § 705A : Delaware Code – Section 705A: REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION AGAINST CUSTODY OR RESIDENCE OF MINOR CHILD TO PERPETRATOR OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Search DEL CODE § 705A : Delaware Code – Section 705A: REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION AGAINST CUSTODY OR RESIDENCE OF MINOR CHILD TO PERPETRATOR OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

(a) Notwithstanding other provisions of this title, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that no perpetrator of domestic violence shall be awarded sole or joint custody of any child.

(b) Notwithstanding other provisions of this title, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that no child shall primarily reside with a perpetrator of domestic violence.

(c) The above presumptions shall be overcome if there have been no further acts of domestic violence and the perpetrator of domestic violence has: (1) successfully completed a program of evaluation and counselling designed specifically for perpetrators of family violence {{aka “Batterers Intervention Program” — a thing marketed by the Duluthmodel.org philosophy}} and conducted by a public or private agency or a certified mental health professional; and (2) successfully completed a program of alcohol or drug abuse counselling if the Court determines that such counselling is appropriate; and (3) demonstrated that giving custodial or residential responsibilities to the perpetrator of domestic violence is in the best interests of the child. The presumption may otherwise be overcome only if a judicial officer finds extraordinary circumstances that warrant the rejection of the presumption, such as evidence demonstrating that there exists no significant risk of future violence against any adult or minor child living in the home or any other family member, including any ex-spouse.

(i.e., RISK ASSESSMENT PROPHETIC UTTERANCES.  How can anyone demonstrate no significant risk fo future violence when people have walked out of batterers intervention programs, with flying colors, and gone on to murder the same person that got them in there?)

Along with “best interests” is of course if the other parent might “alienate” the child, allegedly.

An AFCC judge is going to oppose anything “high-conflict” and be favorably inclined towards shared parenting.  Note presenter Mike McCormick, whose bio is:

Michael McCormick. Mr. McCormick is Executive Director of the American Coalition of Fathers and Children and has written exten- sively and spoken throughout the United States on family law reform.

No presentations by NOW members or feminists in this association, that I’ve seen.  Mr. McCormick is MORE than active in fatherhood issues, and complained that even Obama’s and Evan Bayh (Indiana) fatherhood and healthy marriage promotion just didn’t go far enough.  It was too little carrot and too big a stick.  He hangs out with Glenn Sacks and friends.  I note that the acronym “ACFC” (below) is “AFCC” re-arranged.  Coincidence?

 I (Glenn Sacks) co-authored the column, which appears below, with Mike McCormick, Executive Director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.Obama’s Responsible Fatherhood Bill–Not Enough Carrot, Too Much Stick
By Mike McCormick and Glenn Sacks
Wisconsin State JournalBuffalo News, 6/30/07

U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Evan Bayh (D-IN) recently introduced the Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Families Act of 2007, which they say will address our “national epidemic of absentee fathers.” Obama and Bayh are correct that fatherless children are dramatically more likely to commit crimes, drop out of school, use drugs, or get pregnant than children who have fathers in their homes. The Responsible Fatherhood Act is explicitly a carrot and stick approach. The problem is that the carrot is too small and the stick is already too big.

Readers Every Year
Are you looking for an affordable way to reach over 6 million readers a year with your business or organization? My blog and my websites GlennSacks.com andHisSide.com receive over 10,000 unique visits a day. My weekly E-Newsletter has over 50,000 subscribers, and is by far the world’s largest regularly distributed E-newsletter devoted to family law reform, fatherhood and fathers’ issues. Contactus for more information.
(Note he’s not complaining about fathers being treated like animals & mules, which is where the “carrot & stick” reference comes from.  He wants the bribe, the incentive, and less regulation.  Personally, being a mother, I’d be offended — and have been — when anyone came to me implying or saying that I needed federal intervention to attempt to maintain work to support my kids.  This article was written 5 months after his presentation at AFCC, same year, or published then.

So one factor to remember about AFCC — they have no problem with conference presentations run by activities fathers’ rights leaders.  They are definitely a father-friendly organization, at least certain kinds of fathers.   They are also typically influential within the courts they preside over, when judges:

Another factor is that they are quite interested if not obsessed with redefining (and narrowing the definition) of domestic violence; they are going to discredit domestic violence as having primarily male perpetrators upon females, even though homicide data consistently shows this is who kills the most.  This is consistent with Mr. McCormick (above)’s membership on a group called ‘RADAR’ who pushes this theory.  Read on, same conference:

PLENARY

Rethinking Domestic Violence

This presentation will review research studies on the relationship between domestic violence and custody assessments. The domestic violence paradigm presented in many studies consistently suggests one model of domestic violence, that of male perpetrator and female victim; the argument is then made that this male-abuser model will extend to child abuse.

In other words, let’s consider a different paradigm, the “theory” (“argument”) that male abusers often extend to child abuse is just theory ……just an argument…

The data on gender differences in both intimate personal violence and threats to children indicate, however, that the male-perpetrator model is only one of several models of domestic violence, and that risk to children occurs equally from mothers and fathers. The ethics of presenting a gender biased perspective for custody assessors are discussed.

Presenter: Donald G. Dutton, Ph.D.

I have posted on the Dueling Duttons (just for fun — there is a Donald Dutton, of this premise, and a Mary Ann Dutton also Ph.D., who deals more with the resultant trauma from abuse).

FINALLY as to “AFCC JUDGES” , AFCC is a very activist organization seeking to reform family law and lobbying for changes in laws, practices etc.  They also have foundation sponsorship for conferences on “Domestic Violence and the Courts” as below:

Task Forces and Initiatives

Child Custody Consultant Task Force

Child Custody Evaluation Standards Task Force

Family Law Education Reform Project

Parenting Coordination Standards Task Force

Domestic Violence and Family Courts Project

Child Welfare Collaborative Decision Making Network

Brief Focused Assessment Task Force

Court-Involved Therapist Task Force

And, of course, I believe I have made the case that many AFCC members are actively promoting their own products, curricula, and nonprofits are not at all above utilizing their positions as judges to direct traffic (through court-ORDERED participation into the programs, for example, see posts on Kids’ Turn. Questionable financial practice appears to be part of the territory..  See Johnnypumphandle on some of the Nonprofit Organizations:

Many non-governmental organizations exist to reap profit from the Family Law system. Most are identified as Non-Profit and are exempt from taxation. You may have contacted some of these organizations for help, only to discover that help is not available – particularly if you are seeking justice.

Many organizations have been established by professionals in the Family Law system for conspiracy and protection of these professionals. Thus we have many Bar Associations, whose members are lawyers and judges; Psychological Associations for classifying family members syndromes, so that none will be overlooked; and other associations established merely to act as a conduit for family member’s money collected in the process.

The Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association is a good example of one of the latter Non-Profit organizations whose stated purpose is “promotion of judicial profession pursuant to section 501(c)(6)”. (see form 3500 – Exemption application). The Association boasts a budget of over $100,000 – none of which will be received from members dues – and most of which will be funded by “Professional Education programs for the legal community“. Unlike most professional organizations, this organization was granted(?) the use of County premises, complete with facilities for it’s office space and management of it’s business within the County Court facilities at 111 North Hill Street.

He is talking about private and/or nonprofit associations with judges as members using public buildings and premises to run their own businesses.

It appears that this “Los Angeles Superior Court judges Association” is quite likely the predecessor of the AFCC. See this:

Update 4/11/99Published in Washington, D.C.. . . . Vol. 15, No. 16 — May 3, 1999 . . . .
http://www.insightmag.com

Insight Magazine

Is Justice for Sale in L.A.?

By Kelly Patricia O’Meara

An alleged slush fund for the L.A. Superior Court Judges Association {“LASCJA”} is at the heart of a scandal involving possible income-tax evasion and gifts that may affect judges’ rulings.

Dozens of checks, obtained by Insight, deposited in the LASCJA account were made out to several other institutions, including the Judges Miscellaneous Expense Fund, the Judges Trust Fund, the Family Court Services Special Fund and the Family Court Services.These organizations are not registered with the IRS or the California State Franchise Tax Board, and if the Bank of America has accounts for any of them, the checks were not deposited in those accounts.

So, what was up with that?
. . . . Not only were attorneys who argue cases before the family court making payments to the judges’ fund, but so were the court monitors — appointed by the judges and paid a professional fee of as much as $240 a day as observers during child visitations.
 Bringing in the topic of supervised visitation, and what’s up with tracking usage of those funds.
These monitors qualify for their jobs by paying to take a training and certification course from the judges, with the check going to the fund, whereupon they are placed on the exclusive list the judges use when assigning monitors.
Sounds like kickbacks to me.  That’s definite conflict of interest.  The supervised visitation monitors paying the judges’ account  and those judges funneling them business from the courtroom, from the bench….

“. . . . The Los Angeles County Bar Association’s contributions to the fund were payments to the judges run through a joint partnership with the court on MCLE classes. They split the proceeds from legal and professional seminars. . . . . So, in addition to the ethical issues involved in how the bank account has been maintained, its funding also raises numerous legal issues, according to attorney Richard I. Fine, a taxpayers’ advocate. “If a private group [the LASCJA] is using a public building and everything associated with that private group is being paid for with taxpayers’ dollars, then it is clearly fraudulent,” Fine contends. He adds that “unless the public entity has passed an ordinance specifically allowing the private group to exist and specifically stating that the public will bear the costs — separate phones, leasing office space, furniture, computers, etc. — then it should be paid for by the private organization.”. . . . According to Fine, “If the judges have provided false information on official financial statements submitted to government agencies or financial institutions [the Bank of America account], then they have defrauded the Internal Revenue Service and the county and the people of Los Angeles by receiving tax-free status under fraudulent means. … This would be the same as if a person lied on their tax return. It is incredulous to me that something like this could have happened and the IRS, state attorney general, county district attorney and auditor have not acted over all these years.”

Unless they, too, were in on it somehow.

OK, now I think we’re ready to consider why, when a judge that Wayne County, MI child support workers want OUT goes to privatize child support contracting — although I realize this issue is larger, and different (child support collections is multi-million$$ business within most states) the behavior of doing this is common to AFCC personnel from the outset.  “BEWARE AFCC” “Court Cancer Metastasizes” summarizes it in this timeline (to review):

History of the AFCC – Association of Family and Conciliation Courts

COURT CANCER METASTASIZES Metamorphosis of the Conference of Conciliation Courts into the Association of Family Conciliation Courts (“AFCC”)

A Guide to Destroying Children BY MARV BRYER

1939 Judges, lawyers and mental health professionals got State law passed (SB 737).

The 53rd Session of Legislature. The court became a lobby group. Each and every county {the public} would pay for marital counseling to help unclog the court system from divorce cases. The Family Law code • Section 1740 et seq formed The Children’s Courts of Conciliation, which was later repealed. • Section 1760 Article III Whenever any controversy exists, disruption of household with a minor child, the Court of Conciliation takes jurisdiction: to create a reconciliation. Evidence: Senate Bill and Family Law Code Lukewarm reception

1955 A Los Angeles judge formed the first Conciliation Court as per this law in Los Angeles.

1958 The Los Angeles County courthouse at 111 Hill Street was dedicated.

1962

The Conference of Conciliation Courts (CCC) established a bank account at Security First National Bank (which later became Security Pacific Bank)

Evidence: CCC 1968 Financial Statement. A balance from 5th Annual Conference is described. This indicates the account probably began 6 years before in 1962.

1963

Conference of Conciliation Courts, a private organization, was formed. The address of record was 111 N Hill Street, Room 241, which is the LA County public courthouse. 

No incorporation documents on file, and no registration with Secretary of State, Franchise Tax Board or IRS. Evidence: Statement from IRS that there is no such entity and corporation papers in 1969. The founders of CCC were Los Angeles judge Roger Pfaff and Meyer Elkin.

(Meyer Elkin awards and memorabilia are all over AFCC entitities and spinoff organizations).

(NOTE:  Visit “AFCCnet.org” History page and you’ll see it claims to have begun in 1963.)

I continue to be amazed how little reported this powerful lobbying group is even spoken about. It’s like talking about the air — taken for granted, you inhale and exhale it, with little consciousness of the content.

OK, NOW — My RESPONSE TO THE MICHIGAN POST:


My last post:   Privatizing Child Support (and the courts) in Michigan; County Workers picket.  Judge was AFCC

Showed county workers picketing against the privatization and outsourcing of Child Support Enforcement, particularly as the companies bidding on the contract already had a history of fraud and other legal issues.  Particularly as it would reduce workers’ salaries to $8 to $9 per hour, and more.  People in Wayne County MI picketed to remove the judge (Marybeth Kelly) that did this.

This response shows how simple it can be to look up some basic data on a court situation.   I’m simply pasting what amounts to a fast-track search of some information on the judge in question.  I did not handle the issue of grants systems possibly going to county workers to bring marriage, fatherhood, or other program funding to them rather than the custodial parents, which may have been involved in part.  This is an “off-the-cuff” response, minor phrasing perhaps re-arranged for this different format.

I wrote:

I’m not a Michigan native, and came to this posting because I am investigating some of the privateering in the child support industry, particularly Maximus, but in the course of this, Lockheed-Martin and Tier Technologies do come up.

RE:

 As Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Clifford Taylor noted in a statement thanking Kelly for her service, “What about the children whom the Wayne County Friend of the Court is supposed to serve? What about the families for whom a timely child support check makes the difference between survival and not being able to buy groceries?” ***
Excellent questions. 
{{** this reply doesn’t address what the picketing and rally did– that at least one of the firms bidding for the contract had a known history of corruption, including fraud and conflicts of interest. }}
Actually nice appeal, but wrong questions.  The child support system probably needs to be shut down at this point, because it is so corrupt whether done through public agencies OR farmed out.  I have been blogging at http://familycourtmatters/wordpress.com, and if you search OCSE (or read 06/29/11 posts), it’s clear that Federal Funding (HHS — and OCSE is under it) has been co-opted by special interest groups, and is a $4 billion-a-year industry.  
In California, where I live, a respected attorney (Richard Fine, Esq. at the time) with a record of confronting fraud and taxpayer waste, took on “Silva v. Garcetti” where the L.A. District Attorney was sitting on $14 million undistributed, collected child support.   In return for exposing this, and other financial corruption, Mr. Fine was tossed into coercive solitary confinement (age, 69) and of course disbarred, and his settlement monies compromised, his family had to foreclose on the home, etc.   
Whether it’s done through the Friend of the Court, Administrative Office of the Courts, or otherwise, these grants carry incentives to the states, which impacts custody outcomes, and also provides a wide range of action for various money-laundering and other corrupt practices.  
Tier Technologies is (I think) run out of a Northern California area where the local child support agency  literally advertises and recruits commuters  (targeting at the noncustodial parent) to open a child support case.  Title IV-D child support cases are handled differently than others, and the entire system is I believe more of a public burden than a public waste.  It has undermined the family law process entirely, and introduced outside agents into play, which only ONE party is informed of.   
PRIMETIME AFCC BEHAVIOR IS TO PRIVATIZE AND DIRECT BUSINESS TO CRONIES:
I note that Judge Kelly (Whether she be good, or not so good, I hold no opinion — don’t know her.  I know systems) — reduced the budget by $30 million and added family law judges.  Just check which of these judges are AFCC members.  If so, this is going to expand, not contract, services needed ,and introduce more players into individual court cases.
Maximus sounds horrific, and I REALLY thing anyone else who lands on this page should check out my blog in it.  I am a DV survivor and custody wars survivor.  I am sure there are hardworking, honest, decent office and administrative people throughout the child support system — but when it injected promoting marriage and fatherhood into divorce court, or social science demonstration projects, etc. — it has created a system parallel to the IRS (and working alongside it), and it’s polarizing our society.  I KNOW that without the influence of this group, my court case could’ve closed much sooner, and I could’ve as a single mother handled life without child support and allowing the father regular contact.
Because of these incentives our case, and many other moms cases (I now advocate and report) went south; the children were switched to the non-caretaking parent, many times an identified abuser or molester — and thereafter there is no “Shared parent” or anything close to it.  Child Support gets immediately eliminated if the switch was after a considerable arrears ran up (in my case it was about $10K).  Everyone BUT the children literally gets a piece of the action, and some of the grant moneys.  Double-billing exists.  Like the national debt, one cannot forever support a nationwide infrastructure this large — who will be left to pay the IRS to pay them?  Or are the poor just going to be starved out, or left to kill each other over money from the pressure. 
My judges are on this courthouse forum too, but I’m not commenting on them.  I comment for example, HERE:  
https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/lets-talk-child-support-hhs-series-90fd-grants-to-states-research-and-demonstrate/
Plenty of links and data on the blogroll to others who follow this.
Judge Marybeth Kelly I see (at least 2002) was on the child support leadership council appointed by a governor, and is AFCC — meaning, she has an agenda.  Mothers (=/= 2nd wives stepmothers) should be alert to this.   There are fathers’ activities on that council too it seems.    
Even a brief look, 2010 article about her run for Supreme Court, shows AFCC tendencies (read article, pls):
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/10/judge_mary_beth_kelly_family_l.html

Judge Mary Beth Kelly: Family law bench stint aids high court bid

Published: Sunday, October 03, 2010, 3:13 AM 
As she is Republican & Right-To-Life, she is probably not too sympathetic to women leaving violence, few religious groups are.  While she’s boasting about dealing with runaways, including from kids in foster care, a lot of those children I bet were inappropriately placed there (bet MI gets incentives like others states, see Georgia, Nancy Schaefer).  Notice:

She came under fire for acting too independently and trying to privatize the Friend of the Court.

That privatization effort was among the issues that prompted a labor-led coalition in 2007 to call for her resignation. Lawyers representing children under the supervision of the county’s juvenile court sued her the same year.

The lawsuit alleged Kelly violated the children’s right to counsel and effective representation when she removed hundreds of individual attorneys and replaced them with hand-picked “attorney groups.” **The lawsuit argued she created a “fixed-fee” system that resulted in far fewer attorneys for a growing number of children.

(**hand-picked, aka sounds like cronies to me. Association of Family & Conciliation Courts (AFCC) is a PRIVATE trade association of judges, mediators, evaluators and the type of personnel who mean courthouseforum sites have plenty of horror stories to post.  They get positioned in high places, including state supreme courts, or Friends of the Court associations, and then influence policy, try to and do get laws passed to direct more business to themselves, meaning it’s harder for people to conclude their own court cases.     PRIVATIZING — the complaint is that the courts are jammed, overwhelmed, but the logic behind that fails to say why.  Privatizing removes protections including oaths that Judges are under as to not having conflict of interest, and their required statements to disclosure that have to be filed. )

The suit was filed in April 2007, and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case three months later.  (Who is on the Supreme Court?)

Julie Hurwitz, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said changing the system was politically motivated and leaves her concerned if Kelly is elected to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t think that political ambition has any place on the bench,” she says. “One has to look at the history.”

Kelly says she wanted to reduce deficits and improve services and wasn’t motivated by politics. And even as a conservative endorsed by Right to Life, she says she aims to keep partisanship off the bench.

{{ANYTHING BELOW HERE NOT IN “{{…..}}’s” is quoted material:}}
Article from Aug 2010, from RIGHTMICHIGAN (note: this isn’t a left/right political issue when it comes to this venue):

Judge Mary Beth Kelly a Rule of Law Judge? Obviously not.

By Maryland Farmer, Section News
Posted on Sun Aug 22, 2010 at 09:28:35 PM EST
Tags: Judge Mary Beth KellySupreme Court (all tags)

~ Brought out front, as it is good debate. ~

I believe that the rule of law requires judges to be impartial and not decide cases based on their own personal, social or political views. Judges must take the law as it is written: we should neither add to it nor subtract from it, and apply it equally to everyone alike.

When the State of Michigan seeks to terminate parental rights, it is more than a mere temporary disruption of relationships: it is the forced, irretrievable, destruction of family life. It is an awesome power. “When the State moves to destroy weakened familial bonds, it must provide the parents with fundamentally fair procedures.” The Constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection apply with full force to parental termination cases. See Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 758-759, 102 S. Ct. 1388, 1397, 71 L. Ed. 2d 599 (1982)

The Role of A Judge in A Parental Termination Hearing

A parental termination case is essentially no different from any other kind of case. Both the parent and the State are entitled to a “rule of law” judge who faithfully applies the Constitution and the plain language of the statute, one who is unbiased, impartial, fair minded, and principled. The judge must give each party a fair opportunity to present his evidence. The judge should consider the evidence with an open mind. The judge must render a decision that is just, according to the evidence viewed against the plain language of the law.

In the Matter of Felicia Alicia Clemons, Minor – a Chilling Story of Abuse of Judicial Power

When Tamara Alicia Clemons appeared before Juvenile Court Judge Mary Beth Kelly in August of 2007, Judge Kelly was no rookie; she had been on the bench for eight years.

The Court of Appeals opinion details a chilling abuse of power, an abuse that conservative Supreme Court Justice Maura Corrigan later labeled, “disturbing.” See In re Hudson, 483 Mich. 928, 938, 763 N.W.2d 618, 627 (2009) (Corrigan, concurring)

A Petitioner had requested that the Court terminate Tamara Clemons’s parental rights to her daughter, Felicia. The Petitioner, that is, the person who filed the complaint against Ms Clemons, did not appear for the hearing. Neither did an attorney for the State of Michigan. Although Tamara appeared, she did so without a lawyer to represent her. Astonishingly, Judge Kelly did not dismiss, or even adjourn the case. Instead, she decided to abandon her role as an unbiased judge and take on the role of accuser.

Judge Kelly called witnesses to the stand. Instead of being fair minded, her questions displayed, according to the Court of Appeals, “an accusatory or prosecutorial bent.” Judge Kelly only elicited information that could be used to support termination. She assiduously avoided obtaining information that might help Tamara’s case.

After compiling the one-sided evidence, Judge Kelly refused to allow Tamara to introduce any evidence of her own. Judge Kelly used her power as a judge to deny Tamara the right to even defend herself!

At the conclusion of this inquisition, Judge Kelly wrongfully terminated Tamara’s parental rights to her daughter.

The Court of Appeals naturally reversed the decision. But the Court went one step further: the Court of Appeals, appalled by Judge Kelly’s lawless conduct, actually removed her from the case:

Given the egregious violations of respondent’s constitutional rights that occurred in this case, this case shall be assigned to a different judge on remand to preserve the appearance of justice.

This action by the Court of Appeals, removing a trial judge from a case, is extraordinary. It is reserved for conspicuously bad conduct on the bench.

These are not the actions of a Rule of Law judge. 
Here is the case:http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/freecaselaw?action=OCLGetCaseDetail&format=FULL&sourceID=bcehb&searchTerm=eUiQ.GeLa.UYGU.IbTY&searchFlag=y&l1loc=FCLOW

2008 Mich. App. LEXIS 1652,*

In the Matter of FELICIA ALICIA CLEMONS, Minor. CATHOLIC SOCIAL SERVICES OF OAKLAND COUNTY, Petitioner-Appellee, and LATRECHA ADELL FOX, Guardian, Appellee, v TAMARA ALICIA CLEMONS, Respondent-Appellant.

No. 281004

COURT OF APPEALS OF MICHIGAN

2008 Mich. App. LEXIS 1652

August 19, 2008, Decided

– – – – – 

[ENDQUOTE / start LGH comments]:

Again, the thing is the systems; get a grasp of that, and how individual judges act will be clearer.  California, alas, is responsible for spawning that AFCC organization decades ago, and a lot of the trauma now going, plus excessive removal of kids from one parent or both parent is going to include 2nd and 3rd generations of people affected by policies run through the child support & welfare system, and pushed by AFCC judges in their conferences.  This is privatizing not just the Friends of the Court, but in effect, the entire family court system (and associated ones), court proceedings are seen as problem-solving rather than being subject to justice, and new generations of law students are being coached and trained into this line of thinking, but highly placed AFCC judges, as in UBaltimore School of Law’s “Center for Children & Families in the Court.” (“CFCC”).   Just check out their conference agenda and materials, under-reported situation.

I’d have to side with the county workers in the Wayne County issue because, their being public employees, I can do FOIAs and get payroll information, have a shot at any money trail in individual cases (if I were living in Michigan).  Besides, no low-paid FT employee should lack benefits – if they didn’t have benefits, what’s the motivation for FT employment?  It’d be better to work somewhere else…..

No charge for this PSA.  If you read it, please pass it on, I doubt this is a high-traffic post!

I attach 2008? Annual report (from IN) of a private nonprofit group entrenched in the court system:  Fathers & Families.  Scrutinize who is on corporate donors (Indiana Dept. of Child Support services).  Look at how many court officials and public employees are on the board of this group — which is focused on ONE out of TWO sides of the parents in most custody issues.  Conflicts of interest, much?

Other states (Ohio, PA) have noted copying practices from Indiana.  I even found Ontario, Canada, copying some US practices — the link was AFCC membership (international).

The courthouse forum where I found this had a “reply” button, but my reply has not shown up yet (that I can see), so here it is:

Privatizing Child Support (and the courts) in Michigan; County Workers picket. Judge was AFCC

leave a comment »

I looking up Maximus, and what comes up alongside it, Lockheed-Martin, no matter which way you push it, one finds fraud and complaints about fraud.  I am starting to wonder about how much practices like this contributed to the economic troubles in Wisconsin which caused legislators to exit the state rather than vote to compromise the union’s rights to bargain, that ushered in 2011.

When fraud is entrenched, routine and too much has been invested int he agency committing the fraud to eliminate it from further government contracts, than our government is too big for its britches, which we paid for.    Government Of, By, For, WHICH people?

This article, though 2007, seems to typify the problems with privatizing child support.  Of course there are other problems with keeping it in place, and having the access/visitation “Designer Family” incentives, too — and with the capricious nature of enforcement,  and the vested interests in keeping the states staffed by child support agencies and workers as an antidote to poverty, which I am starting to think, it just ain’t.  I think anymore it’s a contributor.  Parents who can separate and were decent to start with, the one will be willing to support HIS children without going to court to force some sort of child support order.  They will write it up.

Those who can’t are subject to fleecing whether or not through Title IV-D programs.

I did submit a full-length post (and looked up this judge, some) to the same post; it’s not up there yet but I hope will be.

It’s not about individual judges — it’s about systems.  But the forum is helpful if it links to other news articles, or data for those using or viewing it.

MI-Remove Chief Judge Marybeth Kelly (Posted at:   Courthouseforum.com)


 

The Michigan Citizen – 2669 Bagley – Detroit – MI – 48216 � Phone: 313-963-8282Monday, SEP 17, 2007
MichiganCitizen.com
 (ARTICLE POST IS FROM COURTHOUSEFORUM.COM ON THIS PARTICULAR JUDGE)

Kelly moves to privatize Friend of the Court

Councilwoman JoAnn Watson (r) with supporters of Judge Deborah Thomas in her fight for jury rights.  DIANE BUKOWSKI PHOTOS
Councilwoman JoAnn Watson (r) with supporters of Judge Deborah Thomas in her fight for jury rights. DIANE BUKOWSKI PHOTOS

March for Kelly’s removal

By Diane Bukowski
The Michigan Citizen

DETROIT — Wayne County child support workers joined hundreds of youth, legal luminaries, government officials and rank and file Detroiters Sept. 10, marching outside state offices at Cadillac Place, and packing the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center {{“CAYMC}}} auditorium, with standing room only.

They were there to support Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Deborah Thomas in her struggle for racially representative juries, among other concerns, and to demand the removal of Chief Judge Mary Beth Kelly.

On Sept. 6, Kelly announced her intent to contract out the jobs of 169 Friend of the Court employees to a private company which will employ a total of 225 workers at lower wages, with no benefits or pensions. Kelly said the move would increase the amount of collections and a cut of them which goes to the county.

BIDDERS HAVE PRIOR LEGAL ISSUES

Among the national companies likely to bid on the $28 million contract are MAXIMUS, Inc., a Lockheed Martin spin-off, and Tier Technologies, which currently operates the state’s centralized child support disbursement system. 

The companies would get either a flat fee or a cut of the amount collected. MAXIMUS and Lockheed-Martin recently paid millions in fines to the federal government for defrauding social service programs, and Tier Technologies faces a securities fraud suit by its shareholders.

“We have mostly Black employees here, a lot of them with 18 or more years of seniority,” said a child support worker who asked not to be identified. “We’re already working like dogs on the biggest caseload in the state, but now they want to reduce our wages to $8 or $9 an hour. We won’t be allowed to bump into other county positions.”

The Wayne County Friend of the Court is the largest FOC in the state, with 300,000 active cases. In 2006, according to figures released by Kelly, it collected over 74 percent of the $426.2 million owing in the cases, a figure which surpasses the 2005 state-wide collection rate of 60 percent and ranks among the top state percentages nationally.

Failure to collect outstanding amounts is largely due to the poverty rate of non-custodial parents, according to Marilyn Stephen, Director of the State Office of Child Support.

“More than 75 percent of child support arrears in Michigan are owed by parents making less than $10,000 annually,” Stephen said. Over one-third of payments go primarily to the state to reimburse it for assistance to poor non-custodial parents, who get only a small pass-through of $50 a month.

WHAT KIND OF ASSISTANCE TO NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS?  TYPICALLY THAT PHRASE GOES, TO REIMBURSE IT FOR ASSISTANCE TO CUSTODIAL PARENTS (WHO ARE TITLE IV-D).

ENGLER OPENED DOOR TO PRIVATIZATION

State Attorney General Mike Cox originally proposed privatization of child support collection in 2003. Former Gov. John Engler and Supreme Court Justice Maura Corrigan opened the floodgates, supporting a 2002 law allowing privatization of state social services. Kelly is a member of a state child support panel appointed by Corrigan.

Is that this woman, Wikipedia now showing as Head of Michigan DHS?

Description of Michigan DHS (from this site, bottom):

The Michigan Department of Human Services (DHS) is the state’s second-largest agency. The DHS oversees almost 10,000 employees and has an annual budget of more than $4 billion to administer federal programs.

The DHS staff handles more than 1.5 million medical assistance cases and 1.2 million cash and food-assistance cases all across Michigan. It oversees Michigan’s child and adult protective services, foster care, adoptions, juvenile justice, domestic violence, and child-support programs. The DHS also licenses adult foster care, child day care and child welfare facilities.[4]


She graduated from Marygrove College in Detroit, Michigan in 1969 and earned her Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree from theUniversity of Detroit Law School in 1973. While in law school, she worked as a probation officer at a Detroit court.

Her first job after law school was with the Michigan Court of Appeals, where she served as a law clerk to Judge John Gillis. She next worked as a Wayne County Assistant Prosecutor. In 1979, she became an Assistant U.S. Attorney, serving as Chief of Appeals; she later became the first woman to serve as Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney. In 1989, she became a partner at the Detroit law firm of Plunkett & Cooney. In 1992, Governor John Engler appointed her to the Michigan Court of Appeals. She was twice elected to that court and served as its Chief Judge from 1997-1998.

Corrigan is a long-time member of the Federalist Society, Michigan Lawyers Chapter. She was also president of the Incorporated Society of Irish-American Lawyers and of the Federal Bar Association, Detroit Chapter.

A member of the (Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Corrigan has been recognized for her work on foster care and adoption issues, including The Detroit News “Michiganian of the Year” award.

Corrigan is the widow of the late Joseph D. Grano, a professor of constitutional law at Wayne State University. She has two children: Megan Grano, a comedian with Second City in Chicago, and Daniel Grano, an associate attorney with Flood, Lanctot, Connor & Stablein, PLLC, a law firm in Royal Oak, Michigan. She has supported several of George W. Bush‘s nominees to theUnited States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit which includes the state of Michigan.

Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano also supports Kelly’s move.

“We are particularly grateful with the Court’s requirement that the successful bidder hire all FOC employees whose jobs are the subject of the Request for Proposal,” said Ficano in a statement. “We expect a smooth transition.”

However, Wayne County Commissioners Jewel Ware, Bernard Parker, and Tim Killeen attended the CAYMC rally, supporting Judge Thomas and expressing strong opposition to the privatization proposal.

{{Ever since I learned about the behavior of some County Commissioners in Northern and Southern California, I am generally wary.  In S. CA ,they were in bed with the large developers (and others), and in N.CA, voted to allow an Interim D.A. just prior to the other’s planned retirement, enabling (Orloff) in effect to pick his successor (Alameda County DA Nancy O’Malley), who then went on to propound another PRIVATE NONPROFIT WITH PUBLIC EMPLOYEES situation, the Family Justice Center.  She was recently seen with her team seeking support of a California (not US Congress, but a STATE) bill which would incorporate a certain alliance of counties (already working together) as the central, training grounds (3 of them) for more Justice Centers.  I’ve never met anyone who has received help from here, or heard it in the press other than their press releases, and our landscape is strewn with domestic violence and sexual assault outrages, and deaths, plus corruption in law enforcement also — who are entrenched in that Justice Center setup.  “Just say “NO” or at least “Whoa!” post, and/or “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys post,” this blog)

Ed McNeil, assistant to the President of Council 25 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) reiterated their opposition.

“Michigan ranks fourth in the nation in the collection of child support payments,” said McNeil. “Our folks are doing their job. All the monies collected ought to go to the families, not to some private entity that gets a percentage to make a profit.”

The workers’ contract expires Sept. 30. AFSCME staff representative Danny Craig, threatened that employees “will take it to the streets” if the county insists on the privatization move.

Wayne County’s Third Circuit Court previously had a $5 million contract with MAXIMUS in 2000, to modify the child support distribution system. The state had a five-year contract with a Lockheed Martin spin-off, Affiliated Computer Services, Inc., to develop and operate its centralized state disbursement unit. It now contracts with Tier Technologies to run the unit.

In July of this year, MAXIMUS entered a criminal deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. Justice Department, and paid a $30.6 million fine because it submitted claims for servicing all foster care children in the District of Columbia regardless of whether it had.

Also in July, Affiliated Computer Services agreed to pay the federal government $2.6 million because it admittedly submitted inflated charges for services it provided to programs run by the Agriculture, Labor, and Health and Human Services departments.

Tier Technologies is facing ongoing prosecution in New York in a class action securities fraud case, brought in 2006 by its shareholders.

I’ll be back. There is more . . . .. . .

Let’s Talk Child Support — HHS series “90FD” Grants to states: (Research and Demonstrate)

with 5 comments

The size of Child Support Enforcement in some states in phenomenal.  Within this phenomenally large infrastructure, there is not just enforcement activity, but a subset of grants to encourage certain activities — research and demonstration to improve one of the many purposes of “OCSE.”   I’m reporting on a smaller subsection of this today.

Nationwide $4 BILLION per year payments to states for family support and child support enforcement — how much per state, and for what?  The child support itself comes from the parent’s earnings (or assets, income) — the funds to pay the $4 billion per year are of course public funds, also collected from taxes via the IRS, distributed to the various government branches, and then different departments within those branches.  Health and Human Services encompasses welfare (“TANF”), Early Childhood/Head Start, a lot of funding of medical research and institutions, all kinds of things. But the ability of the OCSE / Child Support system to make or destroy an individual, to support or tear down (depending on how administered) and if payments are not made, to potentially get a parent in jail — and this does happen, check your local arrest sheets — makes it a huge United STates Institution affecting most families, it would seem.

Privatized Child Support, some principal players:

While revising/expanding this post, I ran across a site, GuidelineEconomics, for what it’s worth, summarizing some players in

The Child Support Industry

  • Policy Studies, Inc., Denver, CO.
    • Founded and headed by Robert Williams in 1984 while still working for National Center for State Courts (NCSC). NCSC was under contract with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement to develop guidelines for states to consider. ***
    • Vends (sells) the Income Shares child support guideline, originally developed by Williams while working for NCSC as part of the contract with the Office of Child Support Enforcement.
    • Acts as a privately contracted child support enforcement/collection agent in various jurisdictions in a number of states.
    • Also see PSI’s timeline for expansion of their contracted services in early 2004, and their description of their enforcement and collection services.
  • Maximus, Inc.
    • Acts as child support enforcement / collection agent for numerous states. Will also act as a jurisdiction’s child support administration, setting awards.
  • Systems & Methods, Inc
    • Acts as child support collection agent for North Carolina and runs the child abuse reporting system for Georgia.
  • SupportKids, Inc.
    • Private child support collection agent.

There is no question that this person appears to be “fathers-rights” oriented, there’s a link to David Levy & Sanford Braver, to Father’s organizations — but he’s an economist.  Robert G. Williams of PSI, after Princeton, etc.,  apparently branched out into his own business while working with a nonprofit on a government contract.  (My “to do” list included finding out where this person was coming from, philosophically).  … MAXIMUS has a large (and very disturbing) section on my post here.  I don’t know “Systems & Methods Inc.” and I’ve run across a networked group of mothers complaining that when SupportKids, Inc. changed hands (?) they simply stopped receiving their checks, with no recourse.  That’s as I remember it — don’t quote me…. NCSC: NCSC | National Center for State Courts  SupportKids — “ripoff report” — after the mother contacted (private co.) SupportKids, the County gets its act together — and the checks on $20K arrears are finally coming through the Florida County, then they stop.  Finding out why, SupportKids had falsified an order, and had the money redirected to them!

Submitted: Monday, May 19, 2008   Last Posting: Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Support Kids.com withholding child support paid to me including ex- husbands tax return that was garnished by the State of Florida and no one from Support Kids management will even call me to discuss this Austin Texas

 My ex’s tax return is garnished (because he is SO in arears) AND SUPPORT KIDS GOT IT!!!! WHICH IS ILLEGAL!!!! When I call Support Kids to discuss this matter (IF they EVER ANSWER THEIR PHONES!!- well I take that back-THEY do answer their new application line BUT RARELY ANSWER THEIR ESTABLISHED CLIENT LINE) they tell me they do not know when they will send my checks!!!! I left a message for a supervisor (someone named JoAnn), and she does not return her phone calls. I have emailed supportkids many times and all I get is an automatic response!! I went to Hillsborough County Child Support Enforcement for the State of Florida and they are aware of reports and complaints regarding support kids and told me to contact the Florida State Attourneys office (which I plan to do tomorrow). I also checked out the BBB, AND THERE ARE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST SUPPORT KIDS!!!! Please do not sign up with them!!!!! I do not know how long it will take to get this fixed. (or if it ever will) they are going to sit back collecting my son’s child support AND THEY DID NOT EVEN DO THE WORK (HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY DID) TO EVEN GET THEIR 10%…AND NOW I GUESS THEY WILL KEEP COLLECTING MY CHECKS. Please, please do not do business with this company, YOU WILL SO REGRET IT. I DO NOT KNOW HOW THEY SLEEP AT NIGHT- STEALING CHILDREN’S CHILD SUPPORT. THE FASTEST GROWING POPULATION OF HOMELESS ARE SINGLE MOTHER’S WITH CHILDREN!!! DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THEM!! Kj Tampa, Florida U.S.A.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 5/19/2008 4:08:21 PM

Support Kids.com NOT only are the Custodial parents being scammed so are the NON Custodial parent!!! Ripoff Austin TexasAuthor: Cypress TexasCollection Agencies: Support Kids.com   8/10/2007  5:44 PM  (Private company lied, fabricated child support amount due. “A lawsuit by the State of Virginia is challenging the business practices of an Austin-based company that collects money from parents who are behind in child support payments”  (2008) Law firm posts news article reviewing criminal lawsuit against SupportKids for violating state law.  discussing the 34% cut SupportKids is allowed to take, and how it helped draft legislation in California which had no cap on the % it could take.  Austin-based company does business in 47 states and has 40,000 open cases.

And this appears to be the blog I saw earlier.  The mother says she started the blog to put SupportKids out of business; that it’s been bought by another (who is similar in its practices):

“Singleparentsunite:  District Attorney v. SupportKids”   {{meaning, use the DA for enforcement, not this private agency}}

After 16 years of battling the system, it finally worked! I was informed 4 months ago that I was going to get the back child support that was owed to me and my children (who are both grown adults now). My ex husband inherited a house that he put on the market. When it sold, the DA put a lien on the house and guess who got the first cut of the profits? I did. My suggestion to all struggling single parents who are going thru that same fight? File your case with the DA’s office. They keep track of everything and it NEVER goes away. Not only that, collects interest. If you sit back and wait for your ship to roll in without researching your options, you’re going to be waiting a long time. Companies like SupportKids are the wrong way to go. They may collect money for you but they take 34% (or at least that is what is use to be) off the top and send you the rest. The DA’s office doesn’t make a profit off of your case, they fight for you for FREE. When they cut my check it was for the full amount that was owed.

I started my blog to put Supportkids out of business and get out of my contract. Both were accomplished. Supportkids has since been bought by another company and have proceeded to do business as usual. During that time (when the company was bought and in transition with the new owners) was when I put up the biggest fight and won. Supportkids was going out of business and the new company was clueless. I started my blog in 2007. 4 years later, I’m out of my contract with Supportkids and received full payment of my back child support. That may seem like a long time but is it really? Not compared to the years I spent trying to collect the money. 

By the time you finish reading the Maximus information, or some of the Canadian person’s commentary on having Canadian health information handled by the US company, with the US under the Patriot Act (which allows governmental snooping), you JUST might agree with me that the OCSE ought to be eliminated, period — and whatever proper functions it might have left to fulfil, to be transferred to another dept. of the US.  If this post doesn’t convince, there are more.   BELOWTHAT, and with the title to this post, my chart shows some of the various discretionary uses to which child support is put, and for how much, although why — you’ll have to ask the principal investigators of the HHS-funded projects.   And finally (with a little more commentary), I post some of the “Section 1115” US law that permits the bending of the law, the creating of various exemptions, and complain some more about ONE person, in the US, (Secretary of HHS) having so much power to approve what might be termed behavioral modification projects up on (the poor, among others) through the child support system, and at public expense.  Happy reading.  Alas, this all seems to be nonfiction..   .

“MAXIMIZING” CONTRACTS, MINIMIZING ACCOUNTABILITY:

(Circus) Maximus, Inc.

In addition to what the IRS powers to collect and enforce gives to the states, for the purpose of collecting and enforcing, we know that also outside private contractors are also paid by the US Government to do the same thing, such as Maximus,and others:

MAXIMUS helps Child Support Enforcement (CSE) agencies locate non-custodial parents, establish paternity and support orders, and enforce payments to families. Since 1975, we have partnered with CSE agencies to improve the lives of 940,000 families throughout the United States and Canada. Effective CSE operations demand more than business as usual. Innovative solutions, together with a highly skilled staff, are critical to achieve successful outcomes. We support our comprehensive services with technology solutions that enable us to serve participants more efficiently, effectively, and economically.

MAXIMUS. Because Children and Families Come First.

MAXIMUS improves the lives of children and families through a variety of services:

  • Full service child support enforcement
    • Establishment of support and medical orders
    • Administrative remedies to establish orders  {{This sounds like the outside contractor establishing a legally-binding order without proper legal protections to the payee or payor parent.…The remedy to establish any court order, other than ex parte ones, is called a motion and a hearing so the other side can be heard.  These guys adjust (reduce) arrears based on a contract with the noncustodial parent only; without notifying the other parent, at least that’s how it went down in our area.}}
    • Paternity determination
    • Location
    • Enforcement
    • Financial Services
    • Legal Services
    • Reduction of undistributed collections  {{So, what happens to $$ collected but not actually sent to the kids’ custodial parents?  After it sits around earning interest, as it did in Los Angeles County DA’s office previously…}}
  • Customer service call centers
  • Employer repository verification and maintenance
  • New hire compliance
  • Medical support enforcement
  • Income withholding enforcement
  • Early intervention/delinquency prevention programs
  • Review and adjustment of orders
  • TANF arrears case management and collection
  • International full service child support enforcement
  • Business process analysis, testing, training, and documentation

All our services are supported through a team of CSE experts, which includes former state and local IV-D directors and others with significant child support legal, policy, and operations experience.

Program Consulting

MAXIMUS also offers a variety of child support program consulting services. “We also remove barriers to non-payment {?}, allowing NCPs to consistently pay on time” “MAXIMUS experience in designing and implementing early intervention/delinquency prevention programs and operations is unequaled. We can assist any IV-D agency, whether state or local, in establishing a successful early intervention/ delinquency prevention program…” It is affiliated with these nonprofit agencies, which it so happens, I blogged on (some) recently:

As a corporate member of several civic associations across the nation, MAXIMUS is dedicated to the business areas and communities in which we operate.  These are nonprofit organizations whose membership appears to be CSE professionals.

Child Support

Eastern Regional Interstate Child Support Association National Child Support Enforcement Association Western Interstate Child Support Enforcement Council

[Corporationwiki of Maximus Federal in Reston, VA -gives a visual]

Check it out @ usaspending.gov (DUNS# 08234747 is Maximus Inc.;  ($684 million overall of which $260 million HHS contracts. it administers Medicare & Medicaid….)  Also has locations? in 4 countries; DUNS# 36422159 Maximus Federal Services — shows $27 million, 71 contracts or grants.) I googled “Maximus Fraud” (knowing of some high-profile instances) and got this scathing “Rip-off Report,” which goes far beyond fraud.  Rip-off reports are personal filings, but listen to this laundry list and compare with “Prospecting among the Poor” and other records.  it’s just too (damn) large, for one:

Maximus Inc. employees are stealing Medicare, Medicaid, child support, child welfare monies etc. Maximus Inc employees are blackmailing the poorest of the poor so that they can get their child welfare checks. Maximus Inc. employees are sexually abusing clients so that they can get their child welfare checks/child support checks.

Maximus Inc. hiring persons without background checks for caseworkers. One caseworker was a convicted forger, with an arrest record that included kidnapping, battery, and impersonating a police officer. Maximus Inc hired him while he was on parole. He blackmailed child welfare clients into giving him monies or he would cut off their benefits. Maximus Inc. hired one caseworker that pushed his clients to help him sell drugs, and another who told women they would lose their benefits unless they had sex with him and her children were present at the time. Maximus Inc. hired sexual predators as caseworkers who pressured their clients for sex. Maximus Inc. employees were extorting monies under blackmail from women on child welfare/child support, and these employees were sexually abusing these women. In addition, they wanted these women to prostitute themselves on the streets. They were also getting these women pregnant after they were blackmailed into having sex. Maximus Inc. massive theft of monies from child welfare, child support, Medicaid, Medicare, social security, etc. Wire fraud, bank fraud, theft of States monies etc. Maximus Inc theft of clients monies and diverting the monies to other bank accounts so that clients do not get any monies. How do these women pay their rents, and other bills? Children go without food and other necessary things in life. Blatant fraud. Maximus Inc steals welfare funds, and they overlook the victims of this crime. Maximus Inc. steals monies from impoverished mothers, children and people with disabilities who sought assistance and were illegally turned away, sanctioned, and terminated. Maximus Inc. has so many formal gender or racial discrimination lawsuits filed against it to be unbelievable. Maximus Inc has corporate malpractice, including inadequate and poor provision of services; misappropriation of funds, cronyism, and other financial irregularities; and discriminatory practices at company offices. Maximus Inc. used welfare funds intended for the poor to pay consultants who gave campaign contribution advice and solicited new business for the firm. Maximus Inc. spends child welfare monies lavishly on themselves, and they were illegally denying eligible families cash assistance, child care assistance, and even food stamps. So that they can steal the monies. (Reported By: Dr. anthony — Columbia Maryland USA Submitted: Sunday, September 06, 2009 )

This is not just one disgruntled complainant:  Hear this from a Whistleblower Law Firm, on Maximus, Inc.:

Posted on July 23, 2007 by LaBovick Law

Maximus, Inc. pays $30.5 Million to settle False Claims Act Case

“Helping the Government serve the People” is the tagline of Virginia basedMaximus, Inc., latest corporate citizen entangled in a Medicaid fraud scam. Unfortunately, this company needs a new tagline. The DOJ announced today that Maximus has agreed to pay $30.5 Million to settle qui tam lawsuit. The company admitted to their part in submitting fraudulent Medicaid claims for children who may not have received foster care services. … http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2007/July/07_civ_535.html  The Whistleblower was a Division manager at Maximus; it took guts!

it goes on and on.  This is a DIFFERENT $30+million fraud case — same company:

FORMER MAXIMUS EMPLOYEE INDICTED FOR $32 MILLION FRAUD

August 16, 2007

A federal grand jury has indicted a Alan B. Fabian, a Baltimore corporate executive, over allegedly running a scheme that made $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment.

According to prosecutors, Fabian’s alleged scheme defrauded his former employer, the government consulting company Maximus Inc., as well as an equipment leasing company called Solarcom….Fabian has presented himself as a successful entrepreneur, who started an activity-based cost and information technology consulting company which was later sold to Maximus in 2000. While at Maximus as an executive he supposedly made fraudulent sale-leaseback transactions for purchasing computer hardware and software. Prosecutors allege the equipment was either never purchased or much cheaper products were purchased.

And another, an employee feigning unemployment to get herself enrolled…. commonly called lying… Maximus Employee Pleads Guilty to New Jersey Medicaid Fraud
Submitted by Robin Mathias on Mon, 12/16/2002 – 5:21pm. Fraud Cases | Medicaid Fraud Cases

Rayonne Clark pleaded guilty to Medicaid fraud for her role in fraudulently obtaining admission into the Medical Family Care Program. She worked for Maximus, a contractor hired by New Jersey to assist eligible residents obtain health insurance and other medical benefits. Seven other Maximus employees were also indicted: Ifeanyi Akemelu, Kattia Bermudez, Victor Cordero, Lenora Grant, Iris Sabree, and Akbar Oliver. Clark admitted that she enrolled herself and family members into the Medicaid Family Care Program by providing false applications and personal information. “The investigation determined that the defendant was hired to assist those in desperate need of health insurance. Instead, she abused her position and enrolled herself into programs she was not eligible for,” said Insurance Fraud Prosecutor Greta Gooden Brown. “The defendant withheld the fact that she was gainfully employed to make herself appear in need of assistance.” The Consequences Rayonne Clark will be sentenced in February 2003. She was found guilty of 3rd degree Medicaid fraud, which is punishable by up to five years in state prison and a criminal fine of up to $15,000. The other Maximus employees who were indicted must serve 50 hours of commity service as part of a Pre-trial Intervention Program.
And here they are (2007) getting a big contract to PREVENT Medicaid etc. fraud and abuse, with the State of New York.  Notice the date in re: Above:

09/13/2007 | 06:00 am

Maximus Inc : New York Awards Medicaid Fraud Contract to MAXIMUS

MAXIMUS (NYSE:MMS), a leading provider of government consulting services, announced today that it has been awarded a five-year contract with the State of New York, Office of Medicaid Inspector General to provide Medicaid Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Recovery and Retention consulting services. MAXIMUS will work as a strategic partner with the newly-formed New York State Office of Medicaid Inspector General to assist the State in combating fraud, waste, and abuse in the State’s $45 billion Medicaid Program. MAXIMUS will assist the State in developing and implementing strategies to supplement its efforts to combat Medicaid fraud and abuse. The efforts are expected to improve the efficiency of New York’s Medicaid program and allow them to better serve their citizens.

Well if anyone ought to know about Medicaid fraud and abuse, it ought to be this company…. and finally,

You’ve Got to be Kidding Me!  This blog appears to be dedicated to Maximus’ role in the TN Child Support system, and the post is April 18, 2011.  There are plenty of comments, and it’s a good discussion.

State of Tennessee and Maximus Privatization Contract Largest in United States

I came across this article on Business Wire. The article was written in 2009. The title of the article is MAXIMUS AWARDED 49 MILLION CHILD SUPPORT OPERATIONS CONTRACT IN TENNESSEE. This article is sure to get your biscuits burning, since it hails the Tennessee/Maximus Contract as being the “LARGEST CHILD SUPPORT PRIVATIZATION CONTRACT IN THE U.S.” The most sickening statement comes from one Virginia T. Lodge, who is the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Human Services. She states in the article that the renewed contract with Maximus in Shelby County is part of their “primary goal” to ensure that all children throughout the State, especially Memphis and Shelby County, “receive the support to which they are entitled”. Maximus CEO Richard Montoni puts his two-cents into the article, but only to brag about the fact that by signing this contract with Tennessee, it allows Maximus to “build upon its portfolio”. His statements almost made me lose my lunch, since he mentioned nothing about the importance of collections, and only talked about the building of their portfolio and gaining a “market-leading position” in child support collections. This article proves my point about Maximus and their contracts. They are only in this business to gain contracts. After all, 49 million dollars is a hell of a lot of money to put back into the “market”. This simply proves that Maximus could care less about the collections of child support, once they have that contract, they already have THEIR MONEY. Why would they give a rats behind whether or not some poor single mom, or dad, in a town in Tennessee gets their child support payments?

And one of the comments on this:  I think the blog author is a man; another article talks about paternity fraud:

Well, they (Maximus) do have the contract, but their performance has been absolutely atrocious. A couple of the TV stations in Memphis have produced “expose’s” on just how bad their child support collections have been when compared to the rest of the State, the prior years and the prior vendor (Shelby County Juvenile Court). One has to wonder why maximus still has the Shelby contract. Is it the 4 in state lobbyists on their payroll??? None of their competitors for these contracts have in state lobbyists. Why FOUR lobbyists??? Is someone’s palm being greased???? Just wondering why a company performing on a very sub par basis has not been sanctioneed. Hmmmmm???? Does Tennessee Department of Human Services personnel not have eyes in their heads??? Juvenile Court had 242 employees working on child support collections, maximus has nothing close to that number. Was Juvenile Court overstaffed??? … Perhaps, but they had much better collections that maximus. Something bad wrong with this situation … very bad wrong!

(I have seen large contracts to Maximus in various states, still, despite all this.  Makes me wonder sometimes, how much it relates to “birds of a feather fly together.”)

And that was just a sampler of the articles on this corporation…  A nuclear physicist claims his life was destroyed, they couldn’t get mistaken orders corrected;   I am wondering as an American (USA), what we are doing having an internationally-connected company deal with USgovernment services.  Well, here’s a Canadian person wondering about confidentiality issues now that his country has given a health care contract to an American company.  A logo, for some visual relief:

Our Opinions, Thoughts, & Ideas*    {{*at least the person qualifies it as opinions.  That’s a far cry from the fatherhood theorists. or many custody evaluators…..}}

ARE CANADIAN PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS  HANDING OVER YOUR PERSONAL/MEDICAL  INFORMATION TO CORPORATIONS?

From my own reading, research and listening to alternative talk radio, I am, like so many others, fed up of being referred to by family and friends as a conspiracy “theorist”, when the facts to back up the reality, that we are rapidly descending into a global fascist tyranny, are everywhere, for anyone who cares to open their eyes.

(Lets Get Honest just has to interject . . . . .. )

Bronze Fasces

The word “fascist” is at root binding of separate strands to make a stronger whole:  the fasces — there are  Bronze “Fasces” in US House of Representatives — it represents the binding of the various individual states into a federal government, making it stronger (link contains explanation/photo courtesy Office of the Clerk).  what is beginning to happen again — enabled by technology / internet — is that this “fasces” is literally becoming the strong, bound branches of US governmt (designed to be separate, originally) into an impenetrable (almost) unified whole such that individuals in the various states cannot stand up to it alone.  The symbol was in conscious reference to Republican Rome.  Well, Rome later became a dictatorship, an empire, also.  This URL summarizes the years 28 – 23 (BC):

8 The Senate, its numbers already somewhat reduced by Octavian, grants him the title of Princeps Senatus. Census held by Octavian and Agrippa. Mausoleum of Augustus begun. 27 January 13, Octavian makes the gesture of returning command of the state to the Senate and the people of Rome, receiving in return vast provinces and most of the army as his own. Three days later the Senate confers on him great powers, numerous honors, and the title of Augustus 27-25 Augustus directs the final subjugation of Spain and the administrative reorganization of Spain and Gaul 23 The Senate grants Augustus the titles and powers of Imperium proconsulare maius and tribunicia potestas for life, thereby turning over to him complete control of the State and ending the Roman Republic

Probably happened already here, or just about….  Back to our Canadian friend, astonished that his/her private health information might end up in the hands of a US corporation and thus subject to the US Patriot act, allowing snooping without warrants into company’s records ,and forbids the company from revealing that its records have indeed been snooped upon.  This writer goes on to note that many of Maximus’ leaders came from the Pentagon, or military backgrounds:

(After naming several entities. . . . . ):

On and on it goes in ties between Maximus and the US military industrial complex. Very little of their military background seems especially suited to the task of managing storage and dissemination of health and pharmaceutical records of BC residents. They are instead more suited to services like surveillance, monitoring, and tracking of individuals-exactly the sort of thing the government says is its priority to avoid.

“It is the Patriot Act that turns all information management companies working in the US into de facto arms of the sprawling US intelligence gathering monolith.”

Hmmm…..

As a senior, I was appalled to learn recently of the BC Government’s decision to award a ten year contract to outsource the administration of the BC Medical Plan and Pharmacare to a private, for profit, American corporation, and the implications of such to sovereign Canadians.

Wanting to understand fully the implications of this outsourcing, I began in late December by calling my local BC member of the legislature’s office. I asked the assistant who answered my call, was it true that my private medical information was to be handled by a private American corporation, to which she answered “yes.” . . . .

This information is compiled from searches of 3,000 of 21,200 links listed on Google, and 2,000 of 13,100 links on Yahoo for the term “Maximus Inc“.

!  That’s one motivated (or retired / unemployed  / alarmed) person! to do 5,000 searches on one company.

I urge you to do further research on this company, and perhaps all of the companies mentioned herein. Here goes.

ARE CANADIAN PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS HANDING OVER YOUR PERSONAL/MEDICAL INFORMATION TO PRIVATE, FOR PROFIT, CORPORATIONS OF THE MILITARY/INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX?

Beginning at the B.C. Medical Plan Services web site: http://www.healthservices.gov.bc.ca/msp/ which states:

“The Province is moving to modernize and improve the administration of MSP and PharmaCare, and to enhance the timeliness and quality of service to the public and health professionals. After a year-long procurement process, MAXIMUS BC has been selected to provide program management and information technology services to government. This will help to improve B.C.’s health benefits operations services, which include responding to public inquiries, registering clients, and processing medical and pharmaceutical claims from health professionals. Direct health care services to patients are not involved. Under the 10-year, $324 million contract, the operations will remain in Victoria.

“Operations will remain in Victoria” seems to refer to the fact that this giant swallowed up a Canadian company:

MAXIMUS Canada was incorporated in 2002 when it bought THEMIS Program Management & Consulting Limited, the Victoria-based company that has delivered the Family Maintenance Enforcement Program (FMEP) on behalf of the Ministry of Attorney General since 1988.”

MAXIMUS just bought ’em out. .. .

We are on the edge of a new and frightening era in which surveillance of citizens by governments and their private-sector partners could become the dominant reality of our society in other words, an era in which Orwell’s “Big Brother” vision could actually be realized. Whether or not we go over that edge and create what has been called a “surveillance society” will depend on how willing citizens are to draw a line and say “no further” to government attempts to probe into and record the facts of our private lives, said Darrell Evans, Executive Director of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association.”

SERIES “90FD” GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR

RESEARCH, DEMONSTRATION, HEALTHY MARRIAGE, YOU NAME IT….

An exhibit of the many uses to which child support funds can be put, with a little creativity.  Just calling attention to a grant series that caught my eye in one state’s stupendous OCSE enforcement bill.

INTRO — the continued growth of child support* and emotional involvement of fathers, @ Texas Attorney General’s Office.

*aka “Don’t Fence Me In” (=AUDIO link) to actually collecting child support with a view to distributing it to children…

Required reading for this post — the whole post, here, and if you’re into it, I also added some comments.  The post mentions the “Section 1115” grants we’ll see below.

Michael Hayes Wants to Build “Family-Centered” Child Support

(source:  Randi James blog)
I must continue to emphasize that the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OSCE) is no longer about collecting child support. It is about meddling in your family business and exercising government control over families (which begins with the “birth certificate” and “marriage licenses”), with emphasis on removing control from women as childbearers and autonomous beings. This money is NOT going to raise the children–it is going into million-dollar research at the hand of psychology pseudoscience and court litigation.Well, who is Michael Hayes?I’m glad you asked.

. . . after a brief chart (Here’s the 2008 section of OCSE grants to the Texas Office of Attorney General — which is who handles Child Support in Texas):

2008 ACF TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 2008 OCSE $ 157,717,616
2008 ACF TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 2008 SAVP $ 687,405
2008 ACF TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OCSE RESEARCH GRANTS 1115 WAIVER $ 703,000
2008 ACF TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OCSE SECTION 1115 (PA-3) $ 60,000
2008 ACF TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
$ 25,000

(Obviously this little “$ 25,000” escaped its box and belongs in the bottom right of the chart above. I don’t feel like fighting wordpress over this tonight.).  Notice the variety of grants? The OCSE — $157,717,616 was just to collect or enforce child support.  SAVP is access visitation funding (mentioned below, and I mention it MOST posts), then there is a 1115 Waiver, whatever that is, and then a “section 1115 (PA-3)” and last, just in case we missed something, $25,000 for “Special Improvement” as opposed to regular enforcement, increasing access of noncustodial parents to their kids by farming the out to parenting education, counseling and supervised visitation (and thereby encouraging or enabling noncustodial parents to get their act together and actually pay support) etc. It took me a while, but I finally figured out (as it occurse below and above) that “PA-3” stands for “Priority Area 3″ probably indicating the OCSE is getting ready to pilot some other project and then go nationwide with it based on the fact that their own reviews of the pilot were positive.  this is how we became a ‘research and demonstration nation.” more from Randi James’ post, here, quoting Mr. Hayes:

The current national child support enforcement strategic plan (for 2005 – 2009) clearly describes this emphasis on both emotional and financial support and the involvement of both parents. 

I also want to acknowledge the value that OCSE Section 1115 and SIP {Special Improvement Program} grants have had for the evolution of child support, both in Texas and around the country. Through Section 1115 grants, our Family Initiatives Section in Texas has been able to pursue the projects I’ve talked about, since these grants may be used to fund certain activities not normally allowed under FFP rules. The creativity and innovation that those grant programs have fostered play a big part in child support’s continued growth and vision. We take pride in how we’ve been able to keep the work going after the grant funding expires by using careful collaboration and coordination. For example, we found we could provide additional services to parents by linking Access and Visitation partners to our child support offices. Once the parents meet with us about the support order, they are escorted to the AV staff so they can develop a parenting plan. We could not have moved as thoughtfully or as quickly without that support.

Thank you, Michael Hayes, for making this so easy for us! I don’t even have to explain it anymore.

OK, NOW THIS CHART  — This section here is a small sector – SELECTED:  I had noticed a certain grant series with the letters 90FD in them, on TAGGS.HHS.GOV “Search Awards” — I did not select year, state, or almost anything except two program categories:  94563 (Child Support Enforcement) and 93562 (Child Support Research).   This produced a printout below: (it’d be better to view, Selecting & choosing the columns below (and/or others) under “Awards Search” –because of the clickable  links, but this is a sample). These are 406 records, alpha by state as you can see.   Use the scroll bar, notice how some are Healthy Marriage, some are Fatherhood, some are “Noncustodail” (mis-spelled).    The Action issue date keeps the chrono, and while the amounts are small — what is being demonstrated?  What’s the benefit?  Also, I notice in various states, different agencies are getting these grants (enforcing Child Support?) — anyone want to tell me why in OHIO, that’s 3 different entities?   Would this, perhaps have anything to do with the Commission on Fatherhood, legislatively created in about 2001?

Grantee Name

Award Number

Award Title

Budget Year

AcT’n Issue Date

CFDA Number

Award Activity Type

Award AcT’n Type

Principal Investigator

Sum of AcT’ns

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0001 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

1

09/29/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

GLENDA STRAUBE 

$63,063

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0001 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

BYRON WALTHER 

$63,063

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0001 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

2

02/23/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

BYRON WALTHER 

$0

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0001 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

3

08/25/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

BYRON WALTHER 

$63,063

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0001 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

3

05/16/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

BYRON WALTHER 

$0

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0001 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

3

05/12/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

BYRON WALTHER 

-$6,054

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0002 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COLLA 

1

09/17/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

BARBARA MIKLOS 

$30,491

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0002 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COLLA 

2

09/02/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

BYRON WALTHER 

$30,491

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0002 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COLLA 

2

02/04/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

BYRON WALTHER 

$0

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0002 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COLLA 

3

08/09/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

BYRON WALTHER 

$30,491

AK ST DEPT of REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

90FD0002 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COLLA 

3

05/18/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

BYRON WALTHER 

$0

AZ ST DEPT of ECONOMIC SECURITY 

90FD0065 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 2 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHN L CLAYTON 

$99,596

CA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0003 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO SUPPORT ENFORC 

1

09/19/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

PEGGY JENSEN 

$72,500

CA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0003 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO SUPPORT ENFORCEMT SYST 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PEGGY JENSEN 

$72,500

CA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0003 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO SUPPORT ENFORCEMT SYST 

3

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PEGGY JENSEN 

$72,500

CA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0003 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO SUPPORT ENFORCEMT SYST 

3

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

PEGGY JENSEN 

-$73,983

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0047 

OCSE – 1115 DEMOS – URBAN HISPANIC OUTREACH PROJECT 

1

09/13/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

RICHARD A WILLIAMS 

$50,000

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0083 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM – PRIORITY AREA 4 

1

09/15/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

LEORA GERSHENZON 

$60,000

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0114 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

1

08/24/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

DANIEL LOUIS 

$150,000

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0114 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

2

09/19/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DANIEL LOUIS 

$75,000

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0114 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

2

08/29/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

LESLIE CARMONA 

$0

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0114 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

3

09/09/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LESLIE CARMONA 

$75,000

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0114 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

3

10/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KATHY HREPICH 

$0

CA ST DEPT of CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 

90FD0158 

SERVE OUR IV-A/IV-D PROGRAM COLLABORAT’n 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MR BILL OTTERBECK 

$29,000

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0004 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODAIL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 

1

09/16/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$72,500

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0004 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODAIL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAULINE BURTON 

$72,092

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0004 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODAIL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 

2

02/11/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

PAULINE BURTON 

$0

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0004 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODAIL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 

3

08/31/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAULINE BURTON 

$72,500

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0028 

NEW APPROACHES TO CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGES 

1

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$75,000

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0028 

NEW APPROACHES TO CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGES 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

PAULINE BURTON 

-$75,000

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0069 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 4 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$100,000

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0080 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

09/10/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$55,023

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0080 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

09/17/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAULINE BURTON 

$80,108

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0080 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

09/01/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAULINE BURTON 

$64,869

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0096 

COLORADO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

1

09/14/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$125,000

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0111 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM – PA 2 

1

07/12/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$114,741

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0111 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM – PA 2 

2

07/31/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DAN WELCH 

$174,845

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0111 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM – PA 2 

3

07/31/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DAN WELCH 

$125,579

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0111 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM – PA 2 

3

04/30/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

DAN WELCH 

$0

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0126 

AVOIDING AND MANAGING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS IN COLORADO (PRIORITY AREA 1) 

1

09/20/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHN BERNHART 

$99,815

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0126 

AVOIDING AND MANAGING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS IN COLORADO (PRIORITY AREA 1) 

2

08/28/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JOHN BERNHART 

$74,998

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0126 

AVOIDING AND MANAGING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS IN COLORADO (PRIORITY AREA 1) 

3

07/20/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JOHN BERNHART 

$49,923

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0126 

AVOIDING AND MANAGING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS IN COLORADO (PRIORITY AREA 1) 

3

04/27/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JOHN BERNHART 

$0

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0132 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 2 

1

09/20/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHN BERNHART 

$30,000

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0166 

PROJECTS TO ADDRESS CHILD SUPPORT NEEDS OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY MEMBERS 

1

09/27/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

JOHN BERNHART 

$52,443

CO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0168 

TRIPLE PLAY, THREE PATHS TO SUCCESS 

1

09/25/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

JOHN BERNHART 

$84,783

CO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0033 

COLLECTING CHILD SUPPORT FROM INCARCERATED & PAROLED OBLIGORS 

1

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAULINE BURTON 

$80,000

CT ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

90FD0005 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILDSUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COL 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHN FORD 

$66,862

CT ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

90FD0005 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILDSUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COL 

2

09/02/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DIANE M FRAY 

$66,862

CT ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

90FD0005 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILDSUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE AND HEAD START COL 

3

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DIANE M FRAY 

$66,862

CT ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

90FD0037 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration, SECT’n 1115 

1

09/01/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

DIANE M FRAY 

$50,000

DC DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0119 

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR DC 

1

09/01/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CORY CHANDLER 

$135,000

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0072 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 3 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOE PERRY 

$52,525

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0072 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 3 

1

02/16/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

JOE PERRY 

-$31,189

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0072 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 3 

1

09/21/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

JOE PERRY 

$0

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0100 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

1

09/20/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

LYNNE FENDER 

$86,574

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0119 

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR DC 

1

08/28/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CORY CHANDLER 

-$135,000

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0119 

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR DC 

1

10/12/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CORY CHANDLER 

$135,000

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0119 

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR DC 

2

09/27/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CORY CHANDLER 

$65,000

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0120 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

1

08/23/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CORY CHANDLER 

$60,000

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0120 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

2

07/14/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TANYA JONES BOSIER 

$50,000

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0120 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

3

08/28/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TANYA JONES BOSIER 

$37,500

DC OFFICE OF CORPORAT’n COUNSEL 

90FD0120 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

3

06/07/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TANYA JONES BOSIER 

$0

DE ST DEPT of HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0091 

STATE OF DELAWARE, DEPT of HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

1

09/22/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ART E CALDWELL 

$50,000

DE ST DEPT of HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0091 

STATE OF DELAWARE, DEPT of HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

2

09/15/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ART E CALDWELL 

$50,000

DE ST DEPT of HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0091 

STATE OF DELAWARE, DEPT of HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

2

09/29/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ART E CALDWELL 

$0

DEPT of ECONOMIC SECURITY 

90FD0040 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration SECT’n 1115 

1

08/31/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ANNMARIE MENA 

$50,000

DEPT of ECONOMIC SECURITY 

90FD0112 

DEVELOP & IMPLEMENT A WEB BASED ARREARS CALCULA TOOL THAT WOULD ALLOW COURTS, .. 

1

06/28/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

LEONA HODGES 

$120,000

DEPT of Children and Families 

90FD0159 

ENHANCING THE CHILD SUPPORT POLICY KNOWLEDGE OF TANF-ELIGIBLE FAMILIES AND TANF CASEWORKERS: A COLLABORATIVE STRATEGY FO 

1

09/20/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

RON HUNT 

$99,985

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0098 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

1

09/14/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

NANCY LUJA 

$99,853

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0099 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

1

09/20/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

VELVA MOSHER-KNAPP 

$124,144

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0128 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration: PRIORITY 4 

1

09/20/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

HEATHER J SAUN 

$14,619

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0128 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration: PRIORITY 4 

2

09/19/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

HEATHER SANDERS 

$12,202

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0128 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration: PRIORITY 4 

2

02/25/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

HEATHER SANDERS 

$0

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0128 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration: PRIORITY 4 

3

09/01/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

HEATHER SANDERS 

$12,202

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0128 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration: PRIORITY 4 

3

02/08/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

HEATHER SANDERS 

$0

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0143 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REENTRY COLLABORAT’n PROJECT 

1

11/23/2009 

93564

OTHER 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

PATRICIA CLARK 

$0

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0143 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REENTRY COLLABORAT’n PROJECT 

1

08/26/2010 

93564

OTHER 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

PATRICIA CLARK 

$0

FL ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0143 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REENTRY COLLABORAT’n PROJECT 

2

09/27/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PATRICIA CLARK 

$13,237

Florida DEPT of Revenue 

90FD0143 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REENTRY COLLABORAT’n PROJECT 

1

09/19/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

PATRICIA CLARK 

$16,713

Florida DEPT of Revenue, Child Support Enforcemen 

90FD0165 

NON-CONVENT’nAL SEARCH & IDENTIFICAT’n OF DELINQUENT PARENTS 

1

09/25/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

SHARON KERI 

$97,872

Florida DEPT of Revenue, Child Support Enforcemen 

90FD0173 

CHILD SUPPORT AND ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE COLLABORAT’n 

1

09/25/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

MARILYN MILES 

$60,363

GA ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0090 

GEORGIA DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

1

08/27/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

RUSSELL EASTMAN 

$125,000

GA ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0101 

STATE OF GEORGIA 

1

09/16/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

RONNIE BATES 

$43,000

GA ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0156 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

RUSSELL EASTMAN 

$99,000

GA ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0156 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

01/28/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

RUSSELL EASTMAN 

-$55,500

HI ST DEPT of VOCAT’nAL EDUCAT’n 

90FD0110 

PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

06/30/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JAN IKEI 

$108,400

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

90FD0110 

PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

07/27/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JAN IKEI 

$108,400

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

90FD0110 

PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

05/07/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MS ROSEMARY MCSHANE 

$0

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

90FD0110 

PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

09/26/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MS ROSEMARY MCSHANE 

$108,400

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

90FD0110 

PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

03/27/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SHERI WANG 

$0

HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

90FD0133 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration – PRIORITY 2 

1

11/13/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

MS SHERI WANG 

$0

HI ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, NEIGHBORHOODS PROGRAM 

90FD0133 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration – PRIORITY 2 

1

09/20/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MS SHERI WANG 

$30,000

IA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0086 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

1

08/27/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JEANNE NESBIT 

$58,000

IA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0086 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

1

05/04/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

JEANNE NESBIT 

-$2,205

IA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0093 

IOWA DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

1

09/02/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL EATON 

$29,000

IA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0130 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

1

09/20/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

LORI WETLAUFER 

$30,000

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0006 

PRIORITY AREA 1.30A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

1

09/11/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LOIS RAKOV 

$63,318

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0006 

PRIORITY AREA 1.30A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

2

08/28/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LOIS RAKOV 

$64,000

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0006 

PRIORITY AREA 1.30A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

2

03/09/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

LOIS RAKOV 

$0

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0006 

PRIORITY AREA 1.30A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

3

08/09/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LOIS RAKOV 

$64,000

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0006 

PRIORITY AREA 1.30A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

3

05/05/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

LOIS RAKOV 

$0

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0007 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

1

09/29/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ROBERT LYONS 

$56,145

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0007 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

1

10/06/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

ROBERT LYONS 

-$56,145

IL ST DEPT of HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0057 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA III) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOSEPH MASON 

$193,268

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRAT’n 

90FD0075 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 3 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHN J BOYCE 

$100,000

IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRAT’n 

90FD0076 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 3 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

THELZEDA MOORE 

$100,000

Iowa State Dept of Social Services/Human Services 

90FD0144 

LINKING CHILD SUPPORT WITH THE IOWA PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE 

1

09/01/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

HAROLD B COLEMAN 

$50,000

Iowa State Dept of Social Services/Human Services 

90FD0144 

LINKING CHILD SUPPORT WITH THE IOWA PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE 

2

09/06/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

HAROLD B COLEMAN 

$50,000

KS ST REHABILITAT’n SERVICES 

90FD0068 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 2 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JAMES A ROBERTSON 

$59,558

KY ST HUMAN RESOURCES CABINET, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

90FD0149 

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT RESEARCH 

1

09/23/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

STEVEN P VENO 

$45,295

Kansas Dept of Social and RehabilitaT’n Services 

90FD0145 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

KELLY POTTER 

$15,272

Kansas Dept of Social and RehabilitaT’n Services 

90FD0145 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MONICA REMILLARD 

$14,946

LA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

90FD0125 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

2

09/01/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$49,981

LA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

90FD0125 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

2

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$0

LA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

90FD0125 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

2

03/19/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$0

LA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

90FD0125 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

3

09/21/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$37,445

LA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

90FD0125 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

3

05/05/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$0

LA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

90FD0160 

PARTNERSHIP TO STRENGTHEN FAMILIES 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$99,570

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0012 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT EN 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARILYN R SMIH 

$72,500

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0012 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT ENFORCEMT 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$72,500

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0012 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT ENFORCEMT 

2

12/29/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$0

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0012 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT ENFORCEMT 

3

09/07/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$72,500

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0012 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT ENFORCEMT 

3

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

-$3,706

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0013 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REQ. & PREV DOME 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARILYN R SMIH 

$34,078

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0013 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REQ. & PREV DOMESTIC VIOLI 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$64,355

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0013 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REQ. & PREV DOMESTIC VIOLI 

2

02/04/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$0

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0013 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REQ. & PREV DOMESTIC VIOLI 

3

08/25/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$80,000

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0013 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT REQ. & PREV DOMESTIC VIOLI 

3

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

-$2,045

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0030 

ENHANCING INTER-AGENCY COLLABORAT’n & CLIENT COOPERAT’n IN MASS. 

1

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$80,000

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0030 

ENHANCING INTER-AGENCY COLLABORAT’n & CLIENT COOPERAT’n IN MASS. 

1

04/13/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

-$16

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0049 

OCSE DEMOS – FATHERS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: A COLLABORAT’n BETWEEN CHILD SUPPORT 

1

02/16/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

-$3,019

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0049 

OCSE DEMOS – FATHERS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: A COLLABORAT’n BETWEEN CHILD SUPPORT 

1

09/21/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$0

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0067 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 4 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$100,000

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0067 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 4 

1

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MARILYN R SMITH 

-$6,479

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0094 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS – PRIORITY AREA 4 

1

09/18/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

PUAL CRONIN 

$100,000

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0141 

FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN THE IV-D CASELOAD 

2

01/24/2011 

93564

OTHER 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$0

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0157 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARILYN RAY SMITH 

$100,000

MA ST DEPT of REVENUE 

90FD0162 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

KAREN MELKONIA 

$38,060

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0010 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT OF E 

1

09/11/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

DENESE F MAKER 

$78,677

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0010 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT OF ENFORCEMT 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DENESE F MAKER 

$79,000

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0010 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT OF ENFORCEMT 

3

08/31/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

DENESE F MAKER 

$78,677

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0010 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT OF ENFORCEMT 

3

11/10/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

DENESE F MAKER 

$0

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0010 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT OF ENFORCEMT 

3

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

DENESE F MAKER 

-$2,045

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0011 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT CHILDCARE, & HEAD START COLLABOR 

1

09/09/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CLAUDETTE SULLIVAN 

$22,030

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0011 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT CHILDCARE, & HEAD START COLLABOR 

2

09/02/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CLAUDETTE SULLIVAN 

$20,200

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0011 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT CHILDCARE, & HEAD START COLLABOR 

3

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CLAUDETTE SULLIVAN 

$20,200

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0034 

CHILD SUPPORT WORKER TRAINING CERTIFICAT’n PROGRAM 

1

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

TERESA L KAISER 

$127,000

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0034 

CHILD SUPPORT WORKER TRAINING CERTIFICAT’n PROGRAM 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

TERESA L KAISER 

-$50,677

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0066 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT- P.A. 4 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

TERESA L KAISER 

$100,000

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0109 

BALTIMORE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITITIATIVE 

3

07/27/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

SARAH BRICE 

$102,414

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0109 

BALTIMORE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITITIATIVE 

3

01/11/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SARAH BRICE 

$0

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0116 

PROJECT FRESH START 

1

08/24/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOSEPH A JACKINS 

$135,000

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0116 

PROJECT FRESH START 

2

09/26/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

SARAH BRICE 

$64,998

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0116 

PROJECT FRESH START 

2

05/08/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SARAH BRICE 

$0

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0121 

ERASING BORDERS PROJECT-SECT’n 1115 

1

08/23/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

SARAH BRICE 

$150,000

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0121 

ERASING BORDERS PROJECT-SECT’n 1115 

2

07/18/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

SARAH BRICE 

$100,000

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0121 

ERASING BORDERS PROJECT-SECT’n 1115 

2

03/05/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SARAH BRICE 

$0

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0121 

ERASING BORDERS PROJECT-SECT’n 1115 

2

05/11/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SARAH BRICE 

$0

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0121 

ERASING BORDERS PROJECT-SECT’n 1115 

3

08/31/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

SARAH BRICE 

$74,706

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0121 

ERASING BORDERS PROJECT-SECT’n 1115 

3

05/20/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SARAH BRICE 

$0

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0154 

PARTNERSHIP TO STRENGTHEN FAMILIES 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHNNY RICE 

$99,962

MD ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0164 

EXCELLENCE THROUGH EVALUAT’n: ASSESSING ADDRESSING AND ACHIEVING – AN ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP TO STRENGTHEN MARYLAND???S 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

SARAH BRICE 

$267,063

MD ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0041 

CHILD SUPPORT WORKER CERTIFICAT’n IMPLEMENTAT’n PROGRAM 

1

09/06/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

TERESA KAISER 

$49,979

MD ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0109 

BALTIMORE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITITIATIV

1

06/23/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

BRIAN D SHEA 

$105,562

MD ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0109 

BALTIMORE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITITIATIVE 

2

07/27/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

BRIAN D SHEA 

$102,421

ME ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, HLTH & MEDICAL SVCS 

90FD0009 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDER

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

STEVE HUSSEY 

$67,294

ME ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, HLTH & MEDICAL SVCS 

90FD0009 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

STEVE HUSSEY 

$67,000

ME ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, HLTH & MEDICAL SVCS 

90FD0009 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

3

09/07/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

STEVE HUSSEY 

$67,002

MI ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, BUREAU OF MGNT & BUDGET 

90FD0170 

REACH-REFERRAL FOR EMPLOYMENT, ASSET DEVELOPMENT, COOPERAT’n, AND HOPE 

1

09/27/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$85,000

MN DEPT of HEALTH 

90FD0048 

SECT’n 1115 OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT Demonstration 

1

09/06/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$50,000

MN DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0042 

SECT’n 1115 – OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT Demonstration 

1

09/06/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$50,000

MN DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0045 

SECT’n 1115 – OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT Demonstration 

1

09/06/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$50,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0014 

PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – STATE APPROACHES – NONCOOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIR 

1

09/09/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$59,606

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0014 

PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – STATE APPROACHES – NONCOOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIR 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LAURA KADWELL 

$96,570

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0014 

PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – STATE APPROACHES – NONCOOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIR 

2

01/20/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

LAURA KADWELL 

$0

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0014 

PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – STATE APPROACHES – NONCOOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIR 

3

08/09/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LAURA KADWELL 

$96,570

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0015 

ST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMTAGENCIES Demonstration 

1

09/22/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$29,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0016 

ST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMTAGENCIES Demonstration 

1

09/22/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

LAURA KADWELL 

$46,110

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0016 

ST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMTAGENCIES Demonstration 

2

08/28/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LAURA KADWELL 

$46,110

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0016 

ST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMTAGENCIES Demonstration 

2

12/29/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

LAURA KADWELL 

$0

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0016 

ST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMTAGENCIES Demonstration 

3

08/09/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

LAURA KADWELL 

$46,110

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0016 

ST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMTAGENCIES Demonstration 

3

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

LAURA KADWELL 

-$38

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0059 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT (PRIORITY AREA II) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

DENNIS ALBRECHT 

$65,250

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0071 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 2 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

DENNIS ALBRECHT 

$43,500

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0089 

STATE OF MINNESOTA 

1

09/23/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

WAYLAND CAMPBELL 

$43,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0127 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

1

09/11/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

PATRICK W KRAUTH 

$100,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0127 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

2

09/07/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PATRICK W KRAUTH 

$75,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0127 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

2

05/05/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

PATRICK W KRAUTH 

$0

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0127 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

2

04/08/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

PATRICK W KRAUTH 

$0

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0127 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

3

09/26/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PATRICK W KRAUTH 

$50,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0127 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

3

04/27/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

PATRICK W KRAUTH 

$0

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0140 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS 

1

08/28/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

PATRICK M KRAUTH 

$78,735

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0140 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JILL C ROBERTS 

$75,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0140 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS 

2

06/02/2011 

93564

OTHER 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JILL C ROBERTS 

$0

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0147 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – PRISONER REENTRY INITITATIVE 

1

08/28/2009 

93564

SOCIAL SERVICES 

NEW 

MOLLY CRAWFORD 

$50,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0147 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – PRISONER REENTRY INITITATIVE 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

SOCIAL SERVICES 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MOLLY CRAWFORD 

$50,000

MN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0147 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – PRISONER REENTRY INITITATIVE 

2

04/06/2011 

93564

SOCIAL SERVICES 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MOLLY CRAWFORD 

$0

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0017 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT SY 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CARL BLANCHETTE 

$38,896

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0017 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT SY 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY BURKS 

$39,539

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0017 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT SY 

2

12/29/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

CINDY BURKS 

$0

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0017 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT SY 

3

08/25/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY BURKS 

$24,190

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0017 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT SY 

3

08/18/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CINDY BURKS 

$0

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0018 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

1

09/11/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CARL BLANCHETTE 

$29,015

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0018 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY BURKE 

$29,015

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0018 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03A – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT, CHILD CARE & HEAD START COLLABO 

2

12/29/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

DORIS HALLFORD 

$0

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0019 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS & PREVENT. DOM. 

1

09/11/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CARL BLANCHETTE 

$43,738

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0019 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS & PREVENT. DOM. 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY BURKS 

$51,282

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0019 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS & PREVENT. DOM. 

2

12/29/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

CINDY BURKS 

$0

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0019 

PRIORITY AREA 1.02 – COOPERAT’n WITH CHILD SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS & PREVENT. DOM. 

3

08/25/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY BURKS 

$27,817

MO ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0062 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

GARY BAILEY 

$192,607

MT ST DEPT of PHHS, CHILD & FAM SERV 

90FD0036 

A STUDY OF THE COST OF RAISING A CHILD IN MONTANA 

1

09/07/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ANN STEFFENS 

$50,000

MT ST DEPT of PHHS, CHILD & FAM SERV 

90FD0036 

A STUDY OF THE COST OF RAISING A CHILD IN MONTANA 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

ANN STEFFENS 

-$925

Maine St. DEPT of Health and Human Services 

90FD0043 

SECT’n 1115 – OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT Demonstration 

1

09/07/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

STEVE HUSSEY 

$50,000

Maine St. DEPT of Health and Human Services 

90FD0044 

PHASE II: MAINE’S NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT OUTREACH & INVESTIGAT’n PROJEC

1

09/07/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

 

$84,640

ND ST DEPT of HUMAN SVCS 

90FD0118 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration/PRIORITY AREA 3 CHILD WELFARE COLLABORAT’n 

2

09/26/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MIKE SCHWINDT 

$60,000

ND ST DEPT of HUMAN SVCS 

90FD0118 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration/PRIORITY AREA 3 CHILD WELFARE COLLABORAT’n 

2

05/22/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MIKE SCHWINDT 

$0

ND ST DEPT of HUMAN SVCS 

90FD0118 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration/PRIORITY AREA 3 CHILD WELFARE COLLABORAT’n 

2

01/22/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MIKE SCHWINDT 

$0

ND ST DEPT of HUMAN SVCS 

90FD0118 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration/PRIORITY AREA 3 CHILD WELFARE COLLABORAT’n 

3

09/02/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MIKE SCHWINDT 

$60,000

ND ST DEPT of HUMAN SVCS 

90FD0118 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration/PRIORITY AREA 3 CHILD WELFARE COLLABORAT’n 

3

01/25/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MIKE SCHWINDT 

$0

ND ST Office of the Governor 

90FD0118 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration/PRIORITY AREA 3 CHILD WELFARE COLLABORAT’n 

1

08/28/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MIKE SCHWINDT 

$75,000

NE ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0097 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

1

09/14/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARGARET J EWING 

$72,466

NE ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0117 

SECT’n 1115 GRANT PROJECT 

1

08/24/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

NANCY MONTANEZ 

$51,005

NE ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0117 

SECT’n 1115 GRANT PROJECT 

2

09/26/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MR SCOT ADAMS 

$48,487

NE ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0117 

SECT’n 1115 GRANT PROJECT 

2

04/08/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MARGARET EWING 

$0

NE ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0117 

SECT’n 1115 GRANT PROJECT 

3

08/31/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MARGARET EWING 

$50,269

NH ST DEPT of HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0020 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

1

09/22/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARY WEATHERILL 

$24,928

NH ST DEPT of HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0020 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

2

08/28/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

NEAL BOUTIN 

$24,928

NH ST DEPT of HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0020 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

3

08/31/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

NEAL BOUTIN 

$24,931

NH ST DEPT of HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0070 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 2 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

THOMAS PRYOR 

$44,868

NJ ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0038 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES DEMONNSTRAT’n, SECT’n 1115 

1

08/31/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ALISHA GRIFFIN 

$50,000

NJ ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0060 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA III) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ALISHA GRIFFIN 

$127,600

NJ ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0122 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

2

08/26/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ALISHA GRIFFIN 

$78,852

NJ ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0122 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

3

09/19/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ALISHA GRIFFIN 

$71,797

NJ ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0122 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

1

08/24/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ALISHA GRIFFIN 

$150,000

NM ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0055 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM ( AREA IV) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

HELEN NELSON 

$217,667

NM ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0055 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM ( AREA IV) 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

HELEN NELSON 

-$217,667

NV ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0136 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

1

09/01/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

CYNTHIA D FISHER 

$99,320

NV ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0136 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration 

2

09/27/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CYNTHIA D FISHER 

$74,671

NY ST OFFICE OF TEMPORARY & DISABILITY ASSISTANCE 

90FD0021 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

1

09/16/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ROBERT DOAR 

$187,640

NY ST OFFICE OF TEMPORARY & DISABILITY ASSISTANCE 

90FD0021 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

2

09/02/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ROBERT DOAR 

$188,000

NY ST OFFICE OF TEMPORARY & DISABILITY ASSISTANCE 

90FD0021 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

2

12/29/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

ROBERT DOAR 

$0

NY ST OFFICE OF TEMPORARY & DISABILITY ASSISTANCE 

90FD0021 

STATE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT AGENCIES Demonstration 

2

09/24/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

ROBERT DOAR 

-$375,640

OH ST DEPT of JOB & FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0142 

OCSE 1115 – PRISON REENTRY INITIATIVE 

1

12/10/2009 

93564

OTHER 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

ATHENA RILEY 

$0

OH ST DEPT of JOB & FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0142 

OCSE 1115 – PRISON REENTRY INITIATIVE 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ATHENA RILEY 

$50,000

OH ST DEPT of JOB & FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0152 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

12/10/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

CARRI BROWN 

$0

OH ST DEPT of JOB & FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0155 

PROJECTS TO ADDRESS THE SUDDEN AND PROLONGED EFFECT OF THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN ON IV CASELOA 

1

09/23/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CARRI BROWN 

$60,000

OH ST DEPT of JOB & FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0174 

OHIO OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT, COMMISSION ON FATHERHOOD, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORAT’n WILL PROVIDE FINANCIAL EDU 

1

09/24/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

ATHENA RILEY 

$85,000

OH ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0142 

OCSE 1115 – PRISON REENTRY INITIATIVE 

1

08/28/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

CARRI BROWN 

$50,000

OH ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

90FD0152 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CARRI BROWN 

$104,663

OH STATE SEC. OF STATE 

90FD0095 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANTS 

1

09/18/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CARRI L BROWN 

$50,000

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0022 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING AND ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDE 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

PAUL BOWERMAN 

$38,382

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0022 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING AND ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDE 

1

02/27/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

PAUL BOWERMAN 

-$38,382

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0022 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING AND ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDE 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAUL BOWERMAN 

$38,382

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0022 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING AND ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDE 

2

02/27/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

PAUL BOWERMAN 

-$38,382

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0084 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA #3 

1

09/01/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

HARRY BENSON 

$79,750

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0084 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA #3 

1

02/16/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

ANTHONY L JACKSON 

-$79,750

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0146 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – PRISON REENTRY INITIATIVE 

1

08/28/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$31,708

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0146 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – PRISON REENTRY INITIATIVE 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$30,300

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0146 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 – PRISON REENTRY INITIATIVE 

2

04/07/2011 

93564

OTHER 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TERY DESHONG 

$0

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0151 

PROJECTS TO ADDRESS THE SUDDEN AND PROLONGED EFFECT OF THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN ON IV CASELOA 

1

09/23/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MS KATHERINE MCRAE 

$36,681

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0163 

1115 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT MEDICAL REFORM STRATEGY PROGRAM 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

KATHERINE MCRAE 

$37,728

OK ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0167 

GET PAID! COLLABORATE TO COLLECT 

1

09/25/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

ANTHONY JACKSON 

$100,000

OR ST DEPT of JUSTICE 

90FD0135 

EMPLOYER PORTAL 

1

08/30/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

BECKY L HAMMER 

$87,483

OR ST DEPT of JUSTICE 

90FD0135 

EMPLOYER PORTAL 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

BECKY L HAMMER 

$61,347

OR ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES, ADULT & FAMILY SVCS DIV 

90FD0023 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

SHIRLEY IVERSON 

$72,500

OR ST DEPT of HUMAN RESOURCES, ADULT & FAMILY SVCS DIV 

90FD0023 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 

1

04/05/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

SHIRLEY IVERSON 

-$72,500

PR ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT 

90FD0046 

SECT’n 1115 

1

08/30/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MIGUEL A VERDIALES 

$145,000

RI ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0153 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

SHARON A SANTILLI,ESQUIRE 

$105,000

SC ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0024 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03B – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT COLLABORAT’n WITH CHILD WELFARE 

1

09/11/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

BOB BRADFORD 

$17,998

SC ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0024 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03B – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT COLLABORAT’n WITH CHILD WELFARE 

2

09/02/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MICHAEL THIGPEN 

$14,835

SC ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0024 

PRIORITY AREA 1.03B – CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMT COLLABORAT’n WITH CHILD WELFARE 

3

08/09/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MICHAEL THIGPEN 

$15,050

SC ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0056 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA III) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

R. ROSS JOLLY 

$106,801

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0081 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

1

09/08/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARK JASONOWICZ 

$145,000

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0081 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

2

09/18/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$145,000

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0081 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

2

01/19/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$0

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0081 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

3

09/15/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$145,000

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0081 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

3

02/07/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$0

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0081 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT 

3

11/22/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$0

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0150 

CHILD SUPPORT PROJECTS TO ADDRESS ECONOMIC DOWNTURN 

1

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$103,221

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0161 

MICHIGAN MEDICAL CHILD SUPPORT STRATEGIES 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

PAMELA G MCKEE 

$50,000

STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0170 

REACH-REFERRAL FOR EMPLOYMENT, ASSET DEVELOPMENT, COOPERAT’n, AND HOPE 

1

01/07/2011 

93564

OTHER 

CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUT’n / AWARDING INSTITUT’n 

ELLEN DURNAN 

$0

STATE OF TENNESSEE 

90FD0108 

TENNESSEE DPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

06/23/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$82,853

State of Louisiana, DEPT of Social Services 

90FD0125 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-2) 

1

08/23/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ROBBIE ENDRIS 

$59,983

TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0113 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

07/20/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$108,112

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0077 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA #4 

1

08/26/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$60,000

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0102 

TENNESSEE DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

1

09/16/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

LINDA CHAPPELL 

$62,300

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0108 

TENNESSEE DPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

07/31/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$101,427

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0108 

TENNESSEE DPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

07/27/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$100,688

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0108 

TENNESSEE DPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

03/06/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0108 

TENNESSEE DPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

02/24/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0129 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

09/20/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$54,612

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0129 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

08/09/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$52,034

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0129 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

07/12/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0129 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

05/13/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0129 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

09/01/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$50,000

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0129 

SECT’n 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

05/18/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0139 

FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN THE IV-D CASELOAD 

1

09/01/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$100,000

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0139 

FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN THE IV-D CASELOAD 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$71,240

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0139 

FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN THE IV-D CASELOAD 

2

03/14/2011 

93564

OTHER 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0148 

TENNESSEE PROJECT IN SUPPORT OF THE PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE 

1

09/01/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$49,300

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0148 

TENNESSEE PROJECT IN SUPPORT OF THE PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE 

2

09/01/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$49,300

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0148 

TENNESSEE PROJECT IN SUPPORT OF THE PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE 

2

03/14/2011 

93564

OTHER 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MR CHARLES BRYSON 

$0

TN ST DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0171 

BUILDING ASSETS FOR FATHERS AND FAMILIES 

1

09/25/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

CHARLES BRYSON 

$85,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0052 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA III) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

WILLIAM H ROGERS 

$105,254

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0052 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA III) 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

WILLIAM H ROGERS 

-$8,058

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0064 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 2 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CYNTHIA BRYANT 

$71,630

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0073 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 2 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$100,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0073 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-P.A. 2 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

MICHAEL HAYES 

-$6,976

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0078 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA #5 

1

08/26/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$80,040

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0085 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA #4 

1

08/26/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$60,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0088 

SECT. 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

08/29/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

WILL ROGERS 

$196,555

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0088 

SECT. 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

09/27/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PATRICIA CAFFERATA 

$196,555

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0088 

SECT. 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

01/08/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

KAREN HENSON 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0088 

SECT. 1115 Demonstration GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

08/16/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

KAREN HENSON 

$196,555

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0092 

TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

1

09/09/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MICHAEL D HAYES 

$125,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0113 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

2

07/27/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$108,400

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0113 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

2

03/19/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0113 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

2

06/26/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0113 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

3

07/31/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$108,400

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0113 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

3

06/27/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0124 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-3) 

1

08/29/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

HAILEY KEMP 

$60,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0124 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-3) 

2

08/11/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TED WHITE 

$60,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0124 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-3) 

3

09/01/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TED WHITE 

$50,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0124 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 (PA-3) 

3

03/30/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TED WHITE 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0134 

OCSE RESEARCH GRANTS 1115 WAIVER 

1

09/29/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$703,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0137 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration-PROJECTS IN SUPPORT OF THE PAID INITTIATIVE 

1

08/16/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

KAMMI SIEMENS 

$100,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0137 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration-PROJECTS IN SUPPORT OF THE PAID INITTIATIVE 

2

09/07/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$75,000

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0137 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration-PROJECTS IN SUPPORT OF THE PAID INITTIATIVE 

2

01/13/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$0

TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

90FD0169 

URBAN FATHERS ASSET BUILDING PROJECT 

1

09/25/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

MICHAEL HAYES 

$85,000

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

90FD0049 

OCSE DEMOS – FATHERS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: A COLLABORAT’n BETWEEN CHILD SUPPORT 

1

08/31/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$167,748

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

90FD0141 

FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN THE IV-D CASELOAD 

1

09/01/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$99,348

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

90FD0141 

FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN THE IV-D CASELOAD 

2

09/19/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MARILYN R SMITH 

$75,000

US DHHS, ACF, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES 

90FD0115 

COLORADO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, PRIORITY AREA #2 

1

09/01/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

JOHN BERNHART 

$150,000

US DHHS, ACF, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES 

90FD0115 

COLORADO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, PRIORITY AREA #2 

2

09/26/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JOHN BERNHART 

$75,000

US DHHS, ACF, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES 

90FD0115 

COLORADO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, PRIORITY AREA #2 

2

08/10/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JOHN BERNHART 

$0

US DHHS, ACF, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES 

90FD0115 

COLORADO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, PRIORITY AREA #2 

2

06/15/2011 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

JOHN BERNHART 

$0

US DHHS, ACF, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES 

90FD0115 

COLORADO DEPT of HUMAN SERVICES, PRIORITY AREA #2 

3

08/31/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JOHN BERNHART 

$75,000

UT ST DIV OF AGING 

90FD0104 

UTAH DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES PRIORITY AREA 4 

1

06/23/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

MARK BRASHER 

$120,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0029 

NEW APPROACH TO COLLECTING ARREARS 

1

09/07/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG 

$96,396

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0032 

INCREASING THE COLLECT’n RATE FOR COURT-ORDERED CHILD SUPPORT 

1

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG 

$80,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0050 

SHARED PARTNERSHIP: INCREASING EFFECTIVENESS LOCATING NCP’S & ASSETS WITH ON-LIN 

1

09/06/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG 

$70,265

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0051 

SECT’n 1115 

1

08/30/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG 

$50,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0063 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA III) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG, JR. 

$100,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0074 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL YOUNG 

$150,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0074 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

NATHANIEL YOUNG 

-$6,421

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0082 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA 1 

1

08/29/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG,JR. 

$200,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0082 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

09/17/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TODD W ARESON 

$200,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0082 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA 1 

2

09/22/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TODD W ARESON 

$0

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0082 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

09/15/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TODD W ARESON 

$200,000

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0082 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA 1 

3

09/22/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TODD W ARESON 

$0

VA ST DEPT of SOCIAL SERVICES 

90FD0087 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT, PRIORITY AREA 5 

1

08/27/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

NATHANIEL L YOUNG,JR. 

$81,000

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0025 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

1

09/11/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JEFF COHEN 

$72,500

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0025 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JEFFERY COHEN 

$72,500

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0025 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

2

01/27/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

JEFFERY COHEN 

$0

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0025 

PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – ARRANGEMENTS FOR REVIEWING & ADJUSTING CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

3

08/25/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JEFFERY COHEN 

$72,500

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0053 

OCSE – SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

JEFF COHEN 

$199,941

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0053 

OCSE – SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY GRIFFITH 

$199,941

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0053 

OCSE – SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

09/08/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

CINDY GRIFFITH 

$0

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0053 

OCSE – SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

09/15/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

CINDY GRIFFITH 

-$42,007

VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0053 

OCSE – SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

3

09/12/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CINDY GRIFFITH 

$199,941

VT ST AGENCY FOR HUMAN SERVICES 

90FD0106 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 4 

1

06/29/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ROBERT B BUTTS 

$118,607

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0027 

DETERMININGTHE C0MPOSIT’n AND COLLECTIBILITY OF ARREARAGES 

1

09/07/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$75,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0031 

EXEMPLARY COLLECT’n PRACTICE THROUGH USE OF INTERNET-BASED LIEN REGISTRY 

1

09/14/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

ELLEN NOLAN 

$80,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0031 

EXEMPLARY COLLECT’n PRACTICE THROUGH USE OF INTERNET-BASED LIEN REGISTRY 

1

03/12/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

ELLEN NOLAN 

-$47,987

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0035 

A STUDY OF WASHINGTON CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS 

1

09/07/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$50,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0079 

DEMON. AND EVAL. OF CENTRALIZED MEDICAL SUPPORT ENFORCEMT 

1

09/10/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

STEVE STRAUSS 

$80,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0123 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

1

08/23/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$60,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0123 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

2

08/13/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CAROL WELCH 

$60,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0123 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

3

09/20/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CAROL WELCH 

$50,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0123 

OCSE SECT’n 1115 

3

01/21/2010 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CAROL WELCH 

$0

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0131 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration – PRIORITY AREA 2 

1

09/24/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$30,000

WA ST DEPT of SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0172 

BUILDING ASSETS FOR FATHERS AND FAMILIES 

1

09/26/2010 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

MICHAEL HORN 

$85,000

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0058 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$200,000

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0058 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

08/31/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CAROL WELCH 

$200,000

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0058 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

3

09/12/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CAROL WELCH 

$200,000

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0058 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

3

03/22/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CAROL WELCH 

$0

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0107 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

2

07/31/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CAROL WELCH 

$91,381

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0107 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

2

11/06/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CAROL WELCH 

$0

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0107 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

3

07/31/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

CAROL WELCH 

$91,390

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0107 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

3

05/26/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

CAROL WELCH 

$0

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0138 

FOCUS ON THE CHILD: FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN WASHINGTON STATE 

1

09/24/2009 

93564

OTHER 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$100,000

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0138 

FOCUS ON THE CHILD: FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN WASHINGTON STATE 

2

09/02/2010 

93564

OTHER 

Non-Competing Continuation 

MICHAEL HORN 

$75,000

WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

90FD0138 

FOCUS ON THE CHILD: FAMILY-CENTERED SERVICES FOR UNWED PARENTS IN WASHINGTON STATE 

2

02/08/2011 

93564

OTHER 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SARAH KOLLIN 

$0

WASHINGTON STATE DEPT. OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

90FD0107 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROJECT 

1

06/23/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

CAROL WELCH 

$108,400

WI ST DEPT of ADMINISTRAT’n 

90FD0026 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT EN 

1

09/08/1997 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

RONI HARPER 

$72,500

WI ST DEPT of ADMINISTRAT’n 

90FD0026 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT EN 

2

09/18/1998 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

SUSAN MATHISON 

$72,500

WI ST DEPT of ADMINISTRAT’n 

90FD0026 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT EN 

3

08/31/1999 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

SUSAN MATHISON 

$72,500

WI ST DEPT of ADMINISTRAT’n 

90FD0026 

PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS & THEIR RELAT’nSHIP TO THE SUPPORT EN 

3

06/30/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

SUSAN MATHISON 

$0

WI ST DEPT of INDUSTRY LABOR & HUMAN RELAT’nS 

90FD0054 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRQAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

TODD KUMMER 

$166,619

WI ST DEPT of INDUSTRY LABOR & HUMAN RELAT’nS 

90FD0054 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRQAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAUL SAEMAN 

$175,871

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0054 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRQAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

02/04/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

PAUL SAEMAN 

$0

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0054 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRQAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

3

09/23/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

PAUL SAEMAN 

$172,724

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0105 

PRIORITY AREA 1: IMPROVED SERVICES TO NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS 

1

07/11/2005 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

SUE KINAS 

$108,400

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0105 

PRIORITY AREA 1: IMPROVED SERVICES TO NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS 

1

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

TODD KUMMER 

$0

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0105 

PRIORITY AREA 1: IMPROVED SERVICES TO NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS 

2

07/31/2006 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TODD KUMMER 

$108,400

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0105 

PRIORITY AREA 1: IMPROVED SERVICES TO NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS 

3

09/26/2007 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

TODD KUMMER 

$108,400

WISCONSIN DEPT of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 

90FD0105 

PRIORITY AREA 1: IMPROVED SERVICES TO NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS 

3

07/07/2008 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

TODD KUMMER 

$0

WV ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0039 

“PARENTHOOD AND YOU” (PAY) 

1

09/05/2000 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

SUSAN HARRAH 

$50,000

WV ST DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES 

90FD0103 

WV DEPT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

1

09/22/2004 

93564

Demonstration 

NEW 

ELIZABETH JORDAN 

$43,000

WY ST DEPT of FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0061 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

1

09/15/2001 

93563

Demonstration 

NEW 

NANCY Q ROBERTS 

$124,993

WY ST DEPT of FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0061 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

1

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

HOLLY CLARK 

-$4,377

WY ST DEPT of FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0061 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

09/15/2002 

93563

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JOANNE MADRID 

$102,511

WY ST DEPT of FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0061 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

10/01/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

HOLLY CLARK 

$0

WY ST DEPT of FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0061 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

2

09/22/2009 

93564

Demonstration 

OTHER REVISION 

HOLLY CLARK 

-$11,272

WY ST DEPT of FAMILY SERVICES 

90FD0061 

SECT’n 1115 Demonstration PROGRAM (PRIORITY AREA I) 

3

09/23/2003 

93564

Demonstration 

Non-Competing Continuation 

JOANNE VERMEULEN 

                               $ 71,967

~ ~ ~ (TOTAL — per my export to Excel and using the “sum” function — is over $22 million — a spit in the bucket to the larger system, is over $22,000,000. For a contrast, the Florida (only) Dept. of Revenue HHS grants for child support (all categories, not sorted by year) shows as:  $ 2,213,325,477:  two billion, two hundred thirteen million, etc.   This is what caught my eye. Did you notice Maryland, “Baltimore Healthy Marriages” — if only marriage were healthier, maybe there’d be fewer poor people on welfare…. (?) Indiana I didn’t see anything catch my eye, but I already know their Child Services Dept. not Child Support, but Child Services — got to serve the whole child, right? — on the page referring to child SUPPORT links straight out to Fathers and Families and recommends it apply for a grant.  One can hardly distinguish the two.  And Indiana is ALREADY fatherhood land, through Evan Bayh (jr.) and many more entitities. I would bet that most of these projects are labeled “Discretionary.”  At any rate, one can see the variety of Institutions getting them, and perhaps the investigators backgrounds may or may not be interesting (Mr. Hayes sure was, I found him conferencing up in MN with a Fatherhood Summit, fascinating — as with the increasing success of the “parental alienation” theory in custody-switching, more and more MOTHERS are going to be the noncustodial parents and subject to a child support order, wage garnishment, etc.  I know one Mom like that, presently, who was made homeless while working FT, and a DV survivor too.  Fancy that. So how will it work for the mothers when the entire structure, mammoth in scale — has been geared to fathers on the basis that the courts are biased towards Moms and theres a fatherlessness crisis in the land which child support system could fix?

Section 1115″ of the Social Security Act: Means, “Let’s Demonstrate!”

SSA logo: link to Social Security Online home

(a)

Sec. 1115. [42 U.S.C. 1315](a) In the case of any experimental, pilot, or demonstration project which, in the judgment of the Secretary, is likely to assist in promoting the objectives of title I, X, XIV, XVI, or XIX, or part A or D of title IV, in a State or States—

Hence the term flying around in our custody, divorce, child support circles, “TITLE IV-D” — which kicks in a different set of standards (and removes some protections) for example, if a person leaving domestic violence has to resort to welfare in any form.  This becomes a “Title IV-D” case up front and is flagged, from what I understand, for potentially different treatment — IN THE CHILD SUPPORT SYSTEM, AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY IN THE CUSTODY PROCESS. WHY — because other funds can be freed up.  For example, funds in this particular divorce or separation to promote healthy marriage… Note:  one person — the Secretary of the Dept. of Health and Human Services (I think, as I read this) — has the discretion to justify projects that do not have to ACTUALLY assist Title IV-D purposes, but in this ONE PERSON’S judgment, be LIKELY to.  No wonder the place is full of demonstration experiments.

(1) the Secretary may waive compliance with any of the requirements of section 24024541002,14021602, or 1902, as the case may be, to the extent and for the period he finds necessary to enable such State or States to carry out such project, and

The current Secretary of Health and Human Services is a woman…. with power by this Section to waive the lawfor demonstration projects.  Kind of sounds like kingly (queenly) powers, doesn’t it?  Is the public notified how often, how much, and why these laws are waived?  (The grants lookups gives a clue as do other publications).

(2)(A) costs of such project which would not otherwise be included as expenditures under section 3,45510031403, 1603, or 1903, as the case may be, and which are not included as part of the costs of projects under section 1110, shall, to the extent and for the period prescribed by the Secretary, be regarded as expenditures under the State plan or plans approved under such title, or for administration of such State plan or plans, as may be appropriate, and

Permission granted to Secretary to knight certain expenditures as crusade-worthy and bill the public. Just trust us, it’s a good idea, or likely to be a good idea.

(B) costs of such project which would not otherwise be a permissable use of funds under part A of title IV and which are not included as part of the costs of projects under section 1110, shall to the extent and for the period prescribed by the Secretary, be regarded as a permissable use of funds under such part.

Permission granted to the Secretary to alter perceptions of project costs.

In addition, not to exceed $4,000,000 of the aggregate amount appropriated for payments to States under such titles for any fiscal year beginning after June 30, 1967, shall be available, under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may establish, for payments to States to cover so much of the cost of such projects as is not covered by payments under such titles and is not included as part of the cost of projects for purposes of section 1110.

Permission granted to the Secretary to add up to $4 million aggregate (per project?  Per year?) just in case previous mind-bending, law-bending 1115 exceptsion weren’t quite enough.  I imagine “payments” means, up-front? because in most projects, for the rest of us contractors, costs come later, or are billed at the end of the project after a certain amount down.

(b)

(b) In the case of any experimental, pilot, or demonstration project undertaken under subsection (a) to assist in promoting the objectives of part D of title IV, the project— (1) must be designed to improve the financial well-being of children or otherwise improve the operation of the child support program; (2) may not permit modifications in the child support program which would have the effect of disadvantaging children in need of support; and (3) must not result in increased cost to the Federal Government under part A of such title.

WELL, who is going to see that (b) (1-3) is adhered to, as most people are too stressed to even know that these projects are taking place, and what impact it has had on the target, pilot, demonstrated upon population?  It’s a lucky person who happens to notice they are in place, outside of the professions involved in demonstrating (etc.).There’s anecdotal evidence in the form of newspaper headlines and other protest movements that some of this fatherhood agenda is getting kids killed and keeping them in the custody of batterers (convicted) and molesters (convicted), they are experiencing abduction, and in some cases child support and contact with the other (originally caretaking) parent is totally eliminated.  However section (b) doesn’t say it actually HAS to improve the financial well-being of the children, just that it must “be designed” (in the opinion of one person — the Secretary of the HHS, when you look at who approves it) to do so. Perhaps there is some leeway here for upstanding and alert citizens to protest some of the more egregious SECTION 1115 PROJECTS above…  Although they are small compared to the total enforcement costs — what are they being used for?

(c)(1)(A) The Secretary shall enter into agreements with up to 8 States submitting applications under this subsection for the purpose of conducting demonstration projects in such States to test and evaluate the use, with respect to individuals who received aid under part A of title IV in the preceding month (on the basis of the unemployment of the parent who is the principal earner), of a number greater than 100 for the number of hours per month that such individuals may work and still be considered to be unemployed for purposes of section 407.If any State submits an application under this subsection for the purpose of conducting a demonstration project to test and evaluate the total elimination of the 100-hour rule, the Secretary shall approve at least one such application.

The entire welfare system is based on a concept of the 40-hour week as a means to financial well-being, even though the wealthiest people in the country, while they may work 40 hrs a week or more, if they love their work (or have chosen to run businesses, or a business, that requires this) do not HAVE to.  This is why they have time to run around and make sure the rest of society is occupied with the 40 hour week standard.  School is based on this general concept too — quantity versus quality and efficiency.  Crowd control.  Perhaps this is why we have such masses of peasants, etc. that need to be managed — because they are viewed and treated as unable to manage their own lives, direct their futures, LEARN significant things, and achieve beyond middle management level in life. So, the goal is to see if the 100 hour rule can be totally eliminated?   This section is a little unclear, the reasoning that was behind it.  Perhaps I haven’t spent enough months or years on welfare to understand this fully.  I DO understand the concept of hours spent waiting in lines at government offices of all sorts. The 2nd “shall” seems to mean that if not even 1 state came up with a decent plan (unlikely, but if this were so), the Secretary had to approve at least one, anyhow.

(B) If any State with an agreement under this subsection so requests, the demonstration project conducted pursuant to such agreement may test and evaluate the complete elimination of the 100-hour rule and of any other durational standard that might be applied in defining unemployment for purposes of determining eligibility under section 407.

Sounds like when unemployment figures are circulated in the newspapers, these may not be included — people being demonstrated upon and participating in special projects proposed by states, and baptized by the Secretary of Health and Human Resources (IF I’ve named the right Secretary – if not, it would be some other single person over a huge dept.) — so the figures are actually higher than reported if so. New Deal, much?  All of us must pay for the projects of some of us.  This is called Taxation, but not exactly representation.   It’s not so much the amounts (relative to the CSE enforcement budget) but the principle, and the fact that it’s acceptable to demonstrate simply because people got a Title IV-D status at any point in their lives, or were born into such a household. In the case of Child Support system, it has already been declared by the past three (male) presidents that FATHERHOOD is the thing, and worthy of investment.  So of the approximately half the population  (females are 50+% of the US) existing here, and paying taxes here (of the working population, I imagine that’s safe to say.  How many stay at home 100% of the time Moms are around any more?) — of that %, we are paying for projects aimed at teh other gender, and which may benefit us -and our female and male children — if they do at all — only INdirectly. Is that really good for the men, either?  Does it make them better men to know that they can either pay child support or enroll in a program or go to jail? (which is often the case — see Kentucky Court system, for example).  Or that they can beat the system through these programs and get “even” with their ex, to the detriment of the public? Is a Section 1115 activity good just because the Secretary of the HHS (you gotta admit,a busy person) says it is? How much discretion are we going to allow?  Take your head off the next Presidential candidates every now and then, and look at some of these things. Future posts I hope to just put up a few figures (charts) for people to get a mental image of the scope of this OCSE.  When I said, it ought to be eliminated, I meant it. There are so many practices which undermine the legal system – — unbelievable.    And, I repeat, people are being killed over these things.  When there are hotly contested divorces and separation, one of the things we hear the most griping about is child support system — whether from the Mom’s side or the Dads.  Remember Silva v. Garcetti.  Remember Maximus…~ ~ ~

The word “MAXIMUS” is Latin for Largest, greatest.   

Happy Fatherhood Day — and where would “Fatherhood” be without the HHS?

with 6 comments

DISCLAIMER:

The tone of this post is going to be flippant and sometimes sarcastic.  This is NOT aimed at individual fathers, men, and all-round great people who have mentored, helped, befriended, or encouraged young men (and women) to be their best, or simply stood with them through tough times in life.  I am in this blog targeting the professional trainers, the professional know-it-alls, and their habit of demanding more and more public money to build more and more “resource centers” and run “institutes” with less and less proof of any results.  Although the word “evidence-based practice” is throughout the literature justifying why we should sponsor this habit as a public benefit.

Where’s the benefit?  At what point can we demand something besides anecdotal evidence traded in policy institutes run without public input far away from the “delivery of services” locations.  Have homicide, drug, femicide, rape etc. levels gone down AND can this be directly tied to any single, or any set of, training organizations?  The answer to that I’ll bet is simply N.O.

But it is necessary to “out” and mock, ridicule (and reduce) the baloney, the fallacies that simply are opening the door to more federal trainers eager to get access to (in particular) young boys, or adolescents — and again, I’m talking at the institutional levels.  Last post? I showed that one of the Fathers of the Fatherhood movement was a Seventh Day Adventist  (Dr. Charles Ballard), who writes on a page called “Responsible Fatherhood, Faith, Marriage and Family”

God designed Adam to be a covering for his wife, and a protector for his children. More than this, Adam was to be the SERVANT leader. The SERVANT head, and SERVANT priest. Adam was to keep Eve at all times by his side . . . .
Then it happened: first to Eve, then to Adam. An outsider usurped the power of dominion entrusted to them. This outsider, Satan, decided to put asunder what God had joined together. This outsider was allowed to come between the man and his wife. Sin entered the world. Then a tide of woe fell upon God’s wonderful creation.

Any time such a “servant/priest” (i.e. any man in a relationship with a woman, and especially with children) is served with a protection or restraining order, or is convicted of assault and battery upon an “intimate partner” someone indeed has come between him and his Eve.  Thank God!  In this mindset, that’s bad.

TAGGS — apparently a few different “Ballards” are very much into this:

The fifth column in (before CFDA number beginning in “93 _ _ _” is the year of the project.

ACF HEALTH PROMOTION PROGRAMS UNIV OF OKLAHOMA NORMAN OK DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS IN POST ADOPTION SERVICES AND MARRIAGE EDUCATION 1 93652 SOCIAL SERVICES BALLARD FARILYN $ 250,000
ACF INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON DC ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM (IDA) 1 93602 DEMONSTRATION  FRANCES BALLARD $ 1,000,000
ACF INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON DC EVALUATION OF THE INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93647 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) CHARLES A BALLARD $ 180,000
ACF INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON DC RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD AND STABLE FAMILY PROJECT (EARMARK) 1 93647 DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A BALLARD $ 99,350
ACF INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON DC RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS 01 93647 DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A. BALLARD $ 170,000
ACF INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON DC UNSOLICITED/CAPACITY BUILDING AND PROGRAM ENCHANCEMENT OF PHILADELPHIA MODEL 1 93647 DEMONSTRATION FRANCES H BALLARD $ 500,000
ACF OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES OKLAHOMA CITY OK HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 8 1 93086 DEMONSTRATION  FARILYN BALLARD $ 549,791
ACF OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES OKLAHOMA CITY OK PROJECT TO DEVELOP PROGRAMS TO STRENGTHEN MARRIAGES 1 93608 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) FARILYN BALLARD $ 200,000
ACF Texas Healthy Marriage and Relationship Initiative DALLAS TX COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE 1 93009 DEMONSTRATION VALERIE BALLARD $ 50,000

So far, Texas, Oklahoma & DC.

This report didn’t show years, so here’s one that does, I’ve picked a few samples from a simple search, last name “Ballard”; out of 156 returns (Many were medical) these appear to relate to marriage/fatherhood components.

HEALTH PROMOTION PROGRAMS UNIV OF OKLAHOMA NORMAN 90CO1029 DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS IN POST ADOPTION SERVICES AND MARRIAGE EDUCATION 09/12/2006 93652 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT SOCIAL SERVICES BALLARD FARILYN $ 250,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON 90EI0127 ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM (IDA) 09/10/2001 93602 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION FRANCES BALLARD $ 1,000,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON 90PR0003 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS 09/30/1995 93647 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A. BALLARD $ 85,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON 90PR0004 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS 09/30/1995 93647 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A. BALLARD $ 85,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON 90XP0014 EVALUATION OF THE INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 09/15/1999 93647 DISCRETIONARY SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) CHARLES A BALLARD $ 180,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON 90XP0024 UNSOLICITED/CAPACITY BUILDING AND PROGRAM ENCHANCEMENT OF PHILADELPHIA MODEL 07/27/2001 93647 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION FRANCES H BALLARD $ 500,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION WASHINGTON 90XP0043 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD AND STABLE FAMILY PROJECT (EARMARK) 06/30/2003 93647 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A BALLARD
OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES OKLAHOMA CITY 90CW1115 PROJECT TO DEVELOP PROGRAMS TO STRENGTHEN MARRIAGES 09/29/2003 93608 DISCRETIONARY SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) FARILYN BALLARD $ 200,000
OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES OKLAHOMA CITY 90FE0030 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 8 09/24/2006 93086 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION FARILYN BALLARD $ 549,791
TEEN FATHER PROGRAM: A FAMILY SERVICE CLEVELAND D67MP01550 THE AMERICAN MALE LEADERSHIP & EMPOWERMENT PROGRAM 02/15/1995 93910 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A. BALLARD $ 0
TEEN FATHER PROGRAM: A FAMILY SERVICE CLEVELAND D67MP01550 THE AMERICAN MALE LEADERSHIP & EMPOWERMENT PROGRAM 07/31/1995 93910 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION CHARLES A. BALLARD $ 0
Texas Healthy Marriage and Relationship Initiative DALLAS 90IJ0623 COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE 09/24/2006 93009 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION VALERIE BALLARD $ 50,000

Frances Ballard (Mrs. Charles A. Ballard) is known to me from this organization, a recent one also on the HHS funds path:

WOMEN IN FATHERHOOD, INC.  (“WIFI” for short):

Frances Ballard

Petrice Sams-Abiodun

Frances Ballard is the Executive Director for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). In her role she is responsible for the strategic direction and leadership for activities regarding the NRFC, including the coordination of the media campaign, clearinghouse and Web site, Training and Technical Assistance (T & TA) to responsible fatherhood demonstration sites, and building relationships and partnerships for NRFC. She has over 20 years experience working with fathers, families and healthcare.

(Notice — women & mothers — if they exist — are lumped in with children and do not exist as individuals.  The fathers, however, do.  Even “healthcare” has an identity.  This is totally in accord with the religious statements above — Eve was to be at all times by Adam’s side, even though I doubt this Executive Director has been to her husband.  However, I doubt that she’d veer from the primary policy — promoting fatherhood and ignoring mothers / women as individuals..  At least when describing the programs…)

er previous positions include 12 years serving as the Vice President and Chief Operating Officer for The Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization; Consultant to The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Making Connections Program; ** Director of Corporate Development and Clinical Manager-Ambulatory Care, Grace Hospital; and Nurse Consultant/Program Developer, The Institute For Responsible Fatherhood and Family Development. She holds a Masters of Science Degree in Nursing Administration, a B.A. in Social Work, an A.S. in Nursing, and numerous executive management certifications. She is married to Dr. Charles A. Ballard, “pioneer” of the Fatherhood Movement and the mother of their three children, Jonathan, Lydia and Christopher.

**Annie E. Casey Foundation funds many fatherhood programs, and they are indeed a large foundation.

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

FARILYN BALLARD I’ll deduce is not a relative, but on the same theme, and highly placed to run fatherhood programs, possibly similar on the inside:

A devout Christian who sings in her church’s choir, Ballard prays and reads the Bible daily and volunteers. She’s a wife and mother who loves her husband, Dan Ballard, her two grown daughters and crossword puz- zles. Whimsical items like Garden Divas adorn her office, and she’ll readily tell you about her two dogs, Molly and Bosco. . . .

Farilyn Ballard: 

Where Faith And Commitment Make A Difference

By Kevan Goff-Parker Inside OKDHS Editor  (OCT 2004 article):

The Many Sides of Farilyn Ballard

As chief operating officer, Fari- lyn Ballard’s well-known serious side is often seen at OKDHS as she dili- gently works long hours tackling the agency’s many challenges.   It’s a serious job, but Ballard enjoys the responsibility. She leads the daily operations of the state’s largest agency and 4,000 employees from Field Operations, Children and Family Services Division and Family Support Services Division.

Oklahoma had one of the largest (initially) Marriage Demonstration projects, I heard…    it is called “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative”  (“OMI”)

Ms. Ballard was there.

Oklahoma Marriage Initiative logo

Marriage Research – OMI

She has developed a middle range theory of the experience of expectant and newfatherhood in Research Advisory Group meetings include: Farilyn Ballard
http://www.okmarriage.org/Research/MarriageResearch.asp – Cached – Similar

This OMI is also a project of the Public Strategies, Inc. I mentioned with, I THINK (might be wrong…), ties to Center for Policy Research (I believe) -out of Denver.  The common personnel between the Denver-based Center for Policy Research and the (now international) “AFCC” is one of the co-founders, Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. (as I understand matters), and the slant is definitely pro-Richard Gardner, Pro-Parental Alienation theory (“PAS”) throughout.  As opposed to, say, feminist — at all…..   For an idea of what “OMI” is (referring to structure, funding, purpose, and reach, etc.) read this:

Mary Myrick, APR – Public Strategies

Mary MyrickMs. Myrick is the President of Public Strategies, an Oklahoma-based firm, and Project Manager for the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative (OMI). The OMI is widely recognized as the country’s first statewide, comprehensive program model for changing a state’s divorce culture and creating/providing services to reflect a broad-based commitment to family formation and marriage. Under Myrick’s leadership the OMI has recruited a highly-distinguished Research Advisory Board consisting of state and national experts on marriage, divorce, and low-income families; has developed and implemented the first comprehensive statewide survey to assess marriage/divorce values and demographics**; is implementing a multi-sector strategy, collaborating with multiple state agencies, service providers, educators, religious institutions, businesses and the media; and has launched a statewide skills-based Marriage and Relationship Education Service Delivery System, utilizing the research-based PREP as its core curriculum. Myrick speaks nationally about the successful OMI model and has provided hours of technical assistance to several states and communities committed to implementing their own marriage initiatives.

**interesting.  Drawing on ALL marriage/divorce data?  Census?  That colloborating with “everyone” so reminds me of AFCC (although their range is not quite “everyone”) Pulling in MULTIPLE state agencies (for probably program funding and access to population) Service providers (access to population, and training the in the right way to provide service) Educators (naturally) Religious Institutions (OK, here we go  . . . . ) Businesses (funding, sponsorship, promotion, right?) and the media — sound like a monopoly yet? Are there any anti-trust even CONCEPTS at work here?

This can be done in part because in 1995, President Clinton issued an Executive Order about Fatherhood.  You should read it sometime (again).  This was like an ignition that blasted free all kinds of information and technology, and monetary flow — a virtual riverhood of father-promotion and education.  ….

ABOUT US:

about us
Established in 1990, Public Strategies (PSI) began as a public relations and event planning firm with only two staff members…PSI has grown into a culturally and professionally diverse firm with 150 staff members, and offices in Oklahoma, Colorado and Washington, D.C.

The Denver office is walking distance to “Center for Policy Research” in Denver, their name is found on many HHS reports, and their personnel extremely influential, as I have blogged.  @

1121 Grant St # B
Denver, CO 80203-5402
(303) 830-0400
Public Strategies BEGAN as a Public Relations firm, but with this federal funding (at least) has morphed into much more (touch cursor to the URL for a summary box to display, which shows how it works) :

As a visionary leader in public-private partnerships, Ms. Myrick developed Public Strategies (PSI) from a public relations and event planning firm into a leader in business development, strategic planning, and project management. She manages and continues to add to the firm’s diverse partnerships and directs PSI’s portfolio of national, state and community youth and family programs.

Ms. Myrick also leads efforts to provide technical assistance to other agencies and organizations including the Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) grantees, the Texas Healthy and Human Services Commission, and several policy research organizations. (incl. CPR?)

As we can see below (in the list) the bulk of the work is DIRECT US Government-related:

Other Projects:

Publications that Mary has contributed to:

That’s funny, Dr. Richard Warshak’s reunification program was trade-marked “Building Bridges,” which is “treatment” for the extremely alienated child &/or family.

Among the team is a “Director of Fatherhood Services”

Calvin WilliamsCalvin Williams
Director of Fatherhood Services.  He is the “thought leader” in PSI’s fatherhood programs:

As the thought leader for the development of promising practices in the areas of fatherhood for each of the programs that PSI manages, Calvin fills a critical role on the Public Strategies team.His expertise in the fatherhood is now being utilized in the PREP curriculum which he co-authored, “On My Shoulders.” In his new role, Calvin develops programs and interventions targeted to non-custodial parents that encourage cooperative parenting, and provide insight and guidance, as well as resources and tools that assist in providing high quality services to low income men and their families.Before joining PSI, Calvin worked as Program Director, Operations Director, and Acting Executive Director for Services United for Mothers and Adolescents (SUMA) Fatherhood Project in Cincinnati, Ohio

He develops programs targeted to the court system, and probably child support as well, wouldn’t you say?

2003 “Ohio Practitioners’ Network for Fathers and Family”

“In May of 2003 (it reads) the Center for Families and Children in Ohio hosted the first “Fathers Matter” conference in the State of Ohio…a diverse group of stakeholders and practitioners was brought together to discuss the importance of fatherhood and the barriers faced by practitioners. … most participants agreed that there was a need for a Fatherhood Practitioner network in Ohio.”

(to clarify, a “fatherhood practitioner” need not be male — or even a father.  A “Fatherhood Practitioner” is closer to a public relationship or program development function, from what I can tell.  I know that in order to play football, sooner or later one must actually practice football. Generally speaking, there are coaches, right?  These are the self-declared fatherhood coaches, and what they are speaking of is obtaining a platform to enact their policies (and funding, of course).   Whatever these policies be, the “label” is “FATHERHOOD.”   I suggest that all reasonably minded fathers (and mothers) who are unaware of the extent and network of this system consider the impact of it on their bottom line, i.e., their wallets.  Because I assure us, the field is everexpanding, alongside “domestic Violence Advocates” (what — do they ADVOCATE for domestic violence?  Or just research it).  Between the two of them, and the courts — what’s left of any public benefit $$ is going to go the other direction.  Because once in the house, these birds (and I DO mean also the “battered women’s” side of the policy as well) will ONLY continue to expand.

One advantage is that the US Congress, and I’d still bet most state Congresses, are primarily male, in fact white male.  SO the chances that programs of this theme are not going to speak to their gut level sense of masculinity and what’s “right” with the world is slim.

For example, in or about 2000, the good citizens of Ohio — or at least their elected representatives — voted in a ‘FATHERHOOD COMMISSION.”  to find it, simply type in “http://Ohio.fatherhood.gov”     I linked to the “funding” page which summarizes.  Don’t neglect to click on “More” under the first link, where you will see a column of cool graphics & logos, such as:

And shows an entire range in which “fatherhood” can be inculcated, from Early Head Start (basically before they stop nursing) through college, including county government (cf.  “Board of County Commissioners”) recover groups, community action groups, et.    THere is NO area of life and human practice which couldn’t use more fatherhood training and promotion.  Being a long-term noncustodial mother, in large part because of my ignorance of the impact of these grant programs at the on the courts, locally —  I think that every one in the US should fund more of these (yeah, right).

Ohio Commission on Fatherhood Funded Programs

Funded Fatherhood Programs
The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood awards grants to exemplary fatherhood programs throughout the state of Ohio each biennium. The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood recently completed another round of fatherhood grants for 2010-2011. The Commission awarded grants to nine fatherhood programs located through out the state of Ohio in the amount of $1.5 million.  More>>
Fatherhood Regions
Fatherhood regions mirrors Ohio Department of Development regions. This map will reflect fatherhood programs, activities, fatherhood initiatives and resources within each region. More>>
Ohio County Fatherhood Initiative
On January 18th, the Ohio Commission on Fatherhood launched the Ohio County Fatherhood Initiative.   Eleven counties have been selected to participate in this pilot project.  The Ohio County Fatherhood Initiative is a six-month process during which county leaders identify specific needs in their county and develop a fatherhood action plan.  If your county would like to participate in a future training, submit the on-line form to be added to the waiting list.   More>>

Back to Public Strategies, Inc. (and its government-sponsored programs, such as how to collaborate with DV groups and make sure they aren’t too radical, such as actually advocating for complete separation where there has been ongoing criminal activity by one parent upon another, or the children — like ”

These “Bridges” have indeed been built between fatherhood and DV programs so that their practices (and in great part, philosophies) are indistinguishable any more.  BOTH support more and more supervised visitation, trainings, and continue to conference on “best practices.”  BOTH (also a Duluth Model concept) assert that “Coordinated Community Response” = best response.  I don’t agree.  At all.  All this does is build bridges between agencies and a wall of difference between service providers and those served — two different classes and two different outlook.  Client v. service provider, not Human-to-human.

This list of “PSI” clients are well known (at least by name) to anyone looking into the grants and funding of the HHS-sponsored Healthy Marriage Movement; that is basically what the clients are.  Without these clients, PSI would not have a business, or would be one PR firm among many.

http://www.publicstrategies.com/default1.asp?ID=2

Government Agencies

• Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
Family Expectations, a program managed by Public Strategies was recently profiledby the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Office of Family Assistance as one of the most successful Healthy Marriage programs in the country.

• Oklahoma Department of Human Services ( OK DHS)
• Oklahoma Association of Youth Services
• Oklahoma Department of Health
• Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs
• Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF)
• Louisiana Department of Social Services
• Texas Health and Human Services Commission (TX HHSC)

Research Organizations

• Texas Tech University (TTU) – College of Human Sciences
• MDRC  (SEARCH MY BLOG)
• Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR)
• National Resource Center on Domestic Violence (NRCDV)
• Oklahoma State University (OSU) – Research and Graduate Studies

Nonprofit Organizations

• Annie E. Casey Foundation (AEC)
• Johnson Foundation
• The Dibble Institute
• It’s My Community Initiative (IMCI)
• Oklahoma Academy of Family Physicians (OAFP)
• Harding School of Fine Arts

Corporate Clients

• Lewin
• ICF
• Pal Tech
• Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP)
• Hill & Knowlton  (I read this client just bought PSI, one can check)

• Oklahoma State Medical Association (OSMA)

The “big guns” behind this firm, then, turn out to be either (a) federal funds or (b) foundations, primarily.  MDRC (I posted again recently on this one, under “will the real MPDI please stand up?”) — it’s huge…

So were these scholars, experts, and I suppose “practitioners” although the fastest way to practice “fatherhood” might just be to join the AFCC, and several I recognize.

OMI Research Advisory Group Members:

Paul Amato, PhD – Pennsylvania State University
Ronald B. Cox, Jr., PhD, CFLE – Oklahoma State University
Robin Dion, MS – Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.  (an organization that fulfils HHS, gov’t contracts and does research)
Kathryn Edin, PhD – Harvard University
David Fournier, PhD – Oklahoma State University
Norval Glenn, PhD – University of Texas
Sarah Halpern-Meekin, PhD – Bowling Green State [Ohio] University
Ron Haskins, PhD – Brookings Institution  {originator of the TItle IV-D / Access Visitation law which enables the research and demonstration element, and facilitates (increased, is the general idea) “noncustodial parent contact” through federal grants to the states.  1996ff.  These ARE “fatherhood” grants — they do not help mothers with visitation difficulties increase access, although the wording reads “parents.”  i.e., he is a central person in this mix…
Alan J. Hawkins, PhD- Pennsylvania State University
Pamela Jordan, PhD, RN, – University of Washington
Christine Johnson, PhD – Oklahoma State University
Howard Markman, PhD – University of Denver
Steve Nock, PhD – University of Virginia (Our colleague and friend passed away early in 2008)
Theodora Ooms, MSW – Center for Law and Social Policy
Galena K. Rhoades, PhD – University of Denver
Scott Stanley, PhD- University of Denver

OF THIS LIST, I’ll bet there is some AFCC, starting with Paul Amato

Paul Amato

Dr. Amato is a Professor of Sociology, Demography, and Family Studies at Pennsylvania State University. His research interests include marital quality, the causes and consequences the causes and consequences of divorce, and subjective well-being over the life course.   ((If one is measuring subjective well-being, the research possibilities are endless, particularly if the target range is so narrowly defined as married and divorced people over a lifetime…))  He received the Reuben Hill Award from the National Council on Family Relations for the best published article on the family in 1993, 1999, and 2001. He received the Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research Award from the American Association of Family and Conciliation Courts in 2002, the Distinction in the Social Sciences Award from Pennsylvania State University in 2003, and the Distinguished Career Award from the Family Section of the American Sociological Association in 2006.

Ms. DION, of Mathematica, Inc. — a group I remember well because their label shows up on so many fatherhood studies:


Robin Dion

Irwin  Garfinkel, PhD

Sara McLanahan     Ms. Dion (first of the 3 photos here) is a Research Psychologist at Mathematica Policy Research Inc., which has offices in Washington D.C. and Princeton, NJ. This widely respected research firm has conducted studies in health care, welfare, education, employment and nutrition. Robin is currently the Principal Investigator for a federally funded research project, Strengthening Families with a Child Born Out-of-Wedlock. The project grows out of the Fragile Families research project directed by Sara McLanahan (Princeton University, photo above) and Irwin Garfinkle (Columbia University).  [[who also, I believe, publish frequently with Ron Haskins, Ron Mincy, and others]]  “Sara McLanahan, Professor of Sociology at Princeton University, studies the relationship between family structure, income, and child outcomes.”

Note Dr. McLanahan’s study emphasis, in part:  “he is the author of many articles and books including Fathers Under Fire: The Revolution in Child Support Enforcement (1998); Social Policies for Children (1996); Growing Up with a Single Parent (1994); Child Support and Child Wellbeing (1994); Child Support Assurance: Design Issues, Expected Impacts, and Political Barriers, as Seen from Wisconsin (1992); and Single Mothers and Their Children: A New American Dilemma (1986).  Her degree in Sociology is from Univ of Texas at Austin….  She also has published, and will continue to, with Ron Haskins.  Get the general idea?  (research, sociology, behavioral sciences, economic policy, etc.)  She’s a researcher.

Dr. McLanahan currently directs the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, a nationally-representative longitudinal birth cohort study of approximately 5,000 families, including 3,700 unmarried parents and their children. The study is designed to shed light on the health and development of low-income children, the impact of family relationships and dynamics on child wellbeing, and the impact of social policies on family relationships and child wellbeing.

Dr. McLanahan is also editor-in-chief of The Future of Children, a policy journal on children’s issues produced by Princeton University and the Brookings Institution. The journal’s latest issue, “Fragile Families,” (Vol. 20, No. 2) is co-edited by Sara McLanahan, Irv Garfinkel, and Ronald Mincy. Upcoming issues include: “Immigrant Children (Vol. 21, No. 1) co-edited by Ron Haskins and Marta Tienda. (available in spring 2011), “Work and Family Balance,

Dr. Garfinkle (I recognize the name, but dont see it as much, somehow):

Irwin Garfinkel is the Mitchell I. Ginsberg Professor of Contemporary Urban Problems and co-director of the Columbia Population Research Center. A social worker and an economist by training, he has authored or co-authored over 150 scientific articles and eleven books **on poverty, income transfers, program evaluation, single parent families and child support, and the welfare state. His research on child support influenced legislation in Wisconsin and other American states, the US Congress, Great Britain, Australia, and Sweden. He is currently the co-principal investigator of the Fragile Families and Child Well being Study and is completing a book entitled The American Welfare State: Laggard or Leader?. . . . . .

**this is, of course, what social worker/economist Ph.D.s can do.  They write.  A LOT.  Their writing sometimes becomes policy…

Columbia has both the Population Research (Center) and the “Fathers, Children, and Family” (Center for Research on…), run by colleague Dr. Ronald D. Mincy.

Here they are in Wisconsin (2009) running a conference at the “IRP” or “Institute for Research on Poverty.”  Poverty is a pressing issue, therefore RESEARCHING IT (which can be quite profitable and professionally advantageous) is of course important work.    The idea being of course, to stop it.  Notice that in the word “Population” (Garfinkle’s center) or the title of the “CRFCFW” — no noun representing any group of females even exists, not even the word “mother.”  Mothers are IN these groups (Population, Families, and alas even some girls definitely not legal adults, i.e., they are CHILDREN) — but not mentioned.  Father acknowledges the male gender.  No word in there acknowledges the female gender — yet females are at least half the population in the U.S. and a bit more, and worldwide, unless something unnatural (genocide, war, or infanticide of female babies in certain cultures) has come in.  How close is this to “Adam must always have Eve at his side” or disaster will result to the world?   . . . . . .

Young Disadvantaged Men: Fathers, Families, Poverty, and Policy

September 2009, University of Wisconsin–Madison

This conference brought together scholars and policymakers to examine strategies for reducing barriers to marriage and father involvement, designing child support and other public policies to encourage the involvement of fathers, and coping with fathers who have multiple child support responsibilities.** Representatives of the Obama Administration were in Madison to respond to the ideas put forth at the conference.

**It’s a little hard to keep promoting the theory that children MUST wake up with a biological father in the home, when these children live in different homes.  This ignores the fact that women, as well as men, actually do remarry, or have new partners.   Or that sometimes they do not, and their children still succeed.  One example I can think of is — in Wisconsin — a state Rep!   Congresswoman Gwen Moore.

IRP hosted this working conference in coordination with the Center for Research on Fathers, Children and Family Well-Being and the Columbia Population Research Center, at Columbia University. Tim SmeedingRon Mincy, and Irv Garfinkelorganized the conference and co-edited a conference volume. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and EvaluationU.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is also providing financial support for this conference.

COnferences are definitely not free, and if we are to properly study Poverty by studying Fathers, the United States HHS might as well get involved and contribute.  The institutes that organized this have their own funders, of course (Foundational, and most likely government) but extra help was needed for this conference, obviously.

Conference papers are available in the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, Vol. 635 (May 2011): “Young Disadvantaged Men: Fathers, Families, Poverty, and Policy.” Special Editors Timothy M. Smeeding, Irwin Garfinkel, and Ronald E. Mincy.

Co-sponsoring contributors:
CRFCFW Logo

I BELIEVE THAT:

People who don’t appreciate the welfare state shouldn’t be living off it by promoting the practice of using welfare populations FOR that research, and conducting “demonstration” projects on them through institutions their poverty forces them to interact with, and which may have contributed to it.  One of the primary institutions that appears to have contributed to the wealth of some and the poverty of others is slavery.  While it was officially outlawed, it is obviously still practiced, a situation the US hasn’t come to terms with.  THe practice of slavery enabled many of the “founding fathers” to take time to write and research.  Others built their houses, cooked their food (bare their children) and tilled their fields.  Moreover, a middle range of management kept the field hands in place.

Probably this set of professionals can be viewed in these terms — they research and write upon the population and make sure that policy isn’t too radically different to enable more independence and more competition for commodities (food, work, materials, and sales, etc.). . . .  Some people mine the earth, or study the stars. Others mine DATA — and it takes time, money, and workers to collect, analyze and report on all that data.  MOreover it takes computers and an infrastructure where information can flow to and fro.  Hence, “Technical Assistance Grants” are so common.  In practice, except for the greater speed (and scope) perhaps it’s in many ways like farming. ….   First one gets access to the fields and somehow tills them (or SOME space where food can be grown).  Only problem — most of our population now (am I right?) is concentrated, and URBAN.  Hence the richest fields to mine are the urban poor, the urban violent, the urban oppressed (by . . . by what?). . and the urban don’t have access to clean water and food, or good schools.  It’s GREAT material to mine, and positioned right, one might end up at Columbia, Princeton, Harvard, or some Institute or Center of “higher” learning.

. . . continuing with Dr. Garfinkle’s research, and its impact:

 His research on child support influenced legislation in Wisconsin and other American states, the US Congress, Great Britain, Australia, and Sweden. He is currently the co-principal investigator of the Fragile Families and Child Well being Study and is completing a book entitled The American Welfare State: Laggard or Leader?

Dr. Charles Ballard, Ms. — or Mrs.? — Frances Ballard, nonrelative Farilyn Ballard of the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, and here is another Ballard, “Valerie” — and this is the Northeast Texas Fatherhood Initiative (see Corporation Wiki link, there).  It shows only three people:    Valerie Ballard, Sheilah Tucker ,and Preston Mallone.

LinkedIn, Ms. Ballard (looks young!)

Valerie Ballard’s Experience

Valerie Ballard

Executive Director North Texas Fatherhood Initiative

Nonprofit Organization Management industry

July 2009 – Present (2 years)

Executive Director for the Texas Healthy Marriage and Relationship Initiative (TexasHMRI) and North Texas Fatherhood Initiative (NTFI). Responsible for the strategic direction, leadership and capacity building; program development for TexasHMRI and NTFI. My role includes grant development and management, training and technical assistance and fiscal oversight to 50+ collaborative partners in the organization’s coalition.

Both of these are government-funded programs, through Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood (at a minimum):

TexasHMRI is a subcontractor for the Twogether in Texas Healthy Marriage Program under The Texas Health and Human Service Commission.

North Texas Fatherhood Initiative is funded by IMANI -The David Project a 2009 Compassion Capital Fund Grant from U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Administration for Children and Families. (HHS/ACF — what else?)

Texas Healthy Marriage and Relationship Initiative DALLAS United States of America COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE 09/24/2006 93009 NEW VALERIE BALLARD $ 50,000 Abstract Not Available

(I found 80 in Texas under CFDA 93009 — most were small many were aimed at marriage, family & youth, such as:

Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages DALLAS United States of America COMPASSION CAPTIAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – HEALTHY MARRI 09/17/2005 93009 NEW CAROL BOWMAN $ 49,853 Abstract Not Available
Alta Vista Faith-Based Initiative Corporation Double Oak United States of America COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE 09/23/2006 93009 NEW ROBERT CHAVEZ $ 50,000 Abstract Not

Once these take root (cf.  “Alliance for North Texas…”) they tend to get watered; this went straight to almost $1 million ($900K) the second year….

Grantee Name City County Award Title Action Issue Date CFDA Number Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions Award Abstract
Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages** DALLAS DALLAS COMPASSION CAPTIAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – HEALTHY MARRIAGE 09/17/2005 93009 NEW CAROL BOWMAN $ 49,853 Abstract Not Available
Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages DALLAS DALLAS HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 2 09/24/2006 93086 NEW COSETTE BOWLES $ 903,425
Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages DALLAS DALLAS HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 2 09/20/2007 93086 NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION ERIN KINCAID $ 903,425
Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages DALLAS DALLAS HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 2 09/22/2008 93086 NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION ERIN KINCAID $ 903,425
Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages DALLAS DALLAS HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 2 09/18/2009 93086 NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION ERIN KINCAID $ 903,425
Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages DALLAS DALLAS HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 2 09/24/2010 93086 NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION COSSETTE BOWLES $ 903,425

In case you wondered about the name, the acronym is ‘ANTHEM’ but apparently the actual nonprofit? name is “Strong Families”

Strong Families Dallas
Alliance for North Texas Healthy Effective Marriages (ANTHEM)
1201 Elm street
Dallas, TX 75270

Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: The program grant funds will be used to deliver marriage education services to 8,360 married and engaged couples and persons interested in marriage, 5,910 non-married expectant parents and 3,445 high school students over the project period. ANTHEM will also launch a public awareness campaign to reach all Dallas-area residents.

(I tend to look up addresses; here it is all in one):

  1. Anthem Strong Families | Anthem Dallas

    Dallas Black Marriage Day. image. Anthem Strong Families. 12800 Hillcrest RoadSuite#A124 DallasTX 75230. Office: 214-426-0900. Fax: 214-426-0906 
    http://www.anthemnorthtexas.org/index.php?option=com…id=1… – Cached
  2. Providers in your area – Twogether in Texas  (another grants recipient)

    Alliance for North Texas Healthy Effective Marriages 12800 Hillcrest RoadSte A124 Dallas,TX 75230 214-426-0900 twogether@anthemnorthtexas.org 
    http://www.twogetherintexas.com/UI/RIAddresses.aspx – Cached – Similar
  3. Dallas TX computer system consultants | Find computer system 

    computer system consultants for Dallas TX, TX.  2.9 mi; View Phone (214) 426- 0900;12800 Hillcrest Rd Ste 124Dallas, TX 75230 map · more info | Enhance 
    directory.dallasnews.com/dallastx+tx/computer+system+consultants.zq.html – Cached
  4. AllPages.com – Mental Health Specialists, Dallas, Yellow Pages 

    Business Types: Mental Health Specialists. Bowles Cosette Psychothrpst 12800 Hillcrest Road Suite 124DallasTX 75230-1560. Phone: (972) 490-1556 
    tx.allpages.com/dallas/health-medical/…/mental-health-specialists/ – Cached
  5. YiPpIe! – Dallas Marriage & Family Counselors – DallasTX

    Gadol Irwin PhD 12800 Hillcrest Road Suite 224. DallasTX 75230 ….. S MD,8330 Meadow Road Suite 124,Dallas,TX,75231,(214)369-9236 Prestonwood Counseling 
    1499.yippie.biz/tx/dallas/ – Cached

It has no links programs targeted to mothers (I guess welfare is supposed tohandle that).  Why SHOULD it?  after all 93.086 is Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood — not motherhood.  Responsible Fathers will know how to keep the Moms in line, right?  And here is the “Strong Fathers” rhetoric, which definitely targets (negatively) single mothers — if all these are laid at our feet for not keeping a man in the home:

Growing up in a fatherless home has a big price.  Children from a fatherless home are:

  • 5 times more likely to commit suicide
  • 32 times more likely to run away
  • 20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
  • 14 times more likely to commit rape
  • 9 times more likely to drop out of school
  • 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances
  • 9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution
  • 20 times more likely to end up in prison

BUT THEN AGAIN, they also might end up in the White House, USA< where they can start more Fatherhood.gov programs (and a video linking to one is on the site).  Or at Columbia, Harvard, Princeton, or elsewhere, running research on the importance of fathers, and being very well recognized for it…

THIS is funded by the US Goverment, “OFA” OpDiv:

Strong Families Dallas

Strong Families Dallas (SFD) is the 5 year project awarded to Anthem Strong Families by the Federal Office of Family Assistance and funded through the Administration for Children and Families. The purpose of SFD is to offer free 8-12 hour fun, interactive relationship skill workshops to the people of Dallas.

Here is a 2011 “webinar transcript” (obviously partial) talking about this “HEALTHY MARRIAGE OPPORTUNITIES TO PARTNER WITH THE COURTS”

A bit more on this “ANTHEM” — which I was able to find (same grant, I gather) in USAspending.gov.  This find confirms the grant was taken from welfare funds:

  • Total Dollars:$2,885,849
  • Transactions:1 – 5 of 5 (of the two recipients, both were taking TANF funding to promote marriage).

Transaction Number # 1

Federal Award ID: 90FE0072: 0 (Grants)
Recipient: ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE (MARRIAGES)
333 N Washington , DALLAS, TEXAS
Reason for Modification:
Program Source: 75-1552:Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Administration for Children and Families
CFDA Program : 93.086 : Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants
Description:
HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT: PRIORITY AREA 2

Its  DUNS # is 360770486  (DUNS = “Dun & Bradstreet” trading#, used for groups contracting or getting grants from the US Gov’t as well; knowing this # can help search a single organization which goes under more than one name, a.k.a. FVPF, etc.)  It has no “State application ID” (SAI) # for what that’s worth.

The term “FE” on a grant — i.e., 90FE0072 seems to be code for “FATHERHOOD EDUCATION” (trust me, I’ve seen enough).   So whether or not it SAYS “marriage/family” on the front, the purpose is Fatherhood promotion.

this street address (googlemaps) is ? labeled opposite some “Institute of Metabolic Disease

The Initiative above is likely a grants program (HHS, I’d guess), and I’ll bet that one or both are receiving access visitation grants from the Attorney General’s Office..  This is Dallas Fort-Worth area….  The NTFI resides at a college “Business Incubation Center” according to a news bulletin, it operates out of a college.

BUSINESS INCUBATION CENTER BUSINESS PROFILES March 2011

Bill J. Priest Campus of El Centro College Dallas County Community College District

1402 Corinth Street, Dallas, TX 75215, (214) 860-5851

The Dallas County Community College District officially opened the Business Incubation Center June 4, 1990. An integral part of the Bill J. Priest Campus, 1402 Corinth Street, Dallas, Texas, the Business Incubation Center has just over 30,000 square feet of space available for businesses located on site. Designed as a corporate headquarters facility, the Incubation Center offers cost-shared equipment and services for up to 50 small business owners.

The following is a profile of the businesses that are associated with Business Incubation Center as of March 2011.  (And on the list):

NORTH TEXAS FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE, Valerie Ballard, SUITE 123, (214) 884-7020: A regional partnership of community and faith-based agencies promoting responsible fatherhood by providing for male children, teens and adults educational workshops, mentoring, job skills assessments and training, counseling, household products and clothing. They also provide career counseling & job training for ex-offenders, assists families become [i.e., “in becoming”]…homeowners, and computer technology training for jailed offenders.

Check out the tie to the National Fatherhood Initiative, and grants solicitation, underneath the marriage education.

“…When you donate $125 on behalf of a family member, friend or yourself, we will create a memorial fund in honor of the recipient. Anyone may contribute to the memorial fund, at any time…All donations are tax deductible under our 501(C)3 non-profit organization. ”  and “The Why Knot? program is designed to help men develop a positive view of marriage. The National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) developed Why Knot? to help men understand the benefits of marriage…”  etc.

Well, let’s see….. where is this North Texas Fatherhood Initiative nonprofit registered?

http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/search.php

National Center for Charitable Statistics

(So far — going to 4th search site — haven’t found anything “North Texas Fatherhood Initiative.”)

Texas Secretary of State

Texas Secretary of State

Apparently in Texas (and DNK where else) one may form an “Unincorporated Nonprofit Organization,” meaning, no registered agent:

Nonprofit Corporations: Not all non-profit organizations are filed with the Secretary of State. Many, but not all, non-profit organizations chose to incorporate. A nonprofit corporation is created by filing a certificate of formation with the secretary of state in accordance with the Texas Business Organizations Code (“BOC”). “Nonprofit corporation” means a corporation no part of the income of which is distributable to members, directors, or officers [BOC, Section 22.001(5)]. A nonprofit corporation may be created for any lawful purpose, or purposes permitted by the BOC. Not all nonprofit corporations are entitled to exemption from state or federal taxes.

Unincorporated Nonprofit Associations: Section 252.001 of the BOC defines an unincorporated nonprofit association as an unincorporated organization consisting of three or more members joined by mutual consent for a common, nonprofit purpose. All unincorporated nonprofit associations, whether or not the entities are tax exempt, are subject to the provisions of the Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act, Chapter 252 of the BOC. The Act addresses a limited number of major issues relating to nonprofit associations; namely, the authority of the nonprofit association to acquire, hold and transfer property in its own name; the authority to sue and be sued as a separate legal entity; and the contract and tort liability of an association’s officers and its members. If you need further information regarding these provisions or how they might affect your association, you should contact your own legal counsel.

An unincorporated nonprofit association may, but is not required to, file with the secretary of state a statement appointing an agent authorized to receive service of process on behalf of the nonprofit association. The filing of the statement does not represent the creation of the nonprofit association; it simply provides a method for a nonprofit association to receive notice of any lawsuit brought against it.

(one can also look at the 990s through these sites).

EIN: 113774629
Name: Texas Healthy Marriage and Relationship Initiative — Google
Location:  PO Box 764274
Dallas, TX 75376
County: Dallas County
Ruling Date: 2006   (Approximate year when founded)
IRS Type: 501(c)(3) – Public charity: Religious, educational, charitable, scientific, and literary organizations…
Legal basis for public charity or private foundation status (FNDNCD): 15 – Organization with a substantial portion of support from a governmental unit or the general public
NTEE:  P50 – Personal Social Services
Most recently completed fiscal year (TAXPER) 12/2009
Total Revenue $67,520
Total Assets: $9,811

For an idea just how popular the idea is of forming a corporation (profit or nonprofit) in the “healthy marriage” field, see this search:

(Corporation Wiki:  “Texas Healthy Marriage and Relationship Initiative“) (it pulls up similar titles in many other states.  Click on any and get a simple diagram of the Board of Directors — whether current or not is not my issue…  Probably taken from searching Secretary of State or IRS information)….This one has 5 people, including Ms. Ballard, above….

Apparently (per “TAGGS.hhs.gov”) this group got only a single $50K grant in 2006, and were up and running?  If they received any more federal funding after that, I haven’t found it yet (however, my database skills aren’t professionally trained….)…

FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
2006 90IJ0623  COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE 1 0 ACF 09-24-2006 949423417 $ 50,000 
Fiscal Year 2006 Total: $ 50,000

To search USASPENDING.gov, one needs (or it’d help) a DUNS# which here, is 949423417

They are top-down (HHS) funded under healthy marriage.  Meanwhile, in TEXAS there is also a “Council on Family Violence” supposedly keeping some watch on the Healthy Marriage promotion so it doesn’t promote staying together for a healthy family and ending up in a homicide or other violence.   I imagine this ALSO is public funding, and it’s informative about the healthy marriage funding, too:   I notice, it reads:

Please note that Healthy Marriage programs do not provide intervention for couples undergoing serious marital or family problems and stresses, nor do these programs provide counseling. It could be potentially dangerous for an individual in an abusive relationship to participate in a healthy marriage program. The key is to do whatever is needed to ensure your safety and / or the safety of your children. There are services and resources available to assist with this issue. For help and information, please call the National Domestic Violence Hotline.

The Board of Directors of THIS nonprofit (presumably) has a “Chief Executive Officer Emeritus” Sheryl Cates, who can be seen on the “Telling Amy’s Story” video referenced on the “Family Justice Center Alliance web pages, right underneath an interview with Casey Gwinn & Ellen Pence.  This video was produced from Penn State.  It’s a small world, I guess)

NOW THAT WE SEE AT LEAST IN TEXAS, COLORADO, OKLAHOMA AND WASHINGTON, A LOT OF “FATHERHOOD” IS “FEDERAL” THE QUESTION COMES UP — WHEN THE PROMOTION OF MARRIAGE & FATHERHOOD IS VOLUNTARY, HOW CAN PEOPLE BE PERSUADED TO CONSUME THE CLASSES, THEREBY CONTINUING TO JUSTIFY THE PROGRAMMING (WEBSITES, BOOTCAMPS, SEMINARS, BOOK SALES, ETC.)??

(I mean, after all, most healthy marriage program recipients are not judges, and so can’t just order it, like AFCC judges can.  And the research professionals are out researching and gathering the fatherhood data and running institutes and conferences (Columbia, Princeton, Harvard, Brookings,Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, etc.) so they are busy…)

Well, in March 2011, here is a nice webinar to explain some of the basics:

NATIONAL HEALTH MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER

Opportunities to Partner with the Courts Webinar….

The National Healthy Marriage Resource Center (NHMRC) will host a webinar entitled, Healthy Marriage Programs: Opportunities to Partner with Courts on Thursday, March 31, 2011 from 1:00 – 2:30pm (E.S.T.).

Courts deal with a range of people who could benefit from relationship education—couples filing for divorce, parents involved in the child support system, and youth who are processed for misdemeanors as well as felonies are among them. Some Healthy Marriage programs have developed fruitful partnerships with court administrators and/or judges to facilitate referrals. Speakers at this webinar will discuss the potential benefits of such partnerships, how they can be established, and how court-referred participants are profiting from Healthy Marriage program participation.

Webinar Speakers

Alicia Davis, J.D., Principal Court Management Consultant, National Center for State Courts, will discuss the types of cases that courts could refer to Healthy Marriage programs, how program managers can establish partnerships with the courts, and how approaches for forming these partnerships will vary by state.

Lynda Williams, Drug Court Coordinator, Dallas County, TX. will discuss the types of cases she refers to the ANTHEM Healthy Marriage program and why; how the referral process works; and the extent to which the Dallas County drug court finds this partnership beneficial.

Ann Bruce, Program Manager, Building Healthy Marriages, Weld County, CO., will discuss how her program’s partnership with the courts was formed, whether it is a significant referral source of participants, and the extent to which clients referred from the courts are a good match for the type of services that her program delivers.

Rich Batten, Program Manager, National Healthy Marriage Resource Center (NHMRC), will moderate this session.

I’m figuring this is probably the same Alicia Davis, J.D. a member of the Court Improvement Project Program  here:

Ms. Alicia Davis, J.D. Family Unit Supervisor, SCAO Colorado State Court Administrator’s Office 1300 Pennsylvania Street Denver, CO 80203

and others, such as various judges, and

Ms. Susan L. Blumberg, Ph.D. Child and Family Program Specialist Administration for Children and Families, Region 8 1961 Stout St. 9th floor Denver, CO 80294  {{relates to welfare & foster care, this link.  }}

Alicia Davis

Alicia Davis, Principal Court Management Consultant, has expertise in court-community collaboration, program development, data-sharing, child, family and probate law, and alternative dispute resolution.  {ADR  or “mediation,” essentially — is an AFCC hallmark)

Her education includes a J.D. from the S.J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah, and a B.A. from the University of California at Santa Barbara in Spanish and English Literature.

Colorado State Courts (evidently) have an “OFFICE OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION” (or “ODR”) — as follows:

The Office of Dispute Resolution (ODR) exists to establish and make available dispute resolution programs and services within the Colorado Judicial Branch. Through its sixty-plus contract mediators and neutrals, ODR offers mediation and other services across the state. ODR also provides information about dispute resolution in Colorado and nationally, and coordinates training for judicial officers and court staff .

“Mediators and other ADR professionals are independent contractors for the Office of Dispute Resolution and not judicial employees.
All available positions will be advertised on the Colorado Judicial Department’s main website under Careers.” (Click, for an overview).

If these are “contract” mediators — their “contracts” as either professional fees (or if they are operating as a nonprofit, etc.) would show up under VENDOR payments to either city or county.  Their services are aimed at indigent /poor people, who are encouraged to settle out of court — and the fees, paid by one presumes probably by the local county.  OH — and of course, at times (depending on the situation) they might be receiving help from a subgrantee of the A/V fatherhood funds to states.

Simply — as with Parenting Coordination, one simply needs to connect the dots — and teach Marriage Program Recipients how to match up their programs with the courts and prisons.

Another funds recipient from Arizona (Dr. Leo Godzich) has an organization that was at one point connected with a kill-the-gays movement in Uganda — while taking federal marrriage (a.k.a. fatherhood) monies.   And belongs to a mega-church.  And wrote this book:

Men Are From Dirt, Women Are From Men - Dr. Leo Godzich

Men and women are different. That probably doesn’t come as a surprise to you, but most couples are eventually surprised by it. To improve your relationship, you not only have to learn how to understand the differences between men and women, but how to enjoy discovering those differences on a daily basis for the rest of your lives.

((Let us teach you.  Buy the book!))

This is not a one-sided look at men or at women; it is a call to restore dignity in marriage by inspiring increased cooperation, a renewal in humility and personal responsibility while increasing joy and intimacy. Learn how to develop a vision for your marriage together, a mutual understanding of how magnificent it can be—and follow the practical steps you can take to make your marriage magnificent. Loaded with deep and engaging insights, these exciting explanations will help you realize how to turn resentment to rejoicing, tension to togetherness, confusion to commitment, and loneliness to loveliness.

This book is a sometimes stunning, always inspiring, and frequently funny examination of how men and women differ—and how to celebrate those differences to make a marriage that fulfills its purposes, and models a healthy marriage relationship to other

Grantee Name City Award Number Award Title Action Issue Date CFDA Number Award Class Award Activity Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT PHOENIX 90FE0040 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 09/25/2006 93086 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION DR LEO GODZICH $ 250,000
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT PHOENIX 90FE0040 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 09/21/2007 93086 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION DR LEO GODZICH $ 250,000
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT PHOENIX 90FE0040 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 09/22/2008 93086 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION DR LEO GODZICH $ 250,000
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT PHOENIX 90FE0040 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 09/17/2009 93086 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION DR LEO GODZICH $ 250,000
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT PHOENIX 90FE0040 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 09/24/2010 93086 DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION DR LEO GODZICH $ 250,000
Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT  PHOENIX AZ 85022 MARICOPA 362992336 $ 1,250,000

Yes, this was money taken from TANF, or welfare, as another database shows:

Recipient: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT
13422 NORTH CAVE CREEK RD , PHOENIX, ARIZONA
Reason for Modification:
Program Source: 75-1552:Temporary Assistance for Needy Families

This funding began in 2006.  FOr a comparison, in 2006, the same group contributed to opposing same-sex marriage in Arizona, under “NAME” — meaning it was taking from TANF for political activity:

PROTECT MARRIAGE ARIZONA C-02-2006 (ANTI-GAY)
The National Association of Marriage Enhancement
13422 N Cave Creek Rd, Ste 3
Phoenix, AZ 85022
05/16/06 – $5,000.00 – Cash – Filed: 06/30/06
10/17/07 – $2,000.00 – Cash – Filed: 06/16/08

And in 2008, they helped organize a marriage conference in Uganda:

Sunday, 14th September, 2008
E-mail article E-mail article Print article Print article
By Joyce Namutebi

DR. Martin Ssempa, a pastor at Makerere Community Church, has received an award for his fight against homosexuality.

Ssempa and his wife Tracey received the plague from Apostle Alex Mitala, the overseer of the National Fellowship of Born Again Churches in Uganda.

This was during the “Great Marriage Celebration” organised by the National Association of Marriage Enhancement in conjunction with the National Fellowship of Born Again Pentecostal Churches in Uganda at Nakivubo Stadium over the weekend.

Mitala led hundreds of couples who converged at the stadium from various parts of the country into a prayer for Ssempa to continue being the torch-bearer in the fight against the vice in Uganda.

Just for the record, this organization was likely registered at all to received HHS Healthy Marriage Funds….  This is Ssempa supporting the infamous “kill-the-gays” legislation.

(ARTICLE IS FEB 2010; as far as I know, this bill is still “live” in Uganda….)  Since October of last year, Uganda has been the focus of international attention due to a proposal in their Parliament which would ban homosexual behavior of any kind via the death penalty for HIV people who engage in homosexual behavior and life in prison for others who attempt such behavior. One of the chief supporters of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill has been Martin Ssempa, a pastor in Uganda’s capital city of Kampala and well-known among Western evangelicals. Rev. Ssempa this week has called for a “million man march” which he hopes will bring large crowds out to support the harsh legislation. In addition, Ssempa has organized several news conferences in order to rally support among Ugandans for the bill.

The Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 (click here for full text) would make any homosexual contact subject to life in prison, or even death if the participants are HIV positive. Those who know of homosexuals but do not report this information to the police could face fines and jail time. No exceptions are made for clergy or health care professionals.

 

So glad to know that HHS has discretion in WHO gets the marriage funding….NAME did.  In case you are wondering what they might be doing in Uganda, it seems that world wide travel on behalf of helping reduce the welfare caseload in the USA and help poor fatherless children HERE, this appears to be a conference schedule, UNDER this nonprofit organization, and for marriage education.  Wouldn’t you like to see the tax return?  Although it says “NATIONAL” clearly “INTERnational is meant…”

NAME - National Association of Marriage Enhancement

I clicked under “MEETINGS” and found quite the list of locales:

heck out some of the upcoming speaking engagements of Dr. Leo and Molly Godzich. If there is one in your area, we hope to see you there! If you would like to schedule a Together Forever Weekend or Pastor Leo for a sunday, please call our office 602-404-2600.

June 19
Bologna, Italy
La Parola Della Grazia

June 26
Torino, Italy
Chiesa Evangelica Internazionale

July 2-3
Alicante, Spain
Iglesia Rio de Vida

July 10
Paris, France
Charisma Eglise Chretienne

July 15-17
Irvine, Scotland
Bridge Church

August 19-20
Cincinnati, OH
Towne Worship Center

September 2-3
Harrison, OH
Church on Fire

September 6-10
Lima, Peru
Conferencia Salvemos a la Familia

September 22-24
Phoenix, AZ
International Marriage Conference

and back to Tennessee for September 28-October 1
Nashville, TN
AACC World Conference (that’s American Association of Christian Counselors).

THIS LINK (with youtube) ADVERTISES how there should be a NAME Center in your church — or community (i.e., advertising)

and apparently many churches said “Yes!” to Goodzich and joined the ‘war on divorce’ — such as at THIS link:

 

 

 

And they also rescue pastors:

image

(granted, this seems to be before the marriage funding began from HHS):  “In 2003, Pastor Leo and Molly Godzich started the Pastoral Rescue Center. It was founded on the idea: “how can pastors lead people when they cannot lead their own home.” Pastors’ marriages often go through struggling seasons like anyone else, but the predicament is they do not know who they can talk to. Where do they go for help? What will happen if members of the congregation find out that their home life is falling apart?

{{Not to worry.  Most congregations are still pre-occuppied with not noticing and not reporting or, in fact, doing anything to stop domestic violence and child abuse among the “saints.”  Keep the smiles on, keep the music playing, the tithes will keep coming}}

NAME responded to this thought by expanding its ministry (=expanded the scope of its business) to target pastors and church leaders. The pastoral rescue center has been able to restore so many marriages from divorce in complete confidentiality. The NAME headquarters is located in Phoenix, AZ so many pastors come and stay in a hotel while having secret counseling appointments, or they have call in appointements to the headquarter office

 

But the concept does rather bring one to the relationship between Pastor Leo and the disgraced (?) John Hagee.  It’s a bit hard to find information on this not laced with theology, but one blog notes (of Hagee) — in context, this is about Marriage Enhancement —

John Hagee was the leader of the charismatic {i.e., pentecostal} Trinity Church in 1975 and was the father of two children.

John Hagee had an adulterous affair with a woman and admitted to immorality in front of his church.

Pastor John Hagee then divorced the mother of his two children and married a younger woman (Diana Castro, now Diana Hagee) from that same congregation. Pastor John Hagee willfully abused his position of trust and power to take advantage of a younger gullible woman and cheat on his wife.

(not exactly something new under the son, however…..)

So what happened after John Hagee admitted to cheating and abusing his power? Did he repent and pursue becoming a better person and living a life based on Biblical principles? Did people stop following his ministry? The answers are very obvious. John Hagee married the woman he cheated on his wife with and immediately became the pastor of another congregation- the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio Texas.

Pastor John Hagee went on to push his evangelical, speaking in tongues Cornerstone Church into becoming a megachurch that televises his weekly sermons. Nor did he do so for free.

If you visit the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas or watch Pastor John Hagee on his television show, you will see him perched on top of an enormous white and blue throne watching his massive choir or jazz band. When they finish, John Hagee will approach the pulpit for his favorite time of the week- tithe time! Pastor John Hagee has his congregation members raise their money towards the sky and repeat after him “Give and it shall be given.” He then instructs his audience that “When you give, it ualifies you to receive God’s abundance. If God gives to you before you give to him, God himself will becom a liar… If you’re not prospering it’s because you’re not GIVING!” Contained in those few sentences is everything that is unscriptural and wrong with the New-Age “Prosperity Message” pushed on gullible congregations by megachurch pastors nationwide.

KIND of sounds like people lining up to get more fatherhood funding — think of the fatherless children! — one reason I wrote this post…
Now you know perhaps where some of the fatherhood movement sponsors got their techniques from (i.e., the pulpits ,the missionary drives….
“Who is monitoring?” asks this (i’d guess, religious?) blogger — and I say the same about these nonprofits on the HHS dole…

Pastor John Hagee has grown into an enormously wealthy man. In the year 2001, his organization filed revenues of $18.3 million dollars with the IRS. What was John Hagee’s personal compensation package worth? More than $1.25 million dollars. His nonprofit organization, GETV, has a mission statement reading “Spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ”. Somehow I think his nearly 8,000 acre Texas ranch does not help that mission. Not only does Pastor John and his wife Diana Hagee own that sprawling ranch, but they also have a 5,275 foot, 6 bedroom mansion in one of San Antonio’s most exclusive gated communities (The Dominion). The house is appraised at $700,000.

So who is monitoring Pastor John Hagee and his largesse? Who ensures that the millions of dollars that gullible grandmothers give him is spent to further spread the gospel of Jesus Christ? 3 of the 4 Directors who monitor the board of his nonprofit GETV foundation are his direct family members- his wife, Diana; his son, Matthew; and himself.

Forgot to mention, that along with support the kill-the-gays guy (which NAME did), Mr. Hagee blamed Katrina on the residents of New Orleans; they’d offended God:(same blog)

Pastor John Hagee – Cornerstone Church Ministry, Heresy, Divorce & Dirty Deeds

All hurricanes are acts of God because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that.” – John Hagee

Of course that predates the male prostitute scandal.   “Haggard, 52, resigned as president of the 30 million-member National Association of Evangelicals and was fired from New Life Church amid allegations that he paid a male prostitute for sex and used methamphetamine. ….

As part of a severance package with his former church, Haggard agreed to leave Colorado Springs for a period and not speak publicly about the scandal, church officials said at the time. But he never really disappeared, making news when he relocated his family to Arizona and solicited financial support in an e-mail.

One restoration team member, H.B. London, said a return to vocational ministry in less than four or five years would be dangerous for Haggard, his family, former church and Colorado Springs.

“To sit on the sidelines for a person with that kind of personality {ego/greed/drive/lust, etc.) and gifting is probably like being paralyzed,” said London, who counsels pastors through a division of Focus on the Family, the Colorado Springs-based conservative Christian group. “If Mr. Haggard and others like him feel like they have a call from God, they rationalize that their behavior does not change that call.”

Haggard, who declined to be interviewed, is not the first fallen evangelical figure to agree to oversight and then balk. In the late 1980s, televangelist Jimmy Swaggart confessed to liaisons with a prostitute, begged forgiveness and submitted to the Assemblies of God, his denomination. Swaggart was ordered not to preach for a year, but resumed broadcasts after a few weeks and was defrocked.

* * * *  Haggard’s support system includes Leo Godzich, who runs a Phoenix-based marriage ministry and said he met with Haggard at least once a week for more than a year. Godzich said Haggard remains committed to restoration, has paid a high price and still has much to offer. * * * *

“If all men are honest, all men are liars and deceivers,” Godzich said. “Once someone is gifted and called, that is something they generally cannot escape. They will be used in that regard again.”

Yes, this is definitely a type of religion  that believes in USING people — God uses people, and so do they.  SO what’s wrong with that, eh???

 

And NAME ave opened many marriage centers, particularly in churches.  THIS list (see site) is huge, and a bit disturbing only partial listing here:

United States
Alabama
Huntsville
The Rock Family Worship Center
2300 Memorial Pkwy SW
256-533-9292
http://www.the rockfwc.org
Alaska
Wasilla
Wasilla Assembly of God
PO Box 872010
907-376-5732
http://www.wasillaag.org
Arizona
Avondale
Cornerstone Christian Center
11301 W Indian School Rd
623-877-3220
http://www.cornerstoneaz.org
Arizona
Chino Valley
Word of Life Assembly
590 W. Road 1 North
928-636-4224
http://www.cvwola.com
Arizona
Flagstaff
Lamb of God Bible Church
2615 E 7th Ave
928-714-1170
http://www.logbc.org
Arizona
Gilbert
Mission Community Church
4450 E. Elliot Rd
(480) 892-5505
Arizona
Kingman
Kingman First Assembly of God
1850 Gates
928-753-3529
http://www.kfaonline.org

 

NOt the best post, but did I make my point about WHO is paying for Fatherhood Funds — and who knows what is being done with them?

 

Just remember that, and check the US Congress “House Ways and Means Committee” to track the next installments.

 

Happy Fatherhood Day; Be well and prosper ….

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

June 19, 2011 at 8:36 PM

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet].

with 9 comments

This post title with a “shortlink” attached is:

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case &amp; “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet]. (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-JR”. Note: for normal URLs (web addresses), upper or lower case alpha doesn’t seem to matter, but I’ve learned that within this domain (WordPress) and in such short-links, it does.

LGH UPDATE NOTE:  My current table of contents only goes back to Sept., 2012; this is a June 15, 2011 post (early on in this blogger’s learning curve!) so would only be found by search, some other link reference to it, or by Year/Month/Date through the “Archives” (by month) on this blog.  

I added some quick (not thorough) updates on Overcoming Barriers at the bottom in response to a comment submitted March, 2016…including tax returns, California corporate registration (Massachusetts could also be searched). 

For a December 2017 Update (which at first I thought might fit in here), see:

Revisiting Reunification Camps and Treatments, The good Clinical Psychologist Just Want to Help Traumatized People and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), the Good, Ole Court-Ordered (and of course (™)’d Service Model) Way. Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC” and this was written Dec. 16, 2017, starting as a post update to [another] one for which I wanted to cite to this older post on reunification camps for “estranged” families, but from different angle of approach, as that one explains in the first few paragraphs.  After that, on “Revisiting Reunification Camps,” above, I get into looking at what isn’t apparently a large operation, but one with connections in more than one state to the family court system.  It’s in draft, but will be a short post and out Dec. 16 or 17, 2017. [Published Dec. 21 + (additions/clarifications) 22nd] //LGH.
I expect to publish (shortly) a follow-up to the Reunification Camps post above, some information I came across recently which connects the AFCC-drenched providers of at least three camps (Two mentioned here, one featured in my recent post above], the new one trademarked only 2016 (described in the above post) whose lead psychologist apparently was on-call from the NCMEC (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children) who shortly after Jaycee Dugard (and the two children born to her 18-year-long kidnapper rapist and herself) were rescued, was put in touch with Dugard who then (2009/2010) got a $20M settlement from the State of California and set up the JayC Foundation (of very modest size, but it seems in part supporting the reunification camps used ALSO to force-feed alienated children back in to the parent’s life, particularly in cases where the alienation is connected to litigation around the issues of abuse/domestic violence by the “targeted” parent (the one the kids don’t want to see).
(TRANSITIONING FAMILIES, STABLE PATHS (Abigail M. Judge (“clinician”) Boston, S.Florida, with involvement from Transitioning Families clinician R. Bailey. who has a recent book out co-authored with one of the co-founders (mentioned below in THIS older post) of “Overcoming Barriers.”  In addition, in the context of a recent case (2015) of Judge Gorcya and 3 children aged 9-14 ordered into “juvie detention” for refusing to have lunch with their father then, at last check, attempts to get them for aftercare into some Reunification camp — the Detroit Free Press (now part of USA Today franchise) reporting said the Judge was hoping to get them into Warshak’s “Family Bridges” or one modeled on it — in Toronto, Canada!!, while Dr. Bailey was quoted in the context).  I’m taking bets (just kidding) on how long Gorcya has been (if she is) an AFCC member and how much of that county’s system the association controls. Michigan is also long home, at least by organization name, to a batterers’ intervention coalition (BISC-MI).  //LGH 12/22/2017.


I was just going to add a very short update (that comment, it seems, in March 2016), but instead added a section on renewed Parental Alienation discussions, and the socialist “re-education camps” in Viet Nam after South fell to the North, in 1975.  Similar in other countries.   Major quality and scope difference — but force is force, and at some levels, it’s also a form of psychological, personal violence. In my opinion.  So, the original (written/published in 2011) post begins in maroon font and below a double-line after the following paragraphs and a few quotes:

Speaking of how to continue keeping “Parental Alienation” conversation going — and ordering services to undo it through the family courts — I recently noticed that a “Dr. Craig Childress” (Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.) is resurrecting parental alienation under a different theory; I have some comments on it over at Red Herring Alert (a wordpress blog).  “Same old, same old” with new window dressing and tactics (Childress recommends pressuring providers who do NOT recommend IMMEDIATE, safety-for-the-child total separation from the alienating parent (i.e., “mom” typically) through their licensing board, if this could be categorized under some existing DSM-defined disorder.  

You cannot really argue with self-referencing, self-congratulating circles of experts on this matter which is why I recommend a more interesting angle of approach:  If they incorporate, find tax returns and corporate records; if they get contracts with the courts, or government grants to run “reunification camps” and similar therapy for parental alienation (in its old or new classifications), pay attention to the details!

The technique and ability to re-indoctrinate people in groups, as well as children, was also in common use in socialist countries; I believe the term used was “re-education camps,” referring to those in South Viet Nam after the fall of Saigon in 1975:   Search “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps: A Brief History” (that’s supplemental reading, from a man’s father’s oral history — he lived through such camps — from “Choices” program at Brown; see website) or  “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.”

The second link introduces and describes the various levels.  I wonder, in the USA, why the country is so heavily invested in a class of professionals whose purpose seems to be behavioral change and keeping up-to-date with tactics and strategies for re-indoctrinating children, women and men into their proper social relationships with each other and particularly after one or more of the same has spoken out about some prior injustice, or sought to escape being subjected to abuse by a family member.  These camps apparently went on from 1975 – 1986 until people still being held were allowed to emigrate to the US.

 “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.” Posted 4/17/2014 by “kubia”

Following the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vietnamese Communist government began to open hundreds of “re-education” camps throughout the country. Those camps, as Hanoi officially claimed, were places where individuals could “learn about the ways of the new government” through education and socially constructive labor.

In 1975, it was estimated that around 1 to 2.5 million people1, including former officers, religious leaders, intellectuals, merchants, employees of the old regime, and even some Communists, entered the camps in the hope that they could quickly reconcile with the new government and continued their peaceful life. However, their time in those camps did not last for ten days or two weeks as the government had claimed.

Re-education Camps Levels

The re-education camps were organized into five levels. The level-one camps which were called as study camps or day-study centers located mainly in major urban centers, often in public parks, and allowed attendees to return home each night. In those camps, some 500,000 people2 were instructed about socialism, new government policy in order to unlearn their old ways of thinking. The level-two camps had a similar purpose as the level-one, but attendees were not allowed to return home for three to six months. During the 1970s, at least 200,000 inmates entered more than three hundred level–two camps2.

The level-three re-education camps, known as the socialist-reform camps, could be found in almost every Southern Vietnam province containing at least 50,000 inmates2. Most of them were educated people and thus less susceptible to manipulation than most South Vietnamese in the level-one and two camps. Therefore, the inmates (or prisoners) in these camps had to suffer poorer living conditions, forced labor and daily communist indoctrination.

The last two types of camps were used to incarcerate more “dangerous” southern individuals – including writers, legislator teachers, supreme court judges, province chiefs – until the South was stable to permit their release. By separating members of certain social classes of the old regime, Hanoi wanted to prevent them from conducting joint resistances and forced them to conform to the new social norms. In 1987, at least 15,000 “dangerous” persons were still incarcerated level-four and level-five camps2.

Camp Conditions and Deaths

In most of the re-education camps, living conditions were inhumane. Prisoners were treated with little food, poor sanitation, and no medical care3. They were also assigned to do hard and risky work such as clearing the jungle, constructing barracks, digging wells, cutting trees and even mine field sweeping without necessary working equipments.

Although those hard work required a lot of energy, their provided food portions were extremely small. As a prisoner recall, the experience of hunger dominated every man in his camp. Food was the only thing they talked about. Even when they were quiet, food still haunted their thoughts, their sleep and their dreams. Worse still, various diseases such as malaria, beriberi and dysentery were widespread in some of the camps. As many prisoners were weakened by the lack of food, those diseases could now easily take away their lives.

Starvation diet, overwork, diseases and harshly punishment resulted in a high death rate of the prisoners. According to academic studies of American researchers, a total of 165,000 Vietnamese people died in those camps4.

The End of “Re-education” Period

Most of the re-education camps were operated until 1986 when Nguyen Van Linh became the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He began to close the harsher camps and reformed the others5. Two year later, Washington and Hanoi reached an agreement that Vietnam would free all former soldiers and officials of the old regime who were still held in re-education camps across the country and allowed them to emigrate to the United States under the Orderly Departure Program (ODP). As of August 1995, around 405,000 Vietnamese prisoners and their families were resettled in the U.S6.

– See more at: thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/..

The forced “Reunification Camps” (far less harsh, but still forced, and still designed to produce an attitude change) have their professionals willing to engage in these practices.

I think it must take a certain kind of mentality, if not personality aberrancy, to believe in this and what’s more preach about it and take in business to engage in it.

For some reason, those “Re-education camps” remind me of, though lesser in degree, the same idea as, for example, “overcoming barriers.”  It’s still based on force — and who knows how many similar programs are operating around the country.  As I write this, the Grazzini-Rucki runaway teens were reported (in 2016) to being re-indoctrinated to like their father (who they’d run away from as young teens), while the mother, until recently, was incarcerated for parental interference.  See my more recent 2016 posts).

Here’s a sample.  I see he’s from Pasadena, California (Los Angeles area).  To see it in better formatting (the “copy” function sometimes removes all spaces between words!) click on link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394444/Dr-Craig-Childress-DSM-5-Diagnosis-of-Parental-Alienation-Processes#scribd.

C. A. CHILDRESS, Psy.D.LICENSED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, PSY 18857

 547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398
Page 1 of 10
DSM-5 Diagnosis of “ParentalAlienation”

Read the rest of this entry »

Evaluate, Coordinate and Call Mom “Alienator!” — Pt. 3, in which 3 AFCC Ph.D.’s (Benjamin Garber, Peggie Ward & David Medoff) in a NH PAS case get a PAS-based reversal, plus some Warshak Talk

leave a comment »

PARENTING COORDINATION:  This post is going to show how the people crying that Moms are Coaching their kids actually coach each other to say this in reports to the courts.  This is the AFCC-sponsored, engendered, promoted, and if they have their way, exclusively controlled field of “Parenting Coordination.”

(I’m also going to split this post — some of the people mentioned above may not show up til the next one….)

Another place to find wording like (see end of last post) is in your basic “parenting coordination” manual.  It’s AFCC.    And it’s sick — which is probably why it isn’t posted in public at the “self-help” “Family Center” resource centers:  You are going to face a “HAPC” (hostile-aggressive-parenting coordinator) talking about your hostility in protesting or even reporting, aggression.

Why also are we not informed of how AFCC practitioners and their “ilk” are genuinely attempting to change family law into Therapy — and are brazen about it.  This is essentially what the “Center for Families & Children in the Courts” are.  They are venues where parents can be discussed, in third person as a foreign population, and how the far wiser and more noble practicing professionals can plot and plan to deal with their flawed, parental selves.

Might as well show it right now:

NEW HAMPSHIRE  PARENTING COORDINATOR ASSOCIATION LIST — AT LEAST THE AFCC-TRAINED ONES:

Footnote 1, Footnote 2 (and the entire list, this one at least, all have a footnote, or some, 2) stands for:

1Practicing parenting coordinator.

2Completed Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) prescribed training program.

A quick look (the list is only 2 pages) shows that these are either attorney, psychologist, or therapists.  If I were in New Hampshire with an open custody case, I’d memorize the list and be prepared….

Now for that training, a sample page from a sample report, on the association home page:

Notice (on home page) the “high-conflict” phrase, all over the place:

Welcome to Parenting Coordinators Association

The Parenting Coordinators Association of New Hampshire (PCANH) is a non-profit interdisciplinary organization dedicated to fostering the understanding and use of parenting coordination and to supporting professionals who serve as parenting coordinators. Our membership includes attorneys, mental health providers, and other professionals committed to improving the process of family transition in New Hampshire by managing and reducing inter-parental conflict and creating healthier outcomes for children of divorce and separation. The purposes of PCANH are to promote the highest level of practice by parenting coordinators through networking and continuing education, and to educate the judicial branch, legal community, and the general public about the use of this dispute resolution process in high conflict parenting cases.

Their membership includes (most likely, just is) the same fields of practice that AFCC membership covers, with possible exception of the judges themselves.  They are going to educate EVERYone (see last sentence) and of course promote it to the general public as well.   They are excellence-minded, and are going to promote the HIGHEST level of (unbiased?) practice, etc.  They will teach the judges (the judges in AFCC already know this stuff — they attend conferences!  So is this going to trade some training funds around, or go proselytize to the non-AFCC judges?)

This is a very basic (not links- heavy) site, but one of the links is to AFCC.

I can’t drag the picture of a pretty little (Caucasian) girl, with a ribbon in her hair, and a yellow butterfly on her shoulder.  Oh how gentle and sensitive.

Now, (by contrast) for the SAMPLE from the Handbook, and what they really think about ADULT women with children, separating:

I notice, up front, the comment the Indiana Parenting Coordinators group (INDIANA just also happens to be a state in which Family Justice Center has been established; it also on its child support page contains a direct link to Fathers and Families soliciting (from Fathers & Families) grant applications.  They are unbelievably networked…..

The Parenting Coordinators Association of New Hampshire deeply appreciates Families Moving Forward, Inc. of Indiana for granting permission to the Association to incorporate material from the Indiana Parenting Coordination Guide in preparing this document.1

…..

Furthermore, parenting coordination can help heal damaged family relationships and establish the communication, cooperation, conflict resolution, and general coping skills necessary for effective co-parenting so as to enable children to remain psychologically healthy following the divorce or separation of their parents.

John D. Cameron, Esq. Benjamin D. Garber, Ph.D. Co-Chairpersons, Parenting Coordinators Association of New Hampshire April 2008

….

As the manager of the treatment team, the parenting coordinator coordinates the needed services and has the authority to select different services and different service providers, and to replace service providers when necessary, to ensure that the needs of the family are met for the sake of the children. ***  This role would typically be applied in cases where the parents are deadlocked about treatment options for their children, and in cases where mental health problems, parental alienation tactics, or other problematic family dynamics may threaten the parenting coordination process, the safety of the children, or the relationships of the children with one or both parents.

**This basically is putting in place permission for a parenting coordinator to replace a NON-AFCC provider who might be a little more neutral with one more friendly to their particular philosophy, as demonstrated, below in the sample report (p. 28 of handbook).  Notice, “mental health problems, parental alienation tactics,” and of course an assumption that there ar elikely to be “treatment” for children.  Moreover, the material shows parenting coordinators are going to seek to have access to what would be otherwise very privileged information about the parents and children in a particular case:

5. Access to Information.

In carrying out responsibilities the parenting coordinator will have access to non- parties and privileged information as may be required, including school officials, physicians, mental health providers, guardians ad litem, and other professionals involved with the family. The parenting coordinator will also have access to related court records.

Judges have to file with the secretary of state or . . . . . officially, a DIsclosure form, so litigants know there is no “conflict of interest” and can require (or attempt to) a judge to recuse him/herself if there IS one, and the judge hasn’t done so voluntarily up front.  Do Parenting Coordinators have to reveal which AFCC (etc.) conferences they have attended, or which nonprofits they run, with each other, J.D. & Ph.D.?  This is NOT good…..

Of course, parenting coordination is hard work and takes time (so does fighting frivolous causes of action in a family law scenario– are the parents paid for this?), so about FEES:

Fees:

Fees of the parenting coordinator are set by the particular professional and would typically, but not necessarily, depend on the qualifications of the parenting coordinator. {{Hence, run more trainings}} Fees can be expected to apply to all parenting coordination services, including but not necessarily limited to: interview time, meeting time, investigation time (of court, school, or other records), collateral time (conferring with attorneys and other professionals), home visits, travel expenses and travel time, preparation of reports or agreements, and court appearances.

Can they set a minimum level of parental wealth before engaging a parent coordinator?  Oh — I forgot, usually who has the money is sought close to the beginning of any divorce/separation case, so the court knows whether to high-track it, or to low-ball it through mediation (20 minute hearing following 45 minute medication, goodbye children..)

WHO GETS parenting coordination.  In a set of amazingly “clear” reasoning, they say, not parents with high conflict or a history of disobeying court orders.  (well, if not, then what is a coordinator needed for?  Because parents DO keep court orders and can figure out their own business?)

Parenting coordination works best when both parents are willing to accept the parenting coordination process. That is why parenting coordination in New Hampshire typically requires the agreement of both parents for the appointment of a parenting coordinator.** Parenting coordination may be least effective in cases where one or both parents have never accepted the court’s authority and repeatedly violated court orders. Such parents will likely dispute or defy the parenting coordinator’s decisions as well.

**Just wait.  Sooner or later this will be flagged and mandated up front. Probably Indiana will get to this before NH….

After another section establishing their retainer and billing procedures in some detail, we get the assurance that the parenting coordinators are VERY, very, very concerned about impartiality

9. Impartiality.

The parents understand that parenting coordination will be furnished on an impartial basis and that the parenting coordinator will not provide psychological counseling or legal advice to either parent.

. . . . i.e., “just trust us.”  You are in a high-stakes struggle for your civil rights and sometimes safety for children, there is a lot of money at stake, and you are going to pay a parenting coordinator, even if child support is in arrears and you are transitioning from stay at home status as a parent.   So, as with all legal proceedings, be encouraged to take the professionals impartiatlity at face value, although you will of course have to pay a retainer to get their impartial services.  Now, about that lack of gender bias in this profession, which has a gender-neutral title, “Parent” coordination:  SAMPLE REPORT: (in diff’t format in original, see pdf)

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

ROCKINGHAM, SS FAMILY DIVISION AT

In the Matter of Father and Mother Case #2008-M-0000

PARENTING COORDINATOR REPORT

NOW COMES the Parenting Coordinator and submits the following report for the information and assistance of the Court and the parents:

Parenting coordination was ordered by the court in Month 20XX. The role of the parenting coordinator has been helping both parents manage and resolve conflicts and attend to the needs of their children within the scope of the Final Custody and Parenting Schedule Agreement. Every effort was made to encourage them to resolve disputes themselves; however, information was obtained from third parties when necessary to understand the issues, i.e., children’s pediatrician, teachers, and pastors of the respective churches.


(Guess no Jews or Muslims, or atheists, are likely to cross the PC’s paths…  Guess Christian pastors are likely to be gender-neutral, too:  Use of the word “pastor” indicates Protestant, but FYI, here’s the Catholic version of gender-equality, from a random search on “church, fatherhood”)

MISSING FATHERS OF THE CHURCH

The Feminization of the Church & the Need for Christian Fatherhood

byLeon J. Podles

You may have noticed that, in general, men are not as interested in religion as women are. There are usually more women than men at Sunday mass, and there are far more women than men at devotions, retreats, and prayer groups. The men who do come are often there because wives or girlfriends have put pressure on them to attend. . . . . “In my book,The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity,I examine the lack of men in the Western churches, which only the unobservant doubt, and I look at the possible causes and results of the lack of men. My thought has continued to develop, and I have slightly revised my thesis. In what follows I will first summarize my thesis that men stay away from the Church because they regard it as a threat to their hard-won masculinity. Second, I will explore how the Church has become identified with femininity. Third, I will consider how this feminization has undermined fatherhood, and how the Church can reach men and help them to be Christians and Christian fathers.

(Unbelievably, this is copyright 2011).  Is it better with the non-Catholics, this panick about feminizing or rendering men impotent through church involvement?

Here’s an attorney’s writing:  ”

Tips for Restoring the Biblical Role of Fatherhood in the Church  Scott Brown. (note:first quote is from an attorney);

“To know the true state of a nation, look at the state of the Church. To know the true state of the Church, look at the families who populate her pews. To know the state of her families, look to the fathers who lead them. Destroy the vision of the father, and you render impotent the family, thus creating a chain reaction that spreads throughout civilization” Douglas W. Phillips, Esq.

If a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God? -I Timothy 3:5

How does a church begin to restore the role of fathers to the pattern prescribed in scripture? First of all, she must deal with PMS (Passive Male Syndrome). This is accomplished by focusing the energies of the church toward men and challenging them to carry out their Biblically defined roles.

Well, here’s someone else’s “Public Notice Calling for the Repentance of Douglas W. Phillips” (probably the same guy, judging by content):

2. As a self-appointed, unordained, sole elder of Boerne Christian Assembly, Mr. Phillips pronounced an “excommunication” on a member family of his church in 2005. 2 The “excommunication” was vindictive and appears to have been motivated over a difference in political views. 3 The “trial” was conducted without any due process in what can only be described as a Kangaroo Court. The accused were tried in absentia. No witnesses were called. No defense was afforded the accused. No specific, detailed list of charges was made. No evidence was provided. Any actual valid excommunicable sins had already been repented from, including a pre-conversion sin that had been repented of fifteen years prior. 4 A prominent Pastor has since described the excommunication as “the Salem Witch Trials.” The family has attempted ever since to be reconciled with Mr. Phillips, but he has refused all offers to meet with them, thus confirming his vindictiveness.

3. After being “excommunicated,” the entire family was shunned, including the family’s children. The children were never charged with any sins. Yet they, too, were punished. One of the daughters had received an award as a runner-up in a Vision Forum writing contest, but Mr. Phillips ordered her name be removed from the Vision Forum web site.

4. Doug Phillips is known as a leader in what is known as the “Patriarchy” movement. However, his conduct as a pastor makes it apparent that he is more of a misogynist than a Patriarch. “Let the women keep silent” (1 Cor. 13:34) is taken to such an extreme at BCA that women cannot make prayer requests or even introduce their guests. Women aren’t even permitted to get the elements of the Lord’s Supper for themselves. If their husbands aren’t present, they must be served by another man, or one of her sons, even if that son is too young to take the Lord’s supper himself.Mr. Phillips’ treatment of women is degrading and demeaning, and he does not treat them as fellow heirs of Christ Jesus. 5

Be assured the people who tend to talk like this can meanwhile be treating their women (and/or, previously, slaves) like second-class animals. This same person expounding on evolutionary versus revelation concepts of law, starting with Oliver Wendell Holmes..

A millennium of Christian legal tradition came to an end in 1870. In that year, Christopher Columbus Langdell, newly appointed Dean of Harvard Law School, began a revolutionary approach to legal education which specifically discarded the Genesis foundation of law in favor of a philosophy rooted in Darwinism.

Langdell abandoned the historic method of teaching Christian principles of the common law in favor of the new “case-book method” which directed the student to discover law through the constantly evolving opinion of judges. Langdell described the relationship between science, law, and uniformitarianism in the preface to the first “case-book” ever published, his Cases on Contracts:

While it’s clear AFCC is in favor of evolutionary legal language (in fact, moving towards therapy and away from law, just USING the courts to dispense the therapeutic assignments to court cronies, if I may be so sarcastic (and accurate) – – – Be assured that among the people coming before the courts will be women attempting to exit the dominate-the-woman lifestyle of one, or more, religions, and that sometimes they are risking their lives for doing so.

One more — since the Parenting Coordinators of New Hampshire feel it appropriate to consult “Pastors” for “information” on the children and parents.  Pastors are mandated reporters of child abuse (and have been caught as perpetrators, also, or covering up for perpetrators).

For this reason (or at least so He stated), former US President Jimmy Carter LEFT the Southern Baptist Convention, stating as a reason its treatment of women:

Via Feministing, the former president called the decision “unavoidable” after church leaders prohibited women from being ordained and insisted women be “subservient to their husbands.” Said Carter in an essay in The Age:

At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.

And, later:

The truth is that male religious leaders have had — and still have — an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world.

The article here is July, 2009. Contrast with the position of former U.S. President Bush, in 2001 (OFCBI), or in 2003 (heart of the Family Justice Center Alliance — see my post — cites an interest in keeping the “faith” component involved in helping people escape violence, abuse including sexual abuse of children, human trafficking and wife-beating.   And in 2008, the PCANH, in a casual reference, figures that they’ll go get some more data from the pastors…. Yeah, right.. Meanwhile, to clean up its racist act the conservatives targeted urban innercity black MEN to sell them on Fatherhood initiatives, when they were already en route to civil rights….

There’s still over?compensation and a church attempt to solicit men (women are expected to show up and serve, what else have they got to do?) in the form of (date:  2010) a “MANLY MEN conference” which appears to have a Responsible Fatherhood/Marriage Connection:

Celebrate Being a Man!No singing. No crying. No holding of hands.

Take some time to explore the website to learn more about each part of this life-changing weekend. Space is limited and the event is expected to sell out, so take advantage of early bird pricing and get registered today! Bring a friend, bring your sons, but make sure you join us in celebrating MEN!

What beats hanging out with 1,000 men for a weekend?Roasting our own pigs.

Pig Roast

This summer, The Manly Man Conference returns to Green Bay with an all new event, Manly Man III: Time to Man Up. MMIII is a weekend for men, by men. From the food to the speakers and the music, everything is planned with YOU in mind.

This year we’re going hog wild with the pig roast. We’ve purchased a few pigs to raise at a farm in Wisconsin and are forming plans to roast them ourselves. Why? Because we’re men!

Yes, this has a religious and “Focus on the Family” theme.  Do I sense a fear of the feminine somewhere? The key speaker is a pastor, and probably on the CFDA 93.086 circuit too, as he is marketing marriage seminars…

As such, I find the parenting coordinator comment  a bit of a “red flag” (or just ignorant of the influence of religion here…..).

But, after they have assembled all the relevant information (and obtained retainers) then it’s time to write a report.  Benjamin D. Garber, Ph.D. (mental health leadership of PCANH.org) and John D. Cameron, Esq. (legal leadership of PCANH.org) suggest a report as follows:

(After very brief info, this is the first substantive paragraph, attacking Mother.  Again, this is a standard, or sample report.  No contrasting one is suggested to validate any concerns a mother might have about a father.  Catch the tone — this is a PC association coaching PCs how to Coach the Judge to say the Mom Coached the Children.  And you wondered where that idea came from, eh?

There was evidence in the meetings with the children that they were caught in a loyalty bind by mother (i.e., feeling pressure to choose their mother as right or good and their father as wrong or bad). The children shared that their mother asked many questions about their father and his household. They acknowledged that they did not always tell their mother the truth. Sometimes they lied to stop their mother from questioning them intensively after visits with their father. Other times they lied in an effort to please their mother, or because their mother had confused them.

Often, the children complained about their father or his household. For example, “I don’t feel I’m safe at Daddy’s” or “I’m scared of Daddy.” However, when these issues were explored, it was learned that in some cases they were totally without foundation and in other cases they were related only to an incident two years earlier when their father grabbed an arm and directed one of the children to time-out in the garage.

a.k.a., how to discredit any assaults…..

The children also brought up issues and requests which parroted their mother….

“Mom says our clothes don’t fit” and “I want to talk with Mommy more than just the Sunday ” With discussion it was revealed that their mother raised the issues and then directed the children to discuss them in the meetings. In addition, it appears that the mother has made statements that have caused the children to doubt the parenting coordinator. For example, the children said to the parenting coordinator: “Mom told us that you took Daddy’s side and didn’t stay neutral and on the kids’ side.”

a.k.a. how to counter with allegations Mommy is coaching, AND she doesn’t trust the PC authority, either!  (As it seems, with good reason, if this is typical of the bias!)

Father showed improvement in raising only important issues instead of trivial concerns in the joint meetings.

a.k.a. how to win points for Daddy’s patience and forbearance with hysterical mother.

Subsequent paragraphs are no better, and continue to castigate bad Mommy and patient Daddy, and then psychoanalyze the Mother:

Mother displayed a distorted view of the father, seeing him as without redeeming qualities and specifically as abusive to the children. She constantly scanned the world for evidence of his harm to them. She viewed trivial events as having great significance; she interpreted inconsequential remarks by the children as indicative of major problems; and she exaggerated the anxious remarks of the children and accepted their complaints about the father as facts. For example, when the children complained about normal disciplinary (end p. 29) consequences from their father, the mother concluded the father was being abusive.

Similarly, despite evidence to the contrary, the mother alleged that the father’s church did not adhere at all to the Scriptures, and she believed that the father never dressed the children properly.

The mother exhibited rigid or black-white thinking. She had difficulty taking in information, considering it and viewing it objectively. Instead, she integrated it into her unrealistically negative belief system about father She rejected evidence, explanations and interpretations that were inconsistent with her beliefs.

The mother seems to use the children as a narcissistic extension of herself. She is unable to separate her own needs and emotions from those of the children. She attempts to undermine the children’s relationships with their father. The effect on the children is confusion and anxiety. The children vigilantly look for information to fit their mother’s perception of their father. As a result, the children are not learning to trust their own observations and judgments, and they are at great risk of becoming alienated from their father.

Mother’s distorted view and lack of trust in the father does not lend itself to building an effective co-parenting relationship and is destructive to the children. She lacks introspection and sees herself as virtuous and without fault. Mother viewed the parenting coordinator’s attempts to point out these dynamics as persecution and evidence of bias against her.

Actually, it is the parenting coordinator profession that perceives itself as virtuous and without fault, therefore deserving of this authority over — apparently, the mothers in a high-conflict parenting couple.    Is there any indication there that PERHAPS a woman’s instinct, or a mothers’ might notice something the paid PC might not?   The last statement there, to me, indicates that this handbook has anticipated resistance from an alert mother and how to counter it by labeling her.  Ain’t NOTHING new under the son in this field, except the name of the new niche assigned to do the same job!

In summary, a degree of stability has been established in the family system with accountability offered by parenting coordination.

(Actually, there is precious little accountability with this system!  Again, they are looking at “family system” and have a particular spin on events in an individual family.  There is no mention in this whether or not there has been previous severe violence, threats, including to kill or kidnap.  While it says no parenting coordination to be assigned unless parents both “consent” (what would the options be?) — only a very desperate mother, for example, would submit to a process that indicates this much bias going out the gate.

(Continuing….)

Father’s improvement in non-reactivity and being issue-focused has been beneficial. The parenting coordinator is concerned about the mother’s unresolved emotional issues** and the adverse impact these may have on co- parenting and on the children’s psychological health. It is strongly recommended that the mother seek individual counseling with a Ph.D. level mental health professional. Without intervention, co-parenting will be eleven more years of accusations and mistrust, necessitating ongoing parenting coordination. Furthermore, there is reason to be concerned that the mother may further confuse and alienate the children this summer.

In other words, parenting coordination the first step, intervention, the next step, and here is the “alienation” buzz word.

As a school nurse, she has the summer off and will be with the children all day on her parenting time. Finally, it is recommended that parenting coordination continue for 6 more months in order to facilitate effective co-parenting, monitor the dynamics in the family system, and determine whether the mother’s individual counseling has a positive impact.

Good grief, the woman is a school nurse, which is a profession where one is trained to notice details and work with kids.  Now, she may want to have some private down time with her own, perhaps?  Not with this parenting coordinator around.

Did I mention, who is paying child support to whom about this time?   oh, I forgot — this absolutely has nothing to do with $$ and the parenting coordinators are certainly neutral (at least by AFCC standards). ….

Respectfully submitted, Parenting Coordinator

**Cobblers see shoes and mental health service providers see mental health problems.  Does anyone actually see potential CAUSES of the responses?

So there you have it – HOW to call “ALIENATOR!” — blow by blow.  A sample report.  So, isn’t it nice to know that IF you actually agree to a parenting coordinator voluntarily, this is about the level of impartiality to expect.  Don’t agree unless there is no other option, if you’re female, wouldn’t you think?  Or at least, don’t grasp at stray straws of hope….

Now that how to write an antagonistic report about a paranoid mother who needs more therapy (or else), it’s time to get down to the issue of who gets to be a parenting coordinator.  For some reason, reading this, I feel like we are back in grade school again, picking the winning team — who is “in” and who is “out.”  Of course the Non-AFCC are going to be “out” but this is expressed in the following manner:

Mental health and legal professionals who are interested in developing parenting coordinator skills should, in addition to pursuing training in the above areas, consider joining the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts or AFCC (website: http://www.afccnet.org). Furthermore, they should obtain supervision from a professional who is recognized as a skilled parenting coordinator. That supervision should continue throughout at least six parenting coordination cases

(Thus ensuring no “high-conflict” struggles within the Parenting Coordination Community — all will be properly groomed and screened.  With as many judges as AFCC has on its board and in its ranks, this shouldn’t be too hard.  Sounds like they don’t deal too well in this organization with challenges to their authority…..).

Suppose there are real violence or child abuse cases a parenting coordinator is handling?  would such a person then actually consult an expert in the field?  Like a medical expert, or criminal investigator who specializes in this?  Well — no, how about another AFCC parenting coordinator who knows how to put the mental illness spin on anyone who reports.  Notice the order:

Any parenting coordinator cases involving (1) parents with  severe personality disorders or mental illness and (2) cases with allegations of physical or sexual abuse should be conducted only by a licensed mental health professional with more extensive experience as a parenting coordinator and substantial continuing education in parenting coordination, such as parenting coordinator workshops provided through AFCC.

Excuse me, when there are allegations of physical or sexual abuse, let’s not settle where or not this actually took place, but call in the psychiatrists?   I wonder how that will work out.  Notice it’s PARENTS (probably mothers) who have the severe personality disorders, and CASES not with physcial or sexual abuse, but allegations of it.  Just to get the priorities straight. . . . . .

(Are we AFCC enough yet?  in this field).

Again — read it.  It’s an eyeopener.  http://www.pcanh.org/NEW%20HAMPSHIRE%20PARENTING%20COORDINATION%20HANDBOOK.pdf 

Of course, because I am questioning the authority of this profession, I just might be a female with a severe personality disorder…called reading .

How I found out about this:  I read in a case which had been turned around through Alienation charges, and it just so happened to be in NH and involve not one, not two, but THREE mental health professionals stroking each other’s egos and deferentially quoting each other.  The couple involved hadn’t even lived together that long, but they managed to get the kids back to the father away from the mother.

(material on the personnel mentioned in title, on the next post; I am splitting off  one long post by word-count)….

To be continued….

Evaluate, Coordinate, Prepare to Call “Alienator!” — Pt. 2: CFCC and AFCC people Nunn, Depner, Ricci, Stahl, Pruett(s), and others DV groups fail to talk about

leave a comment »

And how this dovetails with purpose of  Access Visitation Grants grants…

The last post (or so) discussed practices in Pennsylvania and Indiana, with side-trips to Kentucky and California, where they originated from anyhow.

(If you read it, I meanwhile confirmed that KidsFirstOrange County Gerald L. Klein & Sara Doudna-Klein, yes,are married.  I forgot to include how much they charge for services ($300 per parent, $120 per kid) in teaching about parental alienation and conflict…..  I wonder who was the first Mrs. Gerald L. Klein… and whether these two have children together or not.

In context, Kids Turn, or Kids’ First, or steering cases to certain mediators, certain GALs, etc. — is the habit.  And then, to top it off, extorting parents into participation through the child support system (Kentucky), or changing the civil code of procedure AND even the Custody Complaint form to name ONE provider of ONE parenting education course (Libassi Mediation Services) which is already being marketed elsewhere — outrageous.

This was tried in California, to standardize judge& attorney-originated nonprofits through the California Judicial Council, but our then-governor vetoed it (though both houses of the legislature passed it).

Now pending — Probably still — is another one that is legitimizing a practice already established, the Family Justice Center Alliance out of San Diego, like Kids’ Turn and financial fraud at the City Attorney’s office level, and so forth.   Why stop while you’re ahead?

This has currently flown through House & Senate and as of June 9th was referred to  Location: Assembly Committee Public Safety Committee  and I think, Judiciary.  Here’s some analysis from the Senate Appropriations Committee.  Senator Christine Kehoe (who sponsored the bill) just so happens to be chair of the appropriations committee and from one of the cities involved in expanding the Justice Center concept (actually the city that started it:  San Diego).

SENATE BILL 557

(link gives the bill’s history; the following is accessible through it)

Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary

Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

Hearing Date: 05/26/2011

BILL SUMMARY: SB 557 would authorize the cities of San Diego and Anaheim, and the counties of Alameda and Sonoma, until January 1, 2014, to establish family justice centers (FJCs) to assist victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, human trafficking, and other victims of abuse and crime. This bill would require each FJC to maintain an informed consent policy in compliance with all state and federal laws protecting the confidentiality of the information of victims seeking services. This bill would require the Office of Privacy Protection (OPP), in conjunction with the four pilot centers and relevant stakeholders, to develop best practices to ensure the privacy of all FJC clients and shall submit a report to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2013.

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 (thereafter, the FJCs are to be locally funded)
_____________________________________________________________________

Fiscal Impact (in thousands)   Establishment of FJCs Unknown; potentially major local costs for operation and services
Major Provisions  
 Report to Legislature $17 to OPP (Office of Privacy Protection) in advisory role General

_________

…This bill would require the Office of Privacy Protection (OPP), in conjunction with the four pilot centers and relevant stakeholders, to develop best practices to ensure the privacy of all FJC clients and shall submit a report to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2013.

…Should the specified cities and counties opt to establish a FJC, there will be unknown, but major local costs for operation and the provision of services to FJC clients.  Costs would be dependent on the number of clients, FJC procedures, staffing, and the availability and cost of local treatment and service providers.

…The OPP has indicated a cost of $62,000 as the lead agency to develop best practice privacy recommendations and coordination of the report to the Legislature.

To reduce the costs of the bill, staff recommends an amendment to have the four pilot centers reduce the OPP to an advisory role over the development of best practices. The OPP has indicated reducing their involvement to oversight and review of the report would result in costs of approximately $17,000.    (WELL, the OPP is slated for elimination anyhow, this report notes).

I’m posting the SB 557 updates for California residents.   Information from:

TotalCapitol home

RECENT POSTS:

Recently, I posted on:

  • Kids Turn (Parent education curriculum, nonprofit started & staffed by family court personnel, with wealthy patrons AND gov’t sponsorship through federal Access/Visitation Funding)
  • Family Justice Centers (origin in San Diego; Casey Gwinn, Gael Strack) and their background.  INcluding a boost by Bush’s OFCBI initiative in 2003 — adding the faith factor to violence prevention.  Sure, yeah..
  • Family Justice Center #2, Alameda County — see “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys” post.
  • Also, remember the Justicewomen.org article on the importance of District Attorneys in safety (or lack of it) towards women.  A D.A. decides whether to, or NOT, to prosecute individual cases.  It’s a huge responsibility.
  • What’s Duluth (MN) got to do with it?
  • What’s Domestic Violence Prevention got to do with this California-based racket?  I questioned what a Duluth-based group spokesperson (Ellen Pence) is doing hobnobbing with a Family Justice Center founder (Casey Gwinn).
  • I have more unpublished (on this blog) draft material on this.
  • The elusive EIN of  “Minnesota Program Development, Inc.” which gets millions of grants (around $29 million, I found) but from what I can tell doesn’t even have an EIN registered in MN, although its address is 202 E. Superior Street, Duluth, MN, and it definitely has a staff.
  •  I have more unpublished (on this blog) draft material on this.  
  • Toronto Integrated Domestic Violence Courts
  • This was intended to be a “break” on SB 557 and Family Justice Centers, but thanks to the internet and international judges’ associations, and downloadable curricula, this is simply (it seems) another AFCC-style project.  (Kids Turn knockoffs, talk of high-conflict & parental alienation, and modeled after several US states).  The intended “global” reach (UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, etc.) is happening, and makes it hard to “take a break” from California basic corrupt practices by looking at another country’s handling of the same issues. The world is flattening — Internet, I guess.
  • Last post, I addressed some partner-type organizations:  AFCC/CRC, or CPR/PSI (in Denver), and personnel they have in common.

REMINDER — in CALIFORNIA — Three accepted purposes of the A/V funds system remain:


Supervised Visitation is an idea from that became an industry spawned and sprouted by some of the above groups, and watered by the US federal funds to the states. The link cites the supporting 1996 legislation…    For a reminder

California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program (Fiscal Year 2009–2010)

REPORT TO THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE MARCH 2010

Federal and State Program Goals

The congressional goal of the Child Access and Visitation Grant Program is to “remove barriers and increase opportunities for biological parents who are not living in the same household as their children to become more involved in their children lives.”3 Under the federal statute, Child Access and Visitation Grant funds may be used to

support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation [with] their children by means of activities including mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement** (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pick-up), and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.4

The use of the funds in California, however, is limited by state statute to three types of programs:5

  • Supervised visitation and exchange services;
  • Education about protecting children during family disruption; and
  • Group counseling services for parents and children.

(This report has been prepared and submitted to the California Legislature under Family Code section 3204(d).Copyright © 2010 by Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts. All rights reserved.)

**isn’t it interesting — if a court order exists, but is not being complied with, wouldn’t “visitation enforcement” be the simplest solution?  Dad, Mom — obey your visitation court order.  But somehow California wasn’t interested in that aspect, but wants the A, B, C, of Supervised Visitation & Exchange Services; of “Educating Parents about “protecting children during family disruptions” {the Kids Turn component) and getting people into group counseling, parents and children both.
If the whole concept sounds like AFCC, it is.   In 2000, I see a report planning how to use “court-based mediation” for child custody.  (California Judicial Council, Administrative Office of the Courts, “CFCC” (Center for Families & Children in the Courts).   This shows Isolini Ricci, Ph.D. under this CFCC:

Report 12 Executive Summary (Sept 2000)

Preparing Court-Based Child Custody Mediation Services for the Future

KEY PERSONNEL POSITIONED TO SET POLICY are AFCC.   
As of 2010, the top two personnel (Director, Assistant Director) of this Center for Families & Children in the Courts are AFCC, I’m pretty sure (Nunn/Depner).
I notice Diane Nunn (attorney), Isolini Ricci (Ph.D., and AFCC leader, author, etc.), and here, Charlene Depner was “Supervising Research Analyst,” but by 2010 (above) was Assistant Director of the entire CFCC.  Depner is an AFCC member.  AFCC members are coached to, or at least always seem to, talk about “Parental Alienation” and ‘High-conflict” parents, or divorces, usually in the same breath, for example:
     -by Mindy F. Mitnick, EdM/MA  {search my blog, she’s AFCC.  Note degrees — a professional educator….}

DIANE NUNN


with emphasis on Criminal Justice
“The Many Faces of California’s Courts”
Diane Nunn, Director, Center for Families, Children & the Courts,
California Administrative Office of the Courts, “She supervises projects related to family, juvenile, child support, custody, visitation, and domestic violence law and procedure. Ongoing projects include training, education, research and statistical analysis.”  (Note, presenting alongside Bill Lockyer, then California Attorney General, whose wife Nadia ran (til recently) the Alameda County Family Justice Center).
Diane Nunn listed as not just “AFCC” but “AFCC Advisory Council” in an inset column — alongside some well-known names, such as Janet Johnston, Joan Kelly, Philip Stahl (all Ph.Ds), and — please note — Jessica Pearson.  (See yesterday’s post, or search my blog).  Plus a passel of judges, including from other countries. I count ten (10) Judges, just a few J.D.s and Ph.D.’s (I’ll bet, several in psychology or psychiatry), some unlabeled, some educators (M.Ed.D.) and social workers, I presume.
About this Newsletter, let’s notice the “Thanks!” list:

AFCC wishes to thank Symposium sponsors and exhibitors for their support:

Children’s Rights Council, Hawaii (that’s CRC)

Christine Coates, JD, Dispute Resolution Training Complete Equity Markets, Inc.

Dr. Philip M. Stahl, ParentingAfterDivorce.com (alienation promoter)

Family Law Software, Inc. J.M.Craig Press, Inc. LifeBridge

The LOGO for the newsletters shows children and has the subtitle “KIDS COUNT ON US.”
It’s an eyeopener to start seeing the AFCC conference and newsletter material.  For example, among the Parent Educators, in fine print it lists “Kids First, Chet Mukliewicz, Dunmore, PA”  (more on him, in this post if I get to it.  Kids First is a Kids Turn knockoff, it sells publications by AFCC personnel, including Isolini Ricci, Philip Stahl, Richard Warshak, and of course himself.  In addition, it takes referral business from at least one other state court besides the one where he lives, and he holds a contract with Lackawanna County, PA, which court is being compared (in print) to the Luzerne County, PA “Kids for Cash” scandal. ….       This is product positioning and marketing, basically.      Janet Johnston, Ph.D. (in this 2004 letter) is welcomed as Associated Editor of the “Family Court Review” (which AFCC puts out) and is revealed as to having previously worked as executive director of “Protecting Children from Conflict,” itself an affiliate of Judith WallersteinCenter for the Family in Transition in California .
3 Pruetts — one on Board of Directors (C. Eileen) , 2 (Kyle & Marsha Kline) as main presenters.    Is Eileen related to the other Pruetts from California?  (I don’t know — it’s not an usual name.  But I’d like to know!).
That’s handy….   C. Eileen Pruett lists on Jigsaw as “Dispute Resolution Program Coordinator” under the Hon. Francis Sweeney (Columbus, Ohio).  AFCC pushesmediation as a solution for custody disputes, even though most custody disputes are acknowledged to have elements of violence and/or abuse, including child abuse.
A 1999 Supreme Court of Ohio Task Force Report called “Family Law Reform:  Minimizing Conflict, Maximizing Families” on Reforming the Courts from Ohio lists her as:

Eileen Pruett and the Supreme Court of Ohio Office of Dispute Resolution Special Committee on Parent Education for the material on parent education, which is replicated in Appendix D.

In Ohio, “To achieve this goal, the Task Force recommend(ed, in 1999): 1) All parties in proceedings that involve the allocation of parental functions and responsibilities should attend parenting education seminars……Sixty-seven Ohio counties currently mandate parent education seminars for all divorcing parents;
Note on this Task Force:  The Executive Director of it (Kathleen Clark), was AFCC Board of Directors at least in 2004 (see newsletter) and acknowledges AFCC allegiance. In fact, a search of both “AFCC” and (AFCC written out) totals 11 references to this task force report — which also details how (besides lifting the parent education segment from an AFCC board of directors) also relates how as part of OHIO’s task force, they flew to Arizona and attended what appears to be presentations at AFCC, including by some members on the task force who were AFCC presenters.
In fact, in its own (1999) words:

More than two dozen experts from around the state and across the country presented testimony to the Task Force over a six-month period. Representatives from a variety of parents’ organizations, as well as a panel of teens who had experienced their parents’ divorces, brought their unique concerns to the Task Force. Staff members obtained research articles and statutes from around the nation and the globe to find the latest policies and practices. Members of the Task Force traveled to Phoenix, Arizona, to meet with staff at the Maricopa County Court system, a nationally recognized leader in court services and pro se programs, and to conferences sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, an internationally acclaimed organization which provides research and programs for professionals dealing with families in conflict.

Given who was on the task force, and what it did, this kind of conclusion is a little predictable:

The following report and recommendations are the result of this extensive research effort and debate and have been unanimously approved, without any abstentions or dissents, by official action of the 17 members of the Task Force present at the final meeting on June 1, 2001.

That’s OHIO flying to Arizona (which has its own chapter of AFCC, and where Philip Stahl happens to live, now that he’s left Northern California) to meet with a Court Administrator to coach themselves how to be GOOD AFCC members and make sure not to swerve from the policy of talking about “conflict” more than criminal issues or domestic violence issues.
Here’s another (undated) AZ supreme court, what looks like Domestic Relations training committee (of some sort) which is heavily AFCC laced, Just click on it and search for “Association of Family and….” and see…  Arizona also happens to be where Sanford Braver, Ph.D. practices.   Philip Knox, that they went to visit (from Ohio Task force)  also worked (it says) with the California AOC (on which Nunn & Depner sit, under CFCC) on promoting a Unified Family Court.

The OTHER Pruetts (I’m still on that 2004 AFCC flyer which mentions Diane Nunn as AFCC “Advisory Task Force”) include Dr. Kyle (child psychiatrist from Yale) and his wife Marsha Kline (also a Ph.D.).  They have three daughters and one son and have naturally dedicated themselves to promoting fatherhood, as a search on “Marsha Kline Pruett, Kyle Pruett Fatherhood” will readily show, at a glance.  Dr. Marsha Kline even got an award for “Fatherhood  Initiative Community Recognition Award, State of Connecticut (2002), and   Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research Award, Awarded by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.   She is definitely (with I gather her husband, Dr. Kyle) on the Grants stream for investigation:  “University of California, Berkeley: Supporting Father Involvement 7/1/09-6/30/12: Total (T) $176,924 Marsha Kline Pruett, Ph.D., Co-InvestigatorUniversity of California, Berkeley: Supporting Father Involvement 7/1/04-6/30/09: Total (T) $353,849 Marsha Kline Pruett, Ph.D., Co-Investigator

The Pruetts, being a double-Ph.D. married family with academic connections to Yale, Berkeley, Tufts, Smith, etc. and on the conference AND grants circuit would of course have first-hand experience and understanding what it’s like to be on welfare, and forced to litigate for years in the family law system, whether a father (to chose between child support issues, or litigate, allowing more business to be driven to the professionals) or a mother (struggling to retain custody, or for survival, or (foolishly, given the state of the field nowadays) for child support enforcement.  AND, they are AFCC.   One psychologist & MSL, and one Psychiatrist.
Basically, if you browse family law reading lists, literature, or establishments, you will run across AFCC members referencing each others’ publications.  These publications may say “domestic violence” but will juxtapose it with “Parental alienation” and then talk about “conflict” which in the case of DV, is a euphemism.  Many of the lists still reference Richard Gardner.  “Reading Materials for Parents and Children Going Through A Divorce

CHARLENE DEPNER, Ph.D., AFCC, etc.

Now (just for the heck of it), more on “Charlene Depner, Ph.D.”  First of all, Ph.D. in what?  the answer — per LinkedIn, is Social Psychology at U Michigan

Assistant Division Director,  Cntr for Families, Children & Courts, CA Administrative Office of the Courts Govt. Admin. Industry  1988 – Present (23 years)/ Education:  U Michigan,   PhD, Social Psychology 1972 – 1978

So it appears, about 10 years, if any, in private practice or employment of some sort?

Yesterday, I ran across a comment (I believe I know who its author is) on an “AngryDadBlogspot” which related some more (Nepotism?) in San Diego between a supervised visitation provider (already found to be practicing without a license) and the family justice center — which started there, apparently, in San Diego.  That’s not today’s topic — but here it is:
2006 NCJRS study of families at supervision centers in NY reads:

A. Does the history of violence in the relationship predict whether the visits are supervised or unsupervised?

We found no statistically significant relationships between the history of physical and psychological abuse or injuries and court orders to a supervised visitation center, family supervised visits or unsupervised visitation. More than three quarters of the participants had experienced severe forms of physical and psychological abuse from the father of their children. One can surmise that these pervasive experiences provided no useful information to the court to determine which fathers might pose a current and ongoing danger.

The one exception was severe injuries, which had been experienced by less than half the participants (46%). Nevertheless, fathers who had severely injured their former partners were no more likely to be ordered to supervised visitation than unsupervised visitation.

A 1996 report (issued by this CA Judicial Council AOC)  on “Future Directions for Mandatory Child-Custody Mediation Services:….”

” notes:

Court-based child custody mediations affect the fate of nearly 100,000 California children each year. Many of them are already at risk when parents come to court. Currently, one- third of all mediations address concerns about a child’s emotional well-being. Child Protective Services has investigated a report about children in 33 percent of all families seen in mediation. Children in half of all mediating families have witnessed domestic violence. Today’s Family Court faces the serious challenge of protecting the best interests of the next generation.

Well, pushing mediation does not appear to be the solution!

Joan Meier, of DV Leap writes on this, and most any battered women’s advocate without AFCC collaboration in the bloodstream, might say the same thing — it’s counter-indicated!  Whatsamatta here?  Joan Meier, of “George Washington University Law School” (and ‘DVLEAP.org”) as posted in a noncustodial mother’s blog. NOTE:  She quotes both Janet Johnston, Ph.D. (AFCC leadership) and Depner, who both acknowledge that MOST of the the high-conflict cases entail child abuse or domestic violence.  This has been known since the 1990s….

Most Cases Going To Court As High Conflict Contested Custody Cases Have History Of Domestic Violence  


By JOAN S. MEIER, George Washington University Law School

Janet Johnston’s publications

Janet Johnston is best known as a researcher of high conflict divorce and parental alienation. {{NOTE how AFCC often pairs those terms– that’s an AFCC language habit}}.   Not a particular friend of domestic violence advocates or perspectives, she has been one of the first to note that domestic violence issues should be seen as the norm, not the exception, in custody litigation.

Johnston has noted that approximately 80% of divorce cases are settled, either up front, or as the case moves through the process. Studies have found that only approximately 20% of divorcing or separating families take the case to court. Only approximately 4-5% ultimately go to trial, with most cases settling at some point earlier in the process.

– Janet R. Johnston et al, “Allegations and Substantiations of Abuse in Custody-Disputing Families,” Family Court Review, Vol. 43, No. 2, April 2005, 284-294, p. 284;
– Janet R. Johnston, “High-Conflict Divorce,” The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 1, Spring 1994, 165-182, p. 167 both citing large study by Maccoby and Mnookin, DIVIDING THE CHILD: SOCIAL AND LEGAL DILEMMAS OF CUSTODY. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U. Press (1992).

Johnston cites another study done in California by Depner and colleagues, which found that, among custody litigants referred to mediation, “[p]hysical aggression had occurred between 75% and 70% of the parents . . . even though the couples had been separated… [for an average of 30-42 months]”. Furthermore, [i]n 35% of the first sample and 48% of the second, [the violence] was denoted as severe and involved battering and threatening to use or using a weapon.”

Mediation is an easy way to increase noncustodial parenting time without the protections that facts & evidence, without the disclosure of conflicts of interests a judge has to abide by, without the attorney-client work product relationship, and much more — in short, without the PROTECTIONS — that a regular trial might afford, and finish.   Mandated mediation is bad enough.  Some counties (in Calif) also have what’s called “recommending” status to the court-appointed mediators, meaning, their reports are taken more seriously by judges.  I have seen how this works year after year (from being in the courtroom) — the mediator’s report is often delivered IN the courtroom, and NOT prior to the hearing, if then.  It is typically a shocker, and this really violates due process, but it’s accepted practice.  Mediation is the poor-person’s “supervised visitation  / custody evaluation.”  If no private family member can be made to pay for the latter two, or then the quick & dirty custody hearing is going to involve mediation.

Guess which organization is heavily composed of mediators, and ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution services) and emphasizes this to unclog the courts?  You betcha — AFCC.

· Attempts to leave a violent partner with children, is one of the most significant factors associated with severe domestic violence and death. 
– Websdale, N. (1999). Understanding Domestic Homicide. Boston, MA: University Press.

· A majority of separating parents are able to develop a post-separation parenting plan for their children with minimal intervention of the family court system. However, in 20% of the cases greater intervention was required by lawyers, court-related personnel (such as mediators and evaluators) and judges. In the majority of these cases, which are commonly referred to as “high-conflict,” domestic violence is a significant issue.
– Johnston, J.R. (1994). “High-conflict divorce.” Future of Children, 4, 165-182.

What “DVLEAP” does in its own words:

A STRONGER VOICE FOR JUSTICE

Despite the reforms of recent decades, battered women and children continue to face unfair treatment and troubling results in court. Appeals can overturn unjust trial court outcomes – but they require special expertise and are often prohibitively expensive.

We empower victims and their advocates by providing expert representation for appeals; educating pro bono counsel through in-depth consultation and mentoring; training lawyers, judges, and others on cutting-edge issues; and spearheading the DV community’s advocacy in Supreme Court cases

(photo also from this site):

They even have a “Custody and Abuse” program, and have taken on the “PAS” theme.  These are specific cases that have been taken to the Appeals or even Supreme Court (state) level.    Here (found on-line) is an Arkansas Case where they took on “PAS” alongside:  Arkansas Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Justice for Children and The Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (on which I believe Ms. Meier is a board or advisory member), the NCADV, and National Association of Women Lawyers.   It is an Amicus Brief and will likely go to discredit PAS.

The Leadership Council’s:

Mission Statement

The Leadership Council is a nonprofit independent scientific organization composed of respected scientists, clinicians, educators, legal scholars, journalists, and public policy analysts.

Our mission is to promote the ethical application of psychological science to human welfare. We are committed to providing professionals and laypersons with accurate, research-based information about a variety of mental health issues and to preserving society’s commitment to protect its most vulnerable members.

Goals

  • To develop a coalition among professionals within the scientific community, the legal system, the political system and the media to provide professionals and laypersons with accurate information about mental health practice and research which helps insure access to the highest quality of care.  (and several others are listed. . . . . .. )

In the bottom line, the Leadership Council is still talking psychology, acknowledging trauma, and opposing “PAS” — but, who they are and what they do is clear — “Apply Psychological Science Ethically.”  So, if you put this psychological group together with some domestic violence lawyers, or lawyers who recognize that batterers (etc.) are getting custody — you just the opposite of the AFCC   “J.D. & Ph.D.” combo of attorney & mental health practitioners

The problem is — the AFCC, being around longer, and having strategized better — have the judges, too.   

As I look at The Leadership Council’s page on “Child Custody & PAS” and associated “resources” below, I notice that they have said NOTHING about the things I blog on, and some others, individuals, who have simply observed.   There is a striking omission of the organizations promoting “alienation” theory — no mention of AFCC, CRC, or the influence of the Child Support System & Grants Stream on how cases are decided.  While NAFCJ (and a similar Illinois group) are listed — for a change — they are one in a dozen-plus links that a mother in a crisis system could not sort through or wade through in time to help her case — if indeed that information even would.

I appreciate the work these organizations do to “out” that violence does indeed happen in the home.  Of course most people experiencing it know this already….

But how much better might it have been to give TIMELY information on the operational structure of the courts, and who is paying whom.  How in the world can one enter a contest being ignorant of the habits and devices of the opposite side?  What’s up with that?

So, I talk about these things.  And so do a FEW others.

Domestic Violence Nonprofit DVLEAP gets a “Sunshine Peace” award:

“This award is so meaningful to me,” said Professor Meier, “because I have so much respect for others who have received it in the past.    I am also grateful to the Sunshine Lady Foundation for the financial contribution to DV LEAP  associated with the award which will make a significant difference to our small organization that manages to accomplish so much with so few resources.”

According to the Sunshine Lady Foundation (which was founded by Doris Buffett), the Sunshine Peace Award program “recognizes extraordinary individuals who make a difference; those who help to build communities that are intolerant of domestic violence and through whose work peoples’ lives are changed for the better.”
Since Professor Meier founded DV LEAP in 2003, the organization has worked on cutting-edge issues in the domestic violence field, submitting 6 friend of court briefs in the Supreme Court.  In the past year, in addition to lecturing and consulting with survivors, DV LEAP staff have worked on 10 appeals, a remarkable output for an organization of its size

Well,this is all very nice — and certainly I”m sure professional work.  But is it the most important task?  I say:  NO!  Neither DVLEAP nor the State Coaliations (why, I hope to show soon enough), nor the related Leadership Council mention the operational systems of the courts — which is their related professional associations and nonprofits — as well as the grants stream and the child support system.  How hard is that to comprehend?  There are different systems working within to promote more and more work for the marriage counseling and therapy industry, PERIOD.

For example:

They did not mention that in 1999, in Ohio, an AFCC-laced Task Force lifted some AFCC_designed policies for custody, then flew to Arizona to attend an AFCC conference as part of their transformations of the courts.  These groups do not mention, typically, fatherhood funding, or the history of Family Law as an offshoot of a brainstorm between “Roger & Meyer”  (Judge Pfaff and Counselor Meyer Elkin) long ago, or anything at all about the Marv Byer discoveries in the late 1990s.  They don’t mention that around the US, “fatherhood commissions” building of the National Fatherhood Initiative have been formed to legalize some of the policies these very groups say they oppose.   Nor, FYI, do they (for example) broadcast to women that the NCADV and associated alliances are actually collaborating with the father’s groups at the national and financing level, and talking policy with them.

They certainly don’t mention when a local legislator slips in some bill to legalize steering court business to court professionals, as Senator Christine Kehoe (San Diego area) did when an Assemblyperson in 2002 (proposing a bill naming Kids’ Turn in its first draft; see my  “kicking salesmanship up a notch” post), or as She (sponsoring?) did again in SB 557 (with her chief of staff then and now Assemblyperson, Atkins) in legalizing the “Family Justice Center Model with an alliance run out of the San Diego City’s original brainchild.

Nor do they mention how the money keeps flowing in after conferences, for example, as in this 2008 AFCC conference:

Not only does the material itself show (coach) professionals how to be prejudiced against mothers — but it also probably more than breaks even (though aren’t judges paid enough in our states?) by selling the stuff!

READ THIS!  Read every sentence and simply think about it.  This is the pre-game and post-game plan for a custody hearing.  And it’s only one of how many?

These are existing people who decided WHERE kids live (or don’t), whether they see their own parents’ income go to professionals and evaluators, or to the children’s future college funds, or simply survival funds.   This is AFCC conference material:

Your Price: $25.00
Item Number: AFCC-08-011-M
Quantity:
Email this page to a friend

This panel will demonstrate how the judge, evaluator, psychologist performing psychological testing and the childrens therapist work together to complete the evaluation process. The panel will present an actual case in which a family comes to the court with allegations that mother is alienating the children and is clinically depressed. Father is asking for full custody. Mother is making counter allegations that father and his live-in girlfriend are verbally and emotionally abusing the three children. The parents have a history of high conflict and the police have been called many times to keep the peace. The family is referred for a child custody evaluation. The panel will demonstrate how the evaluator relies on the childrens therapist and the psychologist performing psychological testing on the parents, fathers girlfriend, and the child experiencing emotional distress, for information and case consultation in order to give the judge the most complete history and assessment possible. The panel will describe how and why the recommendations were made for this family.

The police were probably called because someone (not both) was being assaulted.  However, a single evaluation of a police call might obtain the cause of the call.  To “keep the peace” is an evasion.  911, or non-emergency police calls have causes.  We all know this.  If the police were called many times to “keep the peace” was no referral made?  Was no restraining order solicited?  Why not get to the bottom FIRST of whether or not a crime was committed.  THEN, if the answer is conclusively, NO, it might go to the next level.

Why do that, however, when a custody evaluation can be instead ordered.

I might just get this product and find out how they frame the situation.

To be continued .  . . .

@@@