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 ‘Business Enterprise’ Category

“TAGG” you’re It: CFDA 93.086 Grantees– Let Me Count The Ways (to distribute $121,077,648 on the same old theme, re-shrinkwrapped)…

with one comment

Reader Warning:

Format of these posts — I am simply researching (looking up) as I go, and posting what I find, with commentary.  There is a narrative.  If you want the list of the grants in question, scroll down to the bottom.

Topics in this post include:

  • Criticism of TAGGS database & data entry of these grants.  (misspelling of project names, in particular)
  • Simple instructions, however, on how to run basic reports from it.
  • Proof that USASpending.gov & TAGGS do not match, USASPending either omits real grants, or HHS fabricates (over-reports).   Any thorough look would require using both of them, checking the nonprofit registrations (on a nationwide databse if possible), checking state corporate & nonprofit registration, and comparing with what their websites say, particularly about the history of the company.  Lastly, who is on the board of directors (and what else have those people been up to / associations), and if you actually look at the 990, this tells where they are reporting the money flow.  In a very real sense, unless we have looked at a nonprofit’s 990 form, we really don’t know them.
  • I looked up one particular “Fatherpood” grant, and the umbrella D.C. organization that goes with it.
  • Extensive section discussing some leading personalities in the socialization of America:  Organizations  Children’s Defense Fund (Marian Wright Edelman), “Stand For Children Leadership Center” (DC nonprofit) including its leader Jonah Edelson, background of one corporation (Bright Horizons) and one or tow individuals (Jill Iscol) on the board, and Geoffrey Canada/Ron Mincy (who have worked on similar projects).
  • The background organization, really, behind HEAD START (Bank Street College of Education, basically).   This came up when looking at Jill Iscol’s background.
  • I point out, as the history shows, that if one is going to promote theories about how children learn and “early childhood education,” one needs children to test them on — this is one reason it’s so common to find a child care center near a “family studies institute” or (Cornell) “Family Development Center” — at the university level.
  • Historic figures behind this include Patty Smith Hall (unmarried, not a parent, and apparently not heterosexual); Lucy Sprague Mitchell, Harriet Johnston (I may be misspelling names  — they are below), and others characterized as a “bunch of intellectuals” out of Greenwich Village.
  • What I saw — and have been seeing for months/years in this process – is that the desire to control the training of young children, is indeed the desire to control and reform the world, and should be dealt with accordingly by people with enough humility and perspective to understand, this is not appropriate for anyone.  Particularly in the U.S..
  • What I would call some very unique, if very questionable, studies being done (now, through HHS system) on children in attempts to stop child abuse — and/or predict their “socio/emotional outcomes.”  Quite frankly, I’ve had enough of this; it’s not all it’s cracked up to be.
  •  

    And finally, at the bottom, is another printout of a Grant Series.  The post is raggedy and scraggledy (with long incomplete expressive sentences, sometimes missing a predicate) — but I am going to post it anyhow.  I believe the information is interesting enough for someone of similar interests to grab part of it, and do his/her own lookups.

    Personally, I believe that untold numbers of the HHS grantees are simply front operations, that enable money laundering.  I say this because they cannot maintain a corporate name very long, have multiple people, for example, on a central (umbrella or founding) organization board — and then these people form splitoff nonprofits (sometimes also getting HHS grants) — under their names, and the various groups refer to each other (as if independence existed) to further boost their image.  That, FYI, is an AFCC pattern through and through.  One of the chief groups that led me to come right out and say this was the “California Healthy Marriage Coalition” (CHMC) — which hails to San Diego County, Southern California  + Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project?” – -hailing to Sacramento, Northern California.   These guys are absolutely unbelievable.  Check the street addresses and personnel.  San Diego & Sacramento (State Capitol).  Watch out!

    Over time, the chronological development of the groups — and their ever-changing rhetoric (exhibiting planning, as one phrase gets discredited, another is in the wings and in the works.  Right now, it’s “relationship skills” near the forefront, but Parenting Coordination appears to have been legislated in many states, which is bad news for good Moms, for sure.

     

    OK, HERE WE GO:

    The structure & contents of site “TAGGS” is a real window into what US policymakers think of the commoners, i.e., those who work for hourly wages with taxes deducted upfront to fund social science research — much of it “discretionary” “demonstration” and allegedly “new” grants.   Another commentary on what someone thinks of the “commoners” is how careless, incomplete, and inaccurate — that’s not including the intentionally obscure and deceptive facets also.   It is an appearance only of “transparency.”

    The 2011 Total of CFDA 93.086 (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood) grants, per this site (run just now) is:

    CFDA Prog. No. OPDIV Popular Title Number of Award theses Number of Award Actions CAN Award Amount
    93.086 ACF Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants 164 178 $121,087,642

    I have been running searches (of all types) on this website for most of the time I’ve blogged here.  It should be telling details of how public money, allocated to the Health and Human Services Department, is being spent, and on whom.  So many of the marriage, fatherhood, AND “domestic violence prevention” organizations, when closely examined, are not even legitimate — their incorporation status is lost in one state, and they simply head off to another, networking through the usual court-related associations set up years ago.

    I believe a general overview of specific grant series  paint  a picture, even if one doesn’t study all the details (although groups local to you, I’d want to!).   For example, look at the project name of this first sample (the rest, below):

    (would display with the navy-blue header row, except I pasted, rather than “dragged” the info onto the blog.  Same source as above).

    Recipient: *FAMILY SERVICE OF WESTCHESTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10606-3003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0050 FATHERS COURT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 543,906 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 543,906

    WTHell is a “Fathers Court”?   Is there a Corresponding Mothers’ Court?   Should we then eliminate the concept of “Children’s Court”?   (that won’t happen — the word “children” in almost any combo is a huge grants draw….).   Can we separate  childless couples into a “Marriage Court”?   And, if so, why should all the unmarried and childless, (or they raised kids without going through family court hell, and are continuing to contribute to society, while this system allows, almost indiscriminately, group after religious or simply elitist group, to skim the profits, collected via the IRS and supplemented by large corporations or foundations (Ford, Annie E. Casey, etc.)?

    FK sounds like a new series.  For the record, here’s the nationwide total of the “FK” series a quick TAGGS run for 2011 only:  to run this (takes seconds, only) is easy:

    • Go to http:///TAGGS.hhs.gov
    • Click on the DropDown menu tab, “Search by AWARD keyword or  number.”   It should look about like this, or at least have these 3 fields:
    Fiscal Year:

    Select one or all from Fiscal Year. The current calendar year will be searched by default.

                       ALL               2012           2011           2010           2009           2008           2007           2006           2005           2004           2003           2002           2001           2000           1999           1998           1997           1996           1995

    Award Keyword:

    Enter a keyword in the Award Title. If left blank, all award titles will be searched. Special characters are not permitted.

    Award Number:

    Enter an Award Number. If left blank, all award numbers will be searched. Special characters and spaces are not permitted.

    • Select year – -and FYI, you can also type in a partial “Award#” — I do this all the time to get a feel what that grant series is.  In this case, I chose Award # “90FK” and year 2011, then hit “search.”  Searching by Award “keyword,” even if you typed in simply “Fatherhood” would miss  a number of $1 million+ grants, simply because (this seems an ingrained TAGGS data entry “tic” it’s so commonplace…..) the word “fatherhood” is often misspelled on this database!
    SEE?
    Recipient: Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis
    Recipient ZIP Code: 63158
    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0052 FATHERS’ SUPPORT CENTERS’ PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FAHTERGOOD  1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,530,190 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,530,190
    Recipient: Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20001-4330
    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0054 DC FATHERHPOOD EDUCATION, EMPOWERMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,533,518 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,533,518

    Notice, both of those are $1.5 million grants, and from groups that have been around for a while.  Whoever, the 2nd one above (DC zip code) is, this is their total grants since 2006:

    Total of all award actions: $ 4,033,518


    Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions

    They got $500K per year (2006,7,8,9,10) on a “90FR” grant, and this year, switched to receiving a “90FK,” with triple the amount and a fancier project name — misspelled.   Let’s hope that whoever is entering these names isn’t also entering information that involves a decimal point on accounts receivable or payable for our government.  More likely, someone is being pressured (too much) to help cover up the abuse & mis-use of these funds, by making them harder to track by names.  (recall that the last series of 90FM names had ALL the Principal Investigator last names omitted (the “FN” field was doubled).   Either this or there is NO proofreading or fact-checking in the Taggs submission process whatsoever — not too encouraging, considering the amount of money they are reporting on.

    I’ve done data entry (and AR/AP before) and had I messed up that many words (and obviously failed to spellcheck, or had spellcheck function consistently set to “off”), I’d lose my job.  As you can see, I haven’t been working in government.   (Disclaimer:  this blog is volunteer, and I do not spellcheck, or copyedit and have a post explaining this, and why).

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou  Washington DC 20001-4330 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 012901240 $ 1,533,518

    If I took this number over to USASPENDING.gov, no doubt we’d get a different total, even if selecting grants only & HHS only.  I do not know what result would com if (this would be another step) I went to Washington DC and checked their incorporation, or NCCSDataweb.org and looked for a nonprofit filing.  (not today…)

    Oh well — since you insisted — here’s the data:

    http://dccollaboratives.org/

    Read the description:  This is a 501(c)3 of 501(c)3’s. . .

    Our Mission

    The Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council (HFTCCC) brings together community leaders to create and sustain a District-wide network that empowers families and communities to improve their quality of life.

    Perhaps it would be wiser to figure out what “disempowered” families, including mothers, — confront it, and stop it.  As Washington, D.C. is one of the most powerful places on the planet (not including the centers of Finance…), in one of the formerly? most powerful countries in the world, one wonders how, when, and why it became filled with such disempowered families.  Apparently there was a power grab somewhere along the way.  Address that — and families will be more empowered.

    {{Judging by the HHS funding, the word “families” means “fathers” which is common usage among grantees.]]

    We are a 501(c) (3), organization that provides leadership, advocacy, resource development, technical assistance, and training to the six Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaboratives. The six Collaboratives are independent nonprofit organizations that operate across the District of Columbia in communities facing intergenerational economic, social and safety challenges. Since the mid 1990s, the Collaboratives supported by the Collaborative Council, have joined with community members – residents and institutions alike – to re-weave the social fabric. Each community solution is tailored to the needs of the community with Collaboratives and their partners offering a range of unique services and supports to children and families.

    If they are being trained — and the purpose of most HM/FR grantees can be summarized in one word:  TRAINING — then they are not independent, but just have the appearance of it, any more than your local county child support agency is independent of the others, rather than connected also at the HHS/ACF/OCSE level and by welfare law….

    [[After describing a forum to report results, based on surveys…]]

    Attending the forum to respond to the data presented were Beatriz “BB” Otero, deputy mayor for Health and Human services; Deborah-Portia Usher, interim director,Child and Family Services Agency; HyeSook Chung, executive director, DC Action for Children; and Elizabeth Black, senior associate, Center for the Study of Social Policy.

    Deputy Mayor Otero said that city agencies and community-based organizations must do more to support at-risk families.

    The street address exactly matches the “DC Children’s Trust,” and, for example, a Parent Training center for adoptive & foster parents.  

    1112 11th Street, NW
    Suite B
    Washington, DC 20001

    The DC Children’s Trust’s mission is (per its Facebook summary).

    he mission of the D.C. Children’s Trust Fund is to foster the well-being of the District’s children and their families by leading the way toward the prevention of child abuse and neglect. The Trust serves as a catalyst for prevention efforts by leveraging private and governmental resources, providing resources and technical assistance to community-based organizations, schools, and churches to strengthen families and thereby reduce the risk of child abuse. A major objective of the Trust is to define and develop standards for primary prevention for the D.C. community at-large.

    Clearly, the standards emphasize getting promoting responsible fatherhood grants in order to teach groups how to prevent child abuse (cf.  Footloose in Tuscaloosa post).  This, FYI, is national policy, OCSE /Welfare policy and at some level, could be called HHS policy.  In order to prevent abuse of children by fathers & mothers, train fathers and get them back in the homes.  Period.  Children’s Trusts help direct funding, they are often public/private partnerships.  Under “products” ( a long list) I see “Parents Anonymous Grant,” which I recently blogged, right?  (cf.  “Circle of Parents” is basically a NFI mouthpiece; the work together).

    At the same address is:

    NOTICE — 1996 = established right after welfare reform made father-promotion grants available, block grants to the states (and presumably DC) to enable diversionary programs as a long-term solution to end poverty and child abuse.  

    History

    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative, Inc. (ERFSC) was established in 1996 and is one of seven neighborhood based collaboratives in the District of Columbia participating in the Healthy Families Thriving Communities Collaborative Council. This program, spearheaded by the DC Child and Family Services Agency, received its planning grant in April 1996 and its implementation grant in August 1997.

    ERFSC is also an expansion of the Child Welfare Working Group of the Rebuilding Communities Initiative (RCI) spearheaded by Marshall Heights Community Development Organization. RCI embodies a system reform agenda for which the central goal is the improved and sustained well being of children and families.

    . . . as defined by the same groups….

    ERFSC has operated as an independent stand-alone organization since October 2000. This organization evolved out of a seven (7) year old Child Welfare Initiative funded by the District of Columbia’s Child and Family Services Agency and the Annie E. Casey Foundation in 1996. For the first five (5) years of its inception, the Marshall Heights Community Development Organization, Inc. (MHCDO) provided fiscal agency responsibilities. In October 2000, ERFSC received its 501©3 to serve as an independent non-profit agency.

    Where are the tax returns for the years 2002, 2003-4-5-6 & 7?

    Your query: ( Organization Name: east river family strengthening collaborative , State:“DC” , Zip: None Chosen , EIN: None Chosen , Fiscal Year: None Chosen ) 
    4 matching documents retrieved (4 displayed) 

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative DC 2010 $572,817 990 22 52-2277915
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative DC 2009 $354,508 990 31 52-2277915
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative DC 2008 $435,198 990 25 52-2277915
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative Inc. DC 2001 $208,439 990 14 52-2277915

    {There are many directors, and about 3 of them (per 2009 Tax Return) are working 40 hours a week — for nothing.  Only Mae H. Best is paid ($115K), so here is her bio — notice the Youngstown, OH connection:

    Contact ERFSC’s LEAD STAFF:

    Mae H. Best, LICSW (Executive Director) 

    Mae H. Best has served as the Executive Director of ERFSC since June 2001. 

    (Website says they became a separate 501(c)3 in 2000.  Looks like one of the first things that happened thereafter (or the Foundation 990 Finder is wrong) was to not file tax returns for several years.  I will check another source, and retract statement if they show such returns).

    Under her leadership the organization has grown from a budget of a little
    over $700,000 to $4,000,000 which includes contracts with city government agencies 
    as well as foundations. Mae’s previous work has included stints with Child and Family 
    Services Agency as Director of Resource Development and Director of Adoptions; 
    Director of Homes for Black Children at Family and Child Services Agency and Project 
    Coordinator with the National Council on Adoptable Children. Prior to relocating to Washington DC,
    she worked for the Mahoning County Children Services Board in Youngstown, Ohio.
    Mae received her Master’s in Social Work from the University of Illinois and her Bachelor’s
    in Social Services from North Carolina A&T State University. Mae has one son who is
    a Special Education Teacher in the District of Columbia and an R&B artist.

    This article (scroll down) has a paragraph identifying this neighborhood nonprofit as having grabbed some of the “Promise Neighborhoods” funding, which is described, and modeled ? after Geoffrey Canada’s “The Harlem Zone.”

    January 9, 2011 (published in ‘Circle of Philanthropy,’ by By Suzanne Perry)

    Against Tough Odds, a ‘Promise Neighborhood’ in D.C. Gears Up

    The Parkside-Kenilworth neighborhood is just a few miles from Capitol Hill, though it’s unlikely that many members of Congress have ever visited there.

    The neighborhood, tucked away in a far eastern corner of Washington, bears all of the hallmarks of poverty: high rates of crime, teenage pregnancy,single mothers, and unemployment—and low-performing schools.

    To be consistent, this should have been labeled “father absence” which is a cause of poverty, right.  SIngle mothers in different context might not be so poor; however when stuck in a poor enclave right next to Congressional Districts, than something ain’t right, obviously.   The only gender mentioned in association with this list of bad things is female, but I’m sure residents are both female and male….

    But community leaders have embarked on an ambitious project to turn the area around—with help from money that members of Congress approved last year.  Led by Irasema Salcido, an educator who was dismayed at the obstacles that hindered her students from learning, the project snatched one of 21 grants offered by a new federal program called Promise Neighborhoods.

    . . .

    The grants, totaling $10-million, went to communities that outlined plans for providing an array of academic, medical, and social services for children in troubled neighborhoods from “cradle to college”­—a model that was pioneered by Geoffrey Canada, founder of Harlem Children’s Zone, in New York.

    Mr. Canada’s approach has won widespread acclaim, most recently in the documentary film “Waiting for Superman,” and strong support from President Obama, who proposed the Promise Neighborhoods program while still on the campaign trail.

    This should be a separate post.  Mr. Canada — clearly an astounding person

    Geoffrey Canada (born January 13, 1952) is an African American social activist and educator. Since 1990, Canada has been president and CEO of the Harlem Children’s Zone inHarlem, New York, an organization which states its goal is to increase high school and college graduation rates among students in Harlem.[1] He is a member of the Board of Directors of The After-School Corporation, a nonprofit organization which describes its aim as to expand educational opportunities for all students.

    His parents divorced when he was about 4, with 2 older and 1 younger sibling, and apparently didn’t support the family.  Nevertheless, being sent away to live with his Long Island grandparents in his teens, he went on to be recruited by (win an award from) the Fraternal Order of Masons, and get degrees in Psychology, Sociology, and finally Education, the last from Harvard.  Thank you Mom — I guess you did well! should be a comment, but this is not heard in the publications, is it?

    Born and raised by a divorced mother in the South Bronx, he is the third of four sons of McAlister and Mary Canada. His parents’ marriage ended in 1956, after which his father played little part in the children’s life and did not contribute financial support.[2] Canada was raised among the “abandoned houses, crime, violence and an all-encompassing sense of chaos and disorder,” and understood his life’s calling at an early age. His mother sent him to live with her parents in Freeport, Long Island, when Canada was in his mid-teens.[2] He attended Wyandanch Memorial High School, and won a scholarship from the Fraternal Order of Masons during his senior year of high school.[2] He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology and sociology from Bowdoin College, where he graduated in 1974, and a Master’s degree in education  from the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Canada has an honorary degree from Princeton University.[3]

    Role with the Harlem Children’s Zone

    Starting as president in 1990, Canada started working with the Rheedlen Centers for Children and Families which evolved into the Harlem Children’s Zone. Unsatisfied with the scope of Rheedlen, Canada transformed the organization’s makeup in the late 1990s into a center that would actively follow the academic careers of youths {{both genders??..}} in a 24-block area of Harlem. Due to the success of the new model, the area has grown to 97 blocks.

    (There’s a reason I took time to mention Geoffrey Canada, The Harlem Zone, which relates to another major nonprofit run by the son of Marian Wright Edelman of the Children’s Defense Fund, and which (one can see the trend here) is promoting charter schools hard, and has begun to take some serious flack in a few states by program personnel ramrodding their agenda through, over the voices of local, state-based parents and volunteer workers. ).   Like Ronald D. Mincy (also of Harvard, but in Economics) here is another prominent African-American male leader whose mother MIGHT have done something right (judging by the degrees, and their current position) — and yet their work — which is helping change society — shows an emotional obsession with the absent father, and an inability to properly credit a mother, or recognize that THEIR OWN SUCCESS comes through struggles but with a single mother.  In effect, their work — supported by major foundations which I’ll hazard a guess are not run by any minority whatsoever — (like the Ford Foundation) — has now scapegoated single mothers across the country, and made it not only almost impossible, but also socially unacceptable — and politicially incorrect — to succeed.  Children are being REMOVED from such mothers apparently by the thousands, even when after removal, disaster (death in foster care, or in a court-ordered exchange with the noncustodial parent) often happens.

    Mixing truths, but framing them according to their personal childhood experience, and buoyed up by federal funding and corporate funding — society is indeed being transformed — and what i see is the continued buoying up of the public education which has failed students according to their color, caste, and neighborhoods (which the unequal system will continue to do, although it also fails those in prosperous suburban enclaves in different ways).  We have become (not are becoming) a federally centralized country with a parallel set of government-by-administrative-agency.  This is essentially socialism and foreign to the purpose of the country and the Constitution, to which Presidents must swear an oath to uphold and defend, but don’t.   Any “Cradle to grave” solution focusing on TRAINING — is indeed socialism, and contrary to LIFE (which has more variety, and also a greater variety of personal goals), LIBERTY (consider the economic angle) and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.   People fork this over when they fail to protest, or even investigate where their own money is being spent.  I did this also — while working FT, raising children, and seeking to keep all of us alive from the imminent danger of, their father.   It took YEARS to get out (after deciding to get out) and then only to face systems putting us back in — and come to find they are based on childhood longing for the father, positioned in Harvard, MIT (see next) and other high places.

    Geoffrey Canada, father-absent resounding success & Harvard (Education) grad, created and expanded The Harlem Zone, and Ronald D. Mincy, father-absent, father-obsessed, Ph.D.’d Harvard (economics) Grad, and director of — well, Logo Below —  of whom this naturally reminded me– apparently conducted a vertical study of the Harlem Zone:

    Dr. Mincy is an advisory board member for the National Poverty Center; the African American Healthy Marriage Initiative; Transition to Fatherhood; the National Fatherhood Leadership Group; the Longitudinal Evaluation of the Harlem Children’s Zone; The Economic Mobility Project, Pew Charitable Trusts; the Mac Arthur Network on Family and the Economy, and Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Juvenile Justice

    Dr. Mincy’s undergraduate and graduate training in economics were at Harvard and M.I.T. He and his wife, Flona Mincy, have been married for more than thirty years and live in Harlem, New York. They have two sons.  (Thank God.  Can you imagine daughters growing up around all that fatherhood policymaking?)

    “The Center for Research on Fathers, Children and Family Well-Being’s mission is to expand the knowledge base on the role of fathers (and father figures) in the lives of disadvantaged children and the processes by which nonresident fathers (and father figures) affect child development and family well-being.”

    Many people ask us about our logo. They wonder why we don’t portray a happy family. We would rather showcase the problem we are trying to solve.

    We wanted to show a strong mother, who believes she is capable of taking care of herself and her family. Whatever her beliefs, she often has no other option. Despite her best efforts, the literature shows that children who grow up in two-parent families are less likely than children in mother-only families to do poorly in school, engage in risky behavior, and exhibit anxiety, depression, and aggressive and withdrawn behavior problems. 

    We wanted to portray a father who is interested in his family but who is ill-prepared to help, unsure if his help is welcome, and unsure about he can be involved.** Although conventional wisdom holds that non-resident fathers are not involved in their children’s lives, the literature shows that at least half of non-resident fathers are involved with their children up to five years of age.

    Are there ways of helping these parents work together to meet their children’s needs?

    That is our question. That is our mission.”

    ** (portion in red) — was this Dr. Mincy’s father?  Is this is hope — that his Dad really wanted to be involved, but there were just too many obstacles to father-involvement?  Is all this really about certain men who ascended to (or were selected & placed, not that they didn’t earn every single degree, but are we allowed to mention the Fraternal Order of Masons (for Mr Canada), are we allowed to mention just how many foundations supported Dr. Mincy?) in VERY influential positions, as the figurehead of the successful black man, who is now — rather than confronting the system-concept which separated families to start with (FYI, it’s called slavery) — and is instead, working for the same TYPE of masters (if not some corporations that went back nearly as far) and doing the same thing to other famlies who share none of their Ph.D. characteristics, and may not even know this has been done to them, and by transforming the welfare system further and further to minimize and curtail “mother-involvement,” ensure that the child support system can be utilized by even mutli-millionaire fathers to separate children from their biological mothers, as well as diverting cash aid to single-mother households by defining success by the number of adult biologically related males in the home?

    Why are we allowing groups like Columbia School of Social Policy, or corporations & foundations — to change the forms of government to figure out HOW to produce desired social results?  This is nothing other than “Wealth-Makes-Right” and those on the top of society got their because God wanted them to, from which the position of “God” can be fulfilled through social design and planning how others will — or will not– live, bypassing the legal systems, for example, in particular, the criminal code.

    Fraternal Order of Masons – interesting…

    Freemasonry refers to the principles, institutions, and practices of the fraternal order of the Free and Accepted Masons. The largest worldwide society, Freemasonry is an organization of men based on the “fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man,” using builders’ tools as symbols to teach basic moral truths generally accepted by persons of good will. Their motto is “morality in which all men agree, that is, to be good men and true.” It is religious in that a belief in a Supreme Being and in the immortality of the soul are the two prime requirements for membership, but it is nonsectarian in that no religious test is used.1 The purpose of Freemasonry is to enable men to meet in harmony, to promote friendship, and to be charitable. Its basic ideals are that all persons are the children of one God, that all persons are related to each other, and that the best way to worship God is to be of service to people.  Masons have no national headquarters as such, but the largest regional is the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction (35 Southern states), which is headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia.

    Although only men (of at least 21 years of age) can be Masons, related organizations are available for their relatives — there is the Order of the Eastern Star for Master Masons and their wives; the Order of De Molay for boys; and the Order of Job’s Daughters and the Order of Rainbow for young girls. The Masonic Lodge has more than a hundred such fraternal organizations, including Daughters of the Nile, The Tall Cedars of Lebanon, The Mystic Order of Veiled Prophets Of The Enchanted Realm, The Knights Of The Red Cross Of Constantine, and The Blue Lodge.

    There’s more . . . .

    Many allegories and symbols are used in Masonry. The old English Constitution refers to an ancient definition of the ancient craft: “Freemasonry is a system of morality, veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbol,” [Freemason’ symbols can be made to mean almost anything a person chooses to make them; Master Masons take an oath, “Ever to conceal, never to reveal.”2] It seeks to make good men better through the form of belief in “the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, and the    immortality of the soul.”

    Masonry was originally a means by which people in the occult could practice their “craft” and still remain respectable citizens. The official publication of “The Supreme Council 33” of Scottish Rite Freemasonry is titled New Age. Some church denominations are also led by avowed Masons. For example, a 1991 survey by the Southern Baptist Convention Sunday School Board found that 14% of SBC pastors and 18% of SBC deacon board chairs were Masons; it is also estimated that SBC members comprise 37% of total U.S. lodge membership. (A 2000 updated SBC report found that over 1,000 SBC pastors are Masons.)

    Hardly surprising — we do remember, right, that former U.S. President severed ties with the Southern Baptist Convention over their treatment — and view– of women.  While I may not agree with what he’s doing instead (joined a worldwide “Council of Elders” — give me a break!), this part is true:

    Jimmy Carter Severs Ties With Southern Baptist Convention: “Many Male Religious Leaders Help Subjugate Women

    Carter: Sexism exhibited by male leaders conflicts “with my belief — confirmed in the holy scriptures — that we are all equal in the eyes of God.”  Please read — because this is happening in the U.S. today.  (article concludes):

    The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in Britain and the United States. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for everyone in society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.

    It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and out-dated attitudes and practices — as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.

    Other commentary on the authoritarian (or you going to hell) manner of the SBC’s in re: the Carter’s decision.
    More on “The Elders,” first ref. from the article I quoted>

    • Jimmy Carter was US president from 1977-81. The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity.

    Meet the Elders’: Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Muhammad Yunus and Many More  (Kate Snow, Johannesburg, July 18, 2007)

     Guess they’ll have to contend sooner or later with Sun Myung Moon, the True Parent, who I don’t think was on the list — probably he’s not reall good at sharing leadership .   This one was conceived by “British billionaire Richard Branson and Rock Star Peter Gabriel”  and talks about how, without such piddling matters as “political (i.e., laws), economic (i.e., costs) and geographic (national sovereignty, etc.) constraints” surely this assembly of starpower can fix the world:

    The structures we have to deal with these problems are often tied down by political, economic and geographic constraints,” Mandela said. The Elders, he argued, will face no such constraints. . . .Using their collective experience, their moral courage and their ability to rise above the parochial concerns of nations ? they can help make our planet a more peaceful, healthy and equitable place to live, ” Branson said. ” Let us call them ‘global elders,’ not because of their age but because of individual and collective wisdom.” Calling it “the most extraordinary day” of his life, Gabriel said, “The dream was there might still be a body of people in whom the world could place their trust.”

    Well, the world is fully of nutcase Messiahs, they are found amongst the homeless, and among the ultrarich.  Guess which group probably has done more harm, and been responsible for more human misery, wars, poverty, and genocides, in the long-term?

    A little more detail on Mr. Canda’s life, from “blackpast.org” an on-line encyclopedia.  His mother was a counselor.   He had no sisters…..

    Canada was born on January 13, 1952 to McAlister and Mary Canada in the South Bronx, New York City.  His mother was a substance abuse counselor and his father suffered from chronic alcoholism.  His mother raised him and his three brothers in the South Bronx after she divorced his father in 1956.

    Canada grew up in poverty yet his mother strongly instilled the value of education in him at an early age.  In his teens, Canada was sent to live with his grandparents, both ordained Baptist ministers, in Long Island, New York.  While living with his grandparents, Canada attended Wyandanch Memorial High School where he received the Fraternal Order of Masons scholarship his senior year.   {{SEE above}}

    Canada then enrolled in Bowdoin College in 1970, graduating with a Bachelor’s degree in psychology and sociology in 1974.  A year later he graduated with an M.A. in Education from Harvard Graduate School of Education.  His mother eventually earned her own Master’s degree from Harvard some years later.    

    In addition, Canada has published two books: Fist, Stick, Knife, Gun: A Personal History of Violence in America(1995) and Reaching Up for Manhood: Transforming the Lives of Boys in America (1998).In 1972, Canada married Joyce Henderson and had two children, Melina and Jerry.  They divorced and Canada married Yvonne Grant.  They also have two children, Bruce and Geoffrey, Jr.    [Contributor(s): Jackson, Joelle
    University of Washington, Seattle]
    Are the children from the first wife now fatherless and at risk?

    (VERY) BRIEFLY:  The EDELMANS & CHILDREn’s DEFENSE FUND (1992 interview with Marian Wright Edelman) speaks about her parent’s Baptist past
    ….”her childhood home in Bennettsville, S.C. That was the starting point for the self-assured black girl who would emerge from the segregated South to go to Yale University Law School, create the Children’s Defense Fund and propel herself onto the national scene as an impassioned and relentless champion of needy children and families…. It was in that spirit, to promote continuity, that Mrs. Edelman wrote a little book, a “spiritual and family dowry,” for her sons, Joshua, Jonah and Ezra. She has been married for 24 years to Peter Edelman, a law professor at Georgetown University.

    The family values talk is just talk,” Mrs. Edelman said, her voice rising, her words accelerating. “People understand what is real and what is hypocritical. Family and moral values are so central to everything that I am.”

    The daughter of a Baptist minister, Mrs. Edelman writes in her book that “many of the seeds I am still struggling mightily to harvest for children and the poor were planted during my childhood.” Her father gave sermons, she said, “decrying the breakdown of family and community” and “insisting that poverty of things is no excuse for poverty of will and spirit.”

    Being a Baptist still plays an important role in her life. “If I don’t go Sunday morning, I’m not grounded for the week,” she said.

    I don’t know how much readership understands the role of the Children’s Defense Fund in policies around today, or how one of her 3 sons’ work intersects with Mr. Canada’s, at the nonprofit, charterschoolpromotion level.  I am wondering whether she would be OK with the impact of these social programs on real mothers, today:

    Mrs. Edelman met her husband in Mississippi, where she was the first black woman admitted to the bar. She was working as a civil rights lawyer, and Mr. Edelman was researching poverty and hunger for Senator Robert F. Kennedy. Mrs. Edelman and her husband, who is Jewish, raised their sons in the religious traditions of both sides of the family.

    In his introduction to his mother’s book, Jonah, who graduated from Yale last spring (1992) and is now a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, refers to himself as “a cultural mulatto . . . the sheltered bar mitzvah boy who has struggled with his blackness.” … The Edelmans’ eldest son, 23-year-old Joshua, is a Harvard University graduate who teaches history at the Milton Academy in Milton, Mass. Ezra, 18, is a freshman a Yale.

    . . .

    here have been rumors that Mrs. Edelman, who has worked for years with Hillary Clinton, the past chairwoman of the Children’s Defense Fund, might join the Cabinet if Gov. Bill Clinton becomes President. “I would not,” Mrs. Edelman said, adding that her black friends were urging her to go into Government to increase her power and influence.

    “That is not who I am,” she said. “I need to work outside Government, on my own. I love what I do, and I think I am making a difference.”

    The nonprofit Children’s Defense Fund, which will celebrate its 20th anniversary next year, is widely respected for its lobbying efforts. Its aim is to bring the needs of children to public attention and to encourage preventive efforts in areas like health care and teen-age pregnancy. The fund played an important role in the formulation of the child-care legislation that Congress passed in 1990

    OK — now I will link Jonah Edelman to Geoffrey Canada (finally), through Mr. Edelman’s Wikipedia — and hopefully you will see the connection with these inexorable training grants from HHS — there is an HHS connection in the family line:

    Jonah Martin Edelman (born 9 October 1970) is an Americanadvocate for public education.[1] He is the co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Stand for Children, a national American education advocacy organization based in Portland, Oregon andWaltham, Massachusetts, with affiliates in nine states. He is the first Oregon resident to be awarded an Ashoka: Innovators for the Public fellowship.[2]

    STAND FOR CHILDREN is no ordinary nonprofit — it was set up to be nationwide from the very beginning and to force social transformation.  It is also very well endowed.  Currently, this group is facing off with teachers’ unions, (see “Illinois”) and Mr. Edelman was caught boasting about how he got these unions to give away their rights — although the cause is, “improving public schools” – — right? . . .

    Jonah Edelman is the second son of Marian Wright Edelman, former civil rights leader and aide to Martin Luther King, jr. and founder and president of the Children’s Defense Fund, and Peter Edelman, former aide to Senator Robert F. Kennedy, former Assistant Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and professor at Georgetown University Law Center.

    Edelman was born and raised in Washington, D.C, and received his B.A. in History with a concentration on African-American studies from Yale University in 1992. Edelman attended Oxford University on a Rhodes Scholarship, earning his Master of Philosophy and Doctor of Philosophy degrees in Politics in 1994 and 1995, respectively.

    He is, essentially, a blueblood acting like a blueblood, i.e., arrogant — taking charge — and rescuing poor people  by redesigning government policy— and insisting it be done “his way” or the highway.  When I say blueblood, we know Marian Wright Edelson’s personal background and commitment, discipline, and values.  Her husband/Jonah’s father qualifies as blueblood (See “Georgetown” and working for RFK), and former assistant Secretary to the DHHS — –    where the fatherhood programs now life — and it appears these were instrumental in some of their beginnings.  And may give a better clue to their actual purposes.

    Edelman cites tutoring a six-year-old bilingual child named Daniel Zayas in reading while volunteering at Dwight Elementary School during his first year at Yale as a turning point.[3] While still an undergraduate, he ran a teen pregnancy prevention speakers’ bureau, co-founded a mentorship program for African American middle school students, and served as an administrator of an enrichment program for children living in public housing-Leadership Education and Athletics in Partnership (LEAP).

    Stand for Children

    Edelman was a key organizer of Stand for Children Day, a June 1, 1996 rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. attended by 300,000 people.[4]   {{KEEP THE LINK…}} Among the speakers at this rally, the largest for children in U.S. history, were Geoffrey Canada, who later became Stand for Children’s first Board of Directors Chair, the editor of Parade Magazine, Walter Anderson, who came up with the name “Stand for Children Day,” and Marian Wright Edelman.

    On June 2, 1996, Edelman and Eliza Leighton founded Stand for Children as an ongoing advocacy organization to support rally participants when they returned home. Hundreds of follow up Stand for Children events and rallies took place across the country on June 1, 1997 and then June 1, 1998.

    Yes, about that rally:

    Education plus politics (about “stand for children’s” role in Denver School Board race) 

    Edelman, the son of Children’s Defense Fund founder Marian Wright Edelman, began Stand in an effort to marry child advocacy and grassroots organizing. “Stand didn’t start off working on public education at all,” he said, noting the 1996 Stand for Children rally from which it grew encompassed many issues.

    The rally, which Edelman worked on at his mother’s request, drew 300,000 people to D.C. for what was the largest rally for children in U.S. history. Stand’s first chapter was founded in Oregon in 1999.

    “It’s really evolved organizationally toward public education based on the fact public education is the most salient and fundamentally important issue of so many issues facing kids,” he said.  Stand’s grassroots approach is similar to those of two other parent groups in Denver, Padres Unidos and Metropolitan Organizations for People or MOP.  But Stand differs in that its members get directly involved in politics – something Padres and MOP, which are non-profit 501(c)3 organizations, can’t do – and it works at the local and statewide levels.

    “We don’t choose cities,” Edelman said when asked about coming to Denver, “we choose states.”

    WE’RE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE MOVEMENTS NOW GOING ON  IN HHS, where “CHILDREN & FAMILIES” precludes speech of individuals, and where leadership is to be followed, not questioned, when it comes to policy.   The intent is to transform the public schools, and if necessary, take on teacher’s unions.  I see an article boasting about how their legislators all one, and several “status quo” legislators lost.  Grassroots advocacy, organization, and funding, right?   Next, there is this one showing alliance / alignment with Mr. Canada.  As I have explained, that also = alignment with the fatherhood prominence, and getting more children into state care than Mom’s care, by combining early childhood education + public school (regular or charter) education, both federal projects, while endorsing — apparently — welfare-diversions (like the HTTC above) to transform certain communities:

    1.  Post-Election Message from Stand’s CEO, Jonah Edelman  (nov. 8, 2010)

    Friends and Colleagues:

    Tuesday’s election saw the emergence of Stand for Children as a multi-state electoral force for students.

    By reaching more than 55,000 targeted voters through grassroots volunteer outreach (five times more than in 2008) and strategically investing more than $1 million (15 times more than in 2008) in Colorado, Washington, Illinois, and Oregon, Stand helped protect an overwhelming majority of the legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, who stood tall for students earlier this year.

    And here’s something else that’s striking: while none of the legislators we backed lost because of their vote to improve educator effectiveness, Stand helped unseat several legislators who voted for the status quo.

    2.  Note from CEO, Jonah Edelman – Inpired by Geoffrey Canada

    November 24, 2010

    Last Thursday, some of you [Stand staff, Board members, Advisory Board members]  were able to join in a conference call where we received a mega-dose of inspiration from Geoffrey Canada, Stand’s first Board chair, founder and CEO of the Harlem Children’s Zone, and one of America’s most prominent education advocates.

    On the call, Geoff generously affirmed Stand’s incredible recent progress and he challenged us to seize this unique moment in time and work with even greater resolve, perspective, and discipline to save all of those “perfectly normal children,” as he described them, who are falling hopelessly behind in school.

    This is grassroots organizing from the top-down, not the bottom-up, and if anything, this organization is ORGANized and visionary; that also apparently runs in the family line, plus (see educations). . . . .   (did they attend local public schools, K-12?) . . . . .  Checking my Nonprofit status — and actually reading a tax return (great way to learn about a group — read their tax returns if possible) — there is a:

    • Stand for Children (oregon nonprofit)
    • Stand for Children Leadership Center, Inc. (Washington, D.C. nonprofit),

    and apparently (per that tax return) a 

    • Stand for Children, Inc. — for profit.

    The (2002) board of SFCLC (DC group) was:

    Stand for Children Leadership Center Board of Directors (from tax return)

    • Who We Are

      Founded in 1986, Bright Horizons Family Solutions is the world’s leading provider of employer-sponsored child care, early education, and work/life solutions. Conducting business in the United States, Europe, and Canada, we have created employer-sponsored child care and early education programs for more than 700 clients, including more than 90 of the Fortune 500.

       

    • CNN description (Money.cnn.com, 2008):  Average pay:  Directors, $54K, teachers, $25K…
    • Headquarters: Watertown, MA
      2006 revenue ($ millions): 698
      Website: www.brighthorizons.com

      Employees
      U.S. employees 14,660
      Employees outside U.S. 1,972

      This corporation (investing in its stock) helped make Tennessee Senator, Lamar Alexander, one of the Top 10 (richest) in 2007.  Below this list, I’ll show (I recognized this name.  Lamar Alexander also known because of Corrections Corporation of America (CCA, private prison corporation)’s lobbying, and a move to privatize the entire state’s prisons, connected with this legislator.

    • Geoffrey Canada President, Harlem Children’s Zone
    • Sam Daley-Harris’ President, Results Educational Fund
    • Gun Denhart “s Founder & Chair, Hanna Andersson Corporation
    • MarianWright Edelman` Founder & President, Children’s Defense Fund
    • Daniel Grossman’ Founder & CEO, Wild Planet Toys
    • Jill Iscol” President , Jill Iscol & Associates  
    • Reverend/Dr. Eileen Lindner, Deputy General Secretary for Research & Planning, National Council of Churches, {{Excu UUse me???}}
    • Fred Senn Partner/GroupDirector, Fallon
    • Dorothy Stoneman Founder & President, YouthBuildUSA

    Every one of those corporations / organizations the board of directors sit on has a story, and most likely an interest in education reform.  Who are these people, and why have they taken on (with private, not public funding — on this tax return at least) organization to restructure the US Educational system according to their particular vision?   For example, because it’s simplest to illustrate, “BRIGHT HORIZONS FAMILY SOLUTIONS” is top dog in employer-provided daycare.

    From the site:   INSIDERTRADING.PROCON.ORG

    Mr. Alexander was 10th richest, right after the 9th richest US Senator in 2007, namely, “9.  Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)  Avg. Net worth of household in 2006:   $30,691,003 — and I just love the description of her “Spouse Name and Title:”  Bill Clinton, 42nd US President.
    #10 – Lamar Alexander, Jr. Avg. Net Worth of Household in 2006:  $27,800,155.  Spouse name and title:   “Leslee “Honey” Alexander, Bord of Trustees, WETA; Member and Vice Chairman, Corporation for Public Broadcasting Board of Directors,” 
    5 TOP STOCKS OWNED @ 12/31/2007– TOP STOCK:  “BRIGHT HORIZONS FAMILY SOLUTION” — $500,001 – $1,000,000.
    Senator Lamar Alexander Co-founded “Corporate Child Care Management, Inc.” (now “Bright Horizons Family Solutions).   His wife owns more than $1,000,000 stock in it. …  Committees he sits on that may present conflict of interest:  Health, Education, Labor, Pensions.
    For our leaders:  Investment income from holdings.  For those they set policy for:  Jobs, hopefully, child support – -possibly, welfare — likely at this pace — and parenting classes, and public schools.  Some design, others support (like, the workers at these various corporations) and if there is not too much civil discontent, all is well in the world. ….  While I am here, from the same site, on The (then-Senator) Obama’s household, notes a very lean portfolio, but investment in two speculative stocks he probably wouldn’t have known of except as a legislator — one dealing with mobile communications (and a satellite), i.e., SkyTerra (see also Wikipedia)– and the other AVI BioPharma.(“Advanced RNA-Based Therapeutic Platform)”    The commentary, here:   The second company has “strategic alliances” with the DoD, and includes biodefense in its projects; the first, apparently Boeing just helped put a satellite in space .
    We are in a Post-9/11 society, and throughout these TAGGS (marriage/Fatherhood) corporations, major grants involving telecommunications companies with roots in the Defense Industry keep showing up (Example:  ICF International Incorporated, LLC got a 2011 grant; it went public & international in 2006).   Here’s the “wiki” on AVI Biopharma — note they were going under til got a defense contract (during Obama presidency):

    History  (Wiki article)

    AVI BioPharma opened their own production laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon, in February 2002.[2] The company made headlines in 2003 when it announced work on treatments for SARS and the West Nile Virus.[2][3] In July 2009, the company announced they would move their headquarters from Portland, Oregon, north to Bothell, Washington, near Seattle.[4] At that time the company led by president and CEO Leslie Hudson had 83 employees and quarterly revenues of $3.2 million.[4] AVI had yet to turn a profit nor developed any commercial products as of July 2009.[4] The company lost $19.7 million in the second quarter of 2009,[5] and then won a $11.5 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense‘s Defense Threat Reduction Agency in October 2009.[6] The company had completed its move to Bothell by this time, but retained their Corvallis facility.[4][6]

    SkyTerra is now “LightSquared” —
    SkyTerra - SkyTerra Communications

    “A new nationwide 4G wireless broadband network provider that will use a unique combination of satellite and terrestrial technology to revolutionize wireless communications in the United States.”  ”

    SkyTerra is North America’s leading developer and supplier of mobile satellite communications services (MSS). Since 1996 SkyTerra has been providing reliable wireless voice, two-way radio and data services for a wide range of customers across North America, northern South America, Central America, the Caribbean and Hawaii via its two existing MSAT satellites.   Satellite service is the perfect communications solution for remote locations lacking terrestrial coverage and when man made or natural disasters strike. Current customers cover a broad spectrum including public safety, security, broadcasting, natural resources, fleet management and asset tracking.   {{AND/Or SPYING….}}

    LIGHTSQUARED:  The idea behind this is providing (4G at least) “Wholesale broadband access” to the entire country.  In Nov. 2010, they launched a satellite from Kazakhstan, and the site mentions:

     ““The U.S. stimulus plan announced by President Obama has acknowledged the need for the federal government to step in to ensure that the digital divide is filled, thereby ending the denial of broadband access due to where people live… 2010 will be the year that many governments will recognize that broadband connectivity is essential for economic competitiveness, the delivery of public services, and an inclusive society, and they will step up to the plate to close the digital divide.”

    It is waiting? for FCC approval of its service; there’s claims it would jam GPS.  Fascinating reading — and here’s an article on the debate between FCC (Congressional favorite) this new one — only slightly technical.   Recommended read– it plays into the job market, digital divide.

    SkyTerra Wikipedia

    The new company has operations in both America and Canada, providing service to both countries and the Caribbean. MSV changed its name to SkyTerra in December 2008. The company was traded Over-the-Counter and was listed on the OTCBB: SKYT. SkyTerra (formerly ‘Mobile Satellite Ventures’) [4] was the first company to receive a Federal Communications Commission license to deploy Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) technology.[5]

    In 2005, SkyTerra purchased 50% of Hughes Network Solutions, a subsidiary of the News Corp.-owned DirecTV Group, for $157.4 million, which SkyTerra held under its subsidiary Hughes Communications.[6][7] In January 2006, DirecTV sold its remaining 50% share in Hughes Network Solutions to SkyTerra for $100 million.[8] Hughes Communications was spun off as a separate company in February 2006, with SkyTerra divesting its entire stake in the company to its shareholders.[9]

    TerreStar Corporation, formerly Motient Corporation, was the controlling shareholder of TerreStar Networks Inc. and TerreStar Global Ltd., and a shareholder of SkyTerra Communications.[10]

    SkyTerra was acquired by Harbinger Capital Partners in March 2010 and became part of LightSquared in July 2010.[11  

    MSV satellite telephony

    Most of current products and services are aimed at emergency services, law enforcement, and companies that specialize in transportation. However, MSV and Boeing are developing a satellite telephony network for consumers.

    The use of Boeing’s GeoMobile platform will allow for coverage of the entire United States with a single satellite. This new approach to satellite telephony has already been validated with the Thuraya network. MSV’s satellite will use an even bigger antenna than the Thuraya spacecraft (at 22 meters in diameter, it will be the largest commercial reflector dish ever used in space)[12], allowing it to communicate with phones no larger than modern cell phones thanks to the fact that the large antenna gain allows the handset to operate at a power output comparable to regular cell phones. This is now possible since the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) allowed satellite operators to create terrestrial cellular networks using spectrum previously restricted to satellite use.[13][14][15]

    The Satellite road aboard a Russian Satellite, launched last November, per the Nasa article:   !!!

    LIVE: ILS Proton-M launches with SkyTerra 1 satellite

    November 14th, 2010 by Chris BerginInternational Launch Services (ILS) have launched the SkyTerra 1 telecommunications satellite via their veteran Proton-M launch vehicle and Breeze-M upper stage on Sunday. Lift-off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan was on schedule at 17:29 GMT, ahead of over nine hours of flight until the spacecraft was placed into orbit.

     . . .The 5,400 kg Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems built 702HP satellite is designed for geomobile services, which will be a “major step in LightSquared’s creation of its next-generation, nationwide network that will be among the world’s first to combine satellite and terrestrial technologies,” according to the customer.“The Light-Squared network will enable the company to offer 4G speed, value, and reliability which enables universal wireless connectivity throughout the United States.

    “The company’s next-generation satellite system allows users within the United States to use standard handsets or other devices, equipped with the LightSquared chipset, to access the satellite system with high link availability and long battery lifetimes, with devices that have the same form-factor and functionality as conventional handsets and devices.

    “Further, the combination of the LightSquared satellite system and the LightSquared 4G terrestrial network provides an unprecedented level of coverage throughout the United States.”

    Proton Launch:

    (Somehow this isn’t as comforting as it is probably supposed to be….)

    The Iscol Family (apparently husband made his money in mobile communications…)

    <>STAND FOR CHILDREN LEADERSHIP, JILL ISCOL

    It’s hard to know where, on the web, to start.  Cornell, Yale, New York City?  The portion of Cornell University this husband/wife pair is currently funding / running?    Their connections with Hillary Rodham Clinton?  Well, while we’re on the topic, how about article from “CENTER FOR A NEW AMERICAN SECURITY.”

    Jill Iscol

    In this summary (it’s the entire web page) you can see the policy-making influence with Gores, Family Strengthening projects, and the ability to somehow raise incredible finances for whatever project her heart desires.  This is what Yale Graduates do, and the Columbia background also includes a penchant the teaching.  Does this look like someone who would be taking input from the lower ranks of society, or dishing it out, according to the personal vision determined with the social & political set she runs in, and they do?    Or taking feedback on the impact of these programs on the working class, (or, welfare recipients) which might be at odds from program purposes?

    President, IF Hummingbird Foundation

    Jill W Iscol, Ed.D, is a social activist, an educator, and a philanthropist.

    She serves on the Board of Advisors of City Year New York of which she was a Founding Co-Chair (2002-2009).  She is a Trustee of Vital Voices Global Partnership and is currently chairing its newly launched New York Leadership Council. She is on the Board of the Acumen Fund, a global philanthropic organization. She was recently appointed to the New York State Commission on National and Community Service, is a Trustee of Horizons National, and on the Advisory Board of the Center for New American Security in Washington, DC.

    She serves on the President’s Council of Teachers College (from 1974-1977, she was Co-Director of its Preservice Program in Childhood Education), and on the Advisory Boards of the Iscol Family Program for Leadership Development  {{that’s Cornell, and link tells more about Jill & Ken, after profusely thanking them for generous funding…}} and the Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art at Cornell University. Until 2009 she served on the Boards of Facing History and Ourselves, and Bank Street College of Education (where she was a faculty member from 1973-1974).

    Sorry — I have to point this out  Bank Street College of Education began with a single person’s idea in 1916, and a humanist (as oppose to, say, Deist) idea to study children and figure out what produces the best results, according to humanist definitions and in the process of creating a better world.  This intense obsession — and it IS an obsession — with getting children away from their natural parents (while preaching marriage and family throughout) — didn’t start yesterday.   Particularly one sees the institutes throughout the country wishing to “study” children in order to do a better job than previous generations.  This is reflected to date in Obama Administration’s expansion of Head Start, Early Head Start, and push to get mothers out of the home and back to work, and kids into daycare centers where HHS will pay for “Child Development Scholars” to take notes, etc. etc.     Consider — this was before women got the vote!

    • Bank Street: A Brief History

    In 1916, educator Lucy Sprague Mitchell and her colleagues, influenced by revolutionary educator John Dewey and other humanists, concluded that building a new kind of educational system was essential to building a better, more rational, humane world.

    Beginnings: The Bureau Years

    1916: The Bureau of Educational Experiments (BEE) is founded in New York City by Lucy Sprague Mitchell, together with her husband Wesley Mitchell and colleague Harriet Johnson. Their purpose is to combine expanding psychological awareness with democratic conceptions of education. With a staff of researchers and teachers, the Bureau sets out to study children–to find out what kind of environment is best suited to their learning and growth, to create that environment, and to train adults to maintain it.

    1919: The Bureau of Educational Experiments establishes a Nursery School.

    (The next three bullets, quotes from a “Harvard Educational Review” very laborious review of a book on the development of Preschool in America)

    • Patty Smith Hill, progressive kindergartner of Louisville, Kentucky, studied the works of John Dewey and Francis W. Parker and then challenged the strict kindergarten pedagogy based on Froebel’s theories.  {{German, childless??, Pedagogue, 1782-1852!}} Hill taught at Columbia Teachers College and co-founded the Institute of Child Welfare Research there in 1924.5 Caroline Pratt, who founded the innovative Play School in Greenwich Village, and her life partner, Helen Marot, were a part of a Greenwich Village group of intellectuals.6 Pratt collaborated with Lucy Sprague Mitchell and Harriet Johnson in New York City in the 1910s, “where they developed a radical preschool pedagogy designed to counteract what they saw as the psychologically and politically oppressive environment of the private family” (p. 135). “
    •  A stark contrast to kindergartners’ encouragement of parental involvement is the practice of early-twentieth-century progressive educator Caroline Pratt, who “saw parents as obstacles to their children’s education, not as partners (p. 139). Though Pratt may have been an anomaly among early childhood educators, her stance represents one of the many ways parents were treated and perceived by educators who often were not parents themselves.
    • Her history is a chronicle of preschool-aged children’s access to education in the United States since the early nineteenth century, starting with the advent of infant schools, schools designed for lower-class children whose parents were considered unfit to teach them at home.

    Your basic “Children as lab rats” concept, but of course for a noble purpose.  A Tulane University “Child Development Center” history page describes the Patty Smith Hill Influence, in fact, mentioning the 1969 Chicago University “Lab School.”:

    Newcomb Children’s Center originally started as a nursery school for Tulane faculty and staff when Edith Rosenwald Stern, a young parent and community activist, spearheaded a group of six mothers in the endeavor to establish the preschool in 1926, a time when these were not commonplace in the United States. She was the daughter of Julius Rosenwald, founder of Sears Roebuck and Company, and had attended the University of Chicago Lab School, where a preschool had been initiated in 1916.  (daughter of successful businessman….)

    Stern became acquainted with Patty Smith Hill, a leader of the American Kindergarten and Nursery School Movement, during a visit to Columbia University’s Institute for Child Welfare in New York.  This relationship led to a broad scope of beneficial effects on Stern in terms of its philosophy and methods of teaching.  From its inception, the School has encouraged hands-on learning by the children with guidance from a caring staff of teachers and active parents.

    newcombstrip

    Lucy Sprague Mitchell (from a 2006 “Education Update” site), in short, another blueblood (Radcliffe, UCBerkeley Dean of Women) gets together with others to change the world, starting with studying how to produce a better child:

    Lucy Sprague Mitchell came of age at a time of great changes in the United States. The country was becoming increasingly industrialized and urbanized; waves of immigrants were arriving, and poverty—especially urban poverty—was on the rise. These changing conditions inspired an intense period of social and educational reform between 1890 and 1920, led by pioneers, many of them women, who believed that the world could be changed. An age of often appalling social conditions was also an age of great optimism for people who wanted to remake the society America had built.

    A graduate of Radcliffe, and the first Dean of Women at the University of California at Berkeley, Lucy Sprague Mitchell knew that she wanted to be a force for change, and shared the optimism of the reformers that change was possible. She herself saw in education the best possibility for a more just and humane world.

    With several like-minded women, she established the Bureau of Educational Experiments to determine how children grow and learn by carefully studying and recording their behavior, their language, and their interactions with each other and with their environment.

    (I continued looking — got that “childlike curiosity” still, I guess) — this person who never had a formal education til she was 16, was into early education for the purposes of studying how children learn . . .  she had a domineering father . . . . this Bureau of Educational Systems was subsidized by a cousin’s inheritance . . . and the methods included:

    Lucy Sprague Mitchell’s impact on the educational system in America is all the more surprising considering that she herself did not receive a formal education at school until she was sixteen years old. Lucy’s progressive-some might even say radical-approach to reforming education might be less surprising. Although she grew up with a domineering father in a repressive atmosphere, she also benefited greatly from her father’s own interest in education reform. As a result, young Lucy was not only exposed to the reformist ideas of such philosophical heavyweights as John Dewey and Jane Addams, she actually met them! . . .

    . . .what was radical then is now thought “essential to knowing how to teach” children. The interdisciplinary approach to classroom management, the study of student behavior, psychological profiles recorded and updated, family background and environment checks: all of these were incorporated by Sprague Mitchell into how educating children was conducted at the Bureau.

    Wikipedia on Bank Street College of Education directly ties this group to Head Start.  (Bank Street was simply the Greenwich Village location of the Bureau of Educational Experiments when it started):

    Bank Street was founded in 1916 by Lucy Sprague Mitchell as the “Bureau of Educational Experiments”. (Mitchell was the first Dean of Women at the University of California, Berkeley). Its original focus was the study of child development and education, but, after two years, it was clear that actual living subjects, i.e. children, were needed, so in 1918 a nursery school was opened. This nursery school is the direct predecessor of today’s School for Children. It wasn’t until the 1930s that Bank Street began to formally train teachers, the start of today’s Bank Street College of Education.

    The little kids are brought in to test theory on, but the place started with theory.  Of course, little kids in nursery schools is something of a controlled situation, and in fact, studying a young child in isolation from its parents makes next to no sense to me.  See my post “monkeying with mothers.”  Same mentality!

    In 1965, Bank Street developed the “Bank Street Readers” line of books, which were unique due to their featuring of racial diversity and urban people of contemporary culture. Also in the 1960s, the Bank Street faculty played an important role in the creation of the federal Head Start program.

    Some things never change.  I found a grant (from another organization currently, I think, associated with a group attempting to eradicate no-fault divorce in Ohio, National Council of Family Relations, in cooperation with Utah State University.  Or, at least in the same grant series.  Some ideas just refuse to die, including that the best people to change society are those at the top — although typically it’s those who are starting wars, and sending the masses of lower class youth to go die in them, not to mention locking them up the disproportionately to the white-collar criminals…. and then (Lamar Alexander) getting rich by buying stock in the private prisons that oppress them — which they do, resulting in lawsuits for sexual assault and more. (CCA).

     

    Fiscal Year Program Office Grantee Name State Award Number Award Title CFDA Number CFDA Program Name Award Class Award Activity Type Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    2011 OPRE UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY UT 90YR0035 DADS’ PARENTING INTERACTIONS WITH CHILDREN-CHECKLIST OF OBSERVATIONS LINKED TO OUTCOMES (PICCOLO-D): DEVELOPING A MEASUR 93600 Head Start DISCRETIONARY SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS LORI ROGGMAN $ 0

     

    Notice the nature of this grant, that it’s at a University, and that it’s funded under “Head Start.”   This year, 2011, there were 26 “90YR” projects — ALL at Universities, across the country — and $4.78 million worth — testing, measuring, responding, and attempting to predict human behavior according to certain variables.  I really should post them.   For example, UCLA Board of Regents wants to get better at predicting children’s behavior (good luck with that one!):

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES, BOARD OF REGENTS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90095

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90YR0062 PREDICTING INFANT/TODDLER SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL OUTCOMES FROM INTRAPERSONAL CAREGIVER CHARACTERISTICS AND CHILD CARE PROCESS 1 93.600 ACF 09-13-2011   $ 25,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 25,000

     

    And Utah State has its

    Early Intervention Research Institute

    And Ms. Roggman’s Background:

    Lori Roggman

    Picture of Lori RoggmanLori Roggman
    Staff Biography  Education

    Ph.D., 1988, University of Texas (Developmental Psychology)
    M.S., 1981, Utah State University (Family & Human Development)
    B.S., 1972, Utah State University (Psychology) 
    Teaching
    Undergraduate: Parenting/ChildGuidance, Infancy/Early Childhood
    Graduate: Human Development Theories (6060), Frontiers of Human Development (7060), Topical Seminars on Language Development, Attachment, Play, Fathers.

    – – – – Ah Well  . . . . .

    Since its creation in 1989, Ms. Iscol has been President of IF Hummingbird Foundation, a family foundation which supports efforts to strengthen democracy and to reduce the social injustice, economic and educational inequities that would threaten it.

    From 1997-2001, Jill served as the Chairperson of the Annual Family Re-Union Conference, moderated by then-Vice President Gore and Mrs. Gore, for which she planned and coordinated three annual conferences and raised significant funding for ongoing policy development process aimed at formulating better ways to strengthen family life.

    Jill planned and participated in the White House Conference on Partnerships and Philanthropy in 2000. She was Co-Chair for Hillary Rodham Clinton for Senate’s New York Finance Committee, which raised a record 29 million dollars.  She was Vice-Chair of Senator Clinton’s New York and National Finance Committees in 2006 and a National Vice-Chair of Hillary Rodham Clinton for President’s 2008 Finance Committee.

    Ms. Iscol received a Bachelor of Arts, magna cum laude, from University of Pittsburgh (1967), a doctorate from Teachers College, Columbia University (1976), and a Master of Philosophy in Sociology from Yale (1990).

    This is part of the “FAMILY LIFE DEVELOPMENT CENTER” at Cornell….  (NOTE:  the “HTTC” far above — the DC-based Collaborative I found on the TAGGS list — has a curious link to “Family Development Institute” and is taking personal information for anyone wanting to get credentialed as one:   Guess you can learn how to raise (“develop”) a family, if you get credentialed for it here; wonder who pays how much for the training.   SAME CONCEPT AT CORNELL — in fact overall, this is the concept.  I call it “Designer Families,” although what often seems to result is family breakup, for a better, state-approved “design,” from my experience (and I’m well networked with similar cases….)  (I also did a search on ‘Fatherhood” then “motherhood” at the School of Human Ecology with the usual results: fatherhood 15 to motherhood 8.  Several of the faculty appear to have come from Fragile Families studies, and some prior HHS connection.  The last reference to “fatherhood” was an article by (AFCC professional?) Robert E. Emery, and discussing Custody Evaluations.  Others of course discussed child support….)

    Welcome

    Since 2001, the College of Human Ecology {{at Cornell…}} has been very pleased to be the home of the Iscol Family Program for Leadership Development in Public Service. Established with the generosity and foresight of Jill and Ken Iscol, this program is intended to give undergraduate students inspiration and direction in translating their knowledge, idealism, and optimism into concrete action to build better communities for families and children.

    . . .The Iscol Family Program serves the entire university and for the last 3 years has collaborated with the Entrepreneurship at Cornell program.

    THIS is now, East River Family Strengthening Collaborative Executive Director, as quoted in the “promising neighborhoods” article at “Circle of Philanthropy”

    When we get the little ones in pre-kindergarten, they come to us not even knowing how to hold a pencil or pen.”

    And even when the children are getting the proper instruction in school, the neighborhood’s poverty affects their ability to learn, says Mae H. Best, executive director of the East River Family Strengthening Collaborative, a social-services group in the neighborhood that is participating in the Promise Neighborhood project. Poverty steals children’s attention from the classroom, she says. They may not be eating at home, they may be worried that they are going to be evicted, they may hear their parents complaining about lack of work. * * *

    **omitted — they may hear or witness their parents fighting, or one being assaulted….

    “Everything is generally related to financial resources­—the lack thereof,” she says.

    {Annie E. Casey Foundation is one of the major funders of fatherhood studies; I have been studying this for over 2 eyars.  They show up EVERYwhere, including in groups allegedly preventing family violence, and providing “resource centers,” (Websites, and the paid-for studies that can be downloaded there, and training opportunities), such as “Family Violence Prevention Fund.”  Excuse me, I forgot their recent federally-assisted web facelift, physical move (to the SF Praesidio) AND name change.  How, instead of the grandiose promise of preventing Family VIolence (which I see no evidence they are), they are expanding the scope:  “Futures Without Violence.”  AS I recall (you can check), Annie E. Casey funds this, and probably the “fragile families” study as well.

    I like that they state their timeline and incorporation history.  That’s good.  Notice the “letter to the community” starts with “father absence.”

    Letter to The Community

    Help Us Make Ward 7 Stronger.

    Dear Friend of ERFSC:Imagine a family situation where the father is absent, the mother is unemployed and the children are barely making it in school due to lack of attention and necessary resources. Now consider the stress and embarrassment of not having the “right clothes” to wear to school, a healthy lunch to edify the children’s minds, and a single parent who is so busy trying to make ends meet, that she involuntarily neglects her children. Surely you can see how a family situation like this can negatively affect the mother’s mental health and the children’s self esteem and impact their ability to learn. Surely you can envision how this situation can get worse and result in children who fall into the juvenile system or worse!

    I imagine there is not a single person on this board, or among the families served, who is completely and totally unaware that:

    • Some fathers are absent because of domestic violence, and might have done some jail time for this.
    • African-Americans are over-represented in the jail populations across the U.S., and probably here, too.  

    To rephrase Daddy’s in jail as putting him back with his family (without addressing the “why” of incarceration, which could range from violent criminal activity not a good role model for kids, to drug-related criminal activity not a good role model for kids, to racism, to the fact that there’s a huge corporate lobbying industry behind expanding the prison system (search CCA on my site, “Corrections Corporation of America” – -to possibly even child support arrearages, if combined with other things . . .at what point is it NOT good to reunite that family, and instead allow the female-headed household to be strengthened without letting an abuser back in?

    “With your generous donation, we can open up many windows of opportunity and give our residents a life beyond their limited boundaries along with the tools, the hope and the desire to strive for empowerment. By making a donation, you will not only be contributing directly to the success of these families, but will also be playing an active role in the overall sustainability of ERFSC.

    You may donate right here on our Web site or send your donation check to our office”

    Look who is funding the individual agency, and the umbrella agency here — and below, it’s clear the money (a) comes from welfare that might otherwise actually REACH the household in question, instead of being DIVERTED to fund non-taxpaying entities which set up  slick and donations-collecting websites so they can take credit for any social services provided. . . .   Moreover, between TAGGS & HHS — it’s clear one is under-reporting or the other is OVER-reporting.  Think about that before you donate, because this is common practice in the field:

    USASPENDING has reported (per this DUNS# — which is not always specific only to one organization, i understand — but at least an identifier) only 3 of the 6 grants, or about half of their total.  No data pre-dating 2009 exists.   We can also see that this money is most DEFINITELy coming out of TANF, or “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families”

    I.e., someone’s food and cash aid.   It is more important to have healthy, stable marriages — or try to — than for children to eat and be clothed if not living with their biological Daddies. . . ..

    • Total Dollars:$2,533,518
    • Transactions:1 – 3 of 3


    Transaction Number # 1

    Federal Award ID: 90FK0054: 00 (Grants)
    Date Signed:
    September 28 , 2011 

    Obligation Amount: 
    $1,533,518

    to search D.C. corporations, apparently you have to create a user account.  I don’t want to do this, so let’s check out just the umbrella nonprofit, and this one:

    HTTC:  Unlike most households, their assets are steadily increasing.  View a tax return, and subtract $500K per year (minimum) from the “government grants” and see if it is a well-run organization that could stand on its own, and note the ration of grants to program service income, and the executive pay, etc.  That’s what I do when viewing tax returns.   Notice — they got $500K in 2006.  Where is the 2006 tax return?

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    Healthy Families Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2007 $972,730 990 23 52-2250839
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2010 $634,384 990 23 52-2250839
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2009 $830,758 990 21 52-2250839
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2008 $1,209,182 990 23 52-2250839

    TOTAL of “90FK” awards for 2011:

    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 51,125,462
    Total of 55 Award Actions for 55 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 54,151,962

      

    TOTAL of “90FM” awards for 2011:

     

    Why Think when you can Hyperlink?

    The heart of the “Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood” grantee system is an attempt to get the entire nation (at its expense) in front of trainers and facilitators to — for the sake of our country — submit to indoctrination in what, and how, to speak (i.e., think) about themselves, their children, their neighbors, poverty, work, and their place in this world.

    The “CIRCLE OF IDEAS” circulating through this system is getting smaller and smaller, while the ripples from having thrown this stone into the pond of plurality are still spreading. Ig pushed in t is intentional domination and restriction of a nation’s vocabulary — for profit — to subdue and restrict its thinking about cause & effect, particularly so as NOT to connect this type of corruption with incidents of murder/suicide, kidnapping, child molestation, threats, stalking, or ongoing, chronic stress and work attrition — even when the connection is open, upfront, and obviously in the custody context.

    In Liberia, women of different faiths united (risking their lives) to “Pray the Devil Back to Hell” and changed the course of the country’s history.  They did not want any more excuses for terrorism and attempted genocide.  I do believe that in the USA we are going to have to do this too, ladies and men of conscience.  Not through Occupying Wall Street — but through sitting one’s behind down on some paperwork (or accounting) of this travesty — and THEN boycott something that is profiting from this enterprise at our children’s futures’ expense.

    Recent events in California include:  a little girl not returned on visitation;  Daddy kills herself and himself.  This mother had her child at age approximately 44?  (Samaan/Fay).   8 people killed in Seal Beach, California hair salon, one man in the salon, and one outside it, who was sitting in a car — the rest were women.  And recently in Richmond, California, a brawl broke out in City Hall, surrounding the “Office of Neighborhood Safety.”  Gang members were being paid to attend classes.

    I have not blogged this yet, but as I am networked with “Parents” (mothers and grandmothers) across the country who are tired of THIS war, I became aware of an incident in Trumbull County Ohio which totally baffles the mind — until one explores the funding stream, and the organizaing element of “Fatherhood” at the state level.  Yes, you danged well bet there is a connection!   And I am tired of this propaganda, and excuse-making.  I am tired of, when the closer I look, the more questions come up — WHERE is this entity incorporated?  Why, when the web page is so fancy, and obviously well-funded — can one so many times not find the nonprofit’s EIN# and tax return — and why when those ARE found, they tend to fall into two categories:

    1.   The organization would not exist without HHS (and/or DOJ) funding, and is being propped up by them.

    2.   The organization disappeared (took the money and ran) and no one has caught up with it after an initial, small grant.

    3.   The organization is itself a FOR-PROFIT and HHS has chosen its (fatherhood promoting, family-strengthening) curriculum as one of about a dozen favored solutions to produce world peace (stop abuse, elmiinate poverty, or make irresponsible men responsible through bribes, or a system of bribes/extortion, etc. — i.e., “training” — and the HHS has helped this organization get all set up, create its private market niche or brand, and then certify or license “train the trainer” seminars (tax deductible) to spread it all over the place. . . . .  And is doing this through the already present systems of social welfare, such as TANF, Child Support, Child Abuse Prevention, you name it.  For example “Boot Camp for New Dads” is pushed to hospitals where children are being born.  And the PR firm “Public Strategies, Inc.” in Oklahoma – which as basically “made” by the Healthy Marriage Initiative (it seems to have almost no other clients) actually got another GRANT?

    This, friends, is not what government is for — this is a “Metastasized” government which is eating away the substance of the people that are sustaining it in money, in time, and in labor — and by consuming products it declares we need, when we don’t.  Has anyone ever calculated the huge profits made simply to detox people from chronic stress, and the illnesses that that state produces in a human body?

    Those who buy into this program will likely have income, including potential retirement income; those who do not will be subjected to it, with the exception of those who designed the curricula, who are probably laughing their way between an offshore bank to the next product idea, or (like ICF International Inc., LLC) buying out lesser companies and figuring out how to expand from their Billion-$$ Business with the US Government, one of the largest spenders (and debtors) in the world.

    HERE IS THE SYSTEM:

    Middle class pays for it, and if entangled in it, pays (for example, in the courts).  Many of the middle class have jobs working in the institutions that market these trainings and are used to SELL curricula to fix poverty (etc — create utopia, basically).

    People who have slipped out of or were never out of the lower economic sector — who cannot directly pay for classes — will be forced to take them anyhow, and the implicit “bargain” with the middle classes (from policymakers) is that by forcing the poor rabble into them (through extortion) they will be therefore off the streets and not on YOUR doorstep, so continue to produce wages and taxes that will be distributed to the fatherhood and marriage promoters nationwide, i.e., those who step to our tune.

    The HHS GRANTS PROVIDES THE HYPERLINK ADVANTAGE, AND PRE-FAB ASSOCIATIONS:

    Most resource centers, examined, are primarily on-line database storage.

    The Hyperlink advantage — Federal Help to set up Resources, Visually Engaging Websites, with Official-sounding LInks to the “upline,” and cute new Acronyms for the latest way to market the same material, for example, “FRIENDS” (see last post or so) with the radical concept that Parents might actually know something about their own families.  This fact sheet from a Florida group cites Fatherhood grantees “Circle of Parents”(tr) and “Parents Anonymous(tr)” and declares that we are all in this together, and those who have taken control of our families, and are paid to do so, now wish to “collaborate” and “Share leadership” with the actual parents.  This being a totally foreign concept to social workers and social scientists in general, SOMEONE had to copyright the concept and run trainings on how to let parents back into the decisionmaking process about their kids and their lives.  Get this, from “Factsheet #13” (address to whom?)

    Principles of Shared Leadership

    ␣ Parents and staff members are equal partners

    ␣ No one person has all of the solutions; it depends on how people act together to make sense of the situations that face them

    ␣ Mutual respect, trust and open-mindedness ␣ Collectiveactionbaseduponsharedvision,ownership

    and accountability ␣ Consensus building instead of a democratic process

    Or, here is a “PARENT LEADERSHIP AMBASSADOR FACILITATOR GUIDE” by Circle of Parents & “Friends” — actually by YOU (i.e, USA working citizens), as it cites an HHS grant.  Or names a month after its copyrighted concept self:   Did you know that

    February was designated as National Parent Leadership Month® by Parents Anonymous®, Inc.”

    (which I found out on a site from an organization that my colleagues, family, and friends’ taxes paid to set up and propagate, also trademarked:  “Circle of Parents(tr)”  Get the picture yet?  Here’s the portion of what was taken away from Parents which this proclamation (modeled after the Declaration of Independence, but entirely foreign to it in purpose and process):

    Preamble:

    National Parent Leadership Month® – 2011

    Parents across the nation are working in partnership with practitioners and policymakers to create positive changes in their lives, the lives of their children and the lives of other families. They are doing this quietly and effectively and it is important to honor these parents.

    How sweet — PPP — Parents, Practitioners and Policymakers.  Maybe you can register the trademark “P3” (get a triangle, to imply that we are somehow equal participants, and this is not, instead a basic pyramid scheme run with IRS help….).   No thank you — give me back the wasted HHS funds, and keep your gold stars; we are not in gradeschool any more.    

    I notice, despite all the “fatherhood” words flying around (although not in this PR piece), there’s still no mention of “mother” on it.  And as I believe I HAVE established, “Circle of Parents” has been bought out by HHS/NFI-elements, and is walking, talking, and publicizing like them:

    About Circle of Parents: Fatherhoodphoto of dad and baby

    FATHERHOOD.GOV
    Checkout the new Fatherhood Newsletters
    Webinar: Father Factor in Children’s Health
    August 2011; Time: 1:19:29

    In 2006 Circle of Parents received a grant from the Office of Family Assistance to implement a comprehensive training, technical assistance and community access project to aid local home visiting programs in the provision of support and education to new and expectant fathers. Parents as Teachers, Nurse-Family Partnership, Healthy Families America, Early Head Start and/or Healthy Start homed visiting programs in the states of Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin received $50,000 each to begin services to expecting and new fathers. The project is being implemented in partnership with the Circle of Parents National Network, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Conscious Fathering Program™ of Parent Trust for Washington Children, PACT Law Center, Prevent Child Abuse America and Leslie Starsoneck, a domestic violence expert.

    Through March 2011, 2,280 expecting or fathers of infants, 1,546 fathers of children between 1 and 5 years, 1,057 mothers and 153 other caregivers were served through 710 Conscious Fathering classes and 1,103 Circle of Parents’ groups for fathers.

    Funding for this project was made possible through a 5-year Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Program grant received by the Circle of Parents national office in 2006. This grant is funded through the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Families Assistance – Grant No. 90FR0098, CFDA #93.086.

    PACT I believe stands for PARENTS (meaning Dads) & CHILDREN TOGETHER — PACT.  I could be wrong, but check this out:

    (this link leads right to the Hawai’i DHS)
    Hawai‘i State Commission on Fatherhood
    (etc., etc.)

    The last several posts, I attempted to correlate the ACF announcement with actual grantees, and find out WTF (the “W” standing for ‘WHO’) they were. As it turned out, most of the grants were the “90FM” series.  I found that most of the top half of the ACF Press Release correlated to the 90FM grant series.  That “find” was the result of familiarity with the TAGGS database combined with hunch.  Then I compared my printout with the ACF press release.  The printout was alpha by grantee institution and the ACF Press Release alpha by state.  Complicating it was the name changes of the grantee institutions, but I did check them off, one by one.

    There are, however, in 2011 (as of today) $121,077,648 of distributions on the TAGGS database, under a single “CFDA” — 93.086.

    There’s been major talk between HHS and, say, the Fathers and Families Coalition of America, or even in the recent 2010 law, about making things more fair to fathers (i.e., pleasing the FR movement leadership) by altering the “FATHER”-related portion of money stolen from TANF & OCSE from one-third to one-half.  Accordingly, the HHS/ACF Press announcement of october 3 makes it look well balanced between two themes:  Top half, MARRIAGE ($59-odd million) and bottom half, FATHERHOOD ($59-odd million).

    In practice, the top half having gone primarily to “FM” which sure looks like faith-based groups, is in effect giving it to fatherhood-propagation anyhow; that’s pretty much what faith-based groups do.  IF they weren’t so inclined, they would be just secular social service groups, and as such deal with their difficulties with feminism, women having the vote, women controlling reproduction or contraception, married women having a say in household finances, married women actually reporting what their (likewise married, obviously) spouses were doing to them, or their children in the home, and in general opting out of marriage because of that.  They also would line up with the rest of the United States that is NOT “faith-based” or practicing a private cult that disagrees with basic laws (such as cultlike beliefs as, you cannot–really- divorce, or beating up someone to dominate the relationship is normal behavior if it’s done to preserve the “father-leader/mother-breeder” status quo).

    Yet this next printout shows an increasing variety of grant streams:  FM, FR, FK, FN, & FO are among the new ones. FE (Fatherhood Education) is getting “old,” obviously. From what I can tell, FN is for Native American; FK seems to deal with incarcerated populations, and I haven’t figured out FO yet. Notice not a single of these begins with the word “M” for “Marriage.”  Perhaps that letter might be mistakenly associated with “MOTHERS” about which this movement has little to do, except in making sure they are not going to be sole physical custodians, and certainly not sole physical and legal ones, for long, if HHS has anything to do with it.

    In this listing, you will also see a number of organizations with grants listed as $0, which I gather means either they’re not getting one this year, or they haven’t yet.  CIRCLE OF PARENTS, that I landed pretty hard on last post (today’s revision) is among the $0 ones.

    THESE CHARTS ARE FOR SCROLLING, BUT THE LINKS ARE ACTIVE — CLICK TO LEARN MORE ABOUT ANY GROUP OR GRANT.  TAKE A LOOK AT THE TITLES — of the PROJECTS and of the GRANTEES.  Compare with the $$.  Ask:  WTF are they doing? and perhaps look locally, and demand some explanation, or trace the funding in your area.

    AGAIN — for comparison — here’s the official announcement:

    Administration for Children and Families

    Healthy Marriage / Responsible Fatherhood 2011 Grantees = $59,997,077 + $59,396,652 = $119,393,729.

    As of October 22, 2011 evening, I searched the code “93.086” which represents this category of grants — and got $121,077,648.

    A difference of $1,643,919 in just a few weeks (could be legit) — but take a look.

    At the bottom I talk some about a Community Action Group in Ohio (WSOS).  Research is incomplete on this, and I may not have all the facts straight, but readers can fact-check themselves as well.  I am trying to answer the larger question about the relationship between “Community Action Programs” in this state and their fundings.

    In general, perhaps without my narrative of any guidance, readers might get a general idea of what titles programs are getting how much money, and where.  This listing is not by state, but alpha by Grantee — which gets interesting as we already know Grantees have creative name-changing habits already, plus TAGGS has opted some creative spellings of existing names.  I figure this is just part of the game.  Here we go:

    This report ran “AWARD SEARCH” “YEAR 2011″ CFDA 93086” from dropdown list and comes out in 4 segments:   50 entries per page, plus the last few:

    Showing: 1 – 50 of 178 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »



    Recipient: *FAMILY SERVICE OF WESTCHESTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10606-3003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0050 FATHERS COURT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 543,906 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 543,906

    Recipient: ADVOCAP, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 54936-1108

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0056 FATHER AND FAMILY STABILITY PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 776,994 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 776,994

    Recipient: AL ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36104

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0042 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD ALABAMA 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: ASSOCIATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS (ONAP)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99559-0219

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0011 TANF HEALTHY FAMILIES PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: AUBURN UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36849

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0006 ALABAMA HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION INITIATIVE (AHMREI) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,489,548 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,489,548

    Recipient: AVANCE, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77092

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0041 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages
    Recipient ZIP Code: 75246-1754

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0018 ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE MARRIAGES, DBA ANTHEM STRONG FAMILIES WILL IMPLEMENT A 3-TIERED PROJECT THAT PROVIDES HEALTHY MARRIAGE SERVICES, ECONOMIC STABILITY AND JOB PLACEMENT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,514,359 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,514,359

    Recipient: Archuleta County Department of Human Services
    Recipient ZIP Code: 81147

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0046 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD IN ARCHULETA COUNTY, COLORADO 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 442,291 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 442,291

    Recipient: Arizona Youth Partnership
    Recipient ZIP Code: 85741-2259

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0030 BUILDING FUTURES FOR FAMILIES-HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT IN PIMA, PINAL AND GILA COUNTIES OF ARIZONA. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 634,536 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 634,536

    Recipient: BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45230-2907

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0029 BUILDING STRONG MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 49501-0294

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0011 BE REAL PROGRAM (“BUILDING AND ENHANCING RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT, AND LIFE SKILLS”) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,996 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,996

    Recipient: Brighter Beginnings
    Recipient ZIP Code: 94601

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0099 PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM 3 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0099 PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM 4 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90806-2708

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0034 MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 570,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 570,000

    Recipient: CANGLESKA, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 57752-0638

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0074 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 2 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 67214-3504

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0042 PROVIDING MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS SKILLS AS WELL AS JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WILL PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,445,587 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,445,587

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES INC ARCHDIOCESE OF HARTFORD
    Recipient ZIP Code: 06105-1901

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0044 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 800,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 800,000

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON
    Recipient ZIP Code: 08618-5705

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0016 EL CENTRO HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 555,300 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 555,300

    Recipient: CENTERFORCE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 94901-5516

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0004 HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CHAUTAUQUA OPPORTUNITIES, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 14048-2754

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0024 CHAUTAUQUA RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 618,031 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 618,031

    Recipient: CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60604

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0009 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $- 175,000 
    2011 90FR0009 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 2 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $- 68,402 
    2011 90FR0009 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $- 117,496 
    Award Actions Count: 3 Award Actions Subtotal: $- 360,898

    Recipient: CHILDREN’S FRIEND AND SERVICE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 02903-4011

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0008 DADS MAKING A DIFFERENCE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 735,527 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 735,527

    Recipient: CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES-SCH OF PHYSICAL THER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90027

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0034 RESPONSIBLE YOUNG FATHERS PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 784,521 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 784,521

    Recipient: CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 16830-3323

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0118 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 8 
    2011 90FM0003 HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP PROJECT IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA WITH A FOCUS ON CLEARFIELD COUNTY AND 8 ADJACENT COUNTIES INCLUDING AA (II)(III)(IV) AND (V) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 354,714 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 354,722

    Recipient: CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90005

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0028 PROJECT FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    2011 90FR0076 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 4 93.086 ACF 12-01-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 59521

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0013 CHIPPEWA CREE TANF AND CHILD WELFARE COORDINATION INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: CIRCLE OF PARENTS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60611-3777

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0098 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM 5 93.086 ACF 06-21-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 80203

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0085 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM 4 93.086 ACF 06-21-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: COEUR DALENE TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 83851-0408

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0014 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR COORDINATION OF TRIBAL TANF AND CHILD WELFARE SERVICES TO TRIBAL FAMILIES AT RISK OF CHILD ABU 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 19601-3303

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0044 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 787,665 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 787,665

    Recipient: CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 59855-0278

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0003 PASSAGES FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,440,131 
    2011 90FN0015 CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES FAMILIES FIRST PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    2011 90FR0006 PASSAGES 5 93.086 ACF 06-21-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 3 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,590,131

    Recipient: CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF SILETZ
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97380

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0016 SILETZ ADVOCATES FOR HEALING PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99503

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0006 FATHER’S JOURNEY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 800,000 
    2011 90FN0017 LUQU KENU – EVERYONE IS FAMILY 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 175,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 975,000

    Recipient: COUNCIL ON PREVENTION & EDUCATION SUBSTANCES, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40204-1743

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0009 JEFFERSON COUNTY REENTRY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 549,673 
    2011 90FR0015 JEFFERSON COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE PRIORITY 4 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0015 JEFFERSON COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE PRIORITY 4 5 93.086 ACF 06-23-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0015 JEFFERSON COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE PRIORITY 4 5 93.086 ACF 09-20-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 4 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 549,673

    Recipient: CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 85004

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0021 TODO ES POSIBLE (EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE) – A MARRIAGE PROGRAM FOR HISPANIC FAMILIES IN PHOENIX, AZ 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 359,796 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 359,796

    Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92024-2215

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0104 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1 4 93.086 ACF 11-22-2010   $ 0 
    2011 90FM0019 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 53211

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0043 CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY HEALTH MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROJECT NOW TO SUCCEED 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,779,393 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,779,393

    Recipient: Child family Services of Eastern Virginia
    Recipient ZIP Code: 23517

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0039 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 471,156 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 471,156

    Recipient: Community Marriage Builders, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 47714-1863

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0005 SOUTH WESTERN INDIANA HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVEMARRIAGE EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIP, PARENTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT, DIVORCE REDUCTION SKILLS FOR COUPLES AND INDIVIDUALS. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 30,667,231
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    NEXT!  – PAGE 2 of 4

    Recipient: Connections To Success
    Recipient ZIP Code: 633012634

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0015 PROVIDE RESPONSIBLE PARENTING, HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND ECONOMIC STABILITY TO LOW-INCOME ADULTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 702,553 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 702,553

    Recipient: County of Montrose
    Recipient ZIP Code: 81401

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0030 MONTROSE COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES–RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 574,524 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 574,524

    Recipient: DC DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20032

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0087 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 5 93.086 ACF 09-20-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: DOUGLAS CHEROKEE ECONOMIC AUTHORITY, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37816-1218

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0004 JOBS FOR DADS: PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD FOR LOW-INCOME FATHERS IN RURAL SOUTHEASTERN APPALACHIA 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 416,063 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 416,063

    Recipient: EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90022-5147

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0056 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 2 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 222 
    2011 90FK0019 FUTURO NOW FAMILY STRENGTHENING INITIATIVE: FATHERHOOD PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 800,221

    Recipient: EDUCATION ASSISTANCE CENTER OF LONG ISLAND, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 11550

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0031 PARENTS FIRST IS A PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM DESIGNED TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY, HEALTHY MARRIAGES AND RESPONSIBLE PARENTING ON LONG ISLAND, NY. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 533,040 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 533,040

    Recipient: EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 79930

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0045 HEALTHY OPPORTUNITIES FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,945 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,945

    Recipient: ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45405

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0046 MARRIAGE WORKS! OHIO COLLABORATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Employment Opportunity & Training Center of Northeaster
    Recipient ZIP Code: 18503

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0018 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, MARKETED IN LACKAWANNA COUNTY, PA AS “EOTC’S HEALTHY FATHERS AND FAMILIES INITIATIVE.” 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 379,755 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 379,755

    Recipient: FAMILY & CHILDREN’S SERVICE, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 74120-4429

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0007 F&CS PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0007 F&CS PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: FIRST A M E CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98122

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0032 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0032 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: FIRST THINGS FIRST
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37403-3433

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0048 CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN-HAMILTON COUNTY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,070,834 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,070,834

    Recipient: FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 54520-0396

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0018 THE FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY’S COORDINATION OF FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER WITH TRIBAL TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: FORTUNE SOCIETY, INC (THE)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10031-7116

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0021 FORTUNE SOCIETY PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 725,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 725,000

    Recipient: FRESNO COUNTY ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 93721

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0027 PROVING OUR PARENTING SKILLS PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 782,002 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 782,002

    Recipient: Family Guidance, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 15143-9554

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0047 TWOGETHER PITTSBURGH PROVIDING SIX TYPES OF “ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES” TO THE COMMUNITY: AA (II) EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS; AA (IV) MARRIAGE PREPARATION 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,163,684 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,163,684

    Recipient: Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 27601-1947

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0009 COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 725,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 725,000

    Recipient: Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77006

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0017 HOUSTON MARRIAGE PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 698,102 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 698,102

    Recipient: Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center
    Recipient ZIP Code: 46208-4705

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0027 STRENGTHENING FAMILIES: LINKING HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND STRONG FATHERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,780,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,780,000

    Recipient: Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis
    Recipient ZIP Code: 63158

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0052 FATHERS’ SUPPORT CENTERS’ PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FAHTERGOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,530,190 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,530,190

    Recipient: Friends Outside in Los Angeles County, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 91101-1632

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0053 “DADS BACK!” IS A COMPREHENSIVE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM WHICH WILL SERVICE THE REENTRY POPULATION AND THEIR FAMILIES THROUGH CO-LOCATED SERVICES AT 3 FAMIL 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 518,067 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 518,067

    Recipient: Future Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 30344-4137

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0013 REALTALK – A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH AND PARENTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 685,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 685,000

    Recipient: GATEWAY COMMUNITY SERVICE ORGANIZATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 41472

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0014 GATEWAY COMMUNITY SERVICE ORGANIZATION PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 55104-1708

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0016 G/ESM FATHER PROJECT’S PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 1,772,546 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,772,546

    Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF AUSTIN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78703

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0005 THE FATHERHOOD WORKS PROGRAM OFFERS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 623,965 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 623,965

    Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF PITTSBURGH
    Recipient ZIP Code: 15203-2102

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0011 THE AFFECT PROJECT (ADVANCING FATHERS AND FAMILY ENRICHMENT COLLABORATIVE) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,952 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,952

    Recipient: GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 22182

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0024 FIT RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,599 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,599

    Recipient: HAYMARKET CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60607

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0041 MCDERMOTT CENTER DBA HAYMARKET CENTER RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM FOR LOW INCOME FATHERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 796,393 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 796,393

    Recipient: HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 95546

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0019 PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILY SUCCESS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20001-4330

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0054 DC FATHERHPOOD EDUCATION, EMPOWERMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,533,518 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,533,518

    Recipient: Healthy You, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 363031997

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0020 JUST THE FACTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 681,956 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 681,956

    Recipient: High Country Consulting LLC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 82001-2758

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0049 STRENGTHENING WYOMING TEEN AND LOW INCOME TANF FAMILIES THROUGH SKILL BASED RELATIONSHIP TRAINING AND ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 535,082 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 535,082

    Recipient: Horizon Outreach
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77386

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0045 THE HORIZON EAGLE PROGRAM PROVIDES MALE COMBAT VETERAN FATHERS SUFFERING FROM PTSD WITH STRATEGIES TO REDUCE THE EFFECTS OF PTSD ON THEIR RELATIONSHIPS, PARENTING ABILITIES AND EMPLOYABILITY. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 480,732 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 480,732

    Recipient: I C F, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 22031-6050

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FH0002 NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,500,000

    Recipient: IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97220

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0015 REFUGEE AND IMMIGRANT FAMILY EMPOWERMENT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 492,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 492,000

    Recipient: Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92243-2943

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0001 PROJECT PADRES 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 798,928 
    2011 90FM0061 PROJECT JUNTOS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,597,928

    Recipient: JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 72761

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0023 HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 724,428 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 724,428

    Recipient: Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee,
    Recipient ZIP Code: 34237-5223

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0057 HEALTHY FATHERS/HEALTHY FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,984 
    2011 90FM0060 HEALTHY FAMILIES/HEALTHY CHILDREN 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,993 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,599,977

    Recipient: KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 96819

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0012 KOKA CARES – KEIKI O KA AINA CAREER AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION SERVICES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,752 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,752

    Recipient: Kanawha Institute for Social Research & Action, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 25064-1433

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0029 WEST VIRGINIA PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,351,675 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,351,675

    Recipient: Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40475-2457

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0050 KRFDC COMMUNITY CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: LIGHTHOUSE YOUTH SERVICES, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45206-1780

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0005 LIGHTHOUSE SKILLS FOR YOUNG FATHERS PROGRAM 5 93.086 ACF 11-16-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF SOUTH DAKOTA
    Recipient ZIP Code: 57105-6048

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FO0002 FATHERHOOD AND FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,229,141 
    2011 90FR0097 FATHERHOOD AND FAMILIES: INSIDE & OUT 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,229,141

    Recipient: Lexington Leadership Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40504-3154

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0017 FAYETTE COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 449,113 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 449,113
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 37,025,735
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    NEXT! — PAGE 3 of 4

    Recipient: MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45503-4175

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0004 THE COMMITMENT PROJECT-INSPIRING COMMITMENT TO HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS,RESPONSIBLE PARENTING AND ECONOMIC STABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 798,380 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,380

    Recipient: MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 21201

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0091 STRONG FATHERS STRONG FAMILIES PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0092 WINNING FATHERS PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: MEMPHIS & SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
    Recipient ZIP Code: 38105-5041

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0037 PROJECT MOTIVATED OFFENDERS SUCCEEDING TOMORROW (MOST) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 797,809 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 797,809

    Recipient: MID-IOWA COMMUNITY ACTION, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 50158

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0022 MICA’S STRONG PARENTS – STRONG CHILDREN PROJECT WILL SERVE LOW-INCOME FAMILIES, PRIMARILY NON-CUSTODIAL FATHERS IN THE COUNTIES OF MARSHALL, POWESHIEK, AND TAMA IN CENTRAL IOWA. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 765,433 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 765,433

    Recipient: MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 53226

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0049 MILWAUKEE COUNTY PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,806,892 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,806,892

    Recipient: MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40066

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0036 MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 344,904 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 344,904

    Recipient: Meier Clinics Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60187-4579

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0051 MEIER CLINICS, FAMILY BRIDGES, HEALTY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92116-4557

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0016 SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0016 SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: Minnesota Council on Crime and Justice
    Recipient ZIP Code: 55415-1200

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0028 FAMILY STRENGTHENING PROJECT 4 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: Mission West Virginia, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 25526

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0052 N/A 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 683,935 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 683,935

    Recipient: More Than Conquerors Inc
    Recipient ZIP Code: 300835318

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0053 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 798,798 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,798

    Recipient: NASHVILLE METROPOLITIAN BORDEAUX HOSPITAL
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37218

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0035 THE NEW LIFE PROJECT IS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE LIFE OF HIGH RISK CHILDREN BY PROVIDING THE SKILLS, EDUCATION AND RESOURCES MEN NEED TO EFFECTIVELY PARENT THEIR CHILDREN. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,589,107 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,589,107

    Recipient: NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90746

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0055 NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHOP) HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 685,308 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 685,308

    Recipient: NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF CONCERNED BLACK MEN, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20009-4422

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0043 CONCERNED BLACK MEN FATHERHOOD PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 88003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0037 NEW MEXICO BORDER REGION HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: NJ ST DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 08625

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FO0004 ENGAGING THE FAMILY IN THE RECOVERY PROCESS FOR THE MAX-OUT OFFENDER: A COMMUNITY-CENTERED APPROACH 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,039,049 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,039,049

    Recipient: NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98244-0157

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0020 NOOKSACK HEALTHY FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    2011 90FN0020 NOOKSACK HEALTHY FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97213-2933

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 1,395,000 
    2011 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,395,000

    Recipient: NW Marriage Institute
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98682-2328

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0051 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 747,281 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 747,281

    Recipient: New York Youth At Risk, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10038

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0093 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0093 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: OAKLAND/LIVINGSTON HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 48056

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0036 THE FATHER FACTOR PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 432,251 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 432,251

    Recipient: OH St Governor`s Office of Faith Based & Comm Initiativ
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43215

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0109 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 (TURNING THE TIDE FOR OHIO’S BLACK MARRIAGES) 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73125

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0032 THRIVING MARRIAGES: RETREATS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 776,304 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 776,304

    Recipient: OPERATION KEEPSAKE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 44087-1654

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0056 MARRIAGE IS FOR KEEPS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,054 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,054

    Recipient: PARENTS PLUS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 54952-0452

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0113 WISCONSIN ALLIANCE FOR HEALTHY MARRIAGE 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 89 
    2011 90FE0113 WISCONSIN ALLIANCE FOR HEALTHY MARRIAGE 5 93.086 ACF 11-16-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 89

    Recipient: PEANUT BUTTER & JELLY PRESCHOOL
    Recipient ZIP Code: 87105

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FO0003 IMPACT! NEW MEXICO’S PARENT REENTRY PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,476,500 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,476,500

    Recipient: PEOPLE FOR PEOPLE, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 19130-2202

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0025 PROJECT DEVELOPING ACTIVE DADS (DAD) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 648,273 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 648,273

    Recipient: PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10023

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0025 PHOENIX HOUSE CONNECTIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 618,768 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 618,768

    Recipient: PROJECT S.O.S., INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 32216-6241

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0033 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE ANDRELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 672,703 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 672,703

    Recipient: PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73116-7909

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0026 FAMILY EXPECTATIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Parenting Center (The)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 76107

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0031 EMPOWERING FAMILIES PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 797,093 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 797,093

    Recipient: QUILEUTE INDIAN TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98350

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0022 YOUTH AND FAMILY INTERVENTION PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 33157-5372

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0028 RECAPTURING THE VISION INTERNATIONAL: THE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP PROJECT TARGETING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND YOUNG ADULTS 18-25. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,230 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,230

    Recipient: RIDGE Project, Inc
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43512-2575

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0026 KEEPING FAITH (FAMILIES AND INMATES TOGETHER IN HARMONY) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    2011 90FO0005 KEEPING FAITH – KEEPING FAMILIES AND INMATES TOGETHER IN HARMONY 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 4,000,000

    Recipient: Retreat, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 11937

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0047 SUFFOLK COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 786,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 786,000

    Recipient: SOCIAL ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH (SAY), SAN DIEGO, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92123

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0020 PROJECT COMPASS (CREATING OPTIONS FOR MEN TO PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY, SAFELY, AND SUPPORTIVELY) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 790,927 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 790,927

    Recipient: SOUTH PUGET INTERTRIBAL PLANNING AGENCY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98584

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0023 SPIPA TANF ICW WRAP-AROUND COLLABORATIONS PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: SOUTHWEST KEY PROGRAMS, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78704

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0033 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM IN SAN ANTONIO AND BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS: PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTSHHS-2011-ACF-OFA-FK-0194 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,594 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,594

    Recipient: SPRINGFIELD URBAN LEAGUE, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 62703-1002

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0038 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD IN MACON, MORGAN, AND SANGAMON COUNTIES, ILLINOIS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,387,327 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,387,327

    Recipient: STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 39759-2803

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0035 BUILDING STRONG FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 699,874 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 699,874

    Recipient: SUQUAMISH & KLALLAM HEALTH PLAN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98346

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0021 PORT GAMBLE S’KLALLAM TRIBE ADVOCATING FOR STRONG KIDS (ASK) PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-23-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project
    Recipient ZIP Code: 95821

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0059 FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,825 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,825

    Recipient: Scholarship and Guidance Association
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60609-4231

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0038 FAMILY LIFE SKILLS PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 794,180 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 794,180
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 35,677,886
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    And FINALLY:

    Fiscal Year = 2011

    Showing: 151 – 178 of 178 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »

    Recipient: Shalom Task Force
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10274-0137

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0008 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION IN THE ORTHODOX JEWISH COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN NYC AREA 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 541,633 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 541,633

    Recipient: St. Louis Healthy Marriage Coalition
    Recipient ZIP Code: 63108-3302

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0133 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 2 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 37 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 37

    Recipient: Structured Employment Econ Dev Corp (SEEDCO)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10010

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0040 SEEDCO’S PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Supportive Integrated Services
    Recipient ZIP Code: 71101

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0023 FAITH IN FATHERS CADDO PARISH 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 537,537 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 537,537

    Recipient: TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99701-4871

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0024 ATHABASCAN FAMILY SUPPORT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: TARRANT COUNTY WORKFORCE BOARD
    Recipient ZIP Code: 76103

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0032 PROJECT, “FATHERS AND CHILDREN TOGETHER.”: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO PROMOTE AND FOSTER RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, ECONOMIC STABILITY, AND HEALTHY MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS IN TARRANT COUNTY. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,106,804 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,106,804

    Recipient: TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY-SAN MARCOS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78666

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0007 STRENGTHENING RELATIONSHIPS/STRENGTHENING FAMILIES (SR/SF) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 617,280 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 617,280

    Recipient: THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 94707-0881

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0010 BUILDING BRIGHTER FUTURES 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 794,846 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 794,846

    Recipient: THE HIVE CREATIVE GROUP
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36303-1997

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0093 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION PRIORITY AREA 3 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 0 
    2011 90FE0093 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION PRIORITY AREA 3 2 93.086 ACF 02-08-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: TLINGIT & HAIDA TRIBES CENTRAL COUNCIL
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99801

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0012 ICW TANF COLLABORATIVE CASE MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: TOLEDO AREA MINISTRIES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 436201735

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0040 KEEPING IT TOGETHER 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 24001-2868

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0010 TAP-TVW’S FATHERS FIRST 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 766,515 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 766,515

    Recipient: The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families
    Recipient ZIP Code: 29204-2413

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0021 STRENGTHENING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS FOR LOW-INCOME, NON-CUSTODIAL FATHERS 5 93.086 ACF 09-15-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: UNITED WAY OF JACKSON COUNTY, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 49201-1223

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0138 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 2 4 93.086 ACF 11-16-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10467-2401

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0057 UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES MARRIAGE & RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 72205-7101

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0041 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 09-20-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
    Recipient ZIP Code: 32826

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0039 PROJECT TOGETHER 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 2,184,508 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,184,508

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37916

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0022 RELATIONSHIP RX: INTEGRATING A COUPLES INTERVENTION PROGRAM INTO A PRIMARY CARE SETTING 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 723,508 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 723,508

    Recipient: UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 84322

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 785,612 
    2011 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 785,612

    Recipient: Urban Ventures Leadership Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 55408-2410

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0007 MINNEAPOLIS PROJECT PROMOTING FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 709,385 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 709,385

    Recipient: VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 05405-3401

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0013 DAPPPER DADS — DADS AS PARENTS, PARTNERS AND PROVIDERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 390,600 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 390,600

    Recipient: WAIT Training
    Recipient ZIP Code: 80237

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0054 THE COLORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,605,705 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,605,705

    Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43420-3021

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0012 “FATHER CONNECTIONS” PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 560,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 560,000

    Recipient: YOUTH & FAMILY ALLAIANCE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78704-7046

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0002 LIFEWORKS YOUNG FATHER’S PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 600,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 600,000

    Recipient: YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES OF CANADIAN COUNTY, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73036

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0058 SAFE AND LOVING RELATIONSHIPS FOR AT-RISK YOUTH 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 338,367 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 338,367

    Recipient: YWCA OF SAN ANTONIO
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78240-1480

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0127 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 54,455 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 54,455
    Page Award Actions Count: 28 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 17,716,790
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    Showing: 151 – 178 of 178 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »


    Comment re:

    Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43420-3021

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0012 “FATHER CONNECTIONS” PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 560,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 560,000

    This is the ONLY agency where an HHS grant (apparently) goes directly to a certain OHIO County where a recent child-rape in a supervised visitation center has been making headline news.  In exploring the situation — and the institution — it turns out that the institution where it happens was 75% government funded, with HALF the funding being a special “Children’s Levy” to the state, and the other 22% “Federal Funding.”

    OHIO — like a few states — has an actual “FATHERHOOD COMMISSION” which does what Fatherhood Commissions do, primarily directing grants towards saving families by keeping Dads involved.  Part of the streamlined funding (or, “Flexible Funding” as it’s called), enabling them to get the money FAST to serve children and families — like this 13 month old girl that was raped and molested by her biological mother and father, who got access too her (despite Daddy already being a registered juvenile sex offender) by taking “parenting classes,” and like her older sister — removed from Mom the day she was born, put in foster care, and there bludgeoned to death by a foster care mother, now in prison I gather, before she turned two.  In addition to the funding to provide supervised visitation access centers where by abusers can REALLY bond with their offspring, the state of Ohio now has to pay for jail space for mother and father, and public defenders, as the outrage is normally wanting the couple to go to jail for life.

    I looked at the docket for the father and mother, and find out that while the father’s attorney has been REAL pro-active (insanity plea, etc.) — and that it’s $27.00 per action — the mother’s, if any, appears to be doing nothing.  I have YET to locate a single tax return for the outfit that failed to supervise here, but we hear (so far) that the citizens attempting to get into the Board meeting for the public-funded organization were turned away at the door.  To date, in looking at the “FCFC” setup (hard to understand unless you explore Ohio’s “FAMILIES AND CHILDREN FIRST” site), there are precious few FCFC’s (out of 88 counties in the state) which actually filed — with the state of ohio — as one, resulting in a public-access tax return stating how much money they got, WHAT THEIR BOARDS OF DIRECTORS ARE PAID — and where it went.

    This organization’s primary business is HEAD START — HANDICAPPED TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FULL AND HALF DAY, with occasional RURAL FACILITIES and just a tad of ‘PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.”

    Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
    Address: 109 SOUTH FRONT ST, PO BOX 590
    FREMONT, OH 43420-3021
    Country Name: United States of America
    County Name: SANDUSKY
    HHS Region: 5
    Type: Community Action Organization
    Class: Non-Profit Public Non-Government Organizations
    {{SINCE 1995  – NOW}} Total of award actions for this page: $ 7,104,079
    Total of all award actions: $ 95,486,805

      

    This group must’ve given money to some non-TRumbull County recipients, judging by the results searching awards by LOCATION, and choosing Trumbull County.  Be patient, I’ll explain.  This is selecting no year:  I already know all awards to this county (directly from HHS) were ACF awards, from the same basic Location Search / Group by Agency:

    County = TRUMBULL
    State = OHIO
    Summary = Recipient

    Showing: 1 – 7 of 7 Recipients

    Recipient Number of
    Award Actions
    Number of
    Awards
    Amount
    COUNTY OF TRUMBULL LIFELINES 9 2 $ 691,593
    Children`s Rehabilitation Center 1 1 $ 124,000
    City of Warren, Ohio 1 1 $ 248,690
    Forum Health Trumbull Memorial Hospital 1 1 $ 169,290
    Hopewell Inn/DBA Hopewell 2 1 $ 383,822
    NORTHEAST OHIO ADOPTION SERVICE 26 5 $ 4,006,797
    TRUMBULL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM 64 2 $ 69,574,990
    Report Total: 104 13 $ 75,199,182


    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    TRUMBULL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM  WARREN OH 44485-3730 TRUMBULL 044729874 $ 69,574,990

      

    S

    These awards (if you click on it) are in the exact same category and project name as the WSOS ones, above:

    Trumbull Community Action program is labeled as a nonprofit PRIVATE org. under TAGGS, for what it’s worth (WSOS as nonprofit PUBLIC,e tc.)

    Recipient: TRUMBULL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM
    Address: 1230 PALMYRA ROAD, SW
    WARREN, OH 44485-3730
    Country Name: United States of America
    County Name: TRUMBULL
    HHS Region: 5
    Type: Other Social Services Organization
    Class: Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations

    AWARD ACTIONS

    Showing: 1 – 50 of 64 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 Next »

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2012 05CH4005  HEAD START: FULL YEAR PART DAY HANDICAPPED TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 46 0 ACF 10-14-2011 044729874 $ 2,323,475 
    Fiscal Year 2012 Total: $ 2,323,475
    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC  FREMONT OH 43420-3021 SANDUSKY 077573533 $ 95,486,805

    Their website explains Community Action Programs as part of the 1960s War on Poverty, generally; explains that in 2002, they got Head STart funding, and in essence, they are a middle-man contracting with the government to provide services.  the WSOS apparently represents 4 Ohio Counties (out of 88 available). I”m not quite sure how ‘TRUMBULL” county fits in there, but WSOS grants are apparently going there.

    The program under which “HELP ME GROW” classes appear to take place includes the place where the child was raped during a scheduled visitation.  (Cell phone images were found, so whether or not it took place is not in question).

    2002  

    • Literacy – PRC Ottawa County
    • Skills for Life Ottawa County
    • Help Me Grow

    2003  

    • Help Me Grow Ottawa County
    • WSOS secures funding for Early Head Start program

    WSOS Logo

    Billboard

    Apparently the WSOS stands for 4 different Ohio Counties:   Odd there is no “T” in that acronym, seeing as Trumbull is getting the bulk of their HHS monies:

    Heading - Our History

    1965

    Officers of the Seneca, Sandusky, and Ottawa County Community Action committees meet in Fremont and draft a joint constitution that created SOS Community Action Commission.

    2002

    • Literacy – PRC Ottawa County
    • Skills for Life Ottawa County
    • Help Me Grow

    2003

    • Help Me Grow Ottawa County
    • WSOS secures funding for Early Head Start program

    Funding sought to help unemployed fathers in nine Ohio counties 

     If a $560,000 proposal to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance is funded, 200 families in Wood, Sandusky, Ottawa, Seneca, Hancock, Crawford, Marion, Richland and Morrow counties will receive assistance to help them achieve economic stability during the next three years.

    The Board of Directors of the WSOS Community Action granted approval to submit the proposal along with four other new proposals.

    The grant, called the Responsible Fatherhood grant, will provide access to employment, education, training, intensive family-centered case management as well as a range of other support services customized to each family – all with the goal of helping the family achieve economic stability.

    WSOS will also apply on behalf of the Sandusky County Homeless Coalition for $2,550 from the Sandusky County Community Foundation. The funds will be used to provide 60 needy county residents to secure driver’s licenses, birth certificates, and state identification cards necessary for them to obtain or retain employment.

    The two other proposals will be made by the Community Development Department to assist Ohio communities. One proposal will seek $105,000 from the Governor’s Office of Appalachia that will be used to provide leadership training to small community water and sewer personnel for one year. The Ohio Water District Association (OWDA) will provide matching funds up to $45,000. Another proposal for $250,000 to the same office will provide technical assistance to small communities for GPS data collection and GIS mapping. OWDA will again provide matching funds of $38,000 while the participating communities will contribute another $247,194.

    “ICF”, or is it “I C F”?? and why the “NRCSPHM” must be strategic to our national defense…[First Published Oct. 20, 2011]

    with 3 comments

    ….

    “ICF”, or is it “I C F”?? and why the “NRCSPHM” must be strategic to our national defense… First published Oct. 20, 2011 | Short-link ends “-Tb”| about 21,000 words

    BLOGGER’s UPDATE MESSAGE Aug. 15, 2018: First published Oct. 20, 2011, not updated since except to add post title w/short-link label (a more recent admin. habit) and change the background color to white (necessitated when blog upgrade retroactively changed the default background color to “yuck pale green”), add a post border line and my now standard font: fairly routine changes.

    Otherwise I’m not attempting to improve its curb appeal, not even for quotes (now I often add boxes around them), missing or expired images to logos (now I often take screenshots to avoid that happening), and especially not trying to correct TAGGS.HHS.Gov margins; TAGGs itself has had a major restructure since them).  My purpose is for quoting on Twitter.  I think the message is still relevant, still “missed” by too many, and worth repeating.

    Some terms, individual and nonprofit or program names now much more mainstream as specific public policy models, I was questioning this far back; just over two years after the entire apparatus was cracked open on comprehending the basic concepts behind “Federal incentives to States” under Welfare Reform (two specific funding streams) + where groups like Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ cult-like, court-connected, nonprofit-spawning  group behaviors style=”(it being a membership association primarily of judges, family lawyers, mediators, custody evaluators, and such — people MOST likely to make a FINE living from family court referrals, if not already public civil servants in that capacity!) fit in.

    Not including this message and above label, the post is still About 21,000 words (note: that includes all words within all TAGGS tables too)..


    “ICF”, or is it “I C F”?? and why the “NRCSPHM” must be strategic to our national defense…

    First published Oct. 20, 2011 | Short-link ends “-Tb”| about 21,000 words, by LGH (“LetUsGetHonest”)

    (Today [Oct. 2011], I simply blogged, and continued — incorporating some discussion about our two main databases, about access/visitation grants, demonstrating the importance of doing trademark registration searches on groups (as in Colorado) and following up on a California-based group (influence found in Colorado by way of Washington) which, having been formed in 1970 as “Mothers Anonymous” and intended to help mothers involved in child abuse stop it, was within one year of incorporation changed to “Parents Anonymous,” got its stuff trademarked, was already, or got “in” with the HHS & DOJ — and is doing, currently about $18 million worth of business with HHS & DOJ combined.

    The influence of fatherhood promotion is definitely showing in its materials, as well as the habit of marketing, marketin g, getting the trademark licensed, certifying accreditation to teach one’s own private curriculum brand — AND with close ties to Los Angeles County Judicial System among its board members.  This group was THE top grantee of a certain category (in the year 2002), and I hadn’t even heard of it before.

    I did not finish with the El Paso County, Colorado information (at bottom), and connecting the work of CPR & PSI to actual Child Support Enforcement Groups (via a different, trademarked name), but although it’s LONGwinded — I guarantee you, taken in small installations, this IS a very informative post.

    I also catch TAGGS omitting DUNS# (such that many, many grants will remain unseen) and usaspending.gov doing the exact same thing — with the DUNS#, $697K grants showed (for parents anonymous).  Omitting the DUNS$ the $18 million surfaced.  O Mi God . . . ..

    I am publishing without apologies:  Read at your own risk!

    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    Oct. 21, 2011 update:

    Concern #1:

    March 9, 2009 letter from the Executive Office of the Massachusetts, Dept. of Environmental Protection, a 6-page letter to the US Office of Inspector General, expresses concern that ICF was used to evaluate.  Troubling 2009 protest of ICF assessment (topic:  drinking water contaminate perchlorate, as to cumulative effects on fetus, infants, and children’s neurodevelopment / hypothyroidism; article was “rushed out the door” (full of errors), potential conflict of interest, etc.) – – –

    The letter is signed by:  Tzedash Zewdie, Ph.D./Toxicologist; Carol Rowan-West, MSPH/Director, Office of Research and Standards, and C.Mark Smith, Ph.D.,SM/Deputy Director of Office of Research and Standards, and Toxicologist.  Among other concerns were the dumping of the responsibility for protection from water contamination upon the most vulnerable sectors of the public (young children), to take iodide supplements, and not on the polluters.  The letter recommends the OIG make available the drafts from which the OIG (using ICF) got its conclusion.

    [article abstract from link to Dr. Zewdie, above): Perchlorate inhibits (blocks, slows, lowers etc.) iodide-uptake in the thyroid.   Iodide is required to synthesize hormones critical to fetal and neonatal development. Many water supplies and foods are contaminated with perchlorate.  Massachusetts has stricter and more protective standards than other “regulatory agencies”].  

    (If ICF fudges on something this basic to health of fetuses, infants, and young children, how are they going to be handling the more general, marriage & fatherhood factor?)

    Concern #2:

    A Wikipedia article (flagged by Wikipedia as probably less than objective) shows how many firms ICF began acquiring, and notes that its CEO is from MIT.  What I’m concerned about is why HHS lists this corporation as “City” and not a contractor…..  And its habit of acquiring company after company….  Reminds me of Maximus, the child support giant…

    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    We are still on this topic:  Who are the groups that got these grants?

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
    Monday, October 3, 2011
    Contact: Kenneth J. Wolfe
    (202) 401-9215

    ACF announces over $119 million in Grant Awards for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood

    HHS’ Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (OFA) today announced $119,393,729 in grant awards to 120 grantees to promote healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood. Authorized by the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (CRA), the grant awards will help fathers and families build strong relationships to support the well-being of their children.

    As ever, the missing noun, “mothers.”  Leaving it out is accurate, as these do NOT help mothers build strong relationships with their kids, rather, it helps completely eliminate contact with the children in some cases, in order to be more fair to fathers (supposedly) in the courts.  Once a family court has eliminated such contact, including by refusing to do anything about ongoing violations of existing court orders, or ongoing threats making attempts to re-establish broken contact a Russian Roulette for some mothers, many, many of the organizations set up to help “BUILD STRONG RELATIONSHIPS” for the kids, refuse to help mothers — at all — even contact them.  It is a win-win situation for any substandard father whose real goal is to hurt that mother through taking her kids.

    It is a lose-lose situation for the taxpayers, who will have clean-up duty, or pay for ongoing monitoring procedures (supervised visitation centers) which themselves sometimes come up fraudulent.

    “A strong and stable family is the greatest advantage any child can have,” said George Sheldon, HHS acting assistant secretary for children and families. “These grants support programs that promote responsible parenting, encourage healthy relationships and marriage, and help families move toward self-sufficiency and economic stability.”

    The Healthy Marriage program awarded a total of $59,997,077 in grants, which include 60Community-Centered Healthy Marriage grants and a National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage grant. The Responsible Fatherhood program awarded a total of $59,396,652 in grants, which include 55 Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood grants and four Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry Pilot Project grants.

    THE PRESS RELEASE LIST OF GRANTEES:

    After painstakingly comparing the recent ACF announcement on how and to whom it scattered $119 million (more) of “healthy marriage  / responsible fatherhood” grants, in a press release which listed no contact, no grant award number, and did not even use the same Grantee names as the database on which one can look these up does (http://TAGGS.hhs.gov, which I keep promoting and quoting on this blog), I have found a 1:1 correspondence to my “90FM” series and the list — with 3 exceptions.

    My comment to the last post, I named the few exceptions (including $1.2 million omitted, and about $800K under-reported as to ANTHEM, and this group “ICF” which I had found on-line, but nowhere in the TAGGS database.  Til just now.

    I also started a new page on this blog (2011 Healthy Marriage Grantees . . . Speed- Dating), but its layout isn’t much better.

    I uploaded my printout (which is horizontal and wont fit on this post).  Using the TAGGS list, instinctively having discovered the grants series, only to discover that someone had fudged entering the “principal investigator’s” last names – – I had only one group left to locate:  ICF, Incorporated out of Fairfax, Virginia, which got a $1.5 million grant to push marriage education, presumably.

    Finally I googled the ridiculous set of initials “NRCSPHM” after speculating on their potential meaning (looks like I didn’t read the press release carefully enough, having just skipped to the list of grantees), and found a grants opportunity announcement from San Bernadino County, CA — leading to the interpretation:

    NATIONAL

    RESOURCE CENTER

    for

    STRATEGIES

    to

    PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE

    = NRCSPHM, “obviously”

    How grandiose.

    Is it not enough to let corporations form, dissolve, and reform to make nonprofits (that don’t report properly to the IRS, or their local state registry of charitable trusts, as required to by law, from the same, fairly narrow set of marriage promoters with government contacts in HHS and/or to the National Fatherhood Intiative, plus those working in the child support and welfare  fields, plus anyone whose gut instinct leads them to join some of the right-wing, mega-churches that advertise their wares on-line and run off to Uganda and other sub-Saharan Africa countries to make sure the gays are not getting out of hand, and support leadership who recommend handling this by killing them?

    Or groups that believe the best way to stop the spread of AIDS is by persuading hormone-ridden teenagers in school systems which do NOT challenge them adequately to refrain from sex (while failing to account for middle-aged or other adult males who cannot refrain from having sex with THEIR KIDS, or other kids). . . . ..

    Just for the record, some marriages need to be broken up because they are just a little to close for comfort, either for the person being assaulted, or for the inappropriate sexual relationships with minors in the family.  And those of us who have gotten OUT of some of those situations, and family lines where this was occurring, do not appreciate standing by for the next decade and watching public funds to used to propagate ridiculous practices based on paid-for theory that doesn’t account for exceptions, doesn’t require grantees to really even be legal entities, doesn’t MONITOR the funds from start to finish, and can’t show any results more than accounts of warm bodies who ALLEGEDLY sat through their classes.

    We are having ongoing murder/suicide around custody “disputes,” while the groups running the thing run off and meet in exotic or plush conferences, tax-deductible, to run mutual trainings, tax-deductible, and make up new themes to describe the “flawed parents” they are (sigh) forced to deal with in the process of rescuing children and eliminating the concept of crime as crime, to be replaced with new definitions they have (privately) agreed upon, and how to get these “solutions” voted into state laws.  If you’re lost, this paragraph was talking about the AFCC; any paragraph about the related CRC would have to talk about the practice of financing this through child support and welfare diversions.  That was called “Welfare Reform,” FYI.

    There was already a “NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER” in California — Dennis Stoica, registered agent:

    OK, I let off enough steam (don’t worry, I’m pissed, but not armed, except with information) to get to the point of this post.

    I finally found the missing $1,500,000 grant, and grantee.

    Do you know why earlier search hadn’t located “ICF, INC”??  Well, looks here like someone decided to put spaces inbetween the initials in the name, although in the ACF press release the acronym for the project award had no spaces:

    ICF Incorporated, LLC (NRCSPHM) Fairfax
    VA
    $1,500,000
    Award Title Sum of Actions
    2011 ACF I C F, INC NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE $ 1,500,000

    Then I looked up the name, with its idiosyncratic TAGGS database entry, spacing between the letters of the name.  OH — there was about another $1 million of grants?

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    I C F, INC  FAIRFAX VA 22031-6050 FAIRFAX 072648579 $ 2,477,256

    The company under which Healthy Marriage (a.k.a. “Responsible Fatherhood,” same diff…) shows as “ICF International” (see below).  But 

    under ICF Incorporated, L.L.C.” in Bloomberg  (Businessweek/Investing), after noting “no key executives listed,” and a 1969 founding, shows why we should be giving this company a financial boost, with a $$5.5 million start-up grant, rather than an actual contract:

    ICF Incorporated, L.L.C. Wins $107,631,975 Modified Federal Contract
    02/1/2011

    Office of Acquisition Management (Environmental Protection Agency), EPA/Headquarters, has awarded a $107,631,975.00 modified federal contract on Feb. 1 for professional, administrative, and management support services to ICF Incorporated, L.L.C.

    ICF Inc Win $8,462,890 Federal Contract
    12/25/2010

    ICF Inc., Fairfax, Va., announced that it has won a $8,462,890 federal contract from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Acquisition Management, Cincinnati, for technical and regulatory support for the development of criteria for water media.

    ICF Inc. Wins $4.92 Million Federal Contract
    09/30/2010

    ICF Inc., Fairfax, Va., won a $4,919,708 federal contract from the U.S. Department of Education’s Contracts and Acquisitions Management for race to the top technical assistance network under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  [“ARRA”]

    Well, no, actually more like $3,656,370 million since 2007, and this organization is categorized as “City Government,” although it’s a private, for-profit corporation, from what I can tell in the real world outside TAGGS:

    Recipient: I C F, INC
    Address: 9300 LEE HIGHWAY
    FAIRFAX, VA 22031-6050
    Country Name: United States of America
    County Name: FAIRFAX
    HHS Region: 3
    Type: Supplier Organizations ( Service, Supplies, Material and Equipment )
    Class: City Government

    AWARD ACTIONS

    Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2011 90FH0002  NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE 1 00 ACF 09-28-2011 072648579 $ 1,500,000 
    2011 90PD0271  SELF-SUFFICIENCY RESEARCH CLEARNINGHOUSE 1 0 ACF 09-27-2011 072648579 $ 977,256 
    Fiscal Year 2011 Total: $ 2,477,256

     

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2010 90PD0270  SELF-SUFFICIENCY RESEARCH CLEARINGHOUSE 2 0 ACF 09-17-2010 072648579 $ 500,000 
    Fiscal Year 2010 Total: $ 500,000

     

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number @@##Amount This Action
    2009 90LH0001  NATIONAL CHILD CARE TOLL-FREE HOTLINE 1 2 ACF 06-15-2009 072648579 $- 702,966 
    2009 90PD0270  SELF-SUFFICIENCY RESEARCH CLEARINGHOUSE 1 0 ACF 09-18-2009 072648579 $ 500,000 
    {{LGH:  See FOOTNOTES}} Fiscal Year 2009 Total: $-202,966
    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2007 90LH0001  NATIONAL CHILD CARE TOLL-FREE HOTLINE 1 0 ACF 09-21-2007 072648579 $ 882,080 
    Fiscal Year 2007 Total: $ 882,080

     

    Total of all award actions: $ 3,656,370

    {{{FOOTNOTES:  These comments appeared in FY2009 Total “Amount” column.  Unclear whether they’re HHS’ or mine.  Probably mine, from 2011 post..quoting from ICF International website at that time}}

    Also in 2005, ICF International acquired Caliber Associates, a Fairfax, Virginia, firm that provided high-end consulting services, primarily to U.S. federal clients.In 2007, ICF International acquired Energy and Environmental Analysis (EEA), Advanced Performance Consulting Group (APCG), Z-Tech Corporation, and SH&E.In 2008, ICF acquired Jones & Stokes.[3]In 2009, ICF International acquired Macro International Inc.[4] and Jacob & Sundstrom, Inc.[5]

    In 2010, ICF acquired Marbek Resource Consultants Ltd.[6]

    In 2011, ICF acquired AeroStrategy LLC


    This is a major corporation doing major business with the US Govt and others; it was founded originally by a Tuskeegee airman, and has deep connections to the defense industry and technology.   (read up from its site).  It went public (Trading on NASDAQ) as of 2006 for $12.00 a share and is danged impressive!

    This is the “SHORT” description.  AGAIN, I note that the TAGGS database did NOT give its accurate name (omitting the “INTERNATIONAL”) for some reason spaced out the letters of its name (which the company, obviously, does not do) and so forth.  Here is website description from the news release on its going public in 2006

    ICF International (Nasdaq: ICFI) partners with government and commercial clients to deliver consulting services and technology solutions in the energy, environment, transportation, social programs, defense, and homeland security markets. The firm combines passion for its work with industry expertise and innovative analytics to produce compelling results throughout the entire program life cycle, from analysis and design through implementation and improvement. Since 1969, ICF has been serving government at all levels, major corporations, and multilateral institutions. More than 1,800 employees serve these clients worldwide. ICF’s Web site is http://www.icfi.com.

    CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS in Fairfax, VA

     

    Here they are describing their “RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD” work (no mention is made of “marriage” in the overview).  They are experienced in transforming communities, and no doubt, their work will indeed continue to give father(hood practitioners and promoters) the PR edge and corporate influence, plus public presence through social media, that mothers — who are losing their kids to these fatherhood programs in droves, now — do not have someone doing for our cause, although we give birth to these children, after 9 months (Usually) sometimes nurse them, alter our lives to take care of them, and have a President who has only expanded the programs that his Presidential forebears put in place, which cause this trouble to women leaving abuse while there is a family court system waiting, with open jaws, to direct traffic to one of their family-strengthening programs…

    ICF helps U.S. federal and state agencies, grantees, nonprofit agencies, and service providers in reaching communities, fathers, and families with the message of how responsible fatherhood is critically linked to nearly every aspect of a thriving community.

    Our experts bring skills from the fields of youth at risk, education, children and youth, poverty, and family strengthening and can see the links among these areas. Although the issue has been recently spotlighted in the media and in policy, ICF’s work in this area spans years.

    ICF contributes toward finding ways to help providers implement programs that improve outcomes for children and families. We have helped service providers implement systemic changes to bring men into mentoring, civic life, and neighborhood stabilization efforts in ways that have wide-ranging impact.

    We help organizations get the information that they need to develop programs that support fathers and families through a range of services including:  (See site for the list):

    … CLIENTS (and we see it’s not the OCSE, but the OFA)

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

    • Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
      • Office of Family Assistance (OFA)

    The most recent one they are doing acknowledges — taking TANF monies and trying to direct traffic to a FBCO (Faith-based group) — which in the case of women trying to leave abuse, which SOMETIMES includes abuse by priests, preachers, or pastors, or at least coverups of this BY them, after being made aware of it (it’s part of the religious territory) will then have the same types of groups rooting for the men they are trying to keep a safe distance from.  I”m going to post the list of projects, current and past, done by this organization.  (No WONDER things are getting rough around the edges in family courts!)

    PLEASE NOTE:  the ACF Press release mentions this $1.5 million grant going to the “healthy marriage” grantee portion (as if this wasn’t primarily promoting paternalism anyhow) — but as far as I can tell, ICF International considers the project to be filed under “RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.”  That is the program link.

    http://www.icfi.com/markets/families-and-communities/responsible-fatherhood#tab-2-projects

    {{Sev’l expired-link logos from 2011 were removed during 2018 quick-edit update//LGH}}

     

    Now that I have a DUNS#, let’s see how much business other than HHS grants, they do with us, meaning the U.S.

    ICF INTERNATIONAL INC.

    Healthy Marriage Grantee does over $1 BILLION Of BUSINESS with the US Government.

    (notice its name shows different here, too).

    USASPENDING.GOV:

    • Total Dollars:$1,116,743,207
    • Transactions:1 – 25 of 6,935

    For example, this grant:

    Transaction Number # 5

    PIID: HHSP23320110015YC (Definitive Contract)
    Recipient: ICF INTERNATIONAL INC.
    9300 LEE HWY , FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA
    Reason for Modification:
    Program Source: 75-1536:Children and Families Services Programs
    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Office of Asst. Sec. for Health except national centers (disused code)
    Product/Service Code: R408 : Program Management/Support Services
    Description:
    CHILDREN’S BUREAU CLEARINGHOUSE SERVICES
    Date Signed:
    September 30 , 2011Obligation Amount: 
    $9,481,719

    (NOTICE the other database {{USASPENDING.gov}} doesn’t add the spaces between initials of the group’s name). . . .HHS is a world unto itself, for sure…)

    From the TIMELINE tab (on this DUNS# for ICF, INC) it shows that 2003 was a low, 2009, a substantial jump, and 2011 looks to be a banner year for the company.

    Of the $1 billion plus of business, $32 million were received in 84 grants, the most (or, largest amount) in 2009.

    • Total Dollars:$32,702,456
    • Transactions:1 – 25 of 84

    NOT that you can rely on this database, either (i’ve found by experience, but here’s the other acknowledgement — it aint’ complete, or accurate, or reliable);

    I checked “Health and Human Services” (5 grants) and came up with a smaller number than are on the TAGGS database, by about $1.5 million:   The last reward does not show yet.  (however in other searches, I’ve found grants in prior years, over $1 million, that didn’t make it onto USASpending ever, apparently.  I have typically thought of this as USASpending UNDER-reporting, and only recently (when associated with all the other “anomalies” of the TAGGS database) considered the possibility of HHS OVER-reporting, which would be consistent with the practices of some of their court-affiliated grantees, a few of who have been caught (I’m thinking particularly in the supervised visitation field:  Karen Anderson, Genia Shockome cases .. … )

    • Total Dollars:$2,156,370
    • Transactions:1 – 5 of 5

    COMMENTARY on USASPENDING.GOV (various, random):

    OMB falls short on USASpending.gov data, GAO says

    OMB has not included subcontracting award data on USAspending.gov and has no specific plan for collecting such data.

    The USASpending.gov Web site has been live for more than two years so the public can see where its tax dollars are going, but the site’s data has not been complete nor accurate, according to a new report.

    USASpending.gov went live Dec.13, 2007–a month earlier than the legislated deadline. It’s a Web site compiling a comprehensive list of the more than $1 trillion in financial assistance awarded through contracts, loans and grants. Congress mandated such a site in its Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), which became law in September 2006.

    Since the Office of Management and Budget launched the site, OMB has fallen short of several of program requirements, the Government Accountability Office [“GAO”] reported March 12.

    Or, from 2011, from “SUNLIGHT FOUNDATION”:

    House Oversight Subcommittee Discusses Problems with USASpending.gov Data

    March 15, 2011, 4:46 p.m.

    On Friday, Ellen testified in front of the Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform, a subcommittee of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. Her testimony mostly focused on the findings from our Clearspending project, which assessed the data quality of the grant programs in USASpending.gov. It was heartening to see the committee taking the issue of data quality in USASpending.gov so seriously. While admittedly not a sexy topic, this issue has serious implications in decisions that the government makes about our federal spending. To quote Rep. Issa’s (CALIFORNIA) opening statement, “The failures to make the data right is the reason we’re not getting a responsible government”.

    Clearspending found nearly $1.3 trillion dollars Clearspending logoin misreported spending in 2009. This includes spending reports that were late, incomplete or inconsistent with other information sources that track federal spending. In Ellen’s testimony, she discussed two specific examples of poor data quality in USASpending.gov: the Department of Education reported over $6 trillion in student loans for 2010 and the Department of Agriculture did not report any spending for the National School Lunch Program, which obligated $8 billion in grants last year. The CIOs from both these agencies also testified on the panel, and were given a chance to respond to our critiques during the committee Q&A.

    Chris Smith, the CIO of the USDA, testified that the reason the grants were not reported was because they went to individuals, and the law governing grant reporting does not require reporting for grants to individuals. However, the actual program description describes these grants as formula grants to states. The entity receiving the grant is a state, not an individual, and therefore the grant is subject to the reporting requirements. Smith also mentioned that the transactions were under $25,000 and therefore not subject to the reporting requirement. While this may be the case, it seems unlikely. The program in question has a $10 billion bu

    You Will Be Watched on USASpending.gov…Maybe Even Prosecuted

    SUNDAY, JANUARY 13. 2008 AT 01:32 PM | BY COBY LOGEN IN BREAKIN’ THE LAW

    I intended to write about how innovative and exciting USASpending.govis, because it opens up extensive government budget databases: you can search, browse, and even write programs to query the system.But, that changed when I read this on the home page:WARNING: This is a United States Federal Government computer system that is “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.” This system is subject to monitoring. Therefore, no expectation of privacy is to be assumed. Individuals found performing unauthorized activities are subject to disciplinary action including criminal prosecution. Click here for more information.
    Wow.I guess Uncle Sam doesn’t really want to open up his budget for public review.

    dget. Let’s say that each state gets an equal payment once a month. That would still be over $16 million dollars per transaction–not even close to the $25,000 minimum. It seems that the reporting guidelines have been misinterpreted in this case.

    and, a rather frightening 2007 article on USASPENDING.gov from “DOTGOVWATCH.ORG” indicates, while we are flopping around hoping to get some sensible information, or doing so is likely to be watched, and that the home page contained this warning:

    WARNING: This is a United States Federal Government computer system that is “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.” This system is subject to monitoring. Therefore, no expectation of privacy is to be assumed. Individuals found performing unauthorized activities are subject to disciplinary action including criminal prosecution. Click here for more information.  {link has moved since….}

    GRANT ANNOUNCEMENT for this NRCSPHM:

    National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage 
    HHS-2011-ACF-OFA-FH-0207

    Summary

    Funding Opportunity Title: National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage
    Funding Opportunity Number (FON): HHS-2011-ACF-OFA-FH-0207
    Program Office: Office of Family Assistance
    Funding Type: Discretionary
    Funding Category: Cooperative Agreement  (WITH WHOM??)
    Announcement Type: Initial
    CFDA#: 93.086
    Post Date: 06/28/2011
    Application Due Date: 07/28/2011

    Description

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Family Assistance (OFA) is announcing the solicitation of applications to competitively award cooperative agreements for demonstration projects that support “healthy marriage promotion activities” as authorized by The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-291).The cooperative agreement awarded under the Funding Opportunity Announcement will support the development, implementation, management of a National Resource Center for Marriage and Relationship Education (NRCMRE).The NRCMRE will support marriage and relationship education (MRE) program development, implementation, and integration. ACF is responsible for Federal programs that promote the economic and social well-being of families, children, individuals, and communities.  The NRCMRE will provide MRE information, resources,and technical assistance designed to assist in the development of a broad approach to serving families and children by incorporating MRE into already existing services.

    WHAT”S NEW?  Welfare Reform has always supported DHHS running social science experimentations on the American Public, and required states receiving assistance — access visitation assistance — to help the Secretary of HHS (NOTE:  Presidential appointee, not elected) — run them:

    This SEpt. 1999 “ACTION TRANSMITTAL” (internal HHS document posted on-line) regarding 45 CFR 303.109 shows that there was not even a requirement to monitor what happened to the grants added until 2 years after they’d been in operation!  Nor was there a stipulation for protection procedures.  It provides a nice history of the Access Visitation procedures, which apparently started in 1988 with $4 million and have been at $10 million/year since 1996 or so.  Obama Administration likes to stay on the good side of the fatherhood movement and so has been promising to increase and expand this.

    Recommended browsing for review, and for newcomers to the concept that the Federal Government is interested in your family court case, and tweaking the outcome of it through federal incentives to the states.

    Apr 28, 1999 AT-99-007 Final Rule – Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs: Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting

    The intro gets a little technical, but read it anyhow:

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
    Administration for Children & Families
    Office of Child Support Enforcement

    AT-99-07

    ISSUED: April 28, 1999

    TO: STATE AGENCIES ADMINISTERING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PLANS UNDER TITLE IV-D OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT AND OTHER INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS

    SUBJECT: Final Rule 150 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs: Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting

    BACKGROUND: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs is a recent program to enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parent’s access to and visitation of their children. $10 million per year has been granted to States since 1997; it is a continuing capped appropriation. Funds are granted to states based upon the number of children in single family households, a $50,000 minimum per state will be increased to $100,000 this year. The range of grants is from $100,000 to nearly $1 million per year. State programs are managed by agencies designated by the Governor; many states do not operate the program through the IV-D agency. Funds may be used for the following activities: 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.

    ATTACHMENT: Attached is the final rule published in the Federal Register on March 30, 1999 (64 FR 15132-6). This is a new regulation mandated by Section 469B(e)(3) of the Social Security Act which was enacted by Section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. This rule is consistent with the President’s Memorandum of March 4, 1995 to the heads of Department and Agencies which announced a government-wide Regulatory Reinvention Initiative to reduce or eliminate mandated burdens on States and others.

    REGULATORY REFERENCE: 45 CFR Parts 303.109

    DATES: This regulation is effective April 29, 1999

    INQUIRIES: ACF Regional Administrators

    __________________________
    David Gray Ross
    Commissioner
    Office of Child Support Enforcement

    . . .

    SUMMARY: This final rule implements provisions contained in section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and establishes the requirements for State monitoring, reporting and evaluation of Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs. Access and Visitation programs support and facilitate non-custodial parents’ access to and visitation of 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 pickup) and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.

    In Trumbull, OHIO — very recently — a young girl (13 months old) was RAPED by both her parents in a supervised visitation facility; which was discovered not by the supervising facility (obviously) but by a relative who caught images on the cell phone. The same mother’s prior daughter, “Tiffany” had been snatched by the foster care system at birth, and — in a foster home with mother and father — had been in 2009, killed by ‘asphyxiation associated with blunt trauma.”  This was not a custody situation, but a CPS-type situation. . . . .

    To show their appreciation for reporting something they had missed, the system ALSO took the two-year old son of the relative who did the right thing and reported — called the police, disowned the relative who had perpetrated this horror.  Ohio is up in arms about this, and I have a post in draft format exploring how the funding works in OHIO to enable this kind of “protection” of children.  I found out that (speaking of incentives to break up families — while HHS pays other people to strengthen them) the Ohio DJFS (Dept of Job & Family Services) or whatever it’s called, got $206 MILLION — in 2011 alone — for Adoption Incentives, and $191 MILION for Foster Care (or vice versa).  Maybe these were support payments to foster care families and not just incentives, but the amount clearly trounced other payments under the same DUNS# for this major department.

    All the fatherhood fundings seem to come to this dept. as well as the access visitation fundings.  I found it tied into the Marriage Education stream as well, at the sate level, and linked to a TENNESSEE group selling curricula, a (nonprofit?) called FIRST THINGS FIRST.  The item in question was trying to encourage black families to get and stay married, specifically.  I think OHIO is a bit afraid of black people; they should move to East or West Coast (or Chicago) and “get real!” vs. trying to regulate breeding behaviors through selling marriage education!

    Let me quote this 1999 HHS Action Transmittal (of a final rule regulating access/visitation grants) — because it’s not a half-bad summary, or birds-eye view of how some of these programs (including the healthy marriage system also) really got entrenched and became the norm:

    AT-9907, Issued April 28, 1999

    History of Federal Involvement in Access and Visitation

    The Federal financial involvement in access and visitation began when the Family Support Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-485) authorized up to $4 million each year for fiscal years 1990 and 1991 for State demonstration projects to develop, improve, or expand activities designed to increase compliance with child access provisions of court orders.

    Typically the process of encouraging someone to comply with a court order is contained right in the legal process.  You file a contempt order with the court, and the judge rules on this, or sanctions someone.  What necessity was there to develop programs to “encourage” U.S. citizens to comply with rule of law, or a court order?  I do not believe this could’ve been the genuine purpose, just the alleged purpose.  Designing programs to manipulate people’s behavior is manipulation, period. using public money to do so, I say, is wrong.  We EXPECT people to adhere to a common standard, and then use the existing state and local court systems, so all know what the standards are, and there can be a common expectation of ethics.  Alas, this system was much more distant from the people affected (i.e. voted on in washington; but some of us live on the other coast).

    The legislation required an evaluation of these projects and a Report to Congress on the findings. In October 1996, the Department of Health and Human Services transmitted to Congress the report entitled, “Evaluation of the Child Access Demonstration Projects”. The report indicated that requiring both parents to attend mediation sessions and developing parenting plans was successful for cases without extensive long-term problems.

    In September, 1996, the U.S. Commission on Child and Family Welfare submitted a report to the President and Congress which strongly endorsed additional emphases at all government levels, especially State and local levels, to ensure that each child from a divorced or unwed family have a parenting plan which encourages and enables both parents to stay emotionally involved with the child(ren).

    Finally, PRWORA added a new provision at section 391 to award funds annually to States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate non-custodial parents’ (fathers or mothers) access to, and visitation of, their children. Activities funded by this program include mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision, neutral drop-off and pickup), development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements. States may administer programs directly or through contracts or grants with courts, local public agencies, or nonprofit private entities; States are not required to operate such programs on a statewide basis. Under this provision, the amount of the grant to be made to the State shall be the lesser of 90 percent of State expenditures during the fiscal year for activities just described or the allotment to the State for the fiscal year. The Federal government will pay for 90 percent of project costs, up to the amount of the grant allotment. In other words, States are required to provide for at least ten percent of project funding even if they do not spend their entire allotment. The allotment would be determined as follows: an amount which bears the same ratio to $10,000,000 for grants as the number of children in the State living with only 1 biological parent bears to the total number of such children in all States. Such allotments are to be adjusted so that no State is allotted less than $50,000 for fiscal years 1997 and 1998 or $100,000 for any succeeding fiscal year.

    As you can see, Congress wants these programs in operation. As it says, they are directed towards fathers (admittedly then, and probably still (though less so now, about 15 years later) who are the main noncustodial parents and ones paying child support (although — is anyone keeping track??))  So right here, unknown to me (I was in a marriage, getting assaulted at the time, like many other women), my government was setting up programs to encourage INCREASING noncustodial parent time beyond whatever we would eventually decide ourselves, without these programs’ involvement.

    Personal/Anecdotal re:  Mediation:

    This also resulted — in my case — of going straight to mandated mediation upon a restraining order having been made permanent, and in that condition (while I was still in shock, and probably he was also) a court order was figured out in a VERY short time frame (one appointment), where I was not in shape to protect my boundaries, informed of the access visitation programs, or knowledgeable even about the rules of court for DV cases.  Our mediation almost completely defeated the prime stipulations of the restraining order.  Bad idea!   But because a restraining order was such a huge leap, at the time, our family didn’t know what it’d just been cheated out of, on the basis of anticipation that their father was going to bail out on child support (before any was really set, even!), and needed more policy to encourage him to pay.

    Here is how this Action Transmittal responds to comments raised by DV advocates, or at least some, as to safety issues.  Please note that this is 1999, and only NOW has any provision whatsoever regarding safety to the custodial parent been raised:

    Comment: There was a concern among commenters that the regulation contains no requirement to monitor whether States are screening potential clients for domestic violence (spousal or child abuse) to ensure that the battered spouse is not put at further risk.

    In 2006 (10 years later) and in countless instances inbetween, a woman was murdered during an exchange of children.  However, as her husband had buried her, and no body was found, it was an unusual high-profile trial:  Two children (6 & 8) were there when she was murdered during the routine, court-ordered exchange.  Finally, the man was convicted, and as part of his plea-bargain, helped the police by leading them to the (shallow grave) 3 miles from his home:  Hans & Nina Reiser case.   DastardlyDads blogspot keeps count (I couldn’t handle doing this, have no idea how the person in question does):  see (February 2011 post)

    175 Killer Dads: Fathers who ended their children’s lives in situations involving child custody, visitation, and/or child support (USAAn update to our previous 76 Killer Dads, 88 Killer Dads, and 138 Killer Dads lists.

    “This is NOT a comprehensive list of all U.S. fathers who have killed their children in situations involving domestic violence and/or child abuse. This list is limited to articles I have found where there is an identifiable child custody, visitation, and/or child support angle in the children’s deaths. Even then, I can’t claim that this is a comprehensive list of child custody, visitation, and or child-support- related murders. Quite often, newspaper articles just don’t provide enough information to make a judgment call.”
    This person was simply reading the newspaper accounts, and keeping a count.  Notice — PLENTY from 2008 – 2010.  There is no question that the presence of these access and visitation grants  enabled and encouraged some very bad behaviors, such as murder.  It has also made it nearly impossible for marriages which really should have been split up and NOT have continued involvement by a perpetrator of violence upon mother Or child(ren) — to become separate entitities.
     Why?  Because sometimes the child support arrears literally extorts the father into waging a custody battle he may not even want.
    Recently (for Pete’s sake!) an assistant deputy attorney (I forget exact title), a mother working for the California Attorney General, had her little girl abducted on a court-ordered (?) visitation, and despite her frantic calls to get the baby back, FBI didn’t issue the Amber Alert (per procedures to WAIT LONGER when it’s parental involvement) and there was a murder -suicide.  GUESS WHAT:  THIS POLICY ENABLED THAT (Samaan/Fay).  If even someone working in this arm of government cannot save her own child’s life, what have we come to?
    IF they do persuade/encourage/facilitate (or bribe) fathers to pay child support better, or GOOD Dads to be more involved with their children in cases where there were BAD, VISITATION-OBSTRUCTING MOMS (and NOT prior abuse, violence, or threats in the relatioship) —
    ANYHOW, here was the 1999 response to what I’d call women’s rights organizations to this policy and these grants:

    Response: We share the concerns for safety expressed by commentators who wrote about domestic violence.

    No they don’t.  Not really.  I do not believe the people responding here were themselves in situations where a life was at risk, possibly theirs, possibly their offspring’s, around custody issues.  If it had been, the response would’ve been less “detached” and “handsoff” in nature:

    Access and visitation by a non-custodial parent can lead to dangerous situations for some parents and their children. The safety of the custodial parents and their children must be addressed when it is a problem.

    CAN?  It already had been; the wording should have been “has led.”  And “dangerous situations” doesn’t use the word “lethal” in any way, which it should’ve.

    But — because of child suppport ,and because of child psychologist reports about continuing contact, there MUST be no complete separation from the criminally behaving parent.

    It is our intent to encourage States to ensure safety when necessary in implementing grants under this program. States should develop procedures to assess the degree of danger, weighing sensitively the assertions of both parents.

    “Weighing sensitively” replaces, evaluating the truth of . .. But the, we’re talking family courts…..

    In response to the comments, we have added to the regulation a new requirement under Sec. 303.109(a) requiring States to monitor programs to safeguard against domestic violence, as follows: “(a) Monitoring. The State must monitor all programs funded under Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs to ensure that the programs * * * contain safeguards to ensure the safety of parents and children.”

    Comment: Several commenters suggested that the regulation require specific approaches for addressing problems that may occur in activities funded by these grants. Concerns were noted regarding mandated mediation and supervised transfer and visitation of children.

    Response: Since we wish to provide maximum flexibility to the States, we have not required specific approaches to dealing with issues of domestic violence. Consistent with our authority under the Statute to regulate what the States need to monitor, we require States to monitor their grantees to ensure that there are procedures in place and being used to ensure safety.

    Regarding mandated mediation, we wish to make clear that the statute does not mandate mediation for any particular clients. Mediation mandated by the courts for contending parents is one service that the States may chose to fund. We recognize that in some cases, mediation may be dangerous for the victim of abuse. There is also evidence that in some cases involving partner abuse, mediation has been effective. This is a service that warrants careful monitoring by States to ensure that safety assessments are conducted. When it is determined not to be warranted, alternative forms of conflict resolution should be used.

    Alternative forms of conflict resolution, most likely involving the same stable of family law mediation providers, i.e., AFCC personnel who tend to minimize DV and discredit it.

    EVALUATION OF CHILD ACCESS PROJECTS 

    This “Evaluation of the Child Access Demonstration Projects,” I have read.  Highlights from this one, published by HHS, acknowledge that the purpose is SPECULATION that more access might mean more child support payments — however, also cites child psychology as it being better for the child to have contact with both children.  This being in 1996, and two short years after the Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) passed, failure to mention it is notable.  Responding to “fathers’ rights groups” IS mentioned:

    Purpose

    As set forth in the Family Support Act of 1988, this evaluation explored the effect of two waves of Child Access Demonstration projects on the amount of time required to resolve access disputes; reductions in litigation related to access disputes; improvements in compliance with court-ordered child support amounts; and promotion of the emotional adjustment of children. It also assessed the extent and nature of child access disputes as well as parental satisfaction with the demonstrations.

    Background

    Recent research in child psychology shows generally that close, frequent, and positive contact with the father following divorce and separation is beneficial for the child.

    Child access is also important for child support enforcement. Recent Census data and research studies have indicated that where noncustodial parents have visitation rights or joint custody they tend to be more compliant with child support orders, although it is difficult to show cause and effect since the parents wanting to see the child may also be the better payers. Desire for increased child contact may follow child support payment rather than vice versa. Moreover, denial of visitation is seen {{by _ _ _ _ _ _ _??}} as the major reason for nonpayment of child support for noncustodial parents who have money to pay child support.

    Whatever the reason is, the person is noncompliant.  Trying to set up programs to “get inside their head” as to why is based on some philosophy, I guess, that it’s more important to please noncompliant parents (NB, at the time, primarily fathers) than to establish — for both parties and for stability for the kids — an expectation that a court order is a court order.  Same for visitation.

    There has been considerable pressure {{from fathers and fathers’ groups}} for the system to give support to the needs of noncustodial as well as custodial parents.

    In 1996, it’s obvious that then-President Clinton’s 1995 Executive Order to incorporate more ‘Fatherhood” in federal agencies was already out there.  No mention of this seems real odd.

    Over 43 States authorize joint custody. There are currently over 200 court-based divorce mediation programs and over 280 fathers’ rights groups organized throughout the country to facilitate child access by noncustodial parents.

    Of course there are!  The Children’s Rights Council (Maryland) had been around since the 1980s; and the HHS itself had just provided a tidy grant to start the National Fatherhood Initiative aslo.  Regarding “over 200 court-based divorce mediation programs”  — the organization most pushing mediation has been the AFCC.

    A co-founder of AFCC includes Jessica Pearson (hear tell, see NAFCJ.net, also her name is on at least one of its earlier incorporations in California, from Denver; I’ve posted it more than once on-line here).  This report was done by

    Congress responded to the continuing public debate about the problem of noninvolvement by noncustodial parents and resulting litigation by directing HHS to conduct State demonstration projects relating to a variety of means of facilitating continuing involvement by the noncustodial parent.

    In 1996 a new Federal grant program for child access and visitation programs was established nationwide.  (etc.   . . . You can read it. . .. )

    CHILD ACCESS AND VISITATION:  PROMISING PROCEDURES

    This is a later (after 2002) summary bearing the typical evaluation credit:  Center for Policy Research / Policy Studies, Inc. (both in Denver).

    Its writers (compilers, I gather) are Jessica Pearson and David Price, for the respective agencies.  I’ve profiled both these corporations plenty on the blog and associated Dr. Pearson clearly with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.  Its language is apparent here, in discussion A/V funding when it comes to “high-conflict families.”  I think this section pretty much Says it All — in describing the largest court system in the country (California’s) zero mention is made of the phrase “domestic violence.”  Notice the substitutionary words, applied to BOTH parents, not just one.  THey are viewed as a unit, and not as individuals:

    The phrase “high-conflict” is used 40 times (approximately once every 4 pages on averate) and an entire chapter is devoted to how to deal with such, “parents.”

    SECTION 3 SERVICES FOR HIGH-CONFLICT FAMILIES

    “To investigate and provide long-term access assistance to families with entrenched disputes and/or serious allegations of parental misconduct, using a variety of court-ordered services.”

    “serious allegations of parental misconduct” clearly puts said misconduct into the “behavioral” realm and not criminal.  Readers should understand that the authors, by association, would consider “parental alienation” serious misconduct, as well as alleging or reporting, or having allowed a child to report, any serious misconduct.  There are no moral values or standards outside the dispute resolution industry here, apparently:

    INTRODUCTION

    Brief investigations by trained court personnel when parents exhibit high conflict behavior, with recommendations to the court on needed services.

    It is not necessary to conduct any extended investigation, or read reports of non-court personnel, such as police reports, or CPS reports.

    Translation:  This is a “Catch-22.”  If there HAS been “serious parental misconduct” it is going to cause conflict — unless one parent can be extorted or intimidated into silence (which this system helps do). . . .  NO reference to ascertaining the cause of it shows up.  The knee-jerk solution is tell the court to “recommend needed services”

    I will translate this formula for driving business to related professionals, or court-affiliated nonprofits another time here:

    ANY CONFLICT is an excuse to INCREASE BILLABLE HOURS (whether to Title IV_D provided, or force the parent(s) to pay) to some “SERVICE.”

    SECTION 3 SERVICES FOR HIGH-CONFLICT FAMILIES

    INTRODUCTION

    More approaches listed (on this page, anyhow):

    • Multi-session, psycho-educational interventions for parents for whom domestic violence has been an issue, with the objective of helping them parent apart and understand the dynamics of domestic violence.
    • Monthly meetings and/or telephone contact on a more frequent basis with mental health professionals to resolve ongoing issues and disputes about access
    • Explanatory materials on supervised visitation and exchange services for parents and providers in many languages.
    • Supervised exchange services for families who display conflict during drop-off and pick-up of the children
    • Supervised visitation services for families with allegations of domestic violence, abuse, and/or other forms of parental misconduct or conflict.
    • ␣␣ Teaching inexperienced parents how to interact with their children during supervised visits by providing instruction and feedback.**
    • ThedevelopmentofastandingorderofthePresidingJudgeoftheFresnoCountySuperior Court that police can invoke requiring parents to use supervised visitation services if the police are called out two or more times to assist with the exchange of the children.␣␣ Thedevelopmentofa12-weekcurriculumfornever-married,separated,ordivorcedparents where domestic violence has been an issue.

    (**aka, do not rape, etc.)

    A 12-week curriculum for domestic violence?  (There are 52-week batterers intervention programs, and they aren’t even proven effective…excepting getting out of a jail sentence for DV)

    the word “mother” occurs 42 times and “father” more than 100 times.   The document is well worth reading to understand how the court “thinks” about parents walking into its doors, while providing services that the federal government (as of the late 1990s) pays 90% of the expenses for, and that any state paying less than $100K for statewide services will still get $100K for statewide services anyhow.

    I have not tracked to what extent this program has been expanded, or the Administration hopes to expand payments for it as of 2012.  I have stomach issues and it’s early in the day, might need to keep any meals down  . . .

    David A. Price is a very interesting professional: He publishes consistently opposite the CPR group, and/or with Jane Venohr, Ph.D. (who has been staff in both CPR & PSI), for example, in Colorado:

    Multiple Initiatives Grant

    Notice the authors.  (Thoennes is also CPR).   In the selection above, the piece citing David Price has credit like this:

    Jane Venohr, Ph.D.

    David Price, Ph.D.

    Policy Studies Inc.

    999 18th Street, Suite 1000

    Denver, CO 80202

    (303) 863-0900

    (on the left — and on the right side, is CPR)

    Esther Griswold, M.A., Center for Policy Research 1570 Emerson Street Denver, CO 80218 (303) 837-1555

    However, Jane Venohr has been (from the start?  Certainly for a long time) “CPR” — she is one of the 3 key leaders, out of 6 women listed in “About Us.”

    Jane Venohr, Ph.D., Research Associate

    jvenohr@centerforpolicyresearch.org

    Dr. Venohr has over 20 years of experience assessing and researching Medicaid, child care, child support, and other health and human services and workforce programs. She is the nation’s leading expert on child support guidelines and has worked with over 25 states to develop and update guidelines and present them to legislatures.

    So for purposes of the study, Jane wore her PSI had with Mr. Price, and someone else wore the CPR had.  This is common among AFCC-personnel; if you don’t know the common association, you just don’t know.  Perhaps in all professions, but I sure notice it among the court’s.   ALSO, in Colorado, “David A. Price” is only associated with two corporations, one of which (he) voluntarily dissolved in 2008, apparently, namely, a law firm:

    Found 2 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1.
    # Name Address Type Count
    1 PRICE, DAVID A. 930 ACOMA ST., #415, DENVER, CO
    80204, US
    Registered Agent 1
    2 PRICE, DAVID A. 200 GRAND AVE STE 315, GRAND
    JUNCTION, CO 81501, US
    Registered Agent 1

    The first one was formed (note) in 1984, and he has been filing consistently — unlike many marriage grantees– even this past month! It’s also a nonprofit.

    Found 1 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1.
    # ID # Click here to sort in ascending order. Entity Name Entity Type Date Filed Entity Status
    1 19871583603  CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES Nonprofit Corporation 08/15/1984 GOOD

    I believe I have pointed this out before, but Policy Studies Inc. has 12 trade names, many of them relating to child support; (always) notice the dates of incorporation:

    Found 1 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1.
    # Name Click here to sort in ascending order. Address Type Count
    1 POLICY STUDIES INC. 1515 WYNKOOP ST STE. 400, DENVER,
    CO 80202, US
    Trade name Registrant 12 
    [Next 2>]
    Found 12 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 2.
    # ID NumberClick here to sort in ascending order. 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:

    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

    The “Parent Opportunity Programs” have been studied, noted as problemmatic for mothers, by National Alliance of Family Court Judges (Liz Richards).

    The El Paso County Child Support Services site has a section on this, what appears to be an access-visitation-funded program, one would think from the description:

    This would seem to be a government site, judging by the phrase “El Paso County” and how official it looks.  However the URL is clearly  a *.com:

    http://www.elpasocountycss.com/services.html

    By Contrast, for example, Jefferson County, CO child support site is clearly a government site (see url http://co.jefferson.co.us/cse/index.htm)  Notice, central to the site:

    Jefferson County Child Support Enforcement Home Page!

    Fatherhood Program 

    Learning to be the best dads we can be!

    The purpose of the Fatherhood Program is to provide education and support for those individuals desiring to enrich their lives and their child(ren) while providing peer based engagement, motivation and indefinite support to individual fathers and families.  These fathers will be educated about practical parenting styles and skills.  Emphasis will be placed on the critical need for fathers to be active in parenting their children {{Access & Visitation…}} as well as serving as positive role models for other children in our communities.  The Fatherhood Program will assist dads to identify and overcome barriers they face in maintaining an active role in their children’s lives,{{also code for access and visitation, possibly including help modifying support or custody orders}} becoming and remaining current on financial obligations to their children, and finding on-going support in the community.
    Through a case planning process, a dad’s strengths will be identified, opportunities evaluated and discussed, and a simple written plan formulated.  The plan will identify the responsiblity of the dad and the responsibility theFatherhood Case Manager in implementing the plan.

    The  ‘Fatherhood Case Manager’ is listed as a DHHS employee:

    “The Fatherhood Program of Jefferson County is a program initiative of The Jefferson County Child Support office and is funded by a grant from the State of Colorado Division of Colorado Works made possible by a grant from The Administration of Children and Families Office of Family Assistance.”  (ACF/OFA, meaning, probably, National).  “Colorado WOrks” is no doubt their welfare program).”  Suppose a noncustodial mother hits this page?  We do exist, even as the silent minority!)

    SEE HOW THIS WoRKS, yet?  LInks to, for example:

    WEBSITES

    www.coloradodads.org
    www.familiesfirstcolorado.org

    . . .(I explored this site a bit, which includes a home for abused children, and “Circle of Parents(TR), which also turns out to be HHS/OFA funded:

    Families First received a Partners for Kids: United Hands Make the Best Families Responsible Fatherhood sub- award grant from the national Circle of Parents® office, to provide training and technical assistance to these two sites. The project is funded by the U.S. DHHS, Office of Family Assistance.

    http://www.circleofparents.org/about_us/fatherhood.html

     

    “Mission Statement : Prevent child abuse and neglect and strengthen families through mutual self-help parent support groups.”

    Anything HHS-funded and purporting to prevent child abuse is likely to do this by promoting father involvement . . .  It’s how the cookie crumbles:

    About Circle of Parents: Fatherhoodphoto of dad and baby

    FATHERHOOD.GOV
    Checkout the new Fatherhood Newsletters
    Webinar: Father Factor in Children’s Health
    August 2011; Time: 1:19:29

    In 2006 Circle of Parents received a grant from the Office of Family Assistance to implement a comprehensive training, technical assistance and community access project to aid local home visiting programs in the provision of support and education to new and expectant fathers. Parents as Teachers, Nurse-Family Partnership, Healthy Families America, Early Head Start and/or Healthy Start homed visiting programs in the states of Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin received $50,000 each to begin services to expecting and new fathers. The project is being implemented in partnership with the Circle of Parents National Network, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Conscious Fathering Program™ of Parent Trust for Washington Children, PACT Law Center, Prevent Child Abuse America and Leslie Starsoneck, a domestic violence expert. **  

     CIRCLE OF PARENTS RECEIVED $4,800,000 IN “Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Program” funding from the OFA from 2006 through 2010, a five-year period.  The first two years, a flat $900K each, then each subsequent year $1,000,000.   Here it is, all = award 90FR0098.  (Found in 3 minutes — I didn’t think of it on first posting — taggs.hhs.gov / award search / selected Year 2011/cfda 93086, and scanned the (178) results).  This group shows no 2011 award, but its presence in the list shows prior awards.

    Circle of Parents®   EIN 800106957

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    CIRCLE OF PARENTS  CHICAGO IL 60611-3777 COOK 623444994 $ 4,800,000

    The “Chicago” connection makes me wonder whether Jeffrey Leving is involved.  (See FFCA conferences, a large part of which each year appears to be drooling over (and coordinating how to get) the next round of fatherhood funding from whichever HEAD representative from the HHS/ACF shows up to remind them, “Who’s Your Daddy?” when it comes to caring about them enough to donate public funding from US Taxpayers (of both genders).

    Here’s the Tax Return signed 4/15/2011 by CEO Cynthia R. Savage, with a very moderate salary (for the field) of $73K.  Then again, most if it apparently comes from grants taken away from TANF to start with, or other HHS funds used to promote fatherhood, after setting up organization after organization with websites and other “technical assistance” to dominate the PR on a topic, and sell trainings or curricula, usually.

    Revenue (that year):

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    Circle of Parents IL 2010 $65,404 990 31 80-0106957
    Circle of Parents IL 2009 $68,336 990 25 80-0106957
    Circle of Parents IL 2008 $52,969 990 28 80-0106957
    Circle of Parents IL 2007 $26,843 990 25 80-0106957
    Circle of Parents IL 2006 $83,638 990 24 80-0106957
    Circle of Parents IL 2005 $16,914 990 18 80-0106957
    Circle of Parents IL 2004 $3,803 990 25 80-0106957

    Here’s one project of the group (note the format, graphics, high-quality media) that directly states it was funded by the above grant #90FR0098):

    http://issuu.com/dadsofdouglascounty/docs/dadsgroupflyers

    it is from Douglas County, KANSAS and designed to make Dads feel more comfortable in toddler playgroups, including a section called “DADDY & ME.”

    NOTE:  KANSAS was making news at a petition site recently:  Topeka has declared it cannot afford even its domestic violence laws any more, they are too expensive, it is decriminalizing domestic battery, expecting the county to pick up the slack.  I kid you not:

    Suspected domestic abusers go free as Topeka city, county officials bicker over funds.  Oct 4, 2011, Liz Goodwin.

     For a perspective, Google “Claudine Dombrowski” on my site — I have posted some of her court docket on there, and related the time when she was arrested for not bleeding after a severe assault, in the right county.  Actually she wasn’t reporting, simply seeking treatment at the time.  One of the assaults involved a crowbar, and this particular case has made it (along with Jessica Gonzales Lenahan) to the IACHR, as human rights violation perpetrated by the United States on its citizens.  The handling of this type of violence throughout the land has been resulting in — eventually, and in many, many cases — simply switching custody to the offender and letting the victim go repeatedly to court to fight for contact, while trying to stay sane in knowledge of who is caring for her kids, and (sometimes unsuccessfully) alive.   Another article on this topic.    NOTE:   TOPEKA IS THE CAPITAL OF KANSAS.  NOTE #2 — the head of the HHS department came from Kansas.
    {{An acquaintance of mine forwarded the article (which I knew about), and said she’d submitted a comment, responding to a petition on this matter, that funding be found to allow the Women and Children of the state of Kansas to leave the state, for their own safety.}}

    This article from “The Nation” sites the recent “Seal Beach, California” shooting — around a custody dispute.  The ex-wife and 7 bystanders were murdered. Obviously, what’s needed is more promotion of “responsible” fatherhood to counter murderous fathers.  It is more important to let Dads know how to feel comfortable while pushing strollers and at parks, than to stop that insanity!

    [Tagline:] Topeka, Kansas, decriminalized domestic violence to save money. It’s not the only city to cut services to survivors of abuse, just as the need escalates.

    After Chad Taylor, the district attorney of Shawnee County in Topeka, Kansas, had his budget cut by the County Commission last month, he announced that he no longer had the financial resources to pursue misdemeanor domestic violence cases, essentially handing them off to the city. The City Council, in turn, voted last week to decriminalize domestic violence so that it didn’t have to pay up. This put the ball back in Taylor’s court; he now says he will review cases sent to him by Topeka police and pursue them on a case-by-case basis. During the game of hot potato, suspected abusers walked free—reports range from eighteen to thirty people. Happy Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

    Explained from “The Horse’s Mouth” — in yet another multi-color, logo-decorated newsletter (Date August, 2011):

    PARTNERS FOR KIDS:  GETTING FATHER-READY

    Karen Schrader, Training and TA manager for Circle of Parents:

    In 2006, Circle of Parents applied for and received one of (only) Five “Responsible Fatherhood Community Access” grants from the HHS/OFA.  She specifically mentions connections to “FamiliesFirst” in Colorado, two Dads in particular being among their national leadership, but until this ($900K grant, probably part of a 4-year agreement) they weren’t “specifically focused on fatherhood.”  HOWEVER, “the grant provided the opportunity to move the ‘cultural norm’ of our Circle of Parents network, and the ‘cultural norm” of local community-based/faith-based home visitation programs  farther along the continuum of engaging and supporting fathers.”

    Provided the opportunity?  Translation:  We took the grant, and so agreed to tailor it towards fathers…..  LIke they’d wanted to all along, but not having access to free HHS funds was hampering their ability to change the culture of the organization.  (How much “culture” and a 2-year old organization have, to start with? MORE LIKELY — the organization was formed with a view to this in mind, and very much with an awareness of the HHS funding streams available. Only the 990s would tell, most likely, though.

    NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE INFLUENCE in a $4.8 million national networked nonprofit discovered with links directly to (at a minimum) Colorado Child Support Enforcement site.

    One of our strategic objectives was focused on changing the organization’s cultural norms around embracing fathers. The National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI), experts in the fatherhood field, joined forces with Circle of Parents to help show us the way. We needed to assess where each grantee was on the scale of father-friendliness.

    is called fawning, obsequious pandering to whoever has the money, and probably conflict of interest, too.  It’s disgusting!   The sole purpose of this organization appears to be transforming LOCAL groups into so-called “father-friendliness.”   The Executive Order that endorsed this activity, in 1995, came from a philandering Democratic President with a history financial corruption preceding the PResidency (i.e., “Clintongate,”) and with need of a personal cleanup crew to handle that philandering.  This is the SAME LANGUAGE 15 years later.

    Each local and state grantee completed a father-friendly check-up assessment and created an action plan to increase their abilities to engage fathers.

    Knowing that organizational change was important when we wrote the grant, Circle of Parents created a multi-level training and technical assistance system to assist the Network state and local grantees in becoming more father-friendly. In addition to NFI, expert consultants such as a domestic violence professional with experience in working with males and Bernie Dorsey of the Con- scious Fathering Program of Parent Trust for Washington Children, were engaged to provide much-needed direction and guidance. By year 3 it became clear that we needed to be more intentional in our efforts. We added additional training events and technical assistance focused on not only organizational assessment, but also staff self-assessment. If organizations are going to change their cultural norms, the staff must make personal changes as well. Circle of Parents’ commitment to father outreach and engagement will continue long after the grant ends in September. In this issue, we’ve focused on North Carolina as one illustration of the far reaching impact of this grant both on the state and local levels.

    Karen Schrader took $50,100 as Program Administrator from the over $1 million of government grants (i.e., money taken from poor households food stamps, cash aid, or children’s child support / enforcement) to act as a talking head for the NFI policy set up in 1994, when this group got a conflict-of-interest-type grant from HHS, having a co-founder that was then WORKING for the HHS.  (Wade Horn, to my recall).

    The third employee was paid $34,000 — would support most single-parent families adequately most places in the US — if they were NOT constantly dragged into father-friendly high-conflict custody ligitation, thanks to programs like this — to support the talk and promotion of this one group.  Membership dues one year, $13,000.  That might go a long ways to supporting a family, or helping a family get some of its infrastructure in place (like transportation) to enable access to work. Or medical care, you name it.   $642K of this $1Million plus was given away to other organizations.  Father-friendly ones only, I”m sure . . .  $217K was, again, salaries and benefits to do this; $31K in travel (wouldn’t YOU like to have a $31K travel budget?) and in IRS form Part IX, “Statement of Functional Expenses” they have nothing under “Professional Fundraising” (who needs it, with this kind of a HHS grant backing!), but  $162K in “other program expenses,” meaning, expenses directly related to doing their program.  Of course, their “program” is to transform the culture of (whoever they interact with) to become more father-friendly to start with . . ..    

    Their “Program Accomplishments” are generic, and out of $1,189,089 expenses for accomplishing them, $1,054,454, or over50%, were via government grant, and in the process, said “program accomplishments” produced around $5k revenue as well.  Details for this $1.1 million of expenses (note, the average Circle of Parents(tr) HHS grant was $1 million, so if I were the HHS (and thought anyone was watching), I would want some account of where it went.

    990 reads:  “See Schedule O” (usually attached to the end of the tax return).   “

    Did the organization complete Schedule O — is checked “No.”

    AS SUCH — this is a TYPICAL GRANTEE . . . .  Incorporated shortly before some new uptick in fatherhood / marriage funding, sustained and set up almost entirely by it, and with the primary emphasison “Technical Assistance & Training” which I translated as “PR” and “Web site support.” plus conferences, training, membership fees to do it YOUR way (insert brand name  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  ).     990s are VERY interesting, and often tell a different story and the front face of the organization, although Karen Schrader was astonishingly honest about “just what” Circle of Parents(tr) really is.

    Of course, I picked up on it immediately from their website, because they aren’t the only organization transformed into father-friendly by HHS infusions.

    The newsletter – JUNE 2011 — was posted at the link “SMART START & NORTH CAROLINA PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN, Inc.”

    What is Smart Start?

    Smart Start was created in 1993 as an innovative solution to a problem: Children were coming to school unprepared to learn.”

    Their FUNDERS page speaks loudly — it’s basically a laundry list of organizations that also do fatherhood promotion, plus a pharmaceutical, a tutoring program (Kaplan), a school supply, and (last year) over $1 million from W.K. Kellogg Foundation.  Oh yes — and the Z.Smith Reynolds Foundation which Domestic Violence advocate & public policy influencer Ms. Starosek worked for, above . . ..

    CIRCLE OF PARENTS(tr)

       USASPENDING.GOV — as I have to say, seems habitual — is not reporting one of these $900K grants (the 2006 one, even though USASPENDING.gov has time slots back to 2000 for its data), and only 4 out of 5 awards, resulting in:

    • Total Dollars:$3,900,000
    • Transactions:1 – 4 of 4
     However, if one takes the DUNS# above and looks, it’s clear that the source of some of this is definitely TANF funding, i.e., welfare.
    The office (reported on USASPENDING.gov) being “500 North Michigan, Chicago, IL” right downtown Chicago, on “The Magnificent Mile,” I’m going to look this up further, right now.  (That address also contains a virtual office, including some consulates, etc.)
    ILLINOIS says, it’s in good standing, and incorporated, as a nonprofit, on April 20 2004.

    Its listed as a partner on this group:  “FRIENDS,” or “NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY-BASED CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION” out of Chapel Hill, NC:   (800 Eastowne Dr., Ste. 105, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, to be precise).  I am thinking this is another nonprofit formed to accommodate or appropriate another HHS-originated policy & grant to go with it.

    FRIENDS is an acronym for Family Resource Information, Education, and Network Development Service.

    FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP) is a service of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. We are a federally mandated Training and Technical Assistance Provider for CBCAP lead agencies.

    How is FRIENDS National Resource Center for CBCAP funded?

    FRIENDS National Resource Center for CBCAP (FRIENDS) is funded under a cooperative agreement with the Children’s Bureau to provide training and technical assistance to designated CBCAP Lead Agencies and Set-Aside Grantees. For more information about the Children’s Bureau, please see their web site.

    SO, certain groups (probably including “circle of Parents” with its $4.8 Million “Promote Responsible Fatherhood” grant) are “SET-ASIDE GRANTEES” and the rest of you, good luck getting a foot in the door.   What is CBCAP?  Another acronym leading back to “CAPTA” which appears to lead back to welfare reform, or at least matches the time frame — 2006.   It was reauthorized in 2010, and I bet there are mothers all across the country, in these custody wars, still wondering “what happened?” and why are abusers getting access to children STILL, even when the visitation happens in a supervised visitation center (Trumbull County, OHIO recent:  Convicted juvenile sex offender Dad & Mom take “parenting classes” and get access to their 2nd baby (first one, removed at birth, was beaten to death in foster care before she turned 2), and the facility this happens in “just happens” to be a fairly direct (and statewide) project of — guess what — “OHIO.FATHERHOOD.GOV.”   Gives a whole new meaning to “access and visitation,” not to mention “Parental involvement.”

    What is CBCAP?

    CBCAP stands for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention. It refers to specific types of child abuse prevention programs that exist in every state in the U.S.

    What legislation supports CBCAP?

    The key Federal legislation addressing prevention in child abuse and neglect is the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) which was originally enacted in 1974. This Act has been amended several times in the last 37 years and was most recently amended and reauthorized on December 10th, 2010, by the CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-320).

    Why were CBCAP programs created?

    CBCAP programs were established by Title II of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act Amendments of 1996 and most recently reauthorized in December of 2010.

     

     

     ** For “expert” read “heat shield.”  I linked to her LinkedIn — Ms. Starsonek hails from North Carolina and lists herself as working on this Circle of Parents(tr) “Fatherhood Initiative,” and formerly as a consultant for the NC Administrative Office of the Courts, although it’s clear her public policy experience has focused on “domestic violence/ intimate partner abuse.”   The business is “nonprofit organization management” not “domestic violence advocate.”  A 107 page article on-line here comments on how judges feel about “judicial sensitivity taining” re: domestic violence, i.e., it insults their intelligence to sit through propaganda.  

    A very good summary of her approach in a 2004 article from “Philanthropy Journal,” called “A Voice for Victims,” recommends the usual “integrated approach” and helping agencies get along with each other, gives her personal philosophy and background, and seems a typical system approach:  It does not mention the existence of the AFCC, and attributes failure to protect women & children from getting murdered around custody disputes, plus the suicides apparently to lack of understanding and coordination — rather than any corruption or undue influence within the system.  As such, the solutions are going to be more training and more interagency cooperation.    

     Based in part on recommendations made by a task force coordinated by Starsoneck, a select committee of the N.C. House this year passed what she characterizes as “landmark” domestic-violence legislation. With nearly two-dozen provisions, the law addresses a broad range of topics. It expands legal services for victims of domestic violence, provides for treatment for offenders, addresses the role of schools, and directs the state Department of Health and Human Services to recommend a plan for dealing with victims of domestic violence who have substance-abuse or mental-health problems. The law also bars discrimination by employers against victims of domestic violence who are seeking relief from the courts, ensures safer and more consistent handling of child custody and visitation in domestic violence cases (I’d like to see that!)

    Note:  North Carolina DHS has a “Fatherhood Project” — I don’t suppose any discussion of this comes up in public policy matters affecting child visitation and custody around domestic violence, does it?  For example, informing victims that the field of “Fatherhood” exists?

    WHILE these reports, task forces, and discussions are ongoing, North Carolina — like very other state — continues to have its Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood projects going on (affecting the safety of women & children attempting to leave abuse) and their Access/Visitation Programs as well — run from the Department of Human Resources — (affecting the safety of women & children attempting to leave abuse, and sometimes fathers with children attempting to leave domestic violence (Referring to the physical abuse in particular) as well).  The access/visitation grants ARE the answer to women & children attempting to leave domestic violence, which sometimes casts them upon welfare.  And historically the DV groups rarely report on this, either.  SOMETIMES they do, but never to the point of protesting the expansion of those two policies, which would be like cutting off the hand that feeds the same groups!

    I found 43 grants under two (there are more, but I only searched two) fatherhood-centric grants systems, in NC (all years).  Obviously, from the chart below, the OCSE is administering the Access Visitation (“SAVP”) grants.   (OCSE comes under HHS).  OBVIOUSLY, marriage/fatherhood is being pushed  — or at least “promoted” — through:  Welfare Office, University Level, Community Action Organizations.  I am curious why a “Voice for the Victims” may not be mentioning this consistently throughout a professional development resulting in 127 contacts (in this case).  Without meaning to minimize Ms. Starosek’s career concern about DV issues, she has a educational background of psychology and social science, plus government involvement (contracting and consulting).   She has been active also (per article) in Massachusetts, where AFCC is even listed right on the family court site — twice.  Somehow, this has not caught her attention, and I suspect this is probably because of the associations more with policy-makers and government councils, that people going through the custody-child-removal system enabled by the grants, and the policies behind them.  It is simply an entirely different point of view, and results in an entirely different voice.

    FYI — we can speak.  Victims, unless their larynxes have been injured in an assault — CAN speak.  most I’ve met are articulate (discounting some for the PTSD), and don’t need ongoing interpretation.  They are often adults, and are eyewitnesses of their own experience, and often networked well enough to know others’ common experience. They are often the best voice of what they have consistently experienced, and this voice has been lost.  Federal Policymakers are not INTERESTED in the roadkill to their rhetoric as applied at the state level.  They are interested in maintaining political viability by continuing to get grants for their associates, knowing FULL WELL that there is no adequate oversight, and no real document results in the objectives under which these programs were (improperly) sold to Congress to start with (Welfare Reform 1996).

    (NORTH CAROLINA:  Years, All   CFDAs 93597 (A/V) and 93086 (HM/RF) series).  Circle of Parents, in taking on this DV expert made sure NOt to hear “the voice of the victims” of family court coverup of DV.. . …  ….. , meanwhile complying with federal regulation 45 CFR 303.109 (as to these grants), or at least its sentiment, in taking on a token DV person to lend legitimacy . . . .

    Program Office Grantee Name Grantee Type Award Number Award Title Action Issue Date CFDA Program Name Award Activity Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    ACF CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC Community Action Organization 90FR0001 FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK 09/21/2007 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION SALLIE P SURFACE $ 245,296
    ACF CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC Community Action Organization 90FR0001 FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK 09/14/2008 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION SALLIE P SURFACE $ 245,296
    ACF CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. Welfare Department 90FE0059 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/17/2007 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION CYNTHIA J HARRIS $ 550,000
    ACF CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. Welfare Department 90FE0059 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/14/2008 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION CYNTHIA J HARRIS $ 550,000
    ACF EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY Junior College, College & University 90FE0017 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/20/2007 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL $ 405,528
    ACF EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY Junior College, College & University 90FE0017 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/26/2008 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL $ 525,161
    ACF UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL Junior College, College & University 90FE0094 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 09/20/2007 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ANNE JONES $ 490,465
    ACF UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL Junior College, College & University 90FE0094 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 06/06/2008 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ANNE JONES $ 0
    ACF UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL Junior College, College & University 90FE0094 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 09/22/2008 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ANNE JONES $ 530,482
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0001NCSAVP SAVP 2000 08/22/2000 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 207,273
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0101NCSAVP SAVP 2001 08/23/2001 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 207,273
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0201NCSAVP 2002 SAVP 08/06/2002 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 248,098
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0201NCSAVP 2002 SAVP 09/14/2009 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $- 23,880
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0301NCSAVP 2003 SAVP 09/11/2003 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 248,098
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0301NCSAVP 2003 SAVP 09/14/2009 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $- 30,070
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0401NCSAVP 2004 SAVP 09/15/2004 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 272,566
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0501NCSAVP 2005 SAVP 09/14/2005 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 272,566
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0601NCSAVP 2006 SAVP 09/19/2006 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 268,587
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0701NCSAVP 2007 SAVP 07/20/2007 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 278,157
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0801NCSAVP 2008 SAVP 01/30/2008 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 271,792
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 0901NCSAVP FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 12/23/2008 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 272,258
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 1001NCSAVP FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 11/25/2009 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 279,933
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 1101NCSAVP FY 2011 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION 10/08/2010 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 286,100
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9701NCSAVP SAVP 1997 05/31/1998 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 233,772
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9701NCSAVP SAVP 1997 12/02/1999 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $- 216,494
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9701NCSAVP SAVP 1997 01/04/2000 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 205
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9801NCSAVP 09/01/1998 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 233,772
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9801NCSAVP 02/24/2003 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $- 233,772
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9901NCSAVP 08/16/1999 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $ 207,273
    OCSE NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES Welfare Department 9901NCSAVP 02/25/2003 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs SOCIAL SERVICES $- 132,019
    OFA CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC Community Action Organization 90FR0001 FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK 09/22/2006 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION SALLIE P SURFACE $ 245,296
    OFA CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC Community Action Organization 90FR0001 FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK 08/24/2009 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION SALLIE P SURFACE $ 245,296
    OFA CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC Community Action Organization 90FR0001 FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK 09/24/2010 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION SALLIE SURFACE $ 245,296
    OFA CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. Welfare Department 90FE0059 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/25/2006 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION CYNTHIA J HARRIS $ 550,000
    OFA CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. Welfare Department 90FE0059 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/18/2009 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION CYNTHIA J HARRIS $ 550,000
    OFA CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. Welfare Department 90FE0059 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/24/2010 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION CYNTHIA HARRIS $ 550,000
    OFA EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY Junior College, College & University 90FE0017 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/22/2006 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION DR LINDA ROBINSON $ 514,308
    OFA EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY Junior College, College & University 90FE0017 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/18/2009 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL $ 519,625
    OFA EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY Junior College, College & University 90FE0017 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 09/24/2010 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ELIZABETH CARROLL $ 548,181
    OFA Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc. Other Social Services Organization 90FM0009 COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. 09/27/2011 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION KIMBERLY M KIMBERLY $ 725,000
    OFA UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL Junior College, College & University 90FE0094 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 09/22/2006 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ANNE JONES $ 375,685
    OFA UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL Junior College, College & University 90FE0094 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 09/16/2009 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ANNE JONES $ 538,524
    OFA UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL Junior College, College & University 90FE0094 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 09/24/2010 Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants DEMONSTRATION ANNE JONES $ 550,000
    Results 1 to 43 of 43 matches.

    (THAT was just for effect, and you could find a similar chart in any other state). 

     

    “PARENT TRUST FOR WASHINGTON CHILDREN” logo alerts me to, probably another grant behind this one:  There are only so many icons available showing human figures looped together by a heart, or heart-type logo! . .  Besides, the leading page is “BUILDING STRONG, HEALTHY FAMILIES” which is a government theme.  When it comes to REAL families, somone is a father, someone a mother, someone gives birth (possibly more than once, creating siblings) and the term is “RAISING” my/our children, not BUILDING them!  An entirely different mindset is involved in “BUILDING a family.”  Builders are not the house, they are outside the house!   The house is made out of material they manipulate, according to some master plan, or at least SOME plan.  However, life comeso after childbirth, and from the perspective of the individuals, people GROW, and hopefully good values are instilled, safe places,future hopes, associations — and real, living connections.  The life force from within is the verb “GROW” and the artificial, social-science-focused (i.e., focusing on the theory, policy, or others involved) results in terms like “BUILDING FAMILIES,” (Plural).  Particularly as many of these policies are resulting in partially dead, or wholly dead families (i.e., murder/suicides), wasted years, wasted tax dollars, and time taken out of building their own futures, according to their OWN plans which just may happen to fit their own reality better than an “almost one size fits all” policy from above  . . . . . . (well, you can tell what kind of mood I”m in today on all this mess!) (it’s reall organized, but in practice, it’s messing with other, important realities, like due process in the courts, and the ability to make independent choices, by MOTHERS!)(and, many FATHERS, too!).  

    This one, apparently, is marketing “Professional Trainings” especially “Conscious Fathering”(tr).  Contact your local affiliate to buy it:

    Conscious Fathering’s Creating Parental Balance Trainings:”


    with “DONATE” “WEB STORE” “CONTACT US” (in that order)

     (It took a while to locate, but it’s a project of the Seattle Foundation, self-described as the largest  funder in King’s County) or at least helped by them):  

    Parent Trust for Washington Children 9/10/2010 $15,000.00 support general operating expenses. 

    EIN# 911036940, I’ll check TAGGS (yes, they have been filing, at least):  recorded here under a different name (and no DUNS#)…

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE  SEATTLE WA 98101 KING $ 50,000

    (“Mutual Support” programs?  How about put some of that to tracking down that “undistributable child support collections” held at the state level, no doubt in Washington, like other states!)

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    1998 90CA1648  DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS 1 0 ACF 09-14-1998 $ 50,000 

    There are thousands of “90CA” awards.  To narrow it, I picked 1998, and only WA, D.C. & CA (most projects get tested in CA, why not?) — narrowing it down to 18 awards.  Parents Anonymous apparently got started in California anyhow, and the washington group eventually changed its name:  Here we go, from TAGGS:

    Fiscal Year Program Office Grantee Name State Award Number Award Title Budget Year CFDA Number CFDA Program Name Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    1998  CB  CAL ST LA UNIV AUXILIARY SERVICES, INC CA 90CA1589 PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – FIELD INITIATED RESEARCH ON CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW MITCHELL EISEN, PH.D. $ 9,750
    1998 CB CENTER FOR CHILD PROTECTION & FAMILY SUPPORT DC 90CA1614 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION JOYCE N THOMAS $ 100,000
    1998 CB D.C. CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND DC 90CA1645 DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW CAROLYN S ABDULLAH $ 50,000
    1998 CB EDGEWOOD THE SF PROTESTANT ORPHANAGE CA 90CA1599 PRIORITY AREA 1.03 – INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO KINSHIP CARE OF CHILDREN IN WELFARE SYSTEM 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION LILLIAN JOHNSON $ 199,464
    1998 CB FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO, INC CA 90CA1608 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION ASCENCION HERNANDEZ $ 100,000
    1998 CB FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES OF THE BAY AREA CA 90CA1587 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION PATRICIA CHAMBERS, PH.D $ 150,000
    1998 CB KITSAP BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WA 90CA1609 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION ELIZABETH S BOSCH $ 100,000
    1998 CB LOS ANGELES COUNTY, DEPT OF CHILDREN’S SRVS CA 90CA1594 PRIORITY AREA 1.03 – INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO KINSHIP CARE OF CHILDREN IN WELFAR 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION SHARYN L LOGAN $ 200,000
    1998 CB MARY’S CENTER OF MATERNAL & CHILD CARE DC 90CA1586 PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – HEALTHY FAMILIES DC 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION JOAN YENGO $ 150,000
    1998 CB PARENTS ANONYMOUS  CA 90CA1592 PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – NATIONAL NETWORK OF MUTUAL SUPPORT/SELF HELP PROGRAMS 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION TERESA RAFAEL $ 350,000
    1998 CB PARENTS ANONYMOUS CA 90CA1646 DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW LISA PION-BERLIN $ 50,000
    1998 CB PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE  WA 90CA1648 DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW SYLVIA MEYER $ 50,000
    1998 CB SAN DIEGO COUNTY YMCA CA 90CA1630 PRIORITY AREA 1.04 – SCHOOL-BASED CHILD MALTREATMENT PREVENTION 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW TANYA PHAM $ 100,000
    1998 CB SAN DIEGO COUNTY YMCA CA 90CA1630 PRIORITY AREA 1.04 – SCHOOL-BASED CHILD MALTREATMENT PREVENTION 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION TANYA PHAM $ 100,000
    1998 CB SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, FOUNDATION CA 90CA1566 PRIORITY AREA 1.02R – CONSOR- TIUM FOR LONGITUDINAL STUDIES OF CHILD MALTREATMENT PROJECTS 4 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION ALAN LITROWNIK $ 250,000
    1998 CB STANISLAUS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CA 90CA1601 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW HAROLD R DEARMOND $ 54,725
    1998 CB WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE WA 90CA1590 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 1 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NEW SHERRY C BRUMMEL $ 197,471
    1998 CB WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE WA 90CA1590 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS 2 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION SHERRY C BRUMMEL $ 195,092

    I just looked up “Parents Anonymous” and behold — only CA & AZ show any DUNS#s . . . . the umbrella organizations?  Are they ALL running “Conscious Fathering(tr)” professional training classes, and if so, for how much?  Notice, CA gets the biggest grants…

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS  (earliest grant shown 1995, Budget Year, 2) CLAREMONT CA 91711 LOS ANGELES 090749326 $ 2,828,196
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS   (THIS GRANT IS 2010….) PHOENIX AZ 85014 MARICOPA 119833135 $ 792,550
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS  (THIS GRANT, 1999) PHOENIX AZ 85014 MARICOPA $ 50,000
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF BUFFALO & ERIE COUNTY  BUFFALO NY 14206 ERIE $ 750,000
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF NEW JERSEY, INC.  PRINCETON NJ 08540 MERCER $ 50,000
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF PENNSYLVANIA  HARRISBURG PA 17102 DAUPHIN $ 50,000
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC.  CHARLESTON SC 29416 CHARLESTON $ 50,000
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS ORG. OF MASS., INC.  BOSTON MA 02116 SUFFOLK $ 50,000
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE  SEATTLE WA 98101 KING $ 50,000

     

    Showing: 1 – 9 of 9

    TAKING the DUNS# “090749326” to USASPENDING.gov, we see they have “only” missed over $2 million of grants here:

    • Total Dollars:$697,225
    • Transactions:1 – 2 of 2
    One grant was “discretionary” — and is the National Child Abuse HelpLine (call your local Parenting Anonymous(tr) group  leader???) – 2010
    and the 2007 one was actually even named after this group:
    Recipient: PARENTS ANONYMOUS
    675 W FOOTHILL BLVD STAT 220 , CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA
    Reason for Modification:
    Program Source: 75-1536:Children and Families Services Programs
    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Administration for Children and Families
    CFDA Program : 93.670 : Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities
    Description:
    NATIONAL PARENT HELPLINE
    Date Signed:
    August 22 , 2010Obligation Amount: 
    $500,000
    and

    Transaction Number # 2

    Federal Award ID: U81CE001039: 000 (Grants)
    Date Signed:
    July 02 , 2007 

    Obligation Amount: 
    $197,225

    “parents anonymousa inc.”??  This is supposedly an extension of an earlier grant we don’t see there:

    Obligation / Action Date  07/02/2007
    Starting Date  09/30/2006
    Ending Date  09/29/2008
    R

    BUT, when I omit the DUNS# and just search on the name (in quotes, Prime Award search) I see this — and have to say, just go look yourself:

    • Total Dollars:$18,936,970
    • Transactions:1 – 25 of 25

    This includes more from the Arizona group, and Buffalo and Erie County (NY, PA, I guess).  There are grants or contracts from the Justice Department, and under the term “DRUG-FREE”, as well as (now we know where the term “Strengthening Families” comes from:

    Transaction Number # 1

    Federal Award ID: 98JSFX0001: 03 (Grants)
    Recipient: PARENTS ANONYMOUS
    CLAREMONT
    Reason for Modification:
    Program Source:
    Agency: Department of Justice : Office of Justice Programs
    CFDA Program : 16.541 : Part E – Developing Testing and Demonstrating Promising New Programs
    Description:
    STRENGTHENING AT-RISK FAMILIES ALL ACROSS AMERICA
    Date Signed:
    August 17 , 2000Obligation Amount: 
    $3,000,000

    Transaction Number # 2

    Federal Award ID: 98JSFX000104 (Grants)
    Recipient: PARENT ANONYMOUS
    CLAREMONT
    Reason for Modification:
    Program Source:
    Agency: Department of Justice : Office of Justice Programs
    CFDA Program : 16.541 : Part E – Developing Testing and Demonstrating Promising New Programs
    Description:
    STRENGTHENING AT-RISK FAMILIES ALL ACROSS AMERICA
    Date Signed:
    September 30 , 2001Obligation Amount: 
    $2,993,400

    They are basically THROWING money at this group, and the Arizona branch (again, looking at transaction details, DUNS# is often missing).

    In 2002 (this is from “USASPending.gov”), same program:  they got $2.7 million

    cfda 16;541 comes under ”

    CFDA Program Title  JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION_SPECIAL EMPHASIS AND T/A

    (OK, I finally looked up the project title).   The DOJ awarded a $16 million grant to Parents Anonymous — to try out and assess its own programs!  This is the AUdit Report saying their evaluation was “adequate”!!

    Here they are seeking donations:  Be a Circle of Friends ($500), Patron ($1,000), Hero ($1,500), Champion ($5,000 and get to speak at national conference), or Benefactor ($10,000).  They havent figured out privileges for $10,000 and above yet . . . ..    Contact “Meryl Levine.”  I have a feeling it MAY be this Meryl Levine (from NJ, actually, but look at the details and compare to what Parents ANonymous is doing).  The pay for Parents Anonymous VP was over $100K/year.)

    DO THESE CONNECTIONS have anything to do with getting THOSE grants?

    CALSWEC Standing Committee

    Return to Home  

    Let’s take a look at who “CALSWEC” is, with HQ at UCBerkeley:

    Created in 1990, the California Social Work Education Center (CalSWEC) is a consortium of the state’s 21 accredited social work graduate schools, the 58 county departments of social service and mental health, the California Departments of Social Services (CDSS) and Mental Health (CDMH), the California Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, professional associations, and foundations.

    CalSWEC is the nation’s largest coalition of its kind working to provide professional education, student financial aid, in-service training, and workforce research–all directed toward developing effective, culturally competent public service delivery to the people of California.CalSWEC’s main office is at the University of California, Berkeley.Download a copy of the CalSWEC Fact Sheet (October 2011).

    Ms. Levine is on the “CHILD WELFARE STANDING COMMITTEE” (representing PARENTS ANONYMOUS(tr):
    Child Welfare CommitteeThe Child Welfare Committee is responsible for leading and overseeing curriculum, stipend, and other issues of social work education pertaining to public child welfare. It includes members of the Board and community volunteers interested in child welfare social work. Committee members are listed below.
     
    Committee Chair
    Charlene Reid, Director
    Division of Social Services
    Tehama County Department of Social Services
    Staff
    Barrett Johnson, Director, Child Welfare In-Service Training Project, CalSWEC
    Meryl Levine, Vice President of Development
    Parents Anonymous Inc.
    Viola W. Lindsey
    Department of Social Work and Social Ecology
    Loma Linda University
    Kristina Lavato-Hermann
    School of Social Welfare
    San Francisco State UniversityChristine Mattos
    F&E Steering Committee
    California Department of Social ServicesDavid Meyers, Sr. Attorney
    Center for Families, Children & the Courts

    Administrative Office of the Courts/Judicial Council of California
    Mark Miller, Training Director
    Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family ServicesKate Mortimer, Project Coordinator, Title IV-E Program
    Department of Social Work
    California State University, Northridge
    SEEMS LIKE THEY ARE ASSOCIATING WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE TO GET CHOSEN FOR MAJOR GRANTS . . . . 

    U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General Seal and Site Header

    http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/g9004013.htm

    Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Strengthening At-Risk Families All Across America Grant Awarded to the Parents Anonymous Incorporated, Grant Number 1998-JS-FX-0001, Claremont, California

    Report No. GR-90-04-013
    August 2004
    Office of the Inspector General


    Executive Summary
    The Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division, has completed an audit of a Strengthening At-Risk Families All Across America Grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to Parents Anonymous located in Claremont, California. The purpose of this grant was to build and support strong, safe families in partnership with local communities by utilizing the Parents Anonymous model that helps break the cycle of abuse and delinquency. As of August 20, 2003, Parents Anonymous was awarded a total of $16,673,900 to assess strengths and needs of Parents Anonymous programs. The grant supported national training, technical assistance, outreach, referrals, and program materials and publications. In addition, the grant funded Parents Anonymous’ efforts to design a children’s program model, and a national database system for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information about Parents Anonymous.Our audit revealed that controls over the accounting process and records related to the grant were adequate. We found Parents Anonymous to be in compliance with OJP’s grant requirements. We reviewed Parents Anonymous’ compliance with essential grant conditions and found no weaknesses in the accounting records.These items are discussed in detail in the Findings and Recommendations section of the report. Our audit objectives, scope, and methodology appear in Appendix I.

    (WELL, here are two of those reports from the OIG):

    Sort by date/ Sort by relevance

    DOJ/OIG OJP External Audit Reports
     At-Risk Families All Across America Grant Awarded to the Parents Anonymous
    Incorporated, Audit Report GR9004013, August 2004. 
    http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/_ojp.htm-69k- Cached

    Audit Report
     Claremont, California. Report No. GR9004013 August 2004 Office of
    the Inspector General Executive Summary. The Office 
    http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/g9004013.htm-3k- Cached

    Guess I’ll have to write for it:Prior to 2010, only the Audit Executive Summaries have been posted. All the Executive Summaries have been cleared and are arranged within the appropriate state directory for convenience. States not represented in this distribution do not have Executive Summaries available for inclusion at this time.

    AS WITH THE HEALTHY MARRIAGES CURRICULA — it seems the JUSTICE DEPT. is helping a specific organization disseminate its own, specialty, program material.  There is ONE little minor detail with this grant going to this organization:  . . .. and that’s called CONFLICT OF INTEREST.  (whether it’s above, or below, I looked at the founding documents and find that a long-time L.A. County Judge (haven’t checked out whether other mental health professionals in the employee of the County, or working FOR the Justice Department) (or, as to HHS, in the family court system or around it) – – – were, at the time the grant was awarded.

    Note:  California board had an L.A. County Judge (eventually became a judge ) on the group since 1973, and it might be worthwhile to see who else those board members represent.  Meanwhile, I want to know about this Justice Program “strengthening families all across america” program.  It’s probably a bunch a hooey, based on how frequent there are these family-court-related massacres, one state or another.

    In the year 2002, the DOJ gave away $52 million (grants) in “Developing, Testing, and Demonstrating Promising New Programs.”  The top Ten Recipients included:  #1, Parents Anonymous (the City of Los Angeles itself being #7)”

    Top 10 Assistance Recipients FY 2002

    2. DARE AMERICA$2,475,000

    Do their state registrations show?

    AZ as charity,- yes:

    ID NAME DBA
    12810 *PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ARIZONA, INC

    (at the same street address, as a “dba” also)

    ID NAME DBA
    24105 CPLC SOUTHWEST, INC. PARENTING ARIZONA

    in 2003 (* 2008) it also picked up the trade name:  “PARENTING ARIZONA:  SAFE CHILDREN, STRONG FAMILIES” (Search will probably expire, but file ID 300792 may help on the corporations search website).

    Pennsylvania (per corporate website) has plenty of these by county.

    CALIFORNIA HAS ITS USUAL ASSEMBLY OF:  Formed, dissolved, suspended, with one survivor:

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C1239568 02/22/1984 DISSOLVED PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF MARIN COUNTY CARRIE PUGH
    C0896252 08/30/1978 SUSPENDED PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ORANGE COUNTY
    C1023786 04/13/1981 SUSPENDED PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SACRAMENTO, INC. PETER A BUCK
    C1259155 10/18/1984 SUSPENDED PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SHASTA COUNTY, INC. BARBARA RAYNARD
    C0606551 09/03/1970 ACTIVE PARENTS ANONYMOUS, INC. LISA PION BERLIN
    C0816640 05/27/1977 DISSOLVED PARENTS ANONYMOUS, PACIFIC-SOUTHWEST SHELLY TAYLOR

    Lisa Pion Berlin, Ph.D. apparently influenced the CAPTA legislation, and here is the main site, Los Angeles area:  Every other term is trademarkeed…

    http://www.parentsanonymous.org/pahtml/pressExpert.html

    Dr. Pion-Berlin is a renowned expert in the prevention of child abuse and neglect. She has authored legislation to strengthen the prevention focus of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and is frequently called upon by national and state policymakers along with the media to share unique solutions for implementing effective community-based child abuse prevention programs, achieving meaningful Parent Leadership and Shared Leadership, and creating child welfare system reform to ensure safe and strong families. Dr. Pion-Berlin also speaks on a variety of parenting topics such as: (see site).

    Her son? husband? relative? (It’s an unusual last name) is a filmmaker; this one is about hazing

    The ” National Child Abuse Prevention Advisory Council, helps promote Parents Anonymous(r) Inc.

    With a unique blend of highly respected public figures and experts in the child abuse field, the National Child Abuse Prevention Advisory Council focuses on increasing public awareness about Parents Anonymous® Inc. and its effectiveness in strengthening families and preventing abuse and neglect.    

    (in fact, I can only see one person, maybe two, on the list that is not some celebrity from a TV show….)

    (Heavy emphasis on trademarked classes and training parents to teach them, as a means to prevent child abuse.  In other words,parenting classes. Guess where I am gong next…..)  The theme is having Parents (not just social staff employees) involved.  This (next) says that in 1994, they got funding to form the NPLT (tr) concept:

    Parent Leadership and Parent Leaders

    Parents who are committed to helping to create change in their homes and their communities are called Parent Leaders. They may be parents, grandparents, kinship care providers, foster parents or anyone in a parenting role who speaks from his/her own perspective – – and not in a staff role for an organization. Those who are most effective, however, are Parent Leaders who have personal experience in the systems they are working to change.   

    In other words, we’d rather you be an insider, but speak as a parent.  

    Parents Anonymous® Inc. took Parent Leadership to a new level in 1994 when it received funding to create the first National Parent Leadership Team® (NPLT), thereby ensuring Shared Leadership on a national scale. The creation, development and study of this first NPLT, initiated the Parents Anonymous® Inc. Parent Leadership research agenda. We brought 12 members from across the country on board. Over the years the Team has continued to grow and members work in partnership with Parents Anonymous® Inc. in all matters related to programs and policies.

    OK, this is probably the Grants we just saw above (Taggs) for the California group — the time frame matches, as well as the name of teh grant.  TIHS is probably why the fatherhood emphasis gets in there — because of the HHS funding…  The above quote was from a newsletter put out by a Childrens Center associated with Harvard? or at least with a harvard.edu address:   ©2011 Judge Baker Children’s Center

    I don’t know how common this last name is, but here is a David S. Pion-Berlin  teaching at Univ. of California/Riverside, showing a Ph.D. from International Studies in 1984, Univ. of Denver 

     

     

    Yes, Dr. (in what?) Lisa Pion-Berlin takes credit for her husband, David S. (Political Science, Latin Americanist) and having been raised by her wonderful father (Nazi Refuge) — no mention whatsoever is made of any mother.  IN context, I can understand why, but again — this site is emphasizing Dads, on father’s day.

    Value The Importance Of Your Fathers Daily

    Celebrating Father’s Day this Sunday is essential to focusing on their critical role in our children’s lives. We all need to make sure we embrace fathers daily and value their importance! I have experienced first hand two extraordinary Fathers: my own dad, Kurt Berlin and my husband, David Pion-Berlin.

    I was raised by an extraordinary Dad who has challenged me to be a caring, responsible and contributing member of our society. He still practices law in DC at 85 years old and provides me with valuable input and support (even when I don’t ask) in my role as Mom and as President and CEO of Parents Anonymous® Inc.

    (OBVIOUSLY this is a very website-oriented, and heavily trademarked group, with frequent new programs and initiatives, every single one (that I’ve seen) with a slick website.  I noticed heavy First 5 (California) group, which is a red flag to me; there were questions regarding their funding in the news, including conflicts of interest between someone on its board directing moneys to another charity he was on).

    “The Shared Leadership”  plan would seem to be incorporating parent-input, and thus good.  But (see my notes), the type of parent input preferred is someone IN the system, and the influence could readily go both way.   Again, I simply found this group (at all) by pegging (yet another) fatherhood training certification affecting Jefferson County CO, from Washington State, and as it happens, originated in Southern California. http://www.nationalparenthelpline.org/what-we-do/mission-history.  

    As a domestic violence survivor become a custodial mother become a custody-challenged custodial mother (fatherhood funding influence is clear, in hindsight), become a NONcustodial mother and from there increasingly impoverished (i.e., repeatedly losing work), I know FIRSThand the feeling of a fantastic website full of empathetic terms and hotlines, including the National Domestic Violence Hotline (1-800-799-SAFE or something), which refers people to local agencies that (in the situation I just described) do not help anyhow.  They can be good listeners, however — just not provide actual help.  The same goes for other similarly high-web-profile groups like NCADV, DVLEAP, etc. — they are on the policy side, and not on the actual help side.  Those who don’t have personal referrals to real sources of help will be sorry on calling the official numbers and hoping for real, tangible, in-time, valid resources — as opposed to the appearance of resources.

    Here is the “Charitable Trusts” record of the Parents Anonymous satellite groups.  Only the main one survives, as we can see:

     

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF MARIN COUNTY 056591 Charity Dissolved SAN RAFAEL CA Charity Registration Charity
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ORANGE COUNTY Charity Not Registered MISSION VIEJO CA Charity Registration Charity
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SACRAMENTO, INC. Charity Not Registered SACRAMENTO CA Charity Registration Charity
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SHASTA COUNTY, INC. 057939 Charity Inactive REDDING CA Charity Registration Charity
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS, INC. 015477 Charity Current CLAREMONT CA Charity Registration Charity
    PARENTS ANONYMOUS, PACIFIC-SOUTHWEST Charity Not Registered CULVER CITY CA Charity Registration Charity
    As1

     

    AS early as 2001, we can see their revenues and assets are JUST FINE; even in these hard times, they are not suffering too bad:  EIN# 23-7278097, and the founding articles filing is 47pp long on-line here  

    Fiscal Begin:
    Fiscal End: 30-SEP-01
    Total Assets: $502,908.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $4,312,507.00
    RRF Received: 21-FEB-02
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached:
    Status: Accepted

    2009:

    Fiscal Begin: 01-OCT-09
    Fiscal End: 30-SEP-10
    Total Assets: $1,775,724.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $1,584,661.00
    RRF Received: 12-AUG-11
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted

     As I said, they are selling classes and have copyrighted material (plus their websites have the “Donate” buttons, legal as they are a charity).  Unlike many of the fatherhood group organzations, this SMART bunch (original board, or early board, included a woman who later became a judge) have (to this date) a lot of grants and a lot of program service revenue, the proportion is closer to half.  (2009:  $

    667,716 contributions/grants — $902,923 program service revenue (what they are DOING as a nonprofit is actually bringing in revenue). Plus about $1K investment, and $8K “Other” revenue.”  (which their tax form will explain).  The nonprofit purpose has become technical assistance to spread the gospel about their (copyrighted) concept, and presumably write off expenses, like $940K salaries, etc.  (in other words, they more than wrote off the program service income earnings).

    • “Parents, children and youth transform their attitudes, learn new behaviors, build on their strengths, and create long-term positive changes in their lives through proven effective, quality Parents Anonymous Programs implemented by our accredited network organizations”

    Got this business model yet?   . .. by our accredited network organizations.    What do they do?

    • Parents Anonymous Inc provides training and technical assistance,develops publications and conducts research on meaningful Parent and Shared Leadership, systems reform and effective community-based strategies to strengthen families.  Expenses $1,302,041

    This work – promoting one’s own work and business model — earns Dr. Pion-Berlin $195K per year, VP Meryl Levine $111K, and  another VP Sandra Williams $122K, for 40 hour weeks.

    Other earnings (revenue)  660K Government GRANTS, plus $863K Government CONTRACTS, and like I mention, $39,194 (or about a good secretary’s annual salary), accreditation fees.   No royalties show up …. 

     

    And, of the original 10 (1972) members of the Board, including one just labeled “Betty L., Los Angeles” (no address — guess that was one of the anonymous parents), the top 4 (except Secretary) are two J.D.s, an M.D., and what looks like a social worker, an ACSW and an MD/MPMH (mental health practitioner):

    • Pres Jean Matusinka, J.D. 3401 Club Drive Los Angeles, CA. 90064
    • VP Roland Summit, M.D. 1000 W. Carson Street D-5 Torrance, CA. 90509
    • Sec  Margot Fritz 7373W. 83rd Street Los Angeles, CA. 90045
    • Treas. Gerald Tarlow, J.D. 3812 Sepulveda Blvd. Torrance, CA. 90505
    • Helen Boardman, ACSW 2115 Fargo Los Angeles, CA. 90039
    • Leigh Colitre 8035 S. Vermont Los Angeles, CA. 90047
    • Garold Faber M.D.,M.P.H. 13543 S. Hawthorne Boulevard Hawthorne, CA.
    • Norman Fleishman 6063 Hargis Street Los Angeles CA. 90034
    • Betty L. Los Angeles, CA.
    • Ed. Welz 13106 Glenfield Detroit, Michigan 48201

     In 1996, Amendment stated that any remaining assets would be distributed by the Superior Court where the principal office is (which just so happens, I believe, to be Los Angeles…)

    If this corporation holds any assets on trust, such assets shall be disposed of in such manner as may be directed by decree of the Superior Court of the County in which the corporation’s principal office is located, upon petition therefor by the Attorney General or by any person concerned in the liquidation.

    Hopefully, none of those on the board will have any inappropriate relationships with said Superior Court, or, if a judge is involved in said distribution (which looks like a sizeable amount), he/she will have been REAL honest on the “conflicts of interest” filling.

    THEN AGAIN, common sense tells us, this is Los ANGELES COUNTY (see Richard Fine, etc.) and that is a little much to expect.

     Some of the incorporators:  Jean Matusinka, J.D. became (or was) a judge and a prosecutor of sex and DV crimes; this is her 2006 Obit (LA times), she died at 66, from lung cancer, unfortunately: 

    Judge Jean Matusinka, 66; Professor, Former Sex Crimes Prosecutor

    Obituaries | PASSINGS

    April 02, 2006|From Times Staff and Wire Reports

    Judge Jean E. Matusinka, 66, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge and former deputy district attorney, died Monday of lung cancer at Torrance Memorial Hospital. Since 1990, she had been handling a civil calendar at the Torrance courthouse and was hearing cases until a week before her death.

    Born in New York City, Matusinka graduated from Hunter College with a degree in history and earned her law degree at Brooklyn Law School in 1966. Admitted to the State Bar of California in 1970, she joined the district attorney’s office in L.A. as a deputy district attorney. She specialized in sex crimes, child abuse and domestic violence cases. She was instrumental in forming the child abuse and domestic violence section and the sexual crimes program of the central trials division.  Matusinka was one of the prosecutors in the early days of the McMartin Pre-School molestation case in the mid-1980s.

    {{tis case keeps cropping up in association with judges, or nonprofits (incl. one in Brooklyn), and deals with hysteria, ruined the preschool operators, and etc.  “The longest and most expensive criminal trial in United States history had a modest beginning. On May 12, 1983, 40-year-old Judy Johnson dropped her two-and-one-half-year-old son off at the front of the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, California without notice and drove away. The school’s teachers cared for the unknown “pre-verbal” boy in the hopes that his mother would return for him at the day’s end. ” The link I gave details Matusinka’sinvolvement.}}

    She was appointed to the Los Angeles Superior Court by then-Gov. George Deukmejian in 1985. One of her first jobs was presiding over the calendar in the downtown criminal courts building. As a judge handling criminal and civil cases, she gained a reputation for toughness, fairness and decisiveness.   She was also a clinical professor at the USC Keck School of Medicine’s Institute of Psychiatry, Law and Behavioral Science.

     

     THIS USED TO BE “MOTHERS ANONYMOUS, INC.” and @ SEPT. 1970, had the stated purpose of:  “

    • The specific and primary purposes are to perpetuate .an organized program for mothers who fear they might or are actively engaged in any form of physical or emotional abuse towards a ch1ld.
    • To help and rehab1l1tate mothers who do engage in physical or emotional abuse towards a child
    • • To have and to exercise all the rights and powers that are now or mayay thereafter be granted by law.

     By 1971, the name had been changed to “Parents Anonymous.”   

    (Back to Jefferson County Colorado’s Fatherhood Program’s “Famlies First” link to “Circle of Parents” where, naturally, one is going to find a fatherhood program paid for by yours truly, the US HHS.) 

    Through March 2011, 2,280 expecting or fathers of infants, 1,546 fathers of children between 1 and 5 years, 1,057 mothers and 153 other caregivers were served through 710 Conscious Fathering classes and 1,103 Circle of Parents’ groups for fathers.

    Funding for this project was made possible through a 5-year Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Program grant received by the Circle of Parents national office in 2006. This grant is funded through the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Families Assistance – Grant No. 90FR0098, CFDA #93.086.
    www.thefamilytree.org
    www.proudtoparent.org
    www.uptoparents.org

    For additional information, on this program choose an option below.

    What services we offer!View our classes! Contacts!Your resources!Find out what you need to know!

    However, my question was — is what appears to be the EL PASO

    Parent Opportunity Program

    In an attempt to nurture and grow the relationships between non-custodial parents and their children, El Paso County Child Support Services has developed the El Paso County Parent Opportunity Program (POP). Through individualized case management, POP works with non-custodial parents to achieve personal family and career-oriented goals. By achieving these goals, parents can both bond with their children and learn to become better providers for their families.

    (the ‘evolving nature of child support,” you’re in it…..)

    POP also offers various legal and community services to eligible parents. POP case managers are able to find legal help and mental health counseling for parents in need of them. POP provides services through a community partnership comprised of El Paso County Department of Human Services, Center on Fathering, Goodwill Industries, and Child Support Services of Colorado.

    To be eligible to receive POP services, applicants must be non-custodial parents who are residents of El Paso or Teller Counties and have an income of not more than 185% of the federal poverty level.

    Obviously, they are targeting IV-D cases, and will be able to get some funding for them from the government.

    (An aside, but looking up “El Paso County” we find that in Oct. 2011, it discovered that the state had shorted it $1.3 million from sales tax collected, but not sent back to the county.  An additional $830,000 is apparently still under discussion:

    El Paso County Recoups $1.3 Million from State

    COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) – Colorado has shortchanged El Paso County in the amount of sales tax revenue collected by the state but not sent back to the county. . . . The discrepancy follows a years-long investigation into the money that’s collected by Colorado and remitted back to the county monthly . . .Such discrepancies may not be unique to El Paso County. Douglas County officials say the state’s been off about $200,000 a year since a 1 percent capital improvement tax was passed there in 1996…

    Colorado officials sent letters to the county’s 14,000 vendors, advising them of potential reporting errors.

    Part-time employees researched the discrepancy and found errors in which collections were posted to other entities, vendors provided wrong information and data was incorrectly keyed in.

    That resulted in the $1.3 million going back to the county from the state. Twenty-seven additional audits totaling $830,000 are pending with the state.

    “We’re happy to hear it’s working out well for the county. We think this is a good partnership for everyone,” said Mark Couch, spokesman for the Colorado Department of Revnue. The state has upgraded its computer system and has converted paper files and manual data entry to a new electronic system, Couch said.

    ANYHOW, MY POINT BEING — remember to research trademark names and registrants.  In this case, Policy Studies, Inc. IS “El Paso County Parenting Opportunity Project” which is described (below) as a unit within the child support department.   Knowing, as you do now, that CPR and PSI (dba in this case El Paso County POP) have personnel in common, at least did have Jane Venohr, Ph.D. in common (and they pubish together), being the nonprofit and for-profit prongs of evaluation — here is a 2007 “Colorado Parenting Time Project

    The evaluation is, this time, conducted by 3 CPR people — but NOT Jane Venohr; instead, by Pearson Thoennes and instead of Venohr, “Lanae Davis.”

    They speak of the El Paso POP as though objectively and not associated with it, in this report:

    Cover page: (formatting appears differently in the original)

    Submitted to:  Colorado Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement 1575 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80218*

    Submitted by:  Center for POLICY RESEARCH 1570 Emerson Street Denver, Colorado 80218 303.837.1555 http://www.centerforpolicyresearch.org

    (the offices are 0.5 miles, or a 3 minute drive, away from each other)….PSI (or, El PasoPOP) as of 2002 was 1 mile, or a 6 min drive away)

     

    September 2007

    [Authors} Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. ~ Lanae Davis, M.A. ~ Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D.

    CPR has three Ph.D.’s — Venohr is the 3rd — but only used two for this report.

    Prepared under grant number 90FD0096 from the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) to the State of Colorado Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement (DHS).

    Points of view expressed in the document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of OCSE or DHS.

    Here is the HHS grant that paid for it (the study):

    This $125,000 award was made in 2004 (El Paso POP having become a trade name shortly before, in 2002).

    Program Office Grantee Name Grantee Address Grantee Type Award Number Award Title CFDA Number CFDA Program Name Award Class Award Activity Type Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    OCSE CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 1575 SHERMAN STREET Welfare Department 90FD0096 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 93564 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 125,000

    I imagine that the “F” stands for Fatherhood (or possibly “Family”) and “D” Demonstration….

    Here’s a “9wantstoknow” 2009 investigation complaining about what people used food stamps for.  Pauline BUrton, this time, stood up for their right to choose (understanding there are limits):   Interesting!  At this time (2009, shortly after the report) at least, her office was:   “. . . . Pauline Burton, Colorado Department of Human Services director of the office of self sufficiency, whose office runs the food and cash assistance program”   If the people concerned about what people used their food stamps for actually knew what their government was using TANF & OCSE funds for (diversionary projects), they might feel differently!    Her knowledge of who was on Food Stamps obviously would provide some links to people (like the noncustodial parent/father involved) who might want to be in the POP demonstration project….

    (I say “Father” because so many women I know have never been able to receive help from any A/V program, including after requesting it and when visitation orders were being ignored.  I was in this position, but knew nothing about the A/V system and so didn’t know I could ask).

    Executive Summary

    The Colorado Parenting Time Project was designed to assess whether identifying parents with visitation problems in the child support caseload and providing services aimed at resolving them improves parent-child contact and the subsequent payment of child support. Conducted in child support agencies in El Paso and Jefferson Counties, the project ultimately involved the identification of a total of 716 cases with visitation problems during May 2005 to December 2006, and their assignment to different groups for treatments of varying intensity:

    ␣ In both counties, a high-level treatment group was offered informal facilitation by the child access specialist (CAS), a specially trained worker at the child support agency retained with grant funds;

    ␣ In Jefferson County, a low-level treatment group was handed or mailed printed information about parenting time problems and various community resources to help parents with access problems, including free mediation and parent education services; and

    ␣ In El Paso County, an established unit within the child support agency (Parent Opportunity Project, or POP) offered noncustodial parents assistance with employment and parenting time using both facilitation and mediation techniques.

    I am curious, and selected TAGGS search “90FD to find over 400 projects nationwide.  Limiting it to Colorado it was (I forget, but fewer than 50).  I then reduced it to “NEW” grants and came up with these 11, stretching from the year 1999 through 2010.  There is only one other principal investigator, and I am going to talk about some fo the “abstracts” which reveal the purposes.  Wouldn’t it be interesting to see how many of these “research” type OCSE grants went to the same organization(s)?

    Grantee Name Award Number Award Title Budget Year Action Issue Date CFDA Program Name Award Class Award Activity Type Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions Award Abstract
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0004 PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODAIL PARENTS & THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN 1 09/16/1997 Child Support Enforcement (CSE) DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 72,500 Abstract Not Available
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0028 NEW APPROACHES TO CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGES  1 09/14/1999 Child Support Enforcement (CSE) DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 75,000
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0069 SECTION 1115 DEMONSTRATION GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 4 1 09/15/2002 Child Support Enforcement (CSE) DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 100,000 Abstract Not Available
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0080 SECTION 1115 DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 1 09/10/2003 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 55,023 Abstract Not Available
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0096 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 1 09/14/2004 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 125,000 Abstract Not Available
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0111 SECTION 1115 DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM – PA 2 1 07/12/2005 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 114,741
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0126 AVOIDING AND MANAGING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS IN COLORADO (PRIORITY AREA 1) 1 09/20/2008 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW JOHN BERNHART $ 99,815
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0132 SECTION 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 2 1 09/20/2008 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW JOHN BERNHART $ 30,000
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0166 PROJECTS TO ADDRESS CHILD SUPPORT NEEDS OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY MEMBERS 1 09/27/2010 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY OTHER NEW JOHN BERNHART $ 52,443
    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 90FD0168 TRIPLE PLAY, THREE PATHS TO SUCCESS 1 09/25/2010 Child Support Enforcement Research DISCRETIONARY OTHER NEW JOHN BERNHART $ 84,783
    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 90FD0033 COLLECTING CHILD SUPPORT FROM INCARCERATED & PAROLED OBLIGORS 1 09/14/1999 Child Support Enforcement (CSE) DISCRETIONARY DEMONSTRATION NEW PAULINE BURTON $ 80,000 Abstract Not Available
    Results 1 to 11 of 11 matches.

    Abstracts include:

    Grant 90FD0111:  “early intervention in all cases with NEW ORDERS, NEW delinquencies, high orders, and/or TANF involvement.” (year, 2005)

    In targeting New Orders, this is about to become standard practice now — requiring ALL child support orders to entail diversionary funds to “access visitation” activities.   Going after delinquencies gives the facilitator an edge to highly suggest the parent participate (too much delinquency could result in jail), etc., etc.

    JOHN BERNHART is apparently Division Director of Colorado Department of Child Support Services.

    I also (searching) found him on a 2007 “Colorado Family Support Council” website, and felt it relevant to describe:  They are like other states’ child support training agency, and run conferences to train each other, being a nonprofit:

    History

    The Colorado Family Support Council was organized in 1974 under the umbrella of the Colorado District Attorney’s Council (CDAC). Seed money in the amount of $500.00 was provided to the Family Support Council by CDAC.

    The purpose of the Colorado Family Support Council was to promote understanding of family support issues and to provide a forum for child support workers to discuss problems, solutions and further the direction of the program.

    Since training has always been perceived as an important element in the effectiveness of the IV-D program, the council began sponsoring an annual training conference for those working in the field of child support. In addition to the annual conferences, the council has sponsored numerous regional training sessions on topics of interest. In 1985, CFSC merged its annual conference with, and became host of, the national conference in Snowmass.

    In 1991 the Council incorporated as a 501(c)3 charitable organization. The purpose of the council had to change slightly to drop lobbying efforts to keep its educational tax preference status. Donations made to CFSC are now tax deductible for many tax filers.

    In 2005, the Council started its website at http://www.cfscinc.org to keep its membership informed of pertinent information and assist its board of directors in conducting the business of the organization.

    And this past 2010, one of the conference VENDOR/EXHIBITORS happened to be PSI, which, again runs an access/visitation grant right from El Paso County Child Support Services as “El Paso County POP” At least, I believe that’s what “PSI” below represents:

    Thank You, Vendors

    Thanks to our 2010 sponsors and exhibitors. Their contributions help us to host an outstanding conference with affordable registration fees.


    LabCorp

    Orchid Cellmark

    PSI

    Systems & Methods Inc

    WICSEC

    (upper right).  (Orchid Cellmark probably gives DNA printing or paternity tests;it looks familiar).

    IRS filings (go back to 2001, here):

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    Colorado Family Support Council CO 2010 $44,401 990EZ 8 84-1180995

     

    This post could go on indefinitely.  I will summarize some of my own recent finds, and hope it has provided some tools:

    My recent finds (as a consequence of doing this post):

    Organizations/COrporations:

    • ICF INTERNATIONAL, INC.  — an organization to be watched, and of concern that a company with such roots in the defense industry is producing dubious or potentially conflict of interest reports about water safety (Percholate contamination, which apparently does, in excess, affect the neurology of children, infants and fetuses, among others).  The Massachusetts EPA, after reading a report to which ICF contributed, still chose to set stricter standards.
    • Why are groups getting multi-million federal contracts already also getting any GRANT as well?
    • Why does the HHS call this organization “CITY” but it appears to look like a corporation to me?  Who are they, really?
    • where the ACF called the grant “Healthy Marriage” (as supposedly contrasted with “Responsible Fatherhood”)? while the ICF website is quite clear which it is?
    • This group is doing over $1 billion of business in various fields with the US, AND is in on the fatherhood business too, perhaps it bears a closer look.
    • PARENTS ANONYMOUS is ap”parently” a favorite of both HHS & DOJ departments, which concerns me as one of its original board members was involved in the judicial department of Los Angeles County.  Again, $18 million is a lot of business.  Almost every times PARENTS ANONYMOUS moves, it trademarks something.
    • CIRCLE OF PARENTS(tr) (inc. 2004) got $4.8 million of grants from HHS 2006-2010 (so far identified), and is an NFI front, obviously, with connections to (at a minimum) the Colorado Child Support Enforcement System.  This represents what HHS is promoting – -a policy of organizing corporations around the internet, and co-opting their language.
    • (though I knew this already)  REMEMBER TO CHECK  — always — “dba’s” and Registered Trademarks of any organizations being looked at.  Example:  PSI (aka El Paso County Child Support, aka (ALSO), “El Paso County Child Support Parent Opportunity Program”) — and, then (as “PSI” itself) reviewing the Access Visitation programs run by, itself (under the POP registered name) — in association with another nonprofit it shares personnel with, CPR.  Knowing that the founder of Center for Policy Research (Jessica Pearson, being an original) also co-founded AFCC, from my understanding (and there is a California Corporation entity under the name) . . . .. . I’d have to say the “CIRCLE OF (fatherhood-friendly, custodial-Mom-antagonistic) is fairly complete, and drawing in the drawstrings . . . .
    •  
    •  
    • ALWAYS ATTEMPT TO LOCATE AND EXAMINE A TAX RETURN OR TWO, SEARCH THE STREET ADDRESS, AND WHERE LIKELY TO BE PRODUCTIVE, SEARCH THE CEOs or other Board of Directors’ associates and affiliates.
    •  
    • LAST, but not least — it’s becoming more and more clear that BOTH the public access databases TAGGS and USASPENDING.GOV (which was required by law) — are deceitful and inaccurate.  I have begun to question, moreover, whether rather than USASpending.gov UNDER-reporting, possibly HHS is OVER-REPORTING, and directing funds towards groups that will cooperate with it in programs that are not properly monitored, and a ripe breeding ground for kickbacks and money laundering.
    Prior to looking at this last ground of grantees, and a bit more at the CHMC, I would’ve been less prone to saying this, but the evidence is accumulating quickly.  I believe its possible that the entire programming is designed simply around high-emotion terminology (families, Dads, Kids) to enable hiding federal funds disbursed to, for lack of a better word, cronies.  This is not “taxation with representation” but taxation without it.

    70 New Healthy Marriage/Fatherhood Grantees for 2011, series “90FM” (And Why Let’s Get Honest is NOT amused….)

    with 2 comments

     

    After an exhausting, bloodhound-trail-following attempt to get the “REAL” California Healthy Marriage Coalition” (complete with whoever is running it) to Please Stand Up (on-line, in the form of a historically coherent, traceable set of incorporations, nonprofit registrations, and if I”m lucky, even 990s filed on-line), I determined to post the entire list, and talk about some of them.  Which is below.  I am also starting a new Page here to start profiling these BUSINESSES, AGENCIES or DEPARTMENTS (see grantee types) one by one.  I disclaim all responsibility for any actions readers may take on what’s below before fact-checking themselves; I think the dizzying re-incarnations of a certain two (basic) California groups may have resulted in cross-referencing one with the other at times,

    For my birthday, I would also like to see the articles of incorporation of EVERY SINGLE one of the Healthy Marriage / Responsible Fatherhood Grantees, so the public can know which of them used to be (or still are) working for:

    (1) The Department of HHS/ACF (who it seems would be approving the grants), &/or :

    (2) Local Court system or other County Public Employment, with potential influence on who steers the contracts that these nonprofits are going to take advantage other, in the booming business of “parent education” “marriage education” ‘Fatherhood promotion” and what’s apparently another one, “RELATIONSHIP SKILLS DEVELOPMENT.”

    I also would like a chart (it’d need to be 3D at this point) cross-referencing Board of Directors in common.  As most normal people are not this anal-retentive, or “could care less,” I’ll likely produce that birthday gift myself.

    Any of those terms can be used to suck money out of the Title IV-A (welfare) and Title IV-D (Child Support Enforcement) funds, plus some others, like child welfare, which is synonymous with a child going to sleep with a biological father in the home, apparently (judging by some of the programs being promoted around the term “child welfare.”

    Moreover, when scrutinized, the financial — business – profit is actually going to any company that has developed a marketable curriculum.  This is not only in the form of money, but also in the form of reputation, and anything that would help them keep their place in line for more federally-sponsored business promotion.  Meanwhile, one or both of the parties being forced or induced to consume their material — or divorce in front of judges who believe they should, and have some stake in some of those nonprofits or for-profits — are most likely losing finances and reputation.

    In that regard, these guys put AFCC to shame. AFCC markets quit a bit of its own material, including the usual Conference CDS, DVDs) including BOOKS — and does this through mandated participation via family law system.  But I think they have to work a little harder at keeping it going — in other words, it takes a court order to force someone in front of a parent educator, parent coordinator (unless they can be induced to do so voluntarily under duress) and into a parent education classes aimed at a 5th grade mentality and taking up one’s dwindling resource of TIME.

    But it does NOT take a court order for the manufacturers of a marriage curriculum to get their local pastors, priests, and the occasional rabbi or imam,* to (1) form a corporation with profits anticipated and grants to set it up and (2) set up a website soliciting business, after they understand of course that step one is to join a coalition and then buy into being trained to market membership in the same corporation.  Brilliant.  Of course, AFCC’s preparatory work in wearing down couples and pushing for legislation, and forming associations to endorse each other’s policies while pretending independence, is going to be helpful overall publicity….

    (no relation, but interesting reference:  I.M.A.M. organization, incl points 1& 2 out of 5:)

    1. To be a central resource for the Shia Muslims in North America and their religious and spiritual leadership (Marja’iyyah) in all that pertains to matters of their religion and beliefs away from any political or party influence.
    2. To organize matters of the Shia Muslims in North America in relevant areas such as worship, marriage, divorce, wills, inheritance, or other religious legal matters.

    No, if we want to eradicate poverty in this country we should teach someone to set up a corporation selling healthy marriage curriculum, and trying to persuade teenagers not to have sex.  We are not likely to run out of sexually active teens (or for that matter, mature adults) and I don’t think divorce is going anywhere — so there is definitely a market niche.  Too bad some us didn’t get in on it in the 1980s, but judging by the 1990s and 2000s, there’s hope for newcomers if they buy in, imitate the business model, and don’t rock the boat.

    Ideally, this curriculum should be completely self-promoting and self-executing by internet download.  That way, more is left over from the grants gotten to promote it — not including whatever is lost in the black hole of “No accountability,” several of which are showing up, the closer one looks.

    The names of this curriculum tend to run in cutesy-sounding acronyms, one summary of which shows up here:

    MML, LoveU2(tr), PREP, PREPARE/ENRICH, “PAIRS” (and so forth), plus a whole variety of BootCamps

    MML — “Mastering the Mysteries of Love”; PAIRS – “Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills, PREP – “Prevention and Relation Education Program

    (link shows that PREP is hoping to adapt a version for Muslim Couples, working with a group in Qatar).

    Some of these hearken back to University Institutes and research/demonstration grants previously funded by the US Government. One of these days, if they get enough TANF participants (and others) forced through these classes, they may come up with the right formula to create the perfect human relationship.  Alternately, they can continue working on producing the perfect human being through Early Headstart, the K-12 public education system, and whatever other sources are around.

    Officer/RA Name Entity Name Entity Number
    EISENBERG, SETH D THE PAIRS FOUNDATION, INC. N00000003614
    EISENBERG, SETH D 411-KIDS, INC. N04000002485
    EISENBERG, SETH D UST INTERNATIONAL, INC. P96000094023
    EISENBERG, SETH D THE PAIRS FOUNDATION, INC. N00000003614

     

      Award Number = 90FM

    Showing: 1 – 50 of 70 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 Next »

    Recipient: AUBURN UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36849

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0006 ALABAMA HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION INITIATIVE (AHMREI) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,489,548 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,489,548

    Recipient: AVANCE, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77092

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0041 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages
    Recipient ZIP Code: 75246-1754

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0018 ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE MARRIAGES, DBA ANTHEM STRONG FAMILIES WILL IMPLEMENT A 3-TIERED PROJECT THAT PROVIDES HEALTHY MARRIAGE SERVICES, ECONOMIC STABILITY AND JOB PLACEMENT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,514,359 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,514,359

    Recipient: Arizona Youth Partnership
    Recipient ZIP Code: 85741-2259

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0030 BUILDING FUTURES FOR FAMILIES-HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT IN PIMA, PINAL AND GILA COUNTIES OF ARIZONA. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 634,536 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 634,536

    Recipient: BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45230-2907

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0029 BUILDING STRONG MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 49501-0294

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0011 BE REAL PROGRAM (“BUILDING AND ENHANCING RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT, AND LIFE SKILLS”) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,996 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,996

    Recipient: CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90806-2708

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0034 MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 570,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 570,000

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 67214-3504

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0042 PROVIDING MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS SKILLS AS WELL AS JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WILL PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,445,587 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,445,587

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON
    Recipient ZIP Code: 08618-5705

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0016 EL CENTRO HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 555,300 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 555,300

    Recipient: CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 16830-3323

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0003 HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP PROJECT IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA WITH A FOCUS ON CLEARFIELD COUNTY AND 8 ADJACENT COUNTIES INCLUDING AA (II)(III)(IV) AND (V) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 354,714 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 354,714

    Recipient: COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 19601-3303

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0044 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 787,665 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 787,665

    Recipient: CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 85004

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0021 TODO ES POSIBLE (EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE) – A MARRIAGE PROGRAM FOR HISPANIC FAMILIES IN PHOENIX, AZ 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 359,796 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 359,796

    Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92024-2215

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0019 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

      LGH notes on this group:   (Needs to be a separate post, but here’s a teaser):

    SEARCHED THIS GROUP BY ITS EIN# (Simple “Recipient” search on TAGGS”) — there are two series, note DUNS#s….

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA CA 92024-2215 SAN DIEGO 003664535 $ 7,883,475
    California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA CA 92024-2215 SAN DIEGO 361795151 $ 7,142,080

    The heading (when you click on the title, above) shows the street address.  Note:  LEUCADIA, and in SAN DIEGO area.     

    Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
    Address: 1045 PASSIFLORA AVE
    LEUCADIA, CA 92024-2215
    Country Name: United States of America
    County Name: SAN DIEGO
    HHS Region: 9
    Type: Other Social Services Organization
    Class: Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations

     

    However, from the official HHS/ACF Grantee award announcement, HERE, there is no entry for “California Healthy Marriages Coalition.”  How could there be, in 2011, as the outfit no longer exists.  Instead, it’s called (latest corporate name incarnation I could find, may not be the most current):

    (From the ACF site, not TAGGS:  http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/press/2011/Grantawards2011.html.  As TAGGS information is supplied by the agency in question (see description on the site) the information should match, and public should be able to sort by an identification number.  That’s basic common sense — IF the intent was transparency).

    Healthy Relationships California Leucadia
    CA
    $2,500,000

    What on TAGGS (and on the public website) is “California Healthy Marriages Coalition” is now called, “Healthy Relationships California.”

    This is why the TAGGS database, which possesses EIN# and DUNS#, could easily have put that field in any report generated, but chose to omit EIN (would probably show up a lot of grantees who never bothered to get one) so we could follow the career & grants-allocations track of a nonprofit that keeps changing its corporate name, something that only checking at the State (not federal) level would otherwise show.    And Healthy Marriage Grantees are notoriously (when examined) shape-shifters.

    So I check out this nonprofit name on the Charitable Trusts registration, California STate Office of Attorney General:

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA CT0149740 Charity Delinquent LEUCADIA CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

     

     This is the detail.  For some reason no “Address Line1” is entered (matching the Secretary of State entry for this name)
    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: HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA FEIN: 680606790
    Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2746528
    Registration Number: CT0149740
    Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
    Issue Date: 3/3/2009 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/2011
    Registration Status: Delinquent Date This Status: 3/17/2011
    Date of Last Renewal: 3/17/2011
    Address Information
    Address Line 1: (SAME AS ABOVE) Phone:
    Address Line 2:
    Address Line 3:
    Address Line 4: LEUCADIA CA 92024
    Annual Renewal Information
    Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-05
    Fiscal End: 31-DEC-05
    Total Assets: $48,225.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $60,606.00
    RRF Received: 23-MAR-09
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted

    NOTE:  The $48,225.00 was probably a “Compassion Capacity-Building Grant” to start with.   Google “990 finder” and search by EIN to get the Federal Fillings:

    Here, the amount $48,225 shows under “CHMC.”

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    California Healthy Marriages Coal CA 2005 $48,225 990EZ 10 68-0606790
    California Healthy Marriages Coalition CA 2008 $328,871 990 24 68-0606790
    California Healthy Marriages Coalition CA 2007 $340,894 990 19 68-0606790
    California Healthy Marriages Coalition CA 2006 $148,062 990 21 68-0606790
    California Healty Marriages Coaltion CA 2009 $334,155 990 22 68-0606790

    Looking at the 2005 EIN, one reads purpose:  “CHMC has begun (in 2005) a 17-month federally-funded project

    to offer training and technical assistance

    to marriage-support organizations (including coalitions) throughout California.”  EXPENSES:   $41,709.

    Two Directors (only) are listed:  Dennis Stoica (at a PO Box in Cerritos, CA), and Carolyn Curtis, Ph.D., at a street address in Sacramento.  Remember the names;

    they will show up in several other related organizations / associations, including with another name-changing organization (getting millions) in Colorado.

    Modest salaries are only $10K (Stoica) and $7K (Curtis).   Curtis seems to have better luck staying incorporated than STOICA:

    (Secretary of State)

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2629035 11/08/2004 SUSPENDED CALIFORNIA STATE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE  ((Oakland addresss) CHRIS GRIER
    C2896098 06/01/2006 ACTIVE FRESNO COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC., A NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION ROBYN L ESRAELIAN
    C2271911 03/07/2001 DISSOLVED HEALTHY CHALLENGES MARRIAGE, FAMILY AND CHILD COUNSELING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ELIZABETH LEHRER
    C2884897 06/23/2006 SUSPENDED NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER DENNIS J STOICA
    C2884898 06/23/2006 SUSPENDED ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION DENNIS J STOICA
    C2955473 10/04/2006 SUSPENDED RIVERSIDE HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC. LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
    C2650745 05/12/2004 ACTIVE SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT CAROLYN RICH CURTIS
    C3210304 05/29/2009 ACTIVE SAINTS HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT REGINA GLASPIE
    C2860238 03/02/2006 ACTIVE STANISLAUS COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION JAMES CARLETON STEWARD
    C3013354 08/13/2007 ACTIVE YUBA-SUTTER HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT WILLIAM F JENS

    “ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION” (Stoica, see above) never bothered to register with the Attorney General as a Nonprofit:

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION Charity Not Registered SACRAMENTO CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    which may have something to do with why it got suspended.  Alas, because that makes the EIN# harder to get at.  Mr. Stoica flew off (at least via internet) to Florida

    and has started (as of 2010) an association of Marriage Educators, nevertheless, called “NARME.”  Moreover, for how many people refer to the Orange County Marriage group, one would think it’s still legitimate.  But I’m focusing on the other ones, today.

    2011 News Release, announcement by Calif. Congressman Doris Matsui features Dr. Curtis and the “Relationship Skills Center,” from Matsui.house.gov:

    Congresswoman Matsui Announces Nearly $800,000 for Local Family Development Services

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-5) announced that the Relationship Skills Center, a Sacramento-based relationship education non-profit, has been awarded $798,825 through the United States Department of Health and Human Services to provide relationship and family stability educational services.

    Awarded through the Administration for Children and Families-Healthy Marriage Initiative, this funding will be used by the Relationship Skills Center to provide evidence based relationship education classes and case management services to help families improve their marriage and relationship skills, achieve career and economic stability, and connect families with a variety of community resources.

    “We are thrilled to receive this grant.  In the last five years we have helped 735 couples form healthy, stable, safe families,” said Carolyn CurtisHISTORY OF THE HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT

    The Healthy Marriage Project was founded in 2004 by lifetime therapist and college professor Dr. Carolyn Curtis. She discovered that communities across the nation were organizing and reducing their divorce rate by up to 50%. After a successful career as a therapist helping one couple at a time, Curtis envisioned an organization that would be capable of changing the lives of thousands of couples and their children across our community. In 2005 HMP obtained its 501 (c) (3) designation and began providing relationship skills classes through community and faith-based organizations in the Sacramento Region. HMP received its first significant funding in the form of a $50,000 grant from the Compassion Capital Fund

    Ph.D., Executive Director of the Relationship Skills Center.

    The “Relationship Skills Center” (per Curtis’ LinkedIn profile) was “Formerly Healthy Marriage Project” and Dr. Curtis has worked there since 2004, “7 years 8 months”   OK….  Looking at the list of ACF grantees, this organization name does not appear.  However it has the same street address as “Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project,” including the suite#.

    RELATIONSHIP SKILLS PAGE “CONTACT  US,”  URL:  “http://www.skills4us.org/Contact%20Us

    Address
    9719 Lincoln Village Drive, Suite 205
    Sacramento, CA 95827

    CHARITABLE TRUSTS:  “SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT.”

    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: SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT FEIN: 134280316
    Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2650745
    Registration Number: 130981
    Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
    Issue Date: 12/31/2005 Renewal Due Date: 2/15/2011
    Registration Status: Current Date This Status:
    Date of Last Renewal: 8/10/2010
    Address Information
    Address Line 1: 9719 LINCOLN VILLAGE DR, SUITE 205 Phone:
    Address Line 2:
    Address Line 3:
    Address Line 4: SACRAMENTO CA 95827
    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT 130981 Charity Current SACRAMENTO CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    Moreover, if one looks at the details, it’s clear that “EIN# 134280316” has been a going concern (both assets and income) from Day 1 (2005-06 year), but has not provided the annual required RRF forms, or iRS reports, regularly, as required by law.  Finally in 2010, they got a slap on the wrist from the Attorney General:

    (in the chart here, below the words “Fee Notice” are several entries indicating professional fundraising for the organization by “EXPRESSIONS.”  Professional Fundraisers also are required to register, and hand over evidence that their profits were received by an officer of the nonprofit they are raising funds for….  I’ll quote from the Fee Notice, which is a red flag for the public of something out of order for a nonprofit).

    Fiscal Begin: 01-OCT-08
    Fiscal End: 30-SEP-09
    Total Assets: $37,781.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $670,305.00
    RRF Received: 20-JUL-10
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted
    Fiscal Begin: 01-OCT-09
    Fiscal End: 30-SEP-10
    Total Assets: $64,938.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $598,785.00
    RRF Received: 08-AUG-11
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Rejected
    Related Documents
    1045737 RRF-1 2008
    1045738 IRS Form 990 2008
    59107 RRF-1 2009
    59108 IRS Form 990-EZ 2009
    130981441796 Fee Notice
    Prerequisite Information  {{LINES BELOW HERE REFER TO FUNDRAISING EVENTS..}} {{EXPRESSIONS is the PROFESSIONAL FUNDRAISER}}
    Prereq Type: Prerequisite Relationship: Charity
    Registrant: EXPRESSIONS
    Registration No: E0005532 Registration Type: Fundraising Event Registration Status: Complete
    Date Established: 6/30/2009 Association Date: 6/22/2009 Expiration Date: 7/31/2009
    Prereq Type: Prerequisite Relationship: Charity
    Registrant: EXPRESSIONS
    Registration No: E0007825 Registration Type: Fundraising Event Registration Status: Complete
    Date Established: 5/12/2010 Association Date: 4/24/2010 Expiration Date: 12/31/2010
    Prereq Type: Prerequisite Relationship: Charity
    Registrant: EXPRESSIONS
    Registration No: E0011403 Registration Type: Fundraising Event Registration Status: Complete
    Date Established: 7/13/2011 Association Date: 6/30/2011 Expiration Date: 7/31/2011

    The FEE NOTICE, dated Sept. 20, 2011, “NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT,  reads,

    1. Explanation/Information not provided for “YES” answer to Part B , Question No. 6.

    Part B of an RRF is “PART B – STATEMENTS REGARDING ORGANIZATION DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT” and question 6 is:  

    During this reporting period, did the organization receive any governmental funding? If so, provide an attachment listing the name of the agency, mailing address, contact person, and telephone number.  Incidentally, question 2 is:  During this reporting period, was there any theft, embezzlement, diversion or misuse of the organization’s charitable property or funds?  Question 5, for which (on the 2009 RRF, available to see on-line), “During this reporting period, were the services of a commercial fundraiser or fundraising counsel for charitable purposes used? If “yes,” provide an attachment listing the name, address, and telephone number of the service provider.

    was checked “No,” and (right around Father’s Day 2009) they were using a commercial fundraiser, a sole proprietorship called “EXPRESSIONS.”

    And (on 9/20/2011) the group was also reminded:

    2. The $75 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

    In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.

    I look forward to finding out by October 20th whether this nonprofit which exists primarily as a recipient of a Federal Grants program directing funds from welfare and child support enforcement (as I understand it) into marriage education classes, will get its act together.  I’d also really like to read the articles of incorporation, which it would make sense to post, and some groups actually do, on-line.

    On this ‘RELATIONSHIP SKILLS CENTER” (boasted about recently by Congressman Doris Matsui), we clearly have a SACRAMENTO emphasis, and address — yet, given that Carolyn Curtis shows as one of two incorporators of not the SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE but “CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGE” (corporate registration showing a SAN DIEGO area, not SACRAMENT) (now called “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS” on the charitable site . . )  it appears that Relationship Skills Center (formerly Healthy Relationships — which IS “California Healthy Marriages” but shares a street address & jurisdiction with the Sacramento Healthy Marriage….) sees itself as the original organization, per its “About Us/ History Page”:

    HISTORY OF THE HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT

    The Healthy Marriage Project was founded in 2004 by lifetime therapist and college professor Dr. Carolyn Curtis. … Curtis envisioned an organization that would be capable of changing the lives of thousands of couples and their children across our community. In 2005 HMP obtained its 501 (c) (3) designation and began providing relationship skills classes through community and faith-based organizations in the Sacramento Region.

    …HMP received its first significant funding in the form of a $50,000 grant from the Compassion Capital Fund,   …

    In 2006, HMP applied for and was awarded $2.5 million from the Administration for Children and Families to provide relationship skills classes to low income pregnant unwed couples or couples with an infant. The resulting Flourishing Families Program, now in its fourth year, has served over 500 families, and its success has been nationally recognized. In 2009 HMP was chosen as one of three from a total of 120 healthy marriage demonstration grantees to provide peer to peer training. HMP was selected to lead four workshops at the National Healthy Marriage – Responsible Fatherhood Grantee Conference.

    OK, here are the 2 relevant ACF Grantees again, for 2011, per the Oct 3 news release. interesting that October is also “Domestic Violence Awareness Month”:

    .Healthy Marriage Grantees (top of two charts; the bottom, of almost equal amount (total) is “Fatherhood.”

    Legal Name Organization City
    State
    Award Amount
    Healthy Relationships California Leucadia
    CA
    $2,500,000

    Secretary of State shows Incorporator Patty Howell (and if one clicks, the Leucadia Address)   SOS site does not allow EXACT search, so we got others, too (it really is an inferior search site, and very unwieldy)

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C3073670 01/16/2008 SUSPENDED CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
    C2746528 05/13/2005 ACTIVE HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA PATTY HOWELL
    C2790720 06/09/2006 ACTIVE OAKLAND BERKELEY INITIATIVE FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS DARRYL HARRISON
    C2494811 01/06/2003 DISSOLVED THE CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. TAMARA ILICH
    Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project Sacramento
    CA
    $798,825

    Secretary of State Registration shows it’s still active:

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2650745 05/12/2004 ACTIVE SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT CAROLYN RICH CURTIS

    The EIN# 680606790 (federal level — posted above) belongs to “CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION” (per IRS 990s) which “IS” “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA” as to (state-level) Charitable Registrations.  Carolyn Curtis, Ph.D. (along with Stoica) was indeed apparently a founder — at least an incorporator.  Somehwere, CHMC became “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA” — however (inexplicably) that corporation was also formed in 2005 by another person, Patty Howell.  Adding to the confusion,

    The EIN# 134280316 belongs to “CHMC” — which is Leucadia (=San Diego Area).  KEY that EIN# into the OAG site and you’ll get a listing called

    “Sacramento Healthy Marriages Project “

    ONE is in Southern CA — the other in Northern CA, and we’re a very lengthy state.
    Try it now (takes a few seconds) — Please!   Then, from “foundationfinder” look at their 2006 IRS 990 form:  Executive Director Carolyn Curtis drew a moderate salary of $32,731,”  plus obviously also the $7K she got with Mr. Stoica under the other group.    
    {{I believe this link shows clearly the HHS connection, or at least one of them, to STOICA and HHS:  Bill Coffin promoting a Stoica Webinar on how to get ACF grants.  Bill self-describes as “
    • Bill Coffin
    • Working with NARME and CA Healthy Marriages Coalition on a part-time basis.
      Was Exec Dir of IDEALS (Jan-Aug 2011) [[Has links to these groups, too, based in PA & Kentucky]]
    • From 2002-10 I was the Special Assistant for Marriage Education at ACF/HHS
    BILL also, in “MARRIAGE.GOV” summarizes the Healthy Marriage Movement with glowing descriptions of Wade Horn & George Bush
    It should hardly surprise us that Mr. Coffin is also found presenting at AFCC (Washington, D.C.) in 2007:

    14. Marriage Skills Education and the Courts

    Saving marriages was once a goal of family courts, but was de- emphasized amid all the other problems courts address. Recent developments in relationship skills education offer new hope for improving marriages. Meanwhile, there are increasing demands to do something to reduce the damage to parents and children in fam- ily separation. Can courts not just mitigate the effects of family breakdown, but also help reduce it? First, they must study what works, and carefully adapt programs to the people they serve and to other real-world constraints.

    Bill Coffin M.Ed., Special Assistant for Marriage Education, Administration for Children and Families, Washington, D.C.

    John Crouch, J.D., Arlington, VA Fred J. DeJong, Ph.D., Calvin College, Grand Rapids, MI

    Dennis Stoica teaching a webinar on ACF grant announcements June 17 for NARME members

    On Friday June 17 from 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm (ET), NARME Board Member Dennis Stoica (President of California Healthy Marriages Coalition) will conduct a 90-minute webinar – for NARME Members only – comparing and contrasting the six different grant announcements which are scheduled to be released earlier that week.

    GOOD GRIEF:  This is Fathers Day, 2011, and STOICA is, despite website, I’d lay a bet, NOT President of “California Healthy Marriages Coalition,” however if he by some stretch of the imagination still is involved with Patty Howell’s “Healthy Relationships California” group (which now owns the CHMC Fictitious Business Name), THAT group appears to be evading taxes.  They didn’t even send in $75 with their last registration, and failed to report contact information for which government grants they were getting!”   This 2011 announcement indicates that someone who claims to have been working for ACF from 2002-2010 is using (inside information?) to help this faith-based group get a headsup on grants applications before they are announced.
    the group NARME was formed in Florida (under STOICA) only in 2010; it is a membership group rejoicing at the diversion of TANF funds for abstinence education, etc.
     
    Hundreds of organizations participated in a similar teleconference that Dennis conducted back in 2006 when the original Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grants and Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Grants were released; and many of those participants attributed their subsequent success in being awarded grants to a combination of that teleconference and the subsequent grant-writing tele-trainings that Dennis conducted during that year’s grant-writing period.  Since this webinar will only be offered to NARME members, if you have not yet joined NARME you should do that right away by going tohttp://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?EventID=881238.
    ANOTHER WEBSITE (don’t start bringing out the tomatoes to throw!  Just tell me why this site lists Stoica as “co-founder” of “EPISCOPAL CHURCH-OUR SAVIOR” (in Placerville, CA) and the employees just happen to match the CHMC employees!:  From SPOKE.com

    Dennis Stoica

    Title and Company:

    Company Address:

    Po Box 447
    PlacervilleCa 96114

    Carolyn Curtis

    Director

    Presenter

    Ralph Jones

    Master Trainer of…

    Dennis Stoica

    Co-Founder

    K Krafsky

    Community Mobiliz…

    Bento Leal

    Implementation Sp…

    Kerri Norbut

    Special Projects …

    Alison Doucette

    Special Projects …

    Jakki Penn

    GOOD GRIEF!

    The “Church OF Our Savior” at this address, is Episcopal, and is a historic landmark (it was not founded by Stoica!), around since the 1800s.

    Church of Our Saviour, “Serving God for over 150 years

    2979 Coloma St. // PO Box 447

    Placerville, CA 95667-0447
    office@oursaviourpv.org

     

      However, among the many ministries it operates IS, indeed, a MARRIAGE EDUCATION ministry:    

    Marriage Education Fr. Craig Kuehn Our Saviour offers several, research based, courses designed to enhance relationships, generically called marriage education. Every couple can benefit by attending at least one marriage education program per year. For more inforamtion, see www.edhealthymarriages.org.

    Coalition history

    We began under the intiation of the California Healthy Marriages Coalition and we received our initial funding from them (www.camarriage.com). Fr. Craig Kuehn of the Episcopal Church of Our Saviour, Placerville and Meredith Koch of Marshall Hospital, Placerville attended a workshop about grant opportunities promoting healthy marriages. Ever since then, the project snowballed into a coalition of faith-based and community-based organizations interested in and offering marriage and related programs to the people of El Dorado County, California.

    We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization as recognized by the Internal Revenue Service.

    YES THEY ARE — and one of the few who seems to have kept it up, better than their leaders.  As such they are helping market classes and products put out by

    some truly conservative groups, who are doing QUITE well and remain close to the government faucet.  how nice to know that religious organizations can profit from this also. They can collect their tithes AND their grants, from people who pay taxes towards the grants also, no doubt.   SEE THE LINKS LIST: including one I definitely recognize as being marketed through the welfare system, too:   PREPARE/ENRICH (a  research project out of Minnesota, FOR-profit formed in 1980); “SMARTMARRIAGES.COM” (a FOR-profit) organized by Diane Sollee, with this logo:

    SmartMarriages

    (ALSO quite well-informed about the marriage grants system, while shamelessly marketing classes, DVDs, train-the trainers, certifications, and holding conferences to keep this up),

    and “Institute for American Values,” PResident, David Blankenhorn (also of National Fatherhood Initiative)

    WIKIPEDIA on Blankenhorn confirms this and highlights his “expert-witness” testimony against Prop 8 (anti-Gay, California) as heard in the Supreme Court:

    Blankenhorn founded the Institute for American Values, a nonpartisan think tank whose stated mission is to “study and strengthen key American values”, in 1987.[1][3] In 1992, President George H.W. Bush appointed Blankenhorn to serve on the National Commission on America’s Urban Families.[4][2][5]Blankenhorn helped to found the National Fatherhood Initiative, a nonpartisan organization focused on responsible fatherhood, in 1994.[1][2][6] As of 2007, Blankenhorn has written “scores of op-ed pieces and essays, co-edited eight books and written two.”[1] Blankenhorn identifies as a liberal Democrat.[7][1]   “In his decision filed on August 4, 2010, Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that Blankenhorn was not qualified as an expert witness, and that his testimony was “unreliable and entitled to essentially no weight.”[10]

    BLANKENHORN is a Harvard Grad, (BA Social Studies 1977), and a masters in Comparative Social Science from a British University. He was raised Presbyterian in Mississippi.

    ANYHOW, as we can see, Fr. (or “Rev.”) KUEHN, above, Incorporated in time to get the grants, and has stayed incorporated:

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2856112 03/03/2006 ACTIVE EL DORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION CRAIG KUEHN
    … if not current on the Charitable Registration, for “EIN# 204384330
    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    EL DORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION 130730 Charity Delinquent PLACERVILLE CA Charity Registration Charity
    1
    The annual report was filed ONCE, and it appears that no IRS forms were provided  to notate who gave it the gov’t grants.  TAGGS search on this EIN
    comes up:

    RECIPIENT SEARCH RESULTS

    Recipient EIN = 204384330 No matching awards found.

    Obviously the corporation is operating right out of the church building:
    Entity Name: EL DORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION
    Entity Number: C2856112
    Date Filed: 03/03/2006
    Status: ACTIVE
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: PO BOX 447
    Entity City, State, Zip: PLACERVILLE CA 95667
    Agent for Service of Process: CRAIG KUEHN
    Agent Address: 2979 COLOMA ST
    Agent City, State, Zip: PLACERVILLE CA 95667
    But without government funding, it actually went into the hole:
    Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-09
    Fiscal End: 31-DEC-09
    Total Assets: $1,248.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: ($583.00)
    RRF Received: 12-JAN-10
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: N
    Status: Accepted
    And finally it appears that it filed income taxes ONCE — in 2006 only — as here:

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    El Dorado Healthy Marriages Coal CA 2006 $2,476 990EZ 10 20-4384330

    (This form has no signature on Tax Preparers’ line).  Line 1 -Revenue — Gifts, contributions, grants — shows $20,500.  Salaries, other comp & employee benefits come to $7,428:   $3,384 for Pres:  Rev. Kuehn + $2,006 for VP: Meredith Koch = $5,390.

    By my basic math, $7,428-$5,390 = $1,038 in some form of “comp” (no benefits listed) which I don’t see on the form.

    However, we do see $11,144 in “Conference fees & travel, supplies, & organization fees.”   There’s likely a membership going to CHMC, they buy material to vend? and they get tax-deductive travel & conference times.  Think AmWay….     The tax-exempt purpose is:  “PROMOTE AND TEACH MARRIAGE PROGRAMS.”

    Somehow, $20,655 (of $20,500 received) was spent to:

    Start-up and organizational expenses, capacity building to include six faith-based and community-based organizations teaching marriaged (sic) education.  This included training as (“at”) the Smart Marriages Conference and from California Healthy Marriages Coalition, 64 couples received marriage education.  (that’s a pretty high overhead….  How much did the marriage education for those couples cost?)

    Meredith Koch (retired nurse in the area) is found also teaching “PAIRS” classes.  PAIRS Foundation ends up being Federally Funded, too, in South Florida:

    Large, Multi-Year, Federally-Funded Study
    Finds Enduring Impact of Marriage Education

    Findings from a large, federally funded, multi-year study of South Florida couples participating in nine hours of marriage and relationship education found statistically significant improvements in consensus, satisfaction, affection, and cohesion for both distressed and non-distressed participants…

    Another way of seeing this — PAIRS is another nonprofit out of Florida helping the US Government run a multi-level marketing setup.  It could’ve been cars, toys, or

    any other service which would come under Consumer Protection laws; but it just instead happens to be relationship education.  One can Be a “Leader,” a “CPAIRS” (Christian — Perhaps later, Jews Muslims, Buddhists, Ba’hai, Hindi, etc. might make it on the radar — but so for those populations haven’t really caught the “marriage education is free money” bug yet, to the extent these religious Christian (churches) have.)   One can also be a PTP, MT, or TRAINER.  Buy into the system.  Might as well – -your taxes have already paid for it, and others like it.  See “UNDERSTANDING PAIRS LEVELS” at the site, telling title, “consumer.PAIRS.COM

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    PAIRS FOUNDATION  Weston FL 33331-3642 BROWARD 839942422 $ 4,950,000

    (that’s roughly $1 million/year from 2006-2010)

    (SIGH.  As usual, a combo of for-profit, and not-for-profits under similar names show up.   Seth D. Eisenberg of Florida — or is it Virginia? — has got it together now,

    and the PAIRS FOUNDATION (Inc.), which merged with PAIRS, Ltd. (his corp from VA) are now in business under EIN# 650629670.  With these cohorts, which are visualized (and listed) in CORPORATIONWIKI.Com.  This time, the FOR-PROFIT LLC is “Partnership Skills, LLC”

    As of March, 2011, a list of (mostly churches) with “COURSE PROVIDER” column mostly blank, included Seth & PAIRS International, LLC,” right after “Okeechobee Missionary Baptist Church” and listed these potential under “COUNSELOR” column:   ”  I notice the URL shows the Clerk of Records for the local Circuit court for Okeechobee County.

    EISENBERG, SETH KOSS, PHYLLIS FARBER, AURORA MINZER- BRYANT,SHARON FARBER, RHETT PARKER, DANA GARFIELD, ANNIE SALYERS, JANET GORDON, LORI SPINOSA, WILLIAM HERRINGTON, PEGGY VALDEZ, SCOTT.  

    The merger was in May, 2006, and possibly helped getting this, which I am sure also helped: (fromTAGGS).

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2006 90FE0029  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANTS: PRIORITY AREA 2 1 0 ACF 09-24-2006 839942422 $ 990,000 
    Fiscal Year 2006 Total: $ 990,000

    If I go to USASPENDING.gov and type in the DUNS# and check “GRANTS” only (not “Contracts, Loans,” etc.), and check the tab “TIMELINE” it’s very clear that the above 2006 grant was NOT reported to usaspending.gov, although 2007, 08, 09 & 10 were.  In other words, usaspending.gov ain’t reliable.

    Also clear (looking at details) from this is that the CFDA is 93086 (marriage/fatherhood ) AND that the source is “75-

    Also, (I took the DUNS# and went to “USASPENDING.gov” Prime Award, checked every category except grants, and got 15 transactions:

    • Total Dollars:$227,754
    • Transactions:1 – 15 of 15

    Recommended to do (est. time — 4 minutes max) — well over $100K of this is contracts from 2011 only.  The map above (interactive) shows that half its business (contracts) are from California & Indiana (strong fatherhood state) combined, but also Georgia, Virginia, NOrth Carolina and Florida.  Not bad, eh?

    And (same search, showing “Timeline” of increase in contracts (by graph/bars) shows about a 5-fold increase from 2009.  If you’re IN, you’re IN, in this field.

    Nonprofit + related For-PRofit means wider coverage and probably more profits.  Simply design a product to match the HHS Healthy Marriage/Fatherhood grants stream!   THere’s also a “4-1-1 Kids, Inc.” with his name on it.  Seth appears to be 2nd Generation “MARRIAGE EDUCATION” — as it says on “FATHERHOODCHANNEL.com“:

    Seth Eisenberg, the youngest son of PAIRS Founder Lori Heyman Gordon grew up with a front row seat to the birth of marriage and relationship education. He joined PAIRS Foundation in 1995 to help improve business and organizational systems, began teaching classes in 1999, training instructors in 2000, and was elected President/CEO in 2008. Over the past 12 years, Seth spearheaded development of PAIRS’ evidence-based, brief, multi-lingual courses and technologies to make marriage and relationship education widely accessibile to diverse communities worldwide. He has taught classes to thousands of young people, adults and trained more than 1,000 PAIRS instructors who deliver services to tens of thousands. In 2006, Seth’s “PAIRS Relationship Skills for Strong South Florida Families,” proposal was awarded a multi-year, multi-million dollar grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. The grant program has allowed thousands of people throughout South Florida to participate in free classes, including many low-income, formerly homeless, recovering addicts, special needs populations, immigrants, and veterans who could not have otherwise benefited, while also conducting extensive, rigorous research activities to better understand and validate the impact of marriage and relationship education.

    It is “free” to low-income because most likely it was taken from more direct social services to these populations, such as food, housing help, cash aid, or child support enforcement where applicable.  Reminder:  The Florida “PAIRS” first started (out of several incorporations) as for-profit, and it started in 1994.

    I look it up at http://www.sunbiz.org, which is where FL corporations go to register.  California needs a site like this.

    Officer/RA Name Entity Name Entity Number
    EISENBERG, SETH D THE PAIRS FOUNDATION, INC. N00000003614
    EISENBERG, SETH D 411-KIDS, INC. N04000002485
    EISENBERG, SETH D UST INTERNATIONAL, INC. P96000094023
    EISENBERG, SETH D THE PAIRS FOUNDATION, INC. N00000003614

    From the (top) filing I get an EIN#  521327867

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    PAIRS Foundation FL 2009 $313,681 990 25 52-1327867
    PAIRS Foundation FL 2008 $353,339 990 26 52-1327867
    PAIRS Foundation FL 2007 $0 990R 2 52-1327867
    PAIRS Foundation FL 2007 $414,952 990 17 52-1327867
    Pairs Foundation Ltd FL 2006 $252,096 990 22 52-1327867
    Pairs Foundation Ltd VA 2005 $306,643 990 16 52-1327867
    Pairs Foundation Ltd FL 2004 $300,853 990 14 52-1327867
    Pairs Foundation Ltd VA 2003 $242,249 990 15 52-1327867
    Pairs Foundation Ltd VA 2002 $63,906 990 14 52-1327867

    EIN Watchdog.net describes it as having begun in 1984 c/o “Lori H. Gordon” (which matches his description, above) and last filed in 2007, and with a street address of 2771 Executive Park, #1 Weston, FL.  This worries me, because that’s one of the operating addresses of this organization (per USAspending.gov) and was also found in a SEC complaint on REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT FRAUD (but no overlap of persons involved that I can see, just the street address).  To be clerar, this is a criminal complaint, date-stamped Nov. 15, 2007, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Southern District vs. (various redevelopment agencies)

    (COMPLAINT):

    SUMMARY

    1. Since at least 2002, Webb, individually and through certain entities he owns and controls, -has defrauded numerous investors through a real estate-based investment scheme. During the relevant period, the Defendants have raised at least $8.4 million from more than 80 investors by offering and selling securities in the form of investment contracts to investors in several states, including Florida, California and North Carolina.

    (PAIRS had contracts in those states, plus Georgia, Virginia? & Indiana).

    The PAIRS Foundation, Ltd. (per watchdog.net) address figures in paragraphs 15 & 30

    15. CitiRise NC is a North Carolina limited liability company with its original principal office at 901 Barmouth Ct., Raleigh, North Carolina 27614. At least by November 2005, Citifise NC was reporting on its North Carolina State filings’that its principal office address was at 2771 Executive Park Drive, Suite 1, Weston, Florida 33331-3643, the same address used by CitiRise FL

    30. Webb and the Webb Companies solicited investment offers in various ways, including through word-of-mouth generated by other investors and through Webb’s personal contact with local church groups, including meeting with local.pastors of such churches. In addition, Webb supervised the preparation of promotional materials advertising alliances with faith-based groups, such as a “partnership” between CitiRise and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Webb and the Webb Companies also, on occasion, used independent sales associates who solicited investors through their personal or professional contacts in exchange for commissions. Webb and the Webb Companies also manufactured publicity in other ways, including favorable newspaper profiles in The Triangle Tribune and Triangle

    Business Journal in Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina and an appearance by Webb on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes program in December 2005. In addition, one of Webb’s entities, CitiRise, maintained a website (at http://www.citirise.com) fiom at least 2005 to approximately October 2007 that described Webb’s professional biography, the CitiRise business “model,” and reflected theCitiRise “Corporate Headquarters” address at 2771 Executive Park Drive, Suite 1, Weston, Florida 33331-an address CitiRise no longer occupied from around the Summer of 2006

     PAIRS FOUNDATION, Inc. changed FROM that address (per FL filings) on 1/20/2009, to 1675 Market Street #207, Weston, FL, but didn’t report this until 9/20/2010.  In other words, 5 days after filing the 2009 report, it moved.  09/20/2010 — ADDRESS CHANGE

    USAspending.gov contracts (15 records from 2009 forward) reflect for some reason both addresses.

    • She didn’t provide original signatures, or addresses (although did mail a check).
    • The term “Ltd.” is not acceptable.   
    • They apparently then fixed this and changed it to “inc.”

      I thought it was common knowledge that “Ltd.” was not a USA corporate suffix; Corporation or “Inc.” (etc.) are.  I guess not.    The purpose of the nonprofit

    “Research, development and training of relationship skills for youth and families and communities.  Development of materials and programs to reduce anger, conflict and violence.”

    Here is Lori Gordon giving a rave review to (Helping sell)  a book by D. Stosney, called “Love without Hurt” in which he explains how abused women can help their men stop abusing them.   Rave reviewers also included Dianne Sollee of “Smartmarriages.com”

    This is an important book for everyone in every stage of a relationship, to heal and make whole the love we begin with. Give it as a wedding gift, birthday present, parenting gift. This is knowledge and understanding we all need to be able to heal ourselves and preserve our most cherished relationships. — Lori H. Gordon, Ph.D. founder of PAIRS.

    (Here’s the book, described):   Reviews of Love without HurtTurn Your Resentful, Angry, or Emotionally Abusive Relationship into a Compassionate, Loving One

    Library Journal

    Stosny has put into words the techniques used in his successful Compassion-Power and Boot Camp programs, which help women who have been subjected to criticism, put-downs, or cold shoulders from their husbands or boyfriends. Complete with checklists, case studies, and well-researched information, his program not only shows the damage that verbally and emotionally abusive relationships do to spouses and children but also demonstrates how to change them, with guidance for both parties. For their part, women are directed to practice self-healing skills. Clear, timely, and on the mark; recommended for all libraries. Copyright 2005 Reed Business Information.

    (Usually verbally and emotionally abusive are on their way to physically abusive which, unchecked, goes all the way to “lethal” unless stopped, although not all go the full range.  Somehow this is being missed. …  And it absolutely the church theme, for the most part, that women are to stop the abuse, somehow, by changing themselves.  That’s another reason I protest these programs….)

    Looking up “Lori H. Gordon, Ph.D.” I found (yet another) Christian Marriage Association, as they advertised PAIRS training.

    Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills(PAIRS)

    2771 Executive Park Drive Suite #1
    Weston, FL 33331
    USA
    Website: http://www.pairs.com/
    Contact(s)
    Seth Eisenberg
    Phone: 877-PAIRS-4U
    Fax: 954-337-2981
    Purpose
    Sustain healthy relationships
    Description
    The PAIRS programs, developed by Lori H. Gordon, Ph.D., provide a comprehensive system to enhance self-knowledge and to develop the ability to sustain pleasurable intimate relationships. PAIRS is located in Reston, Virginia but is a nationally known program

    “The Association of Marriage & Family Ministries” ( photo to right appears to be its founders, out of Scottsdale, AZ) reveals that marriage education is a great  tool for church growth.  So I suppose there’s no harm in having non-believers fund church growth because, what’s good for the Kingdom is surely good for the rest of America?

    The Association of Marriage and Family Ministries (AMFM) and its members are committed to you, the local Church, the pastor and all those called to this vital area of ministry. There has never been a greater time in history to show the love of Christ than today in serving those marriages and families that God has given us.

    Today, there is no greater growth tool for the church than to have strong marriages and healthy families walking out of the church on Sunday (when ever you worship) and walking into the culture on Monday. What a great opportunity to impact our culture for the Kingdom.

    Blessings,

    Eric and Jennifer Garcia
    Co-Founders

    (Sunday worship post-dated Jesus Christ by a few centuries, last I heard.  See Emperor Constantine    🙂    )

     

     LIKe NCADV,NARME, and AFCC, there is a sliding scale of membership.  THe more you can afford, the more you will pay.

    “Resource Vendors” pay the highest:

    Student Membership – $35

    Individual Membership – $75

    Church Organization Membership – $125 – $450

    Resource Membership (Vendors) – $225 – $550

    (I.E. SPECIAL PRIVILEGES FOR SPECIAL PAYMENTS )

     

     FORGIVE ME FOR NOT RESISTING THE TEMPTATION TO POINT OUT THAT THE BIBLE SAYS AND RECOMMENDS THE OPPOSITE:

    BY CONTRAST, THE BIBLE CONDEMNS HAVING “RESPECT OF PERSONS” AND DECLARE THAT GOD DOESN’T.

    JAMES 2:

    My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.2For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; 3And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 4Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? 5Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? 6But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? 7Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?8If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: 9But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

    NOT TO MENTION (WHILE I”M IN “JAMES”) A SCATHING COMMENTARY ON RICH MEN, AND FAWNING OVER THEM IN THE CHURCHES:

    26If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain. 27Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”


     INSTEAD, THESE PROGRAMS ARE ACTUALLY TAKING AWAY FROM THE FATHERLESS AND THE WIDOWS, BY TAKING TANF FUNDS TO PROMOTE MARRIAGE EDUCATION TO HELP EXPAND THEIR CHURCHES! . . .    IF THEY WERE PREACHING RIGHT TO START WITH, WOULDN’T THEIR MARRIAGES BE IN BETTER SHAPE?  SEEMS TO ME THERE’S ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THE BIBLE ON LOVING ONE ANOTHER, AND A GOOD BIT ON MARRIAGE ALSO (I COR 13, EPHESIANS – – IT’S THROUGHOUT).

     

    SOMEBODY HAD TO DO THIS — why not me? — I looked up their corporate status in Scottsdale.   For one, someone from Scottsdale is following my site:

     

     

    Click on ID number to see the full detail.
    ID Type Name
    12163487 CORPORATION THE ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY MINISTRIES, INC.

    ©Copyright 2000 by Arizona Secretary of State – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

     

     

     

     

    Here we go:  (date — today, 10/11/11)

     

    Corporate Status Inquiry
    File Number:  -1216348-7
    Corp. Name: THE ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY MINISTRIES, INC.
    This Corporation is NOT in Good Standing for the following reasons:
    DELINQUENT ANNUAL REPORT 09/13/2011
    2011 ANNUAL REPORT WAS DUE ON 05/19/2011

     

    Next Annual Report Due: 05/19/2011

     Surprise, surprise, lots of Delinquent Reports, and two Dissolved/Reinstated.  I can’t paste too much from the AZ corporations site; it positions funny.

     

    Somehow, being delinquent, or even suspended status rarely seems to slow down these groups.  I recently ran across another one (with California links) called “ABOVE THE LINE”  — they run retreats, and marriage enrichment seminars, and (as I recall) the Tonkins were proud of their association with Dr. Phil.

    There is “ABOVE THE LINE ASSOCIATION, INC.” at the same (residential) address the Garcia’s (of AMFM), which ALSO appears to be not filing, but not yet IRS_suspended.  Here are the 990 reports:

    EIN# 460496745 

     

     

    ID Type Name
    10418500 CORPORATION ABOVE THE LINE ASSOCIATION, INC.


      It got warnings about dissolution in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.  It WAS dissolved the year after it formed — 2003, and reinstated.  What a mess — and these people are teaching us how NOT to get divorced?

    On 9/27/2005, they provided (finally!  Forms are available in a single click on-line, too!) the “Annual Report” for years 2003, 2004 & 2005, and were reinstated.

    By 12/11/2006, their status was pending again, but they managed to file a report by the following April, for the year 2006.  Three months later, they are again “status pending” and apparently didn’t respond.  Another 12 months, another notice, and still they didn’t respond.  So in 9/2008 they were dissolved – but got reinstated two months later (11/17/2008) probably by forking over the annual reports for 2007 and 2008.

    Is that the type of behavior (even for tiny grants) we want of an organization getting $103,000 of help/grants from the Government?

    Administrative Dissolution Date Administrative Dissolution Reason Reinstatement Date
    AD-DISSOLVED – FILE A/R  
    AD-DISSOLVED – FILE A/R 11/17/2008
    AD-DISSOLVED – FILE A/R 09/27/2005

    (But as of 7/2005, the same couple had already formed AMFM, above).

    Your query: ( Organization Name: None Chosen , State: None Chosen , Zip: None Chosen , EIN: 460496745 , Fiscal Year: None Chosen )
    4 matching documents retrieved (4 displayed) 

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    Above The Line Association Inc. AZ 2007 $5,464 990EZ 15 46-0496745
    Above The Line Association Inc. AZ 2006 $2,498 990EZ 12 46-0496745
    Above The Line Association Inc. AZ 2005 $800 990 17 46-0496745
    Above The Line Association Inc. AZ 2002 $0 990 12 46-0496745

     

     And their 2005 filing explains WHY it pays to look at the IRS 990 filings!

    Government Grant (doesn’t show under this EIN via TAGGS) — $103,500

    Program Expenses:    (neat, eh?)  $102,845.

    Eric and Jennifer Garcia (husband/wife) are the unpaid directors of “ABOVE THE LINE ASSOCIATION INC.”

    “Part II line 43” expenses are explained, among other things as (statement 3):

    STATEMENT 3 SCHEDULE A, PART II,LINE 2 TRANSACTIONS WITH TRUSTEES ,DIRECTORS, ETC.

    THE ORGANIZATION PAID $100,000 TO A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, GARCIA-TOOKER LLC, WHICH IS OWNED BY ERIC AND JENNIFER GARCIA. THE PAYMENT WAS FOR THE SPONSORSHIP OF TWO MARRIAGE AND FAMILY CONFERENCES DURING THE YEAR 2005.    

    I find the multiple corporate names in a few short years, and the shoddy incorporation history to be a little suspicious.  Where did the initial $103K come from and why is it not listed in TAGGS that I can see (I tried the EIN#)?

    Roughly translated, they paid themselves $100K (which is “Expenses”) to sponsor two marriage conferences (not named).  Because this is not a major amount, who is about to look it up, or go request the information?  But multiply this by how many such organizations are lining up to do exactly the same thing, and there goes our social services funding, nationwide, poured down the gullet of religious tax evaders and delinquent filers.

    Garcia-Tooker LLC DID exist, possibly in order to shift money to or from Above the Line  . . . and/or AMFM (the 2005forward version).  While I think Rev. Craig Kuehn of El Dorado Healthy Marriage (duration, one tax filing in 2006) simply wasn’t up to the corporate filings (he’s a Rev!) — this looks like more deliberate planning to move names and money around — and less honest.

    I looked this up.  From what I can tell, “GARCIA-TOOKER LLC” (these two) INCORPORATED  in JAN. 2004. One month later they changed their name to ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY & MARRIAGE MINISTRIES, LLC.”  (may load microfilm image)….  In other words, by the time they’d published their incorporation, it was under a different name.  8 months later an agent resigned:  

     

     THIS LINKS TO THE GRAPHICS OF “ABOVE THE LINE” — what they are selling:  “http://marriagehelpcenters.com”  (see “Dr. Phil” connection).

    Their lnks are familiar by now — and some we know federally funded:  (photo is “Ron & Tina Konkin”)

     

     Ron & Tina Konkin

     Throughout the years that we’ve been providing our seminar and bootcamp services, we’ve aligned ourselves with many organizations and partners who share our commitment to helping people just like you. The following are just some of our affiliations, partnerships, and camaraderie.

     Among other things being sold is an “Exclusive Couples Retreat” (only $4,995) where one can learn to play games designed by Dr. Phil….Intensive Relationship Boot Camp is only $1,225. . (not including hotel, ca $109 group rate). . . . Don’t miss two upcoming in California . . . . . 

     

     

    GUIDESTAR regarding “Above the Line, Inc.,” a red-font alert to left of the listing, writes:  “This organization does not appear in the IRS’s most recent list of tax-exempt organizations. IRS records do not, however, indicate that the organization’s tax-exempt status has been revoked. Contact the organization for more information.”

     

     THERE”S MORE TO THIS MAZE:

     Apparently, Patty Howell (of “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS as incorporated in 2005) noticed that the “California Healthy Marriage” name was vacant, and registered as the owner of what is now a Fictitious Business name.  Or, they were working together, and notified each other, I don’t know.  I would never have found this without having gotten irritated enough to continue looking at the county level, where this is registered:  

       

     

    THESE CHANGES happened in 2009 & 2011:  http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca/us/services/fbn/search.aspx if the image doesn’t show below:
    San Diego “Fictitious Business” registration shows 3 trademarks of this group:
    But they want to sell me further details (forget it!)
    Records 1 – 3 of 3
    Select Filing Number Business Name Owner Name Document Type Filing Date
      …  Certified  Non-Certified 2009-019747 CALIFONIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION STATEMENT 7/7/2009
      …  Certified  Non-Certified 2008-033480 CALIFORNIA MARRIAGE INITIATIVE CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION STATEMENT 10/22/2008
      …  Certified  Non-Certified 2009-019745 CALIFORNIA MARRIAGE PROJECT CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION STATEMENT 7/7/2009
    Notice that the “Coalition” is the “OWNER NAME.”  However, I happen to know that in the OAG site, it has a different name.  SEarching that, I found (notice dates),
    Select Filing Number Business Name Owner Name Document Type Filing Date
      …  Certified  Non-Certified 2011-002009 CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA STATEMENT 1/21/2011
    TO SUMMARiZE:  “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA” as a BUSINESS was incorporated by Patty Howell in 2005.  Think location “SAN DIEGO” (Leucadia).
       
    But as to being a (delinquent) charity, “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA” actually resides in SACRAMENTO and is associated with (and credit is taken for it) by Carolyn Curtis.
         
    Yet the HHS/ACF appears to think that it’s still in Leucadia when reporting the 2011 grantees as “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS” and “SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION” (associated with Curtis) – as a separate group.       
       
    And I haven’t even gotten into “WorldClassMarriage.com” which is also Howell-Jones (who appear together on I forget which Board of Directors…..).
       
        
    Carolyn Curtis’ LinkedIn profile, however, relates Healthy Relationships (San Diego) with “Relationship Skills Center” (Sacramento), which is getting good press right now.
       
       (FROM LINKEDIN  page)
       

    Carolyn Curtis

    Executive Director and Founder, Healthy Marriage Project

    Sacramento, California Area 
    Nonprofit Organization Management
    Current
    Past
    Education
    • Alliant University
    • California State University-Sacramento
    • University of California, Davis
    Connections

    437 connections

    Websites
    • Personal Website
         
         
     
     
     
    Looking further at this detail, towards the bottom, its clear this organization is prosperous — both assets and revenues are increasing.  However, it is not filing RRFs or IRS forms with the
    Office of Attorney General, and FINALLY gets a mild slap on the wrist, dated April 2010 (Four years after it was awarded, and boasted that it was awarded, the largest EVER
    Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood Grant.  I blogged it, too!    See this post (scroll down past the large chart):    
     
    LETS HAVE FUN ANALYZING THE ANALYSTS” and learn that the largest-ever grant went to a faith-based organization collaborating with 23 other faith-based organizations.
    In 2006, CHMC received a five-year, $2.4 million per year grant from Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (HHS/ACF), the largest grant ever awarded by HHS/ACF in support of Healthy Marriages.  Through this funding, CHMC partners with a network of 23 faith- and community-based organizations (FBCOs) throughout California (from http://www.camarriage.com/about/index.ashx?nv=3)
    Their team includes (per website), Dennis Stoica, Patty Howell, and Ralph Jones, among others, such as Bento Leal (LinkedIN lists only this organization) despite college degree in 1973;
    Oh dear, it looks (see this) like he may have some connection with the Unification Church (see URL)?
    http://www.tparents.org/Library/Unification/Talks/Leal/leal-marriage.htm
    “Bento Leal is the California Regional Coordinator of the American Leadership Conference, a project of the American Constitution Committee.”
     OH DEAR, YES.    Interrupting our “regularly scheduled program material,” let me speak to my (money trail / family court reform / blogging mothers) who don’t want to touch this
    topic with a 10-foot pole — that the incredible push for forcing marriage education on us DOES have a strong Unification Church origin (see also the CRC history page, website CRCKids.org, which actknowledges involvement).  THe phrase TRUE PARENTS” — refers to Rev. Sun Myung Moon and his wife.  I am sorry people don’t wish to touch this with at 10-foot pole, but I wish to nail it to that pole.  Does this perhaps answer why so many of these grantees smack of money-laundering traits, like it’s known the UC does?  ??
     
    this 2001 Excerpt from Bento Leal (never heard of the guy before) shows how they are going after inner city urban churches.  FOr more, go see Rick Ross sites, or others:   
       
    UNIFICATION TRAINER IN CHMC . . ..  

    Today Was A Very Special Day In California

    Bento Leal
    November 30, 2001

    Today was a very special day in California:

    Tonight (Thursday, Nov. 29) 800 people heard True Mother speak at the Marriott Hotel in downtown Oakland, CA.

    Program: Delicious dinner, songs by the Redeemed Convicts for Christ, then Rev. Jenkins greeted everyone, later he introduced Arhbishop Stallings who gave an uplifting introduction of True Mother, who read her speech with warmth and grace. Afterwards flowers and plaques were given to Mother. Mother then presented 3 of the gold watches to leading ministers and she also presented 8 framed Ambassador for Peace certificates to selected leaders. The program went very well and the audience was very appreciative of the entire event. Afterward, there was a lively victory celebration with hookup to True Father at East Garden for singing and testimony.

    Earlier in the day was an afternoon ILC that featured 70 people (40 guests and 30 UC members). Several Ambassadors for Peace attended the ILC. Northern California has awarded 90 Ambassadors for Peace representing clergy, educators, community organization leaders, journalists, and others. Dr. Frank Kaufman presented the IIFWP material very eloquently and professionally and was followed by Imam Qasmi of the Muslim community of Sacramento who strongly praised TPs for their work to promote strong marriages and families, and bring unity among the faiths. Though he is fasting for Ramadan, he drove the 2 hours from Sacramento just to present his 15 minute talk to our group. He immediately drove back to officiate services in his mosque.

    We then had a presentation by our local WFWP chairwoman. After the break, a sister read the HDH material on Marriage for our AFC session, which was followed by Rev. Lawrence Van Hook speaking strongly about the importance of a God-centered marriage.

    One special feature of the day was a visit by Archbishop Stallings and a few of us with Mayor Jerry Brown of Oakland. We presented him with a nicely framed Ambassador for Peace certificate in his office. He was impressed with our work and has fond memories of working with us over the years. He asked us to help him with tutors for struggling students in a military academy for 7th graders that he set up in Oakland. We said that we would help him.

    Archbishop Stallings was also able to bring Rev. Dr. J. Alfred Smith, Sr., Pastor of Allen Temple Baptist Church in Oakland. Rev. Smith is a foremost leader among the clergy in Oakland. This was the first time he had attended a speech with TPs, {{TRUE PARENTS, get it?}} so this was a HUGE breakthrough. Mother presented him with a watch for all of the wonderful work he is doing for the city of Oakland. The door is now open for us to work more closely with him.

    CHMC site describes Bento Leal’s background including working with a different set of federal grants in SF:  HERE IT IS:

    Bento Leal
    Implementation Specialist
    Bento@CaMarriage.com
    510.333.3478

    Bento has worked in the field of marriage- and family-strengthening for the past 20 years. Before joining CHMC staff, he worked with Federal grants in the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Area to provide life skills mentoring to ex-offenders and to help build family-strengthening capacity of small or emerging faith-based and community organizations.  Bento is a trainer in several Marriage Education curricula, including Mastering the Mysteries of Love (MML).  Bento’s primary assignments with CHMC are to teach MML leadership workshops and provide technical assistance to newly-trained MML facilitators so they are successful in organizing and conducting MML classes.  Bento and his wife, Kimiko, have been married for 25 years.

      
    Fiscal Begin:
    Fiscal End: 31-DEC-09
    Total Assets: $334,155.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $3,232,190.00
    RRF Received: 15-MAR-11
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: N
    Status: Accepted
    Related Documents
    00000550 CT-550  **{{THIS IS THE LETTER OF DELINQUENCY.  CHECK IT OUT!}}
    1056740 IRS Form 990 2008
    1056741 RRF-1 2007
    57272 RRF-1 2008
    Prerequisite Information
    No Prerequisite Information
    IRS Return Data
    This letter, citing the same CTFILE# you see above, is dated APRIL 2010, and says only, Please, if you would, pay the $150 annual fee (and is silent about the missing material from 2006-2010)

    CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION

    1045 PASSIFLORA AVE. ENCINITAS CA 92024

    RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT

    April 5, 2010

    The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

    1. The $150 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

    In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587

    WHY was there no interest in the previous year’s filings?   Hmmmm??
    Regarding Dennis Stoica (first listed as CHMC staff), here is the corporate business search results on “California Healthy Marriage” (singular):
    I realize the “Agent” column may not display and suggest readers do their own search at http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/cbs.aspx
    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2629035 11/08/2004 SUSPENDED CALIFORNIA STATE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE CHRIS GRIER
    C2896098 06/01/2006 ACTIVE FRESNO COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC., A NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION ROBYN L ESRAELIAN
    C2271911 03/07/2001 DISSOLVED HEALTHY CHALLENGES MARRIAGE, FAMILY AND CHILD COUNSELING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ELIZABETH LEHRER
    C2884897 06/23/2006 SUSPENDED NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER DENNIS J STOICA
    C2884898 06/23/2006 SUSPENDED ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION DENNIS J STOICA
    C2955473 10/04/2006 SUSPENDED RIVERSIDE HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC. LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
    C2650745 05/12/2004 ACTIVE SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT CAROLYN RICH CURTIS
    C3210304 05/29/2009 ACTIVE SAINTS HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT REGINA GLASPIE
    C2860238 03/02/2006 ACTIVE STANISLAUS COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION JAMES CARLETON STEWARD
    C3013354 08/13/2007 ACTIVE YUBA-SUTTER HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT WILLIAM F JENS
    NOW — understanding that “CHMC” doesn’t exist (as an entity, at least), and HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS does, although not legally, here’s the
    business search on “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS.”  Keeping it straight:  for incorporation — go to secretary of state site.  For Charitable Registry (nonprofits) —
    go to the Attorney General’s (OAG) site.  Because Californians deserve to know whether people knocking at their doors, soliciting by email, through their churches,
    or the YMCA, or anywhere else, when claiming to be a charitable organization, actually are, and are not just ‘take the money and run” outfits.
    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C3073670 01/16/2008 SUSPENDED CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
    C2746528 05/13/2005 ACTIVE HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA PATTY HOWELL
    C2790720 06/09/2006 ACTIVE OAKLAND BERKELEY INITIATIVE FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS DARRYL HARRISON
    C2494811 01/06/2003 DISSOLVED THE CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. TAMARA ILICH
    Notice the dates (also, the Oakland Berkeley Initiative is not current on its charitable registration, I think).
    Patty Howell is listed as staff at CHMC (nonexistant).  The address for “healthy relationships california” is listed — actually NOT listed if you mean street address also, and matches what the US, TAGGS database calls “California Healthy Marriage Coalition.”
    Entity Name: HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA
    Entity Number: C2746528
    Date Filed: 05/13/2005
    Status: ACTIVE
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: (SAME AS ABOVE)
    Entity City, State, Zip: LEUCADIA CA 92024
    Agent for Service of Process: PATTY HOWELL
    Agent Address: 1045 PASSIFLORA AVE
    Agent City, State, Zip: LEUCADIA CA 92024
    Let’s move on.  I hope you are sufficiently alarmed by now, but if not, “I’ll be back!”

       Recipient: Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 53211

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0043 CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY HEALTH MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROJECT NOW TO SUCCEED 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,779,393 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,779,393

    Recipient: Community Marriage Builders, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 47714-1863

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0005 SOUTH WESTERN INDIANA HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVEMARRIAGE EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIP, PARENTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT, DIVORCE REDUCTION SKILLS FOR COUPLES AND INDIVIDUALS. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 79930

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0045 HEALTHY OPPORTUNITIES FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,945 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,945

    Recipient: ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45405

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0046 MARRIAGE WORKS! OHIO COLLABORATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    {{NOTE:  I look at this one below, simply because $2.5 million is a definite vote of confidence from HHS.  For the record, the total HHS grants recorded for this group show as: $17 million.  It’s pulling in Abstinence Funding, and is the lead agency in the multi-county “Marriage Works!” above.  Something tells me our HHS doesn’t want too much fertility among the TANF recipients; it will starve them out I guess by diverting funds into

    get-rich-quick grants on anyone producing abstinence is best curricula.}}

     

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER  DAYTON OH 45405 MONTGOMERY 101653447 $ 17,272,584



     

               Recipient: FIRST THINGS FIRST
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37403-3433

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0048 CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN-HAMILTON COUNTY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,070,834 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,070,834

    Recipient: Family Guidance, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 15143-9554

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0047 TWOGETHER PITTSBURGH PROVIDING SIX TYPES OF “ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES” TO THE COMMUNITY: AA (II) EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS; AA (IV) MARRIAGE PREPARATION 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,163,684 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,163,684

    Recipient: Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 27601-1947

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0009 COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 725,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 725,000

    Recipient: Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77006

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0017 HOUSTON MARRIAGE PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 698,102 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 698,102

    Recipient: Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center
    Recipient ZIP Code: 46208-4705

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0027 STRENGTHENING FAMILIES: LINKING HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND STRONG FATHERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,780,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,780,000

    Recipient: Future Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 30344-4137

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0013 REALTALK – A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH AND PARENTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 685,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 685,000

    Recipient: GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 22182

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0024 FIT RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,599 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,599

    Recipient: Healthy You, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 363031997

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0020 JUST THE FACTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 681,956 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 681,956

    Recipient: High Country Consulting LLC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 82001-2758

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0049 STRENGTHENING WYOMING TEEN AND LOW INCOME TANF FAMILIES THROUGH SKILL BASED RELATIONSHIP TRAINING AND ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 535,082 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 535,082

    Recipient: IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97220

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0015 REFUGEE AND IMMIGRANT FAMILY EMPOWERMENT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 492,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 492,000

    Recipient: Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92243-2943

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0061 PROJECT JUNTOS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,000

    Recipient: JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 72761

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0023 HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 724,428 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 724,428

    Recipient: Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee,
    Recipient ZIP Code: 34237-5223

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0060 HEALTHY FAMILIES/HEALTHY CHILDREN 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,993 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,993

    Recipient: KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 96819

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0012 KOKA CARES – KEIKI O KA AINA CAREER AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION SERVICES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,752 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,752

    Recipient: Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40475-2457

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0050 KRFDC COMMUNITY CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45503-4175

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0004 THE COMMITMENT PROJECT-INSPIRING COMMITMENT TO HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS,RESPONSIBLE PARENTING AND ECONOMIC STABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 798,380 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,380

    Recipient: MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40066

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0036 MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 344,904 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 344,904

    Recipient: Meier Clinics Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60187-4579

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0051 MEIER CLINICS, FAMILY BRIDGES, HEALTY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Mission West Virginia, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 25526

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0052 N/A 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 683,935 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 683,935

    Recipient: More Than Conquerors Inc
    Recipient ZIP Code: 300835318

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0053 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 798,798 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,798

    Recipient: NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90746

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0055 NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHOP) HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 685,308 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 685,308

    Recipient: NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 88003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0037 NEW MEXICO BORDER REGION HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97213-2933

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 1,395,000 
    2011 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,395,000

    Recipient: OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73125

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0032 THRIVING MARRIAGES: RETREATS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 776,304 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 776,304

    Recipient: OPERATION KEEPSAKE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 44087-1654

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0056 MARRIAGE IS FOR KEEPS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,054 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,054

    Recipient: PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10023

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0025 PHOENIX HOUSE CONNECTIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 618,768 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 618,768

    Recipient: PROJECT S.O.S., INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 32216-6241

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0033 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE ANDRELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 672,703 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 672,703

    Recipient: PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73116-7909

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0026 FAMILY EXPECTATIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Parenting Center (The)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 76107

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0031 EMPOWERING FAMILIES PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 797,093 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 797,093

    Recipient: RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 33157-5372

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0028 RECAPTURING THE VISION INTERNATIONAL: THE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP PROJECT TARGETING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND YOUNG ADULTS 18-25. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,230 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,230

    Recipient: STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 39759-2803

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0035 BUILDING STRONG FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 699,874 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 699,874

    Recipient: Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project
    Recipient ZIP Code: 95821

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0059 FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,825 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,825
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 48,511,440
    Total of 70 Award Actions for 60 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 60,296,527

    (NEXT PAGE of the SAME SERIES):

    Unfortunately, the next page will not display on this simple search allowing me to find the remaining 10 grantees.  I managed to get 68 awards to show

    under “Advanced Search,” keying in nothing but the same “90FM” under awards — and got basically the rest, but without the HTML links.  Here are those 68, and I’ll highlight where the above listing.  I”m glad I did — because notice that the Principal INvestigator field has a strange showing, i.e., someone possibly didn’t type in the {Principal Investigator’s) last name — but the first name twice, meaning if you searched the database by that field, you’d miss the Public Strategies, Inc. $2.5 million (new) grant, and several others.  There is a LOT of this type of inexplicable typo or other screwup activity (like failing to enter a DUNS# where there is one) in TAGGS, sometimes I wonder why:

    Note that “DIBBLE FUND” here shows up alpha under “The” (such a database, eh?) towards the end.  I am going to publish this post, and take a personal Time Out” to cool off, after having learned more than the public was intended to know about, for example, the California Healthy Marriages Act” and how it’s apparently gone through a few incorporations and name changes.  Or how there is one person on three of the grantees’ boards below, and the website (she) is listed as “founding” is under about a fourth business name ,not shown below and whose corporation status, trademark registration, or listing of “we changed the company name” I haven’t caught up with.  One address (including suite#) seems to match two of the organizations below.     Notice also that the Colorado-based “WAIT Training” (near bottom of the list) — which appears to be its legitimate corporate name, although its website claims to have said the “new” name is Center for Relationship Education (but no namechange was filed) shows up under the ACF/HHS listing of “2011 grantees” not under “WAIT training” but instead under “Center for Relationship Education.”

    All in all, it seems that many obstacles are in place to non-federal grantee recipients, like a person actually just wanting to know!, in tracking single organizations.

    I have already mocked the grandiose schemes and language of both this California Healthy Marriage Coalition (and warned us about it) before, along with the Dibble Fund, whose goal is to educate EVERYONE over the age of 14 who has, may have, or is in some other way potentially fertile male or female — existed in the State of California, and educate them (at public expense) on marriage.  Search “Leucadia” on my blog to find it.

    They are connected at the hip with WAIT Training (or at least Joneen MacKenzie) which is basically a religious — VERY religious — abstinence education group out of Colorado.  And a brand-new association (that they’re advertising) called “NARME” which I looked up, it’s in Tallahassee, Florida, and on the board are some of the groups below.    I’m getting tired of all this nonsense, as well as alarmed at what appears to be overt tolerance of federal grantees that form shell front groups, take the money, and either pull a chameleon or simply disappear (and I have one of those to show, also — not on this list, because they disappeared back in 2006).

    ///

    ADVANCED SEARCH RESULTS

    Results 1 to 68 of 68 matches.
    Excel Icon
    Page 1 of 1
      
    Grantee Name State County Award Number Award Title Budget Year Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    AUBURN UNIVERSITY AL LEE 90FM0006 ALABAMA HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION INITIATIVE (AHMREI) 1 NEW FRANCESCA M FRANCESCA $ 2,489,548
    AVANCE, INC TX HARRIS 90FM0041 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 NEW MARTHA MARTHA $ 799,999
    Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages TX DALLAS 90FM0018 ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE MARRIAGES, DBA ANTHEM STRONG FAMILIES WILL IMPLEMENT A 3-TIERED PROJECT THAT PROVIDES HEALTHY MARRIAGE SERVICES, ECONOMIC STABILITY AND JOB PLACEMENT. 1 NEW COSETTE COSETTE $ 1,514,359
    Arizona Youth Partnership AZ PIMA 90FM0030 BUILDING FUTURES FOR FAMILIES-HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT IN PIMA, PINAL AND GILA COUNTIES OF ARIZONA. 1 NEW DANIEL DANIEL $ 634,536
    BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER OH HAMILTON 90FM0029 BUILDING STRONG MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS 1 NEW NATHANIEL NATHANIEL $ 799,999
    BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES MI KENT 90FM0011 BE REAL PROGRAM (“BUILDING AND ENHANCING RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT, AND LIFE SKILLS”) 1 NEW NONYEM A NONYEM $ 799,996
    CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC CA LOS ANGELES 90FM0034 MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT PROJECT 1 NEW KIMTHAI KIMTHAI $ 570,000
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES KS SEDGWICK 90FM0042 PROVIDING MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS SKILLS AS WELL AS JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WILL PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 NEW MARTHA L MARTHA $ 1,445,587
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON NJ MERCER 90FM0016 EL CENTRO HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 NEW RONALD RONALD $ 555,300
    CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY PA CLEARFIELD 90FM0003 HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP PROJECT IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA WITH A FOCUS ON CLEARFIELD COUNTY AND 8 ADJACENT COUNTIES INCLUDING AA (II)(III)(IV) AND (V) 1 NEW BONNIE BONNIE $ 354,714
    COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY PA BERKS 90FM0044 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 NEW CHERYL CHERYL $ 787,665
    CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER AZ MARICOPA 90FM0021 TODO ES POSIBLE (EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE) – A MARRIAGE PROGRAM FOR HISPANIC FAMILIES IN PHOENIX, AZ 1 NEW GUILLE GUILLE $ 359,796
    California Healthy Marriages Coalition CA SAN DIEGO 90FM0019 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 NEW PATTY PATTY{{probably Patty Howell”}} $ 2,500,000
    Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc. WI MILWAUKEE 90FM0043 CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY HEALTH MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROJECT NOW TO SUCCEED 1 NEW JEANETTE JEANETTE $ 1,779,393
    Community Marriage Builders, Inc. IN VANDERBURGH 90FM0005 SOUTH WESTERN INDIANA HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVEMARRIAGE EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIP, PARENTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT, DIVORCE REDUCTION SKILLS FOR COUPLES AND INDIVIDUALS. 1 NEW JOHN JOHN $ 799,999
    EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN TX EL PASO 90FM0045 HEALTHY OPPORTUNITIES FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT 1 NEW LEONARD LEONARD $ 799,945
    ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER{{Abortion Alternatives}}** OH MONTGOMERY 90FM0046 MARRIAGE WORKS!OHIO COLLABORATIVE{{known fatherhood collaboration: see below 1 NEW GREG GREG $ 2,500,000
    FIRST THINGS FIRST TN HAMILTON 90FM0048 CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN-HAMILTON COUNTY 1 NEW DEBORAH DEBORAH $ 1,070,834
    Family Guidance, Inc.{{evangelistic– see 10/9/2011 post}} PA ALLEGHENY 90FM0047 TWOGETHER PITTSBURGH**PROVIDING SIX TYPES OF “ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES” TO THE COMMUNITY: AA (II) EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS; AA (IV) MARRIAGE PREPARATION(**LLP formed in 2009 to do this) 1 NEW ROBERT L ROBERT $ 1,163,684 
    Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc. NC WAKE 90FM0009 COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. 1 NEW KIMBERLY M KIMBERLY $ 725,000
    Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County TX HARRIS 90FM0017 HOUSTON MARRIAGE PROJECT 1 NEW TIM TIM $ 698,102
    Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center  IN MARION 90FM0027 STRENGTHENING FAMILIES: LINKING HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND STRONG FATHERS  1 NEW ROBERT ROBERT $ 1,780,000
    Future Foundation GA FULTON 90FM0013 REALTALK – A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH AND PARENTS 1 NEW QAADIRAH QAADIRAH $ 685,000
    GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES VA FAIRFAX 90FM0024 FIT RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMS 1 NEW LAURA A LAURA $ 799,599
    Healthy You, Inc. AL HOUSTON 90FM0020 JUST THE FACTS 1 NEW MARY A MARY $ 681,956
    High Country Consulting LLC WY LARAMIE 90FM0049 STRENGTHENING WYOMING TEEN AND LOW INCOME TANF FAMILIES THROUGH SKILL BASED RELATIONSHIP TRAINING AND ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 NEW KATHLEEN KATHLEEN $ 535,082
    IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION OR MULTNOMAH 90FM0015 REFUGEE AND IMMIGRANT FAMILY EMPOWERMENT PROJECT 1 NEW LEE P LEE $ 492,000
    Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program CA IMPERIAL 90FM0061 PROJECT JUNTOS 1 NEW MARY MARY $ 799,000
    JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY AR BENTON 90FM0023 HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 NEW APRIL APRIL $ 724,428
    Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee, FL SARASOTA 90FM0060 HEALTHY FAMILIES/HEALTHY CHILDREN 1 NEW ROSE ROSE $ 799,993
    KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC. HI HONOLULU 90FM0012 KOKA CARES – KEIKI O KA AINA CAREER AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION SERVICES 1 NEW MOMI MOMI $ 798,752
    Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc. KY MADISON 90FM0050 KRFDC COMMUNITY CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 NEW VICKI VICKI $ 799,999
    MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY  OH CLARK 90FM0004 THE COMMITMENT PROJECT-INSPIRING COMMITMENT TO HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS,RESPONSIBLE PARENTING AND ECONOMIC STABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. 1 NEW RONDA M RONDA $ 798,380
    MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC KY SHELBY 90FM0036 MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM 1 NEW PAT PAT $ 344,904
    Meier Clinics Foundation IL DU PAGE 90FM0051 MEIER CLINICS, FAMILY BRIDGES, HEALTY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE 1 NEW NANCY NANCY $ 2,500,000
    Mission West Virginia, Inc. WV PUTNAM 90FM0052 N/A 1 NEW TORRI TORRI $ 683,935
    More Than Conquerors Inc GA DE KALB 90FM0053 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 NEW PHILLIPIA PHILLIPIA $ 798,798
    NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS  MN ANOKA 90FM0001 HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER 1 NEW MICHAEL L BENJAMIN $ 899,694
    NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS  MN ANOKA 90FM0001 HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER 2 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) MICHAEL L BENJAMIN $ 200,000
    NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS MN ANOKA 90FM0001 HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER 2 EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS MICHAEL L BENJAMIN $- 962,992
    NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS  MN ANOKA 90FM0001 HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER 2 NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION MICHAEL L BENJAMIN $ 699,755
    NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS  MN ANOKA 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH  2 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) MICHAEL L BENJAMIN $ 450,000
    NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS CA LOS ANGELES 90FM0055 NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHOP) HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 NEW JUNE JUNE $ 685,308
    NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY NM DONA ANA 90FM0037 NEW MEXICO BORDER REGION HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 NEW ESTHER ESTHER $ 799,999
    NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES OR MULTNOMAH 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) ROSE ROSE $ 0
    NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES OR MULTNOMAH 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 NEW ROSE ROSE $ 1,395,000
    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES OK OKLAHOMA 90FM0032 THRIVING MARRIAGES: RETREATS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS 1 NEW MARY JO MARY JO $ 776,304
    OPERATION KEEPSAKE OH SUMMIT 90FM0056 MARRIAGE IS FOR KEEPS 1 NEW PEGGY S PEGGY $ 798,054
    PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC NY NEW YORK 90FM0025 PHOENIX HOUSE CONNECTIONS 1 NEW NAOMI NAOMI $ 618,768
    PROJECT S.O.S., INC. FL DUVAL 90FM0033 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE ANDRELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 NEW PAM PAM $ 672,703
    PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC  OK OKLAHOMA 90FM0026 FAMILY EXPECTATIONS 1 NEW SAMMYE SAMMYE $ 2,500,000 
    Parenting Center (The) TX TARRANT 90FM0031 EMPOWERING FAMILIES PROJECT 1 NEW JENNIFER JENNIFER $ 797,093
    RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC. FL 90FM0028 RECAPTURING THE VISION INTERNATIONAL: THE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP PROJECT TARGETING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND YOUNG ADULTS 18-25. 1 NEW JACQUELINE JACQUELINE $ 799,230
    STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT MS OKTIBBEHA 90FM0035 BUILDING STRONG FAMILIES 1 NEW JOAN JOAN $ 699,874
    Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  CA SACRAMENTO 90FM0059 FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 NEW CAROLYN CAROLYN $ 798,825
    Scholarship and Guidance Association IL COOK 90FM0038 FAMILY LIFE SKILLS PROGRAM 1 NEW MARTHA MARTHA $ 794,180
    Shalom Task Force NY NEW YORK 90FM0008 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION IN THE ORTHODOX JEWISH COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN NYC AREA 1 NEW DANIEL DANIEL $ 541,633
    TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY-SAN MARCOS TX HAYS 90FM0007 STRENGTHENING RELATIONSHIPS/STRENGTHENING FAMILIES (SR/SF) 1 NEW W. SCOTT W. SCOTT $ 617,280
    TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY TX LUBBOCK 90FM0002 NATIONAL HEALTHLY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER  1 NEW JAMES D MITCHELL $ 512,993
    THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  CA ALAMEDA 90FM0010 BUILDING BRIGHTER FUTURES 1 NEW CATHERINE M CATHERINE $ 794,846
    TOLEDO AREA MINISTRIES OH LUCAS 90FM0040 KEEPING IT TOGETHER 1 NEW DONNA DONNA $ 799,999
    UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES NY BRONX 90FM0057 UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES MARRIAGE & RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROGRAM 1 NEW SCOTT SCOTT $ 799,999
    UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA  FL ORANGE 90FM0039 PROJECT TOGETHER  1 NEW ANDREW ANDREW $ 2,184,508
    UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE TN KNOX 90FM0022 RELATIONSHIP RX: INTEGRATING A COUPLES INTERVENTION PROGRAM INTO A PRIMARY CARE SETTING 1 NEW DEBBIE DEBBIE $ 723,508
    UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY UT CACHE 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) BRAIN J BRAIN $ 0
    UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY UT CACHE 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH 1 NEW BRAIN J BRAIN $ 785,612
    WAIT Training  CO DENVER  90FM0054 THE COLORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT  1 NEW JONEEN JONEEN $ 1,605,705
    YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES OF CANADIAN COUNTY, INC OK CANADIAN 90FM0058 SAFE AND LOVING RELATIONSHIPS FOR AT-RISK YOUTH 1 NEW TRACY TRACY $ 338,367

    **”Elizabeth’s New Life Center has a logo:  the Elizabeth in question was the mother of John the Baptist, (per Bible), the cousin of Jesus and prophet heralding his coming.  Another overtly Christian group, million$$ grant.  This one looks pretty Roman Catholic….

    http://www.elizabethnewlife.org/

    In 1989, Steve and Vivian Koob, along with their church, founded Elizabeth’s New Life Center (ENLC) as a compassionate response and option to the abortion clinic operating in their neighborhood. ENLC opened its first office in the Five Oaks neighborhood of the city of Dayton to serve pregnant women facing unexpected pregnancies.

    I am glad that Steve and Vivian Koob founded an organization to follow their vision (I suppose).  However, according to the State of Ohio, it was founded as a nonprofit, at least, in 1992, not 1989.  The evidence is here: (because of “paste” function, business name doesn’t display.  LINK to search is here; remember to include the “S” in “ELIZABETHS”)   [Jon Husted Ohio Secretary of State Business Name Search]

    832233 CORPORATION FOR NON-PROFIT 11/30/1992 11/01/2012 Active DAYTON MONTGOMERY OHIO

    ELIZABETH’s NEW LIFE CENTER BUSINESS FILING — see dates.

    1994-1NorthMain_web

    In 1994, Elizabeth’s New Life Center purchased a vacant building beside the abortion clinic and renovated it into a women’s center with medical capabilities. The following year ENLC opened its first Mother and Baby Boutique to provide needy clients with material assistance to establish family life, and in 1999 began providing abstinence education services to schools in an effort to expand efforts to prevent teen pregnancy.

    Not mentioned:  Abstinence education not proven to reduce teen pregnancies, in fact it’s been an abysmal failure from what I hear.

    About that same time, Elizabeth’s New Life Center purchased and renovated a medical building on Forest Avenue in front of Grandview Hospital’s emergency room. That facility currently houses administrative offices, Women’s Center-Dayton, Holy Family Prenatal Care, classrooms, a nutrition center, and a chapel accessible to both clients and staff.

    ENLC continued its growth as the youth development department was awarded highly competitive federal grants to provide abstinence education to area schools in 2002, 2005, and 2008. In 2006, Elizabeth’s New Life Center also was awarded one of the largest federal healthy marriage demonstration grants in the country to establish Marriage Works! Ohio and offer marriage education across Southwestern Ohio.

    COngress shall make no law establishing a religion.  They don’t have to any more.  All that’s needed is to fund corporations that did.  No Thank You, George Bush!)

    Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives”

    The Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI), was established January 29, 2001, when President George W. Bush “issued two executive orders related to faith-based and community organizations. The first executive order established a White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. The second order established centers to implement this initiative at the Department of Justice, along with the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Housing and Urban Development.”[1]

    Government by Executive Order, it’s definitely problemmatic.  We’re in it. 

    I should get this ebook, published 2008, in anticipation of Presidential Election:  The Court and the Cross, by Frederick Lane

    Front Cover

    Today Elizabeth’s New Life Center operates from six women’s centers, three in Dayton and ones in Warren, Hamilton, and Shelby counties. The Dayton boutique (??) continues to operate from the Five Oaks building, and Marriage Works! Ohio operates from a facility on Main Street in Dayton.

    TO CLARIFY MY POSITION:  My viewpoint on abortion changed considerably after (1) I became a mother, and (2) I had to deal with a jealous relative who’d opted for abortion, then went after my kids.   Before then I was far more liberal and neutral.  However I STILL do not think we should allow religious groups to take government funding for abstinence education.  Then again I don’t think the Federal Government should be in so deep into education either– first of all, because their model is antiquated and based on authoritarianism and designed to slow down children from learning, and to keep the lower castes in place.  YES, I believe that.  A lot more arts (etc.) education would go further to dealing with literacy and math (not to mention probably violence) issues in the schools, but as fate? would have it, the opposite approach is taken.  I see the schools as a caste-sorter, by economics and race, and so do statistics.  Be that as it may, this organization has prospered because of then-President George Bush, and his decision to break down church/state.

    This organization has several trade names, had a merger or so, and the original incorporator (registered agent) was from a law firm out of “10 Courthouse Plaza” in Dayton.  I can’t upload the articles of incorporation (at this point).   And I don’t see they are filing in my 990-finder, an E perhaps TAGGS will give me a nice DUNS#, but usually duns# only show on TAGGS if you can search by EIN, which I (haven’t found yet).  THey are most definitely soliciting donations on the web. The board of 12 has 3 women on it (only) one of who is the Warren County (OH) Prosecutor  Another board member is the County Auditor.

    Vivian Koob (one of the two founders) has a bio also showing a connection with State Government (and pro-life activism):

    Vivian Koob
    Executive Director

    Vivian Koob founded Elizabeth’s New Life Center with her husband Steve in 1989. Vivian holds a Master of Education degree as well as a Master in Rehabilitative Counseling. Before founding Elizabeth’s New Life Center she taught high school and spent 12 years working for the State of Ohio Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation. She also spent years as a stay-at-home mom for her large family of natural, adopted and foster children. The Koobs’ blended family includes 12 living children and 16 grandchildren.

    One of their programs listed, “Marriage Works!” (a trade name of this group, its Ohio SOS records say) includes “FE grants,” i.e. clear Fatherhood emphasis:

    Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant:  90FE0035.  Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. Participation in all Marriage Works! Ohio programs is voluntary.

    View Our Privacy Notice
    Copyright 2008, Marriage Works! Ohio.  

    While MARRIAGE WORKS! is a collaboration, This ELIZABETH NEW LIFE center is the “Lead Agency,” according to the website, which is soliciting donations.  WHO HOLDS THE EIN#?

    Marriage Works! Ohio - About Us

    Marriage Works! Ohio is a collaborative effort of diverse organizations united to help build healthy families and healthy communities throughout the Miami Valley of Ohio by providing marriage and relationship education for couples.   


    SIX Counties are involved in “Marriage Works!”  Among the other agencies is a “Family Violence Prevention Center.”

    I experienced the religious-based marriage counseling as a response to domestic violence in the home (long ago).  I assure the general public (speaking for at least my Northern California urban area), the religious groups are not one iota better addressed to handle DV (or interested in doing so if it’s going to reduce warm bodies in the pews, or tithes by evicting a batterer) than they were last decade.  Nor do the religious leaders seem any more inclined to treat it as a reportable crime which it is (and child abuse absolutely is for pastors).   So here is what to the outsider looks like a “Family Violence Prevention Center.” and when a person comes in, she will be receiving services provided by a lead agency pro-life Catholic group, whose web and public presence has been funded by fatherhood education.  I notice that this FVPC also leads to a “DIVERT” Violence program.

    Family Violence Prevention Center of Greene County

    The focus will be on family preservation through treatment, and stopping battering through training the batterer.  People get killed that way, but this is how the field of DV has been altered (a sea-change) to accommodate the Marriage/Fatherhood agenda.  And as I will be showing NEXT post, the groups doing this are many times chronically dishonest, and sometimes crooks, when characterizing WHO THEY ARE as an organization.

    • DIVERT:  Xenia and County DIVERT crisis response in collaborative partnerships with law enforcement jurisdictions throughout Greene County to offer home and community based services to families experiencing domestic disputes or domestic violence
      Jackie Weckesser, DIVERT Crisis Response Specialist, 937-376-8526 ext. 26
      Jennifer Henderson, DIVERT Crisis Response Specialist, 937-376-8526 ext. 27
    • Domestic Violence Intervention Program: (DVIP) , therapeutic and educational group counseling for batterers working to prevent future cycles of violence. Fee for service
      Cherie Dixon, DV Intervention Counselor, 937-376-8526 ext. 31

    At the bottom of this “DIVERT” page are the links showing possibly origins or technical support in setting up the web.  I notice NCADV is one.  Upcoming post on them, too:

    Privacy Policy | Donate | Contact | Apply for a Job | Apply to Volunteer
    NCADV.org | NRCDV.org | NDVH.org | ODVN.org

    This brochure shows how one organization, when it added considerable funding, became more and more entrenched in the County Government, got a spanking new building in 2000, named after the donor (what takes place in it, who knows) and probably have not YET told any women coming for help, or totally traumatized that in the same approximate year, the Ohio Legislature created a “Fatherhood Commission” and required that it targeted counties with a lot of single-mother households (probably to get access to the TANF funds that go with them).

    It began as a shelter, before VAWA and probably many laws against domestic violence had even been passed.

    The Greene County Domestic Violence Project began as a two-bedroom apartment in Yellow Springs in 1979 as a project of the Greene County Welfare Department. In 1980, the agency incorporated as a private, not for profit corporation and the shelter moved to its first house in Xenia, which had one staff and several students. The project relocated twice more until 1984 when it settled into its long-term site in a large Victorian House in the Water Street District of Xenia where it remained until 2001.

    It morphed into a mental health agency and a new facility:

    And, in 1995 the Xenia Police Division and GCDVP collaborated to form a nationally recognized program entitled DIVERT that partners law enforcement with domestic violence crisis workers for home based follow-up. Today, DIVERT services are being made available throughout Greene County and the agency has been able to operate satellite educational programs in Fairborn.

    Violence Free Futures….

    In 1997 the agency began to set a goal to secure a new facility and requested the help of the community. Seventeen community leaders formed the Shelter Facility Task Force and began to search for a site for the new facility. The Board decided to mortgage the aging property and invest the loan to begin a capital campaign which would require that the agency hire a Development Officer. The Shelter Facility Task force located a potential site, the Xenia Grace Chapel which was up for sale

    (“Violence-Free Futures” is echoes of the wording from one of the major resource centers, formerly the Family Violence Prevention Fund, now “Futures without Violence.”  As such, it focuses on prevention through education [[which has NOT been shown to work]] — which of course it will help provide.)

    (reading this brochure, and recognizing what it represents, I am feeling a little sick….)

    Or that there was an Ohio Task Force on “Changing the Culture of Custody” which was basically AFCC-central, and even flew membership out to Arizona to take input from such membership, including prominent “Parental Alienation” promoter (and published author marketing books through the courts also), Philip Stahl Ph.D.

    It was named after one of the County Commissioners, in fact the President of the County Commissioners:

    The Greene County Commissioners The Hon. Kathryn K. Hagler, Pres. 61 Greene Street Xenia, Ohio 45385 (name at bottom of link having been served of a certain notice on a civic project):

    Hon. Hagler has been involved with the Governor’s Child Support Task Force.  As Child Support — at this point — has been re-tooled and adjusted to accommodate “Fatherhood” (see Clinton 1995 Executive Memo, etc.) — and child support offices throughout the nation, it seems (Indiana comes esp. to mind) to solicit participation in fatherhood programs (see above grantees) under — extortion, at times — in exchange for participating in prolonged custody battles they may not even want — etc. – – – – – This would seem to me a mild conflict of interest, at a minimum.

    Here’s the blurb on the woman the building is named after:

    KATHRYN K. HAGLER 

    Kathryn K. Hagler began her 19th year (third year of a fifth term) as a Greene County Commissioner with the start of the year 2001. Prior to her service to Greene County, Mrs. Hagler was a school teacher for 35 years. In 1982, she began a new phase in her life when she became Greene County’s first female County Commissioner. During her time as a Commissioner, Mrs. Hagler helped initiate a program in which retired teachers volunteer their time to assist Greene County jail inmates work toward their general (high school) equivalency diplomas. Awards and recognitions Mrs. Hagler has received include: the Paula J. Macilwaine Award (for her GED program), the Ervin J. Nutter Award (for her service to the community), the Senior Citizen of the Year Award from the Golden Age Senior Citizens Center, and recognition from the Ohio Senior Citizens Hall of Fame and the Women’s Hall of Fame. Over the years she has been involved with Greene County United Way, American Business Women’s Association, the Governor’s Child Support Task Force, the Altrusa Club, and Greene County Domestic Violence. Mrs. Hagler is very committed to families and children of domestic violence. Because of that commitment, Mrs. Hagler and her family were the largest donors to the capital campaign for victims of domestic violence. On June 1, 2000, the Greene County Domestic Violence Project named their new facility after Mrs. Hagler for her commitment. The Kathryn K. Hagler Family Violence Prevention Center is scheduled to officially open on June 12, 2001.

    Fathers and Families is very active in Ohio, it says here, and rejoices about advances it has won in the Child Support arena.  The article following this one rejoices at a nonpaying mother being thrown in jail for nonpayment, as it encourages the opposite for fathers:

    F & F’s Hubin Praises Ohio Child Support Changes in Columbus Dispatch

    Monday, September 26th, 2011 by FAF Staff

    columbus-dispatch-icon

    Donald Hubin, Ph.D., Chairman of Fathers and Families of Ohio’s Executive Committee, was quoted in Child- support changes arrive: New provisions give struggling parents leniency(9/25/11) in the Columbus Dispatch, a 200,000 circulation newspaper in Ohio’s capital.

    Under the new Ohio policies, for which Fathers and Families has advocated and supports, child support enforcement agencies will not be able to seize the driver’s licenses or professional licenses of any obligors who are paying at least half of their child support obligations. Given the terrible economy, and the fact that many obligors’ obligations are not being modified downward to accommodate for their lower wages and/or job losses, this is an important measure.

    Kimberly C. Newsom, executive director of the Ohio Child Support Enforcement Agencies Directors’ Association, (OCDA) said the laws have been flexible and enforcement efforts have changed as the sinking economy made it harder for many parents to pay support.

    “As Ohio started going into an economic recession, counties weren’t suspending licenses as much. They were working with parents and trying to assist them with employment or getting them into work programs to try and get them employed,” Newsom said.

    In Franklin County, parents are often referred to job training or co-parenting classes, said Susan Brown, director of the county’s Child Support Enforcement Agency.

    I’ll bet they ARE being referred to co-parenting classes which will definitely help feed hungry children and increase the income in whoever is raising them. (sure, yeah).  I’m sure a single mother whose Dad is behind in child support would rather have a co-parenting class (mothers are solicited to attend too, you know!) than the child support.  Particularly if there was domestic violence in the marriage or partnership previously.    .

    My Prior Post with some research on Franklin County, OPNFF, OHIO fatherhood initiative, and more of these matters  (Scroll down).

    Link at “Columbus Urban League” — A.A.M.I. (African-American Males Initiative) shows some of the partners and funders — and referrers to classes.  This is Franklin County:

    Father 2 Father

    Columbus Urban League
    African-American Male Initiatives

    Black Father

    Mission
    To assist men in becoming the instinctive, responsible, & nurturing fathers they desire to be. While also, educating the general public on the unique, important, & essential role that Fathers play in the development of their children.

    Scope of Services
    Provide a classroom curriculum that develops the attitudes and skills needed for responsible fatherhood and helping men discover and cultivate their nurturing potential. Assistance with issues regarding child support, visitation, and family law matters, ultimately advocating for policy change/implementation that make these very areas more father friendly.

    Partners
    Columbus Urban League’s (CUL) – African-American Male Initiatives (A.A.M.I.)
    Columbus Urban League’s Head Start
    Ohio Commission on Fatherhood (OFC)
    Franklin County Child Support Enforcement Agency (FCSEA)
    Ohio Practitioners Network of Fathers & Families (OPNFF)
    Nationwide Children’s Hospital (Family & Volunteer Services)

    Target Audience
    Class Curriculum – ‘Nurturing Father’
    African-American fathers between the ages of 16-35 referred by CUL Head Start, Franklin County Child Enforcement Agency & Juvenile Court System. There will be a dual class format (One AM – One PM) on 3 month cycles. Each class will consist of 12-15 fathers giving us the ability to serve 100 fathers per calendar year.

    Kathryn K. Hagler Family Violence Center, or No Family Violence Center — GREENE COUNTY is highly involved (and vice versa) with the “National Fatherhood Initiative” (NFI started in 1994 with a cronyism-based grant from Wade Horn before he quit HHS, like JUST before), with the Greene County Child SUpport system, and with Green County Commissioners.

    Here’s a recent link to their 2011 goings-on, which was apparently prepared in part with another PR firm who has made it big by going with the Fatherhood Flow:  “PUBLIC STRATEGIES, INC.” (see my post on PSI in Denver vs. PSI in Denver), which runs (I think) the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, in large part.

    A Rapid Ethnographic Assessment of Programs & Services (REAPS)

    for Fathers in Greene County, Ohio

    Prepared By:

    With Contributions From:

    Public Strategies, Inc. Ohio State University Extension—Greene County

    An Initiative of the Ohio Commission on Fatherhood

    April 2011

    In part, it reads:

    Introduction

    The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood (OCF) has partnered with National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) in 2011 to assist 12 Ohio counties mobilize around responsible fatherhood. Greene County was one of the 12 counties selected to participate in this Community Mobilization Initiative.

    Of course, this is going to start out with the usual blather blaming society’s ills (by omission, by deduction) on single mother households.  Not being honest enough to call it this — they call it “father absence”  Women exist, as nouns, in this dialogue, implicitly, primarily as the brood mares.

    Children who live absent their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.1

    As of April 2011, and based on my reading of what these grants are doing (and how they have changed the courts) that poverty could be attributable about as much to the war on single mothers which this rhetoric has waged, as much as  not having a Daddy in the home, per se.  Some Daddys need to get OUT of the home, because they are violent; others refuse to work while they are living WITH their kids, preferring instead to let mothers do it.  There are varieties of families and varieties of Daddy-in-the-home scenarios, as well as a huge variety of Daddy NOT in the home scenarios.

    None of this centralization and collaboration (taxation WITHOUT appropriate representation, or informed public consent) accounts for OR allows the true diversity of ways there are to earn a living, raise (and educate) a child, or escape poverty WITHOUT being forced into high-stakes, high-conflict custody litigation, and paying heavily into the system that — by its own words, and I can see plainly by state on-line databases — doesn’t even account for money it takes from children, while diverting child support enforcement monies (that pesky $4 billion) away from actually distributing child support they have collected.  I truly do believe that our country would be better off — ENTIRELY — without this whole agency, based on its track record.

    If I as an employer had a track record that lousy, I’d definitely be fired.  Instead, I was taken repeatedly out of paying jobs where my work was needed and appreciated (as a single mother) to answer frivolous lawsuits in a process where no cause of action was ever proved, let alone most of the time even alleged.

    Children who grow up without their fathers are at greatest risk for child abuse. In fact, the presence of a child’s father in the home lowers the likelihood that a child will be abused. Compared to living with both parents, living in a single-parent home doubles the risk that a child will suffer physical, emotional, or educational neglect.9 There were 1,436 new allegations of child abuse/neglect in Greene County in 2009.1

    Any allegation is OK when it comest o justifying more county-absed or state-based “interventions” in private lives.  The fact is, Dads do abuse children — where in this statement is such an acknowledgment?  And where, in the group of “single-parent home” where child abuse was alleged — is the separation of ten these into cases where the child abuse was by the custodial mother (or her boyfriend) — versus the child abuse and/or MURDER (after which child abuse ceases because the child is dead, sometimes along with the father/abuser)   — and those where the child abuse happened on a court-ordered weekend enabled by the access/visitation (or other father-involvement) program.  Although these children were “living” in single-parent homes, the abuse happened from ONE parent, and the other one complying with court orders — again, at times.

    I have been talking here about a Marriage/Fatherhood County grantee — they got $2.5 million in 2011 alone — based in Warren County OHIO, who turns out to e a pro-life, Catholic-based group (adamantly so) that has targeted abortion clinics and hospitals to get their message out.  IT turns out that two on the board of this organization work for Warren County, and then the Executive Director has worked for the state.  I think that any group getting $2.5 million (or over $1 million) in this economic climate should not only be watched but scrutinized — because that amount indicates the Secretary of HHS and public policy has another “brainstorm” of some idea, and is throwing money behind it.

    While this one appears to have stayed legitimate and above-board, many (on the list above here, the TAGGS chart) absolutely have not.  We have GOT to stop this ongoing trotting out of fatherhood rhetoric to enable more grants — which are not tracked.  EVERY SINGLE EIN# should be posted and public be enabled to find out whether their websites are telling the truth about an organization.  FAILURE TO FILE is a red flag  I can’t talk about this group yet, until I see an IRS form (even if they have been a church to start with, as an organization taking federal grants, they should have an EIN — and they really should also have a DUNS#, enabling us to look for contracts, too, and outside the HHS).

    This one also appears to be heavily networked with a group that believes domestic violence can be stopped through marriage and relationship education (that’s the model).  This education is often going to happen through the web, therefore once set up, it will be having a low overhead, and turn profits for someone.  We deserve to know WHO, as they go about solving the problems of poor people!

    For the record, then, and in light of “Elizabeth’s New Life Center” (Inc. 1992, not 1989, and having several registered trade names also) being the lead agency of “Marriage Works!” a multi-county collaborative, and every single one of their websites (almost) soliciting donations, here is who in Greene County Ohio (where a Commissioner got a building named after her, by donating so much to it), was ALSO collaborating to RAPIDLY MOBILIZE more fatherhood STUFF:

    Greene County Leader Focus Group Results

    The Greene County focus group on fatherhood was attended by nineteen individuals representing a diverse cross section of the community and included representatives from the Ohio Commission on Fatherhood.

    The following community sectors/organizations/individuals participated in the discussion (Note: some organizations had more than one representative and some people represented several sectors).

    Adult Probation Anderson Williamson Insurance Child Support Children’s Service Board County Commissioner Drug & Alcohol Initiative Family and Children First Council Fairborn City Schools Greene County Career Center Greene County Combined Health District Greene County Community Foundation Greene County Fatherhood Initiative Grant Greene County Public Transit System Greene Leaf Therapeutic Community Program Juvenile Court Parent Education and Support Xenia Association of Churches & Ministries

    No one representing the mothers, or custodial parents’ interests when there has been violence — was probably even aware of this meeting, much less present.

    The ideas they came up with were predictable, and please note that FATHERHOOD PROGRAMMING was to be incorporated into the FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION CENTER (named after a County Commissioner).  Also marriage promotion….

    When asked what assets or resources existed in Greene County that could be mobilized, expanded or used to promote responsible fatherhood the following were mentioned:

    24/7 Dad Breakfast for Dads Churches – particularly if they opened their gyms and facilities for activities Daddy and Me Carnival (Early Childhood Collaborative Coalition) Family Violence Prevention Center programming Graduation Reality and Dual Role Skills – Family & Consumer Science program for pregnant and parenting teens Green County College Success Program The Marriage Resource Center Money Management Classes Urban Light Ministries – InsideOut Dad and other programs, Visitation Center.

    The link is here, notice that “fatherhood” is a *.gov proposition:

    http://fatherhood.ohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=yxKCPn6VuPA%3d&tabid=93

    This action plan — and the meeting involving it — was straight out of the mouth of the National Fatherhood Initiative;  It is a marketing plan.  If you do not understand THIS GROUP (and its origins) — you do not understand why $119 million is needed for programming and how that is just to set up an infrastructure to transfer a lot MORE money from child support to programs that reduce, compromise or eliminate child support for our kids — and direct monies instead to those who support and design programs.

    MARRIAGE PROMOTION = FATHERHOOD PROMOTION = USUALLY PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.

    EXAMPLE:  PUBLIC STRATEGIES, INC.  (a PR Firm in Oklahoma).

    I have JUST now showed you that Public Strategies is working directly with National Fatherhood Initiative to “Rapidly MObilize” more fatherhood (stuff & programs).  See the “REAPS” link, the “Fatherhod.ohio.gov” link — right above here.  Now, I probably know Public Strategies a little better than you do, unless you study this topic, live in Oklahoma, or work for them.  You can also see them, bolded in maroon font, in the chart above, of grantees of the new “90FM” grant series to promote — what else, marriage and fatherhood.

    In fact, they just got another $2.5 million, alongside Elizabeth’s New Life Center, alongside also California Healthy Marriages Coalition, which I am going to flat-out SAY I believe is a fraud (a front group), so I will now have to prove this in subsequent post).

    But here is the “OKMARRIAGE.COM” link telling the origins of this Oklahoma Marriage Project (from top-down, Governor, and Department of HHS), choosing the PR Firm Public Strategies Inc. (WHY might be  a very good question) and explaining an intention to bypass Commissions to Study, and passing Legislation, but through a “multi-sector” approach to (Ramrod it through).  which, as you can see, they are also recommending in Ohio.  When the word “mobilize” is used, the idea is obviously that an emergency exists.  It is a MILITARY term, that’s what it calls to mind.  The intention is to bypass the slower (but more due-process, and more public-input-wanted!) processes designed into state and federal constitutions and instead, get the thing going FAST.

    Here’s what they say about their origins and how they GRABBED $10 Million of TANF funding (intended for welfare:  Food stamps, cash aid, helping poor families) to set up the infrastructure to funnel more grants to anyone who was of the same belief system (as to the causes of poverty and child abuse), and away from those who didn’t, including families on welfare that probably needed the help.  Moreover, the double-whammy is, money is ALSO diverted from Child Support Enforcement at times for similar purposes. Here we go:

    Oklahoma Marriage Initiative logo

    OKLAHOMA MARRIAGE INITIATIVE “ABOUT US

    OMI History

    In 1998, University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University economists produced a joint study on what Oklahoma needed to do to become a more prosperous state.

    And  someone probably funded that joint project.  Coincidentally, in 1998, the US Congress was passing Fatherhood Resolutions (as in 1999), Welfare Reform had just happened, and nationwide a condition of receiving welfare funding to states mandated that every state create a centralized state distribution unit (SDU), or forfeit their TANF funding.  TANF was the welfare reform that changed program funding to block grants to states….It figures in here. Maybe that was coincidental, but I doubt it.

    National Fatherhood Initative DOES have congressional and senate contacts / “Task Forces” and has from shortly after its (1994) founding.  As it says, here:

    (NFI’s) TASK FORCES ON RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD

    Shortly after its founding, NFI formed Task Forces in the U.S. House and Senate to identify elected leaders who were supportive of the goals of the responsible fatherhood movement. 15 years later, the Task Forces continue to serve as a vehicle to mobilize support for NFI events on Capitol Hill and to generate support for legislation that impacts responsible fatherhood.

    (Back to the OMI About us Page)

    Their conclusions included the usual economic analysis relating to tax issues and regulatory reform issues, as well as some surprising results. The economic researchers found some social indicators that were hurting Oklahoma’s economy. They mentioned the high divorce rate, high rates of out-of-wedlock births and high rates of child deaths because of child abuse. One OSU economist wrote in an editorial, “Oklahoma’s high divorce rate and low per-capita income are interrelated. They hold hands. They push and pull each other. There’s no faster way for a married woman with children to become poor than to suddenly become a single mom.”

    As evidence of his serious commitment to this [DIvorce leads to poverty and child abuse] issue, [Governor] Keating put his Cabinet Secretary for Health and Human Services, Jerry Regier, in charge of developing a plan of action for the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. In addition, Public Strategies (PSI), a small public affairs/public relations firm, was awarded a project management bid and, from the beginning, national experts {{GEE — I wonder which ones! }}  advised various aspects of the Initiative. This leadership outlined the main themes and components of the OMI. They deliberately decided not to appoint a Commission to “study” the issues, nor did they propose a legislative package of reforms. Instead, they decided on a multi-sector approach with both a secular track and a faith-based track. The OMI was to be a public/private partnership, guided by high-level leadership and strong operational, day-to-day management. Its major focus at this initial stage was delivering education services to the public, conducting research, and working with the faith sector to develop marriage-strengthening services.

    I would have to characterize this as a State Governor (who is head of the State EXECUTIVE branch) intentionally overstepping his bounds, deliberately avoiding the legislative branch, to push through his own plan, using federal funds that WERE supplied to the state of Oklahoma through legislation.  Intentionally NOT having a commission study the issues is suspect.   Now read the next part carefully

    Initial activities were funded with private foundation monies and discretionary state dollars. Howard Hendrick, Department of Human Services (DHS) Director, pointed out that using TANF monies to fund the initiative fit within the intent of the family formation goals of the 1996 federal welfare reform law. The DHS Board set aside $10 million of undedicated TANF funds for OMI activities. The funds were earmarked primarily for developing marriage-related services, and leaders acknowledged that efforts should be made to make them available to low-income populations.

    FORMERLY, AFDC (pre-1996) would have made sure this was to low-income families.  But the sea-change to TANF BLOCK_GRANTS TO STATES intentionally freed up the possibility of states doing more creative things with these funds.  This was great if you’re into promoting marriage and fatherhood, and probably no accident.  Look at who was pushing the 1996 reform, and you have a lot of answers….

    Right there you can see it was not restricted to low-income population, but efforts should be made to let poor people know their option to take marriage education (etc.) classes, for their own good, of course.

    I just saw on-line an advertisement for a psychologist at Public Strategies firm (Glassdoor.com)  The pay was $72K.

    Thus, the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative was launched and has grown to become the broad-based social service prevention project that it is today. The OMI has made sound decisions-by both policy and political standards-to build on the best [paid-for] research available, to invest in research to learn about marriage and divorce in Oklahoma, and to assess, to the extent possible, the effects of its activities and programs.

    From “http://www.okmarriage.org/ProgramHighlights/MarriageProblems.asp” = the “OMI – ABOUT US page”

    PUBLIC STRATEGIES” started in 1990 (site says):

    Clients are primarily HHS/ACF and other corporations.  Listed under “Corporate” clients is “PREP” which is itself a company that feeds off marriage education policy.  Two professors from Denver (also on the advisory board to Public Strategies) co-founded a Colorado Business to produce/sell this product, itself clearly focusing off Marriage Education grants  See “PREPinc.com.”  Nonprofit clients include The Dibble FUnd (itself also a corporation feeding off Healthy Marriage education policy.

    about us
    Established in 1990, Public Strategies (PSI) began as a public relations and event planning firm with only two staff members with a client base that included the Oklahoma City Cavalry professional basketball team. In a matter of years, PSI became the only firm in the United States to develop and maintain a state-run healthy marriage initiative, which has since become the longest-running and most in-depth endeavor of its kind in the country.PSI has grown into a culturally and professionally diverse firm with 150 staff members, and offices in Oklahoma, Colorado and Washington, D.C. We have a solid success record of client-centered project management and strategic planning services for a variety of clients in the public and private sectors.

    Public Strategies is committed to helping organizations and individuals reach their full potential while maximizing their impact on the public good. Our clients represent the impact that PSI has had on an array of fields including education, business, faith, criminal justice, child welfare and human services.

    http://www.publicstrategies.com/default1.asp?ID=2

    WELL, enough for one day, eh?

    ////

    ///


    Chasing Down Charitable and Corporate Registrations for (more) Court-Connected Nonprofits… [publ. Aug 31, 2011; re-formatted re-post expected in late Dec. 2017]

    with one comment

    Post title with short-link (and to explain the 2011/2017 references in the title):

    Chasing Down Charitable and Corporate Registrations for (more) Court-Connected Nonprofits… [publ. Aug 31, 2011; re-formatted re-post expected in late Dec. 2017] (with WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ending “-Qp.”)


    This long (18.7K words) post featuring among others examples in HOW TO and features from various places to check in the process of doing the lookups, the two nonprofits Kids’ Turn San Diego and Kids’ Turn (in San Francisco), both of which after being hit repeatedly in 2011 with simply talking about it, posting boards of directors (plenty of whom were judges), at some point one of them later submerged itself under another nonprofit running training classes to prevent child abuse, in a networked, proprietary-program sort of way across the country.  As I recall, and referring (as I recall at the close of 2017 — which is many years ago!) but will double-check, the surviving entity it merged into — thereby “disappearing” its California OAG charitable details record, some of which I posted herein, is SFCAPC (San Francisco Child Abuse Prevention Center or “Council”). For more details look this up at (now it’s called) BusinessSearch.SOS.Ca.Gov or “Verification” page at California OAG/RCT. ( Go to those sites for more details).  California OAG search results have added an EIN# field, but are not otherwise changed in a major way; however the California Secretary of State Business Search website (formerly “kepler.sos.ca.gov”) has been radically revised in both initial level search results, and possibly in reporting requirements.

    I do not claim personal — I’ll call it — “credit” for having driven one of two California-based “Kids’ Turn” 501©3s underground, but at least one of them did go underground. It may be just coincidence, BUT the possibility that maybe I did (in addition to the general public-interest purpose of calling attention to how family-court-connected, and business-referrals-taking nonprofits organize and reproduce themselves over time) provides some minor compensation in terms of a sense of making an impact in the behavior of the court cultures nationwide,but in no way compensates for the damages the process inflicted upon my family line, and the legacy for my own children which this process re-directed away from them, and towards the professionals who make their livelihoods speaking on behalf of abused women (who apparently can’t speak), noncustodial fathers (for whom “fatherhood.gov” is still not enough help to “even out” the unfair advantage women supposedly have as mothers in divorce, or the public at large in (allegedly) reducing public debt through Post-PRWORA (1996) Welfare Reform policies scapegoating single motherhood itself and pretending to take into account that one cause of “single motherhood” is abusive fathers. No, encouraging and promoting RESPONSIBLE fatherhood will handle the danger situation, with appropriate and ever-more interventions and court-order therapies/treatments for the abused and the non-abused. etc.

    One of the commissioners I stood in front of post-child-stealing event, in order to negotiate how to retroactively reduce my ex-batterers child support arrears (which I’d just been told in person in the child support offices right before, could not happen), I years later learned had been on a Kids’ Turn Board of Directors.  As with AFCC, it seems that the nonprofit gave everyone a shot at being listed on the board, which helps those who choose to do so, cite proudly to that community service. That ruling was no favor to our children, who pre-abduction at least had one stable, and consistently working parent (with whom they lived, namely me) although that work life was increasingly under attack once the restraining order had been stripped off and an apparently underemployed (and later admitted in court, wasn’t actively looking for work because he was “depressed” about not having a wife and supportive partner — an excuse I hardly was making at any point).


    I worked on a re-formatted version of this post (under separate “cover” — title) earlier this season and am thinking it might be my charitable contribution (of a sort) for 2017.  This post is entertaining, and gets into layered foundations and venture capitalists directing their grants to groups like these which don’t even bother to stay current at their state level filings.


    I see in hindsight from the part of the post dealing with San Diego Foundation (Gross assets in August 2011 shown as $666M) which in 2007 formed the Carlsbad Community Foundation (which then donated several thousand dollars to Kids’ Turn San Diego), and with the various dbas under which various Kids’ Turn (either SD or SF in this case) donors operated (referring to Taproot Foundation, a dba of “TapFound, Inc.”), with its (Taproot, Inc.s) third-generation venture capitalist startup funding, that the topics covered are still relevant even though many links no longer are intact.  Any more commentary from this perspective will be found on the updated, reformatted post.//LGH 12/29/2017…

    For some of the flavor — after many of the lookups — a screenprint from the post below.  It’s in my voice, not a quote from some other website; “me” = yours truly…

    Image from my 8/31/2011 post, complete with some typos and more sarcasm.

    …Just describing what I was seeing…
    Below this line is August 31, 2011, writing. If you want a better-looking version of the same information (with some, though not 100%, updates on the organizations mentioned below), wait for the 2017 update. //


    And moreover, what about all these grantor/grantee relationships with corporations that don’t seem (note disclaimer) to be even operating legally in California?  While the promise is that 25 SF courthouses must be shut because of budget cuts….

    And I don’t just mean Kids’ Turn /  San Diego, which at least were incorporated here legally, but is now (per the databases) on suspended status, charity registrations delinquent.

    Kids’ Turn

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C1657442 12/29/1989 SUSPENDED KID’S TURN CLAIRE BARNES
    C1970774 06/05/1996 ACTIVE KID’S TURN, SAN DIEGO JAMES REYNOLDS DAVIS

    Incorporation status suspended for the SF branch (top row), but not the San Diego (which was a spinoff nonprofit).

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    KID’S TURN 075606 Charity Current SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity
    KID’S TURN, SAN DIEGO 102902 Charity Delinquent SAN DIEGO CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    Minor note:  The organization’s name is KIDS -apostrophe, so one must move the apostrophe (making it Kid, singular, apostrophe, S) to find on either database.

    Also, California, unlike some other states doesn’t tell the on-line viewer WHEN the license was suspended, i.e., before or after outreach such as this:

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE APRIL 20, 2011:

    Dateline:  San Francisco, California Kids’ Turn formally announces its partnership with Relate and National Family Mediation — two charities in Great Britain scheduled to pilot Kids’ Turn’s curriculum in Fall, 2011. This collaboration is the result of creative international colleagues who let go of ‘attachment to the facts’ believing in the value of shared ideas. We acknowledge the centuries’ old British social service system as the model for social work in the United States. The fact Relate and NFM are willing to implement innovations developed in San Francisco speaks to their commitment to offer evidence-based services to improve the lives of British children negatively impacted by parental separation.

    Yes I do believe swallowing some of this would indeed call for release from “Attachment to the facts” such as that this organization has some really strange financial liaisons.

    Or, I wonder if Linda Brandes was able to claim her $10,000 donation to Kids’ Turn San Diego, as their charitable status is delinquent, still, also in 2011:

    Rancho Santa Fe resident Linda Brandes gives Kids’ Turn San Diego a $10,000 grant

    (Posted May 25, 2011 in the Rancho Santa Fe Review)

    Kids’ Turn San Diego recently received a $10,000 grant from Rancho Santa Fe resident Linda Brandes through the Linda Brandes Foundation. The grant will be used to support psycho-educational workshops for families going through high-conflict divorce, separation or custody disputes.

    Linda Brandes

    Kids’ Turn is a unique program of prevention and intervention dedicated to helping children whose parents have become opponents. A psycho-educational approach, focused on the whole family, helps children understand and cope with the harsh realities of divorce or separation and custody disputes. Kids’ Turn is a non-profit workshop for children and their parents with a proven record.

    Kids’ Turn’s psycho-educational approach is the only one of its kind in Southern California.

    “Serving the entire San Diego County, and reaching all who need Kids’ Turn are our top priorities, for we have a proven, effective and life-changing curriculum that makes a significant difference in the lives of these children and families,” said Jim Davis, executive director, Kids’ Turn San Diego.

    For more information, visit www.kidsturnsd.org.

    March 2, 2011 letter from the California Department of Justice (in file, on-line):

    [From:] State of California DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1300 I STREET P.O. BOX 903447 SACRAMENTO CA 94203-4470

    Telephone: (916)445-2021×5 Facsimile: (916) 444-3651 E-Mail: RRF1@doj.ca.gov

    [TO:] KID’S TURN, SAN DIEGO 16935 W BERNARDO DR NO. 234 SAN DIEGO CA 92127

    March 9, 2011

    CT FILE NUMBER: 102902

    RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT

    The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

    1. The $50 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

    In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.

    Sincerely,

    Tony Salazar Staff Services Analyst Registry of Charitable Trusts

    for:  KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General

    Now that they have another donation, they can afford the $50 check. I see no “our check is in the mail” response, perhaps one was sent.  And another letter:

    Another letter a week later, same file# (CT 102902) reminds Kids’ Turn San Diego, California needs KT to fill out (not just send partial details) their list of donors, i.e., a “Schedule B,” just like you have to file with the IRS (“oops!”).    Too busy with international expansions of the programs, or is list of donors too hot to touch?

    RE: IRS Form 990, Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors

    We have received the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF submitted by the above-named organization for filing with the Registry of Charitable Trusts (Registry) for the fiscal year ending 12/31/2010. The filing is incomplete because the copy of Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors, does not include the names and addresses of contributors.

    While you and I don’t get this private information (barring anything on the web), it’s nice to know someone is keeping track.

    The copy of the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF, including all attachments, filed with the Registry must be identical to the document filed by the organization with the Internal Revenue Service. The Registry retains Schedule B as a confidential record for IRS Form 990 and 990-EZ filers.

    Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please submit a complete copy of Schedule B, Schedule of

    Contributors, for the fiscal year noted above, as filed with the Internal Revenue Service. all correspondence to the undersigned.

    I learned this from “Don Kramer’s Nonprofit Issues” (i.e., I looked up the IRS form # footnoted on the KT San Diego letter) and learned:

    Is a nonprofit required to report anonymous donors to the IRS?  Several colleagues have said that it is illegal for a nonprofit to not disclose an anonymous donor to the IRS.  Schedule B of the Form 990 provides a listing of major contributors but I have seen 990s that list the amounts without disclosing names.

    You are both right.  Nonprofits of all types, not just 501(c)(3) charities, that file a Form 990, 990-PF or 990-EZ tax information return are required to identify substantial donors (generally donors of $5000 or more) to the IRS on Schedule B, and must include the names and addresses of the donors.  But organizations other than private foundations and Section 527 political organizations may eliminate the names and addresses of donors when they make the Schedule available for public inspection. Therefore, you are undoubtedly correct that you have seen Schedule Bs without names of donors, and your colleagues are correct that the names must have been disclosed to the IRS.

    this suggests (but of course doesn’t prove) that the charity in question here (helping kids and parents deal with divorce, right) may have failed to disclose donors of over $5,000 — possibly the figures didn’t add up to the grants received, I don’t know.

    The fact that 501(c)(4) advocacy groups and 501 (c)(6) trade associations are not obligated to publicly disclose the names of their donors has made them a very attractive vehicle for people who want to engage in political campaign advertising anonymously.  In theCitizens Unitedcase, the U.S. Supreme Court said corporations could engage in campaign advertising. Since (c)(4)s and (c)(6)s are permitted to support or oppose candidates in election campaigns—unlike 501(c)(3) charities that can lose their exemption for electioneering—many have opted to use anonymous donations for this new activity.

    6/14/2011

    Someone should maybe also contact the “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” who awarded KTSan Diego $20,000 to do at least four workshops for about 100-120 families in Carlsbad “experiencing” divorce and child-custody “disputes.”

    Carlsbad Charitable Foundation awards nonprofit grants
    13 months ago | 449 views | 0 0 comments | 2 2 recommendations | email to a friend | print
    From left, Carlsbad Charitable Foundation Grants Chairman Tom Applegate hands over the grant money check to Interfaith Community Services representatives Greg Anglea, Lara Velde and Mary Ferro, along with CCF Board Chairwoman Yvonne Murchison Finocchiaro. CCF also awarded a grant to Kids’ Turn San Diego. Courtesy photo
    From left, Carlsbad Charitable Foundation Grants Chairman Tom Applegate hands over the grant money check to Interfaith Community Services representatives Greg Anglea, Lara Velde and Mary Ferro, along with CCF Board Chairwoman Yvonne Murchison Finocchiaro. CCF also awarded a grant to Kids’ Turn San Diego. Courtesy photo
    CARLSBAD — The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation awarded more than $44,000 to Kids’ Turn San Diego and The Interfaith Community Services for their efforts in promoting a more civil society in Carlsbad. The awards were presented at CCF’s third annual Grants Award ceremony at the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Discovery Center in Carlsbad on June 29. 

    Kids’ Turn San Diego will receive $20,000 to provide no less than four workshops, each lasting four weeks, for approximately 100 to 120 families in Carlsbad experiencing divorce or child-custody disputes. The workshops address the emotional impact that these issues have on children and provide guidance on more effective communication techniques for all members of the family, such as anger management.
    And what’s more, they reduce parental alienation, right?
    Interfaith Community Services will receive $24,545 to assess resources, existing programs and specific opportunities for social outreach at each Carlsbad faith center. ICS will conduct one-on-one meetings to identify discussion points for Carlsbad’s faith-based community and spearhead at least two community-wide town hall meetings to further galvanize all faith communities/congregations around specific issues.

    CCF Grants Chairman Tom Applegate noted that collective resources of Carlsbad’s 40-plus faith communities will be more effectively utilized to help persons in need. . . .

    with all those faith communities and enough finances to go around, one might think that there’d be fewer divorces and out-of-wedlock births to start with.  (:

    CCF Board Chairwoman Yvonne Finocchiaro said that grants were made possible through the contributions of the members of The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation. “We’re extremely honored to support Kids’ Turn San Diego and The Interfaith Community Services commitment to our community,” she said. “The intent of these donations is to support activities and programs that unify and inspire Carlsbad residents to make a positive difference in the future of our city.”

    Kids’ Turn SD has great reasons to be committed to Carlsbad’s Community — see median household income.

    Carlsbad’s median income (per its site, whatever date), $92, 249, and there are 2.55 people per household.  I can see how that would be stressful, custody of that extra burdensome 0.55 child, occasioning many divorce “disputes.”   The Top 10 employers of this 65,000 population city & average employee salary of $49K, with 40 faith communities, 1% African-American residents, and almost every other adult having a bachelor’s degree, plus 12% master’s or higher,  being:

    Top 10 employers (2007)

    1,429 Callaway Golf
    1,172 Life Technologies Corporation (Invitrogen Corporation)
    1,169 Carlsbad Unified School District
    1,014 La Costa Resort and Spa
    874 Park Hyatt Aviara Resort
    862 LEGOLAND California
    854 ViaSat, Inc.
    797 Gemological Institute of America
    714 City of Carlsbad
    694 TaylorMade (Adidas Golf)

    The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation is an affiliate of the San Diego Foundation, apparently (nothing is listed directly under that name, as my searches below show):

    703 Palomar Airport Rd , Carlsbad , CA 92011 | 760-269-3882

    www.​carlsbadcharitablefoundation.​org

    The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation’s mission is to “advance philanthropy in Carlsbad in order to build community excellence, stimulate innovation and enhance the capacity of nonprofits.” Every year the foundation splits the total amount of donations in half. One half goes to grants for the year; the other goes specifically to the Carlsbad endowment, which is for the advancement of the community. CCF is an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation.

    Or, in their own words:

    Inspired by the desire to build philanthropy in Carlsbad that would have impact immediately and forever, a group of citizens partnered with The San Diego Foundation to establish the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation in 2007. This community-specific effort helps meet the emerging needs of Carlsbad by encouraging and increasing responsible and effective philanthropy by and for those living and working in Carlsbad.

    1. What is the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation?
    Inspired by the desire to build philanthropy in Carlsbad that would have impact immediately and forever, a group of citizens partnered with The San Diego Foundation to establish the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation (CCF) in 2007. This community-specific effort would help meet the emerging needs of Carlsbad by encouraging and increasing responsible and effective philanthropy by and for those living and working in Carlsbad.


    4. What is The San Diego Foundation?
    Founded in 1975, The San Diego Foundation was created by and for the people of the San Diego region. Its purpose is to promote and increase effective and responsible charitable giving. The Foundation manages nearly $500 million in assets, almost half of which reside in permanent endowment funds. Since its inception, The Foundation has granted more than $600 million to nonprofits serving the community.
    5. What does it mean that CCF is an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation?
    As an affiliate, the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation benefits from the experience and management of The San Diego Foundation. The San Diego Foundation provides such back-office support as investment management, staffing, marketing and expertise. In return, the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation shares with The San Diego Foundation its local knowledge of the emerging needs and causes important to the Carlsbad community.
    DOES IT HAVE TO REGISTER AND FILE TAXES SEPARATELY, WITH THE HELP OF The San Diego FOUNDATION EXPERIENCE AND MANAGEMENT, OR NOT?
    6. Who may participate in the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation?
    The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation encourages everyone who lives, works, and plays in Carlsbad to participate in the Foundation.

    7. What is an endowment?


    (on the SAN DIEGO SITE):

    For Nonprofits

    The San Diego Foundation is honored to be able to claim $60 million in grants to community causes last year, but we cannot take all the credit. Over ninety percent of our annual grants are driven directly by our donors. These are individuals, families, and corporations recommending grants from Donor Advised Funds to the organizations and causes that are important to them.
    In addition to Donor Advised Funds, The San Diego Foundation’s program grants fund nonprofits through a competitive application process. Program grants cover subject areas such as arts and culture, civil society, the environment, health & human services, and science & technology.

    . . .

    Donor Advised Funds

    Donor Advised FundsDonor advised funds allow you to be actively involved in the granting process. Through an agreement with The San Diego Foundation, a donor’s contribution establishes a fund named by the donor. The Fund is managed and administered by The San Diego Foundation, but the donor may be the fund advisor and advise The Foundation about preferences regarding grant recipients and gift amounts. Distributions are made in the fund’s name and the donor receives regular financial statements. As the fund is considered part of The San Diego Foundation’s holdings, it receives the maximum tax benefits and the donor is not responsible for the tax filings.

    Designated Funds  (note the photo chosen — things “kids” are great fundraiser causes).

    Designated FundsDesignated funds are gifts that provides a source of support to a nonprofit organization selected by the donor. Often this gift is made in the form of an endowment fund. In an endowment, the principal is invested and only a portion of the income is paid out. The remaining income is returned to principal to protect the value of the endowment over time. This option provides support for your fund now and forever.
    With a designated fund, at the outset, the donor designates one or more charities who will receive the earnings on the fund in perpetuity. Grant checks are mailed automatically once or twice a year, with the donor choosing the best time or according to The Foundation’s schedule of March and/or September. Donors may also opt to reinvest the earnings until the fund grows to an amount desired by the donor. Fees associated with the designated fund are particularly inexpensive, at 0.5%.
    To establish a designated fund, or to learn more information, contact our charitable giving team at GivingTeam@sdfoundation.org or 619-235-2300.

    The San Diego Foundation holds raffles, and registered for one in 2009 which raised “$42,564.66.”

    It’s filings (under the OAG site) show this for 2002 (earliest year shown):

    Annual Renewal Information
    Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-02
    Fiscal End: 30-JUN-03
    Total Assets: $361,600,036.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $717,938,952.00
    RRF Received: 19-NOV-03
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted

    and this for 2009 (latest year shown): (notice difference in revenue, but increased assets):

    Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-09
    Fiscal End: 30-JUN-10
    Total Assets: $466,087,961.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $63,742,314.00
    RRF Received: 15-NOV-10
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted


    Organization Details
    EIN: 952942582
    Name: The San Diego Foundation — Google
    Location:  2508 Historic Decatur Rd Ste 200
    San Diego, CA 92106
     Report Address Change
    County: San Diego County
    Ruling Date: 1975   (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:  T31 – Community Foundations
    Most recently completed fiscal year (TAXPER) 06/2010
    Total Revenue $63,742,314
    Total Assets: $466,087,961
    Organization Mission Statement and Purpose
    The San Diego Foundation improves the quality of life within the San Diego community by promoting and increasing responsible and effective philanthropy.

    In 2003, it Amended its bylaws on two points:

    2. Article VIII is added to the Articles of Incorporation of this Corporation and shall read as follows:

    The Corporation is specifically authorized to obtain licensure as a grants and annuities society pursuant to California Insurance Code Sections 11520 through 11524 and to conduct a grants and annuities business once licensed.

    I. of The San Diego Foundation, a California nonprofit public benefit

    3. been duly approved by the Board of Governors.

    The foregoing amendment of Articles of Incorporation has

    4. The Corporation has no members.

    Grants and Annuities means one can receive transfers of property, provided the business agrees to pay out to the Transferror — or the Tranferror’s Nominee — an Annuity.  Not just anyone can do it, an organization has to have been in operation for 10 years or more and qualifies according to this code:

    INSURANCE CODE 
    SECTION 11520-11524 

    11520.  The following organizations and persons may receive
    transfers of property, conditioned upon their agreement to pay an
    annuity to the transferor or the transferor's nominee, after
    obtaining from the commissioner a certificate of authority so to do:
       (a) Any charitable, religious, benevolent or educational
    organization, pecuniary profit not being its object or purpose, after
    being in active operation for at least 10 years; provided,
    nevertheless, that 10 years of active operation shall not be required
    in case of:
       (1) A nonprofit corporation organized and controlled by a hospital licensed by the State Department of Health Services as a general acute care hospital pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section
    1250) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; and
       (2) An incorporated educational institution offering courses of instruction beyond high school, organized pursuant to Section 94757
    of the Education Code, and which is, and for at least one year has
    been, qualified pursuant to Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 94700)
    of Part 59 of the Education Code to issue diplomas or degrees as
    defined in Sections 94724 and 94726 of that code;
       (b) Every organization or person maintaining homes for the aged for pecuniary profit. . . .

    This can be problematic, I imagine, if when elders are receiving public guardianship or being placed under a conservator’s care against their will or improperly, for the sake of access to their property.

    What is an Annuity?  Investopedia explains:

    What Does Annuity Mean?
    A financial product sold by financial institutions that is designed to accept and grow funds from an individual and then, upon annuitization, pay out a stream of payments to the individual at a later point in time. Annuities are primarily used as a means of securing a steady cash flow for an individual during their retirement years.

    The root word represents “yearly,” as in “ANNUAL.”

    Women’e Enews puts in a few words about Annuities, their types and their purpose:

    Annuity Funding Explained

    When it comes to annuity funding and annuities in general many people are confused. The problem is often because there are so many different kinds. There’s single or flexible-payment, fixed or variable, and deferred or immediate.

    Regardless the type of annuity funding you’re ultimately interested in, all annuities are financial contracts which have been created to provide you with a good source of income in your retirement years    & …..

    You can choose from a number of annuity options which include a lifetime income, a guaranteed period income where your beneficiaries would receive any remaining payments, a joint and survivor option for couples as well as many other options that a financial advisor or insurance representative can tell you about

    In many cases, options can be mixed and matched to provide you with the best kind of annuity funding possible.

    The money contributed to any annuity funding may be in post-tax dollars. The advantage to this is that you can contribute as much money as you would like. However before you put any after-tax savings into any kind of annuity funding, it’s often advisable for you to put the maximum pre-tax amount into a retirement plan.

    When an annuity is used to fund a retirement plan, contribution limits usually apply. Federal tax laws also generally require that you begin taking minimum distributions by April 1 of the calendar year following the year in which you reach age 70.

    Annuity funding earnings are taxed as ordinary income.

    A few more comments on annuities, endowments, and related financial/investment terminology;

    I’m a novice in this and I’ll BET that Title IV-A people and others impoverished through violence (or the court battles) or just life, are not educated about these things.  That we aren’t is a factor of our school systems and family systems, most likely.

    How interesting, because what the child support / fatherhood systems emphasize is getting everyone into a low-income job, garnishing the wages for child support (or don’t) and then, as I like to point out, lose track of it at the state or county level, while splitting the difference with the Feds 66%/34% for a well-behaved State SDU (Statewide Distribution Unit), or failing to report interest income — which can be considerable — if they are not.

    How the HHS/OIG/OAS responds to the un-accounted for collected child support  is a concerted attempt to get their 66% but a hands-washing response to, they’re only overseeing, not controlling operations, when the situation is pretty much in epidemic proportions country-wide.   Where the child support programs WORK is when groups like Maximus, Inc. & MDRC, CPR and PSI etc. get their contracts in, their CEO’s get paid (a LOT) and stock values for shareholders manages to stay above water, even if it loses some value.  Meanwhile, what the children are getting, if they’re lucky is a child support allotment that makes it through, is not too substantially compromised, and may represent wages at (judging from what they program materials say they are aiming to help with) perhaps $8.00 to $12.00/hour, not including taxes withheld.

    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    While there are all kinds of plans for certain types or classes of people (including financially savvy and/or endowed, or sucessful businesspeople or investors) to figure out how to have monthly income — enough to live on, plus some — til they breathe their last breath, even at 80 or 90  years old — and typically its WOMEN living much longer — the philosophy for the vast masses being coached and think-tanked/policy-driven by people that live like this, is that the real cause of widespread poverty includes only one income earner in a household, i.e., fatherlessness and single-motherhood.

    I do believe that even my children in elementary school (at least MY kids at that age) could figure out that if one wishes to end up with the number “5” one might add 2+ 3 or 4 +1.  Or one might even go, if x=4,    3x-7 and come up with 5, meaning what one needs to live on.  The factors can be adjusted.

    But somehow we are not to calculate the possibility of variety in income when it comes to marital dissolution and fatherhood movements, or child support program evolution, and the need of judges and attorneys to run nonprofits teaching parents anger management, and (once we learn the background of this) giving them plenty of opportunity to practice, although not regarding the other partner so much as who is forcing this on couples already under financial stressor called divorce? and dealing with the family court’s elimination of the concept that a crime is a crime, even if it was committed by someone you previously had a sexual relationship with.

    No mention of where that income comes from; the presumption is always jobs only,  or possibly jobs and child support.  Not, for example, ANY form of passive income such as may come from a trust, a foundation, investments, annuities, assignment of rents, royalties on books, or virtually anything that would NOT involve being easier to find and control (and/or threaten) by the IRS.  Not on any form of initiative taking by the single parent(s), or for that matter low-income married parents.

    In other words, “wealth” knows how to consolidate, aggregate, distribute according to wealth’s understanding of how not to pay taxes, after which it can tell significant others (like employees in some of their corporations) how to work jobs in which taxes ARE paid.  Last I heard, such things are NOT taught in the public schools K-12; they are still working on reading, period, and basic math, plus how to stand in line without bullying someone else.

     

    So, in 2003, The San Diego Foundation (still solvent, on the books) gets into the grants and annuities business around 2003.  They have every right to.  I’m just pointing it out they did….

    The New York Times Reports:

    Promising security, U.S. annuities business takes on a new life

    By Paul Sullivan
    Published: Tuesday, October 23, 2007
    • BOSTON — Wall Street swings between fear and greed. With U.S. stock markets hitting record highs this month, greed seems to be back in the saddle.

    Still, the current wave of retirees, the first of the baby boomers, is as fearful as any group leaving the work force has ever been, many still shell-shocked from the bursting of the technology bubble five years ago, which wiped out huge paper gains.

    This group is now looking at a future without gainful employment and only their often diminished portfolios to fall back on.

    They do not like what they see.

    “People are more fearful and realistic,” said John Diehl, head of the retirement solutions group for the Hartford, an insurance company. “There was no fear in the late 1990s. Being respectful of the markets is a good thing. People have started to think the market doesn’t always return 20 percent.”

    Enter the annuities salesmen. The once-stodgy insurance product is having a resurgence. New York Life, one of the largest providers of annuities, has had an annual growth rate of 75 percent from 2003 to 2007, according to Mike Gallo, senior vice president in the guaranteed lifetime income department.

    The growth in annuities has tapped into this fear. In the old days, people were wary of annuities because they locked up assets and distributed a payment only as long as the policyholder lived. But the industry has become more sophisticated. New products have guarantees for life, adjust for inflation and, at their most sophisticated, allow people access to some or, in extreme cases, all of the principle.

    [Meaning “principal,” I think, right?]

    ALL YOU NEED FOR $5,000/month in retirement is to put down $100,000, sure!

    (not including what a $$ will buy at that time…..)

    The difference, he said, is that the most popular annuities now offer a living benefit drawn from an income stream, which can rise with any increase in the value of the underlying principle, while carrying a guarantee that the payout will never fall below the initial amount.

    The guarantee is financed by building derivative-style collars into the structure of the underlying portfolio to cap potential losses.

    Yeah, like we all  know what is a derivative-style collar.  Some people in alternative lifestyle, about dog collars, from dog-walking & pet-sitting….

    With such a variable annuity plan, “people aren’t as worried about inflation as they are with a traditional payout annuity,” he said. While the payout may remain constant in percentage terms, the cash amount will rise if inflation – or skillful investment – swells the amount of the underlying fund.

    And this is what today’s retirees – without the pension plans their parents had, and uncertain of the continued existence of Social Security – want.

    The top concern of the baby boomers nearing retirement is, ‘Do I have enough money to last for the rest of my life,’ ” said Doug Wolff, vice president for business development at Security Benefit, a provider of annuities in Topeka, Kansas. “We’ve seen a major shift from ‘Who can develop the best death benefits?’ to ‘Who can develop the best product to guarantee some minimum investment amount?’ “

    Quite different from some people, with more than 0.55 child per household, whose concern is staying alive & housed/fed til next week.

    Providers of annuities today encourage people to buy enough coverage for basic expenses, from food to taxes, plus a little bit more. The average portion of a portfolio placed in annuity is 25 percent to 33 percent and most insurers limit a 65-year-old to 75 percent, to ensure the retention of sufficient liquid assets. Coverage of basic expenses can be achieved with either a traditional immediate annuity – the buyer puts $100,000 in and receives a fixed percentage of the initial value, typically 5 percent, every month – or with a variable annuity that guarantees a minimum withdrawal benefit.

    . . .   Can get a little complicated . . . . .

    Something similar can be accomplished with a joint-survivor annuity – essentially paying out for two lives. A further refinement can be added in the form of a cash-refund feature that pays to the heirs whatever principle is left at death.

    The next wave of innovation is expected to produce annuities that look to address the large health care bills that many retirees will face as they age, Wolff said.

    Pricing all of these permutations of annuities can be complicated. There is one constant, however: The more guaranteed features that are attached – from joint-survivor to inflation adjustment – the higher the cost and the lower the percentage payout.

    Jack Lemery, a former chief investment officer for Paul Revere Life Insurance, which sold annuities, maintained that this should dissuade people from putting any money at all into an annuity. Lemery is now a portfolio manager at Emerson Investment Management in Boston, where he has sworn off annuities.

    Well, in 2006 “The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” was founded (same EIN# as San Diego) and began raising some money, part of which they obviously gave to Kids’ Turn to run classes in THEIR neighborhoods, too.  Sounds from the description at around around  $200 per four-week session per family ($20,000 for four-weeks for 100 – 120 couples).

    http://www.sdfoundation.org/CommunityFoundations/RecentNews.aspx

     


    THE CARLSBAD CHARITABLE
    FOUNDATION

    Since its inception in 2006, the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation has granted $142,731 and has grown to 147 members, with an endowment of $311,000. This year CCF will focus their grantmaking on the environment in Carlsbad.

    Grantees 2007-2008
    Carlsbad Unified School District $20,000
    Biztown $23,780

     

    Grantees 2008-2009
    San Diego Hospice $28,406
    North County Community Services $12,500
    Interfaith Community Services $12,500

    Grantees 2009-2010
    Kids’ Turn San Diego $20,000
    Interfaith Community Services $24,545

    For more information visitwww.carlsbadcharitablefoundation.org.

     

    BEFORE I FOUND OUT tHAT THE “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” was an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation, I went looking for it, unsuccessfully, in the usual places and found a few more interesting groups.

    I cannot locate any business, or charity, called “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” on either site where they are to be registered.  There are 20 results to “Carlsbad Foundation” search.

    Apparently this contribution was made, or at least announced, “13 months ago.” In the interim, Carlsbad Foundation’s charitable status seems to have held:

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    CARLSBAD FOUNDATION 124543 Charity Current CARLSBAD CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    Actually, that’s fairly strange as there is only ONE annual RRF (charitable registration) form on file, and for the first 6 years, no IRS filings, then after that approximately just about zero (or close to, relatively speaking) assets OR gross (not net) revenue.    For example, Apr 2009-March 2010, they reported a whopping $220.00 (so how did the $20,000.00 get to Kids’ Turn?  I am such a novice in this field, I don’t see it..)  From April 2010 to March 2011, they had zero revenue.

    Carlsbad Foundation’s President (at least in 2010), Jim Comstock, (and the foundation’s address is his office, Comstock & Associates,) is a tax, financial and estate planning professional, so I assume he knows better than I how to pull that off legally:

    logo

    There are also  least 75 Marriage and Family Therapists (probably some overlap with the 40 Faith Communities) in Carlsbad, including two in the suite right next to Mr. Comstock and, including them, 15 on the same street, perhaps within two blocks (judging by street #s only).  There are fully 20 foundations incorporated in Carlsbad (Search “Carlsbad Foundation) only 4 (and not this one) with “suspended” status:

    Entity Name: CARLSBAD FOUNDATION
    Entity Number: C2530851
    Date Filed: 04/24/2003
    Status: ACTIVE
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: 2755 JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 102
    Entity City, State, Zip: CARLSBAD CA 92008
    Agent for Service of Process: JIM COMSTOCK
    Agent Address: 2755 JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 102
    Agent City, State, Zip: CARLSBAD CA 92008

    Though it incorporated 2003, the ruling date shows (NCCSDataweb) as only 2007.   In 2004, however, they filed with the IRS — only tax return showing here:

    There are a lot of blanks and “x”s up, including (NOT checked)< “Check here if your receipts are normally under $25,000.”   There are 3 officers, Jim & Linda Comstock, plus Glen Blavet, who appears on Corporation Wiki (for what that’s worth) associated with 2 other corporations.

    I looked under “CCF,” but don’t feel like laboring through the entire list.  However, under “Carlsbad Foundation” again, this entry is interesting:

    Entity Name: CARLSBAD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
    Entity Number: C2980846
    Date Filed: 02/13/2007
    Status: SUSPENDED
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: 2755 JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 102
    Entity City, State, Zip: CARLSBAD CA 92008
    Agent for Service of Process: ** RESIGNED ON 12/02/2010
    Agent Address: *
    Agent City, State, Zip: *

    (see address).

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    CARLSBAD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION Charity Not Registered CARLSBAD CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

     

    There are, like, 3 people involved in this one, apparently.  I’m not going to track them down, now that I know the Kids’ Turn grantor was under some other umbrella.

    It does make me wonder whether a Donor couldn’t just set up funding and then somehow direct it towards certain charities and not get very well monitored, so long as they keep the amount low enough not to call attention to itself (read on):

     

     

    SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION:

    The San Diego Foundation, having been started original (it says) with 11 people, is still active corporate status: (There are 269 results for “The San Diego Foundation”), which shows you what good management can do.

     

    Entity Name: THE SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION
    Entity Number: C0735981
    Date Filed: 05/09/1975
    Status: ACTIVE
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: 2508 HISTORIC DECATUR RD., STE.200
    Entity City, State, Zip: SAN DIEGO CA 92106
    Agent for Service of Process: MICHAEL PATTISON
    Agent Address: 2508 HISTORIC DECATUR RD., STE.200
    Agent City, State, Zip: SAN DIEGO CA 92106

     

    And, yes, their 2010 IRS 990 does indeed acknowledge a grant of $22,500 to Kids’ Turn San Diego for “Human Services” (the form is 99 pages long, search the name!)      the grantees (for under $100,000) are asked, in return, to inform the foundation of their “Successes and Challenges” in meeting the conditions for the grant.  As KT is all about communication to start with, and the nonprofit clearly is very good with PR, I’m figuring they did this (although it doesn’t seem the registered as a california charity correctly).  FOr Donor Advisedgrants over $100,000, IF the Donor advisee requests, the foundation can do some more monitoring.  I don’t see that the IRS shows which funds were donor advised or not.  There are several to churches & religious schools, $8,500 to Focus on the Family and (interesting)

    $10,000 to the “Los Angeles Family Law Help Center” 205 S. Broadway Suite 500, EIN# 26-1252578, filed under “Civil Society.”   and

    $7,750 to the “National Conflict Resolution Center,” 625 Broadway, Suite 1221, San Diego, EIN# 33-0433314
    ($15,000 to Oral Roberts University in Tulsa) and many more groups, obviously.  The directors (mostly, but not all, unpaid) would not fit on one page, but those who were paid, salaries (not including retirement or benefits plans) was over $1,000,000; understandable for administering so much.

    2006 (formation of Carlsbad Charitable…) was not a good year in San Diego,

    at least in government circles:

    Report calls San Diego’s finances reckless, ‘Enron by the Sea

    [08-09-2006, found under USAToday]
    SAN DIEGO (AP) — The city recklessly and deliberately mismanaged its finances for years, exhibiting disregard for the law and becoming “Enron-by-the-Sea,” according to consultants who investigated how it created a $1.4 billion pension fund shortfall.

    San Diego “fell prey to the same type of corruption” that ruined companies including Enron Corp. and WorldCom Inc. and prompted Orange County to file for bankruptcy protection in 1994, said a report by the risk management company Kroll Inc.

    The evidence demonstrates not mere negligence but deliberate disregard for the law, disregard for fiduciary responsibility and disregard for the financial welfare of the city’s residents,” the report concludes.

    Good thing there are foundations to pick up the slack….

    The $20 million report, presented at a City Council meeting Tuesday, offers one of the most detailed accounts of how San Diego created its $1.4 billion pension shortfall that has crippled its ability to borrow money.

    The shortfall — the gap between the value of its pension assets and its obligation to retirees — soared after the City Council in 1996 and again in 2002 skipped payments to the pension fund and, at the same time, enhanced retirement benefits.

    The fiscal meltdown that resulted sparked investigations by the U.S. Justice Department and the SEC in early 2004. Five former city and pension fund officials were charged with federal fraud and conspiracy in January.

    The report outlines a series of recommendations, including creation of an independent audit committee and more authority for the city’s chief financial officer.

    “You got a second chance here, folks,” said one of the authors, former chief SEC accountant Lynn Turner. “I think it’s a marvelous city, but you need to change it from being Enron-by-the-Sea to Emerald-by-the Sea.”

    The report found that several former city officials likely violated federal securities law and others were negligent.

    It says former Mayor Dick Murphy and members of the City Council failed to disclose the extent of the city’s problems to bond investors and for “knowingly and improperly” causing the city to violate state and federal law in its collection of sewage fees.

    Arthur Levitt, former chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, was involved in Kroll’s investigation and said the city overcharged homeowners for sewage to subsidize large businesses.

    Wow.  Reminds me of the Los Angeles issues with the Department of Water and Power, but that’s another subject.

    ANYHOW, Kids’ Turn SAN FRANCISCO, states on its 2010 Annual report (December? 2010) that half its attendees are court-ordered, that it applied for a grant from the FY 2011 AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts) and is pushing a new curriculum, as well as teaching charities in the UK how to operate like itself, presumably:

    The following representative results definitely affirm the efficacy of Kids’ Turn’s 2010 services:

    • 50% of Kids’ Turn families are Court ordered

    That’s efficacy, or that’s a court-connection?  ! !  Who’s on the Board of Kids’ Turn, generally speaking?

    However, the first thing readers are told on this report is:

    Program 1. Kids’ Turn sustained its very specialized services in five Bay Area Counties serving 700 participants over twelve months. Kids’ Turn enrollment is down slightly, likely attributable to the economy. It is our impression families are struggling to pay our fees and we are making every effort to negotiate reasonable tuition costs based on the particular needs of each situation. We still do not charge children to attend Kids’ Turn, and parents pay on a sliding fee basis depending on their income. Workshop records verify 60% of the families attending Kids’ Turn are in the low- to moderate-income range.1

    (the footnote explains that this is because more wealthy people have less tendency to divorce, because there’s more money to support their families…In fact, let me quote it here:   “As per the Huffington Post’s new DIVORCE page (www.huffingtonpost.com), families with higher incomes have a lower divorce rate, likely attributable to the supporting resources available to them to sustain their marriages (therapists, counselors, mediators).**”

    Which just goes to show that **It takes a a Village — of AFCC operatives —  for couples to stay married…..  Or so, those operatives believe!   Those who can’t afford it, might end up needing subsidy to attend Kids’ Turn classes by out-of-compliance nonprofits during their breakup.  I would just love to take classes on a sliding fee with people who attribute marital breakup among the not-so-wealthy to inability to pay for a therapist, quoting the Huffington Post…

    Seriously now, how does the world manage to keep turning without the advice of these professions?   

    Other factoids (again, this is the SF, not the San Diego, group):

    Development

    Kids’ Turn Development activities have been shaped and modified in order to accommodate the recent recession while simultaneously continuing projects that will help improve and develop our trade mark.

    1. Kids’ Turn launched its new logo in January, 2010. Development of the logo was the result of a grant from the Taproot Foundation and we are very satisfied with the universal image which emphasizes the protective role of parents for the children in their families.

    Although it’s quite likely that many people come to Kids’ Turn after violence- or abuse-related separation, followed by family court involvement, court orders for child support, access/visitation grant diversion for fatherhood promotion, and voila — a parent education project….

    2. Kids’ Turn launched its new website in December, 2010. This project was also the result of a partnership with the Taproot Foundation. The new website is cleaner and consistent with the unstated emphasis offered by the logo.

     

     

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    Tapfound Inc. Dba Taproot Foundation CA 2003 $436,604 990A 13 91-2162645
    Tapfound Industry Dba Taproot Foundation CA 2004 $350,319 990 15 91-2162645
    Taproot Foundation CA 2003 $187,547 990 13 91-2162645
    Taproot Foundation CA 2002 $56,366 990EZ 7 91-2162645
    Taproot Foundation CA 2002 $56,366 990ER 6 91-2162645
    Taproot Foundation, Inc. CA 2009 $2,156,525 990 24 91-2162645

     

     

    (Wow.  The earliest 2002 is missing page 1; the other, parts are handwritten (on forms), parts typewritten (on blank sheets, for example, the listing of Board Members).

    The last board member listed is Jenny Shilling, who works for The Draper Richards Foundation, which apparently started Tapfound, Inc. (The Taproot foundation) with $50,000.  The group started with $79,000 assets, not including -$32,000 of “undeposited assets,” for a net assets of $48K.  Its “Liabilities & Equity” just about cancelled each other out, and program service accomplishments for this year were “Service Grant Program awarded 18 nonprofits (not shown) with volunteer teams” — $23K.

    An “updated July 6, 2003” board of directors is attached.

    The 2003 filing (at least the one above I clicked on) shows the act is rather more together, and service program accomplishments reads:

    Service Grants were awarded to 63 nonprofit organizations with a total estimated value of $2.5 million (I’ll tell the IRS my return was “close enough for jazz also….”) 582 volunteers were recruited to deliver these services.  (at a cost of $148,872 Program Service Expense).

    STATUS WITH CALIFORNIA (AS OF TODAY)?

     


    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    TAPROOT Charity Not Registered SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

     

    and (I searched the EIN)

     


    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    TAPFOUND, INC. 120759 Charity Current SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity
    1


    I guess the OAG’s office maybe is behind in their database entry, because for a “current” charity, including tax returns showing revenue over $4 million in 2007, the only year the group’s RRF shows up is for 2008; they only reminded of an unpaid registration fee of $150 in 2010.   There is revenue of over $100K on IRS forms from 2003 through 2009, though.     OAG’s (then Edmund G Brown’s) office respectfully requests they send in their $150 fee in September 2010:

    September 8, 2010

    TAPFOUND, INC. CT FILE NUMBER: 120759 466 GEARY ST STE 200 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102

    RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT

    The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

    1. The $150 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

    In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.

    We’re coming up on a year from the date of this letter, so presumably they did, or they didn’t and OAG hasn’t noticed yet, or doesn’t care.  Secretary of State has corporate status active, too:

     

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2374009 01/18/2002 ACTIVE TAPFOUND, INC. AARON HURST

     

     

    Entity Name: TAPFOUND, INC.
    Entity Number: C2374009
    Date Filed: 01/18/2002
    Status: ACTIVE
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: 466 GEARY ST STE 200
    Entity City, State, Zip: SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
    Agent for Service of Process: AARON HURST
    Agent Address: 466 GEARY ST STE 200
    Agent City, State, Zip: SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102

     

    An independent audit states that for 2010:

    In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Tapfound, Inc. dba: Taproot Foundation as of September 30, 2010, and the changes in its net assets and its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

    The Taproot concept, from which Kids’ Turn benefitted, sounds great:

    MAKE IT MATTER

    Most organizations tackling social problems don’t have access to the marketing, design, technology, management or strategic planning resources they need to succeed. Without this talent, few are able to have their intended impact on critical issues like the environment, health and education.

    Taproot is a nonprofit organization that makes business talent available to organizations working to improve society.

    (is it also registering anually as a charity within California, or not?)

    We engage the nation’s millions of business professionals in pro bono services both through our award-winning programs and by partnering with companies to develop their pro bono programs. One day, we envision all organizations with promising solutions will be equipped to successfully take on urgent social challenges.

    DOWNLOAD OUR 2011-13 STRATEGIC PLAN

    OUR MISSION

    Our mission is to lead, mobilize and engage professionals in pro bono service that drives social change.

    LEAD NATIONALLY BY ACTING LOCALLY

    While working to expand the impact of pro bono services nationally by leading the pro bono movement, we concentrate our efforts for social impact within five metro areas where we have offices: ChicagoLos AngelesNew York CitySan Francisco Bay Area and Washington, D.C.

    Today, we offer three core programs to increase nonprofits’ access to pro bono services. Through these programs we provide millions of dollars in services annually aimed at best enabling organizations to address local social issues.

    Service Grant Program

    Our signature Service Grant program operates in five cities and, since its inception in 2001, has engaged professionals in over 780,000 hours of pro bono service on over 1,300 projects.
    GET A SERVICE GRANT

    DONATE YOUR SKILLS 

    Advisory Services

    With our Advisory Services and leadership resources, we support companies and organizations in designing and developing their own customized, high-impact pro bono programs. We apply expertise garnered through our Service Grant Program to design pro bono programs best meeting our corporate clients business needs while ensuring their employees’ service makes a meaningful impact in their communities.
    LEARN MORE

    Advocacy

    We partner with leading foundations, universities, companies, coalitions and associations to host convenings and run campaigns where we collaborate to design innovative solutions bringing pro bono service to bear for progress on issues facing our cities and society

    (July 2010 letter from founder Aaron Hurst….)

     

    There are certain core values that I have made a point of formally celebrating at Taproot.  We close the office on Election Day to stress the importance of civic engagement and democracy.  We honor civil rights, and in addition to MLK Jr. Day we close the office for Matt O’Grady Day, commemorating the marriage of long-term Root Matt O’Grady to his partner in 2008.  The anniversary of every Root is also marked by giving them the day off showing our appreciation for their involvement in our shared success.

     

    We also value the diversity of backgrounds and interests of our Roots and give the team three days a year to create their own holidays. For some people, they use these days for traditional holidays like President’s Day and others use them for their birthday or culturally meaningful days like Chinese New Year, Rosh Hashanah or Cinco de Mayo.

     

    Draper Richards — which provided the first $50,000 for TapRoot (Tapfound, Inc.) is a venture capitalist company, also interesting — in high tech.

    Draper Richards L.P. is a venture capital firm investing in early-stage technology companies. We fund entrepreneurs with the energy, vision, experience, and desire to build great companies.

    I’m not so sure about making themselves the TapRoot being a great idea, although it’s great market positioning for nonprofits.  Are they as focused on screening who taps into them as they are on making the connections?  And I’ll just point out, this does spread tax benefits around nicely between foundation and nonprofits.

    WHY TAPROOT?

    A “taproot” is the core root of a plant. It gathers nutrients from lateral roots and delivers them to a plant to enable it to flourish.

    We see ourselves as a taproot for the nonprofit sector, drawing nutrients from the community and delivering them to nonprofits to enable them to thrive.

    A bit more on the background of Draper Richards, that helped start Taproot, that helped revamp the logo of 1989 court-connected, court-official run (basically), CCSF nonprofit vendor and access/visitation grants beneficiary “Kids’ Turn” (“Kid’s Turn” on the state search sites…) update its logo.  NOtice all the companies involved.

    History

    Three Generations of Venture Capital

    The Draper name is well known in the venture capital industry. Bill Draper’s father,General William H. Draper, Jr., became the first professional west-coast venture capitalist when he founded Draper, Gaither & Anderson in 1958. Formerly Undersecretary of the Army, General Draper was responsible for economic reconstruction of Germany and Japan under the Marshall Plan.

    Bill Draper began his venture capital career in 1962 with Pitch Johnson, when he started Draper & Johnson Investment Company. In 1965, together with Paul Wythes, he founded Sutter Hill Ventures which was managed with great success until 1981, when he was appointed Chairman of the U.S. Export-Import Bank. In 1985, he was selected to be Administrator and CEO of the United Nations Development Program. While in the venture capital business, Bill Draper was a founding investor in Apollo Computer (acquired by Hewlett Packard), Dionex, Integrated Genetics (Genzyme), Quantum, Qume (I.T.T.), Activision (Mediagenic), Xidex (Eastman Kodak), Measurex, Hybritech (Eli Lilly), and LSI Logic. In 1995, he returned to venture capital by founding Draper International which focused on venture investments in India. In 1996, he turned his attention to technology companies in the U.S. and co-founded a new domestic fund,Draper Richards L.P., with his partner, Robin Richards Donohoe.

    Bill Draper’s son, Tim Draper, left Alex. Brown & Sons in 1985 to become the third generation of venture capitalists in his family with the formation of Draper Fisher Jurvetson. Tim restructured a family-owned Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) that had been set up by his father in 1979 and then created a highly successful early-stage venture capital fund. Draper Fisher Jurvetson has become synonymous with early-stage venture capital. Among other successes, Tim Draper was a founding investor in Parametric Technology, Digidesign, Parenting Magazine, Upside Publishing, PLX Technology, Four-1-1, Hotmail, and Skype.

    > > > > > > And Mr. Draper’s Partner, Robin Richards Donahue’s background:

    Robin Richards Donohoe

    Robin Richards Donohoe

    General Partner

    Robin Richards Donohoe has over fourteen years of experience in international venture capital. She has served on the boards of many portfolio companies including Kana Communications, Selectica and Digital Impact. Prior to managing the Draper funds, she served for four years as Managing Director of Seaboard Management Corporation, a venture capital firm based in Atlanta, Georgia investing in media and technology companies. Ms. Donohoe has also worked in Prague, Czech Republic for a venture capital fund and in Paris for an investment bank. Ms. Donohoe is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of North Carolina and has a Master of Business degree from the Stanford Graduate School of Business. She currently serves on the boards of the Stanford Business School Trust, University of North Carolina College of Arts and Sciences, Advisory Council of the Gladstone Institute at UCSF, Bay Area Discovery Museum, and Gateway High School. She is the Secretary for her Stanford Business School Class and an Advisor to Room to Read.

    It seems obvious to me — if we really want to end “welfare as we know it” and eradicate poverty, we should encourage kids to get on the venture capitalist in high tech media track, starting with a college degree that will help them get on board, and perhaps take people out of inner city classrooms and let them see how the other half puts together a deal and structures a nonprofit corporation, possibly one doing business in grants and annuities, or catering to the grants-based marketplace.

    This might cut down on “enrons by the sea” as we all begin to realize that the social services segment of the public-employee sector cannot be trusted (which, in truth) it can’t! to those setting policy and deciding who is naughty and who is nice in distributing contracts, business, and other grants.    Of course i could be entirely wrong, but I also would suggest that the white collar sector who have their noses to the grindstone for (venture capitalists and the risk-takers with more money to play with) start taking some personal holidays to figure out where their taxes are actually being spent, and do it with a KID old enough to understand watching…

    But the two parallel sets of infrastructures — the tax-supported and the tax-exempt — both working together, and seeking clientele among the tax-paying low and moderate income, will help drive their incomes lower, and someone else’s wealth higher, leaving credibility in the dust.  Of course, with appropriate assets to spin off payments into old age, this may not matter, and if the US goes bankrupt, a b/millionaire can afford to live somewhere else, whereas a person living on social security alone, most likely can’t.

    This of course would be a little messy at times, actually teaching ALL children (not just the offspring of venture capitalists and others where business knowledge including about the function of taxes and corporate identities, is absorbed from an early age) how to deal with the invisible, or at least underlying, intangible principles and  skillsets, that are the  scaffolding sustaining significant, life-supporting wealth (barring extravagances that lead to early death, such as pharmaceutical or other addictions).

    OH WELL, more Kids’ Turn turnabouts:

    3. Kids’ Turn took dramatic steps to downsize and reduce event expenses. We downsized the May, 2010 event to a cocktail party (not a sit-down dinner); all invitations were sent electronically (eliminating the need for an expensive invitation mailing). We exceeded our event net goal and will build on this success for 2011.

    Yep, that would probably be good.  I’m looking at the 2006 return, and for fundraising activities (“Golf Tournament, “SF Event” (whatever that is), and “Other”) the ration of revenue raised to expenses is rather interesting:

    (GOLF — someone contributed $25K, expenses were $24,423, leaving net income of $12,802 out of $62K receipts.  I’m sure golfing was fun.    The “SF Event” (great descriptor) gross receipts of $44,475, expenses $10,752, is it fair to say about 25%? or 11/44ths;       “Other fundraising events” (plural), raised $1,140, COST $13,618, resulting in a net loss of $12,478.  Essentially whatever those other fundraisers were wiped out the golf tournament’s profit completely, except for $530.    And there’s a CPA on the Board of Directors, too.)

    Perhaps next time they should simply start raffles — of course this would require REGISTERING those raffles and providing signed receipts from the recipient that the funds were indeed distributed.  But they could also run raffles for themselves and the overhead is pretty low, right, on that….)

    4. Kids’ Turn is developing its presence on electronic social networking. We have an active Facebook Fan page (currently 335 Fans); a Board member ‘tweets’ regularly and posts on our behalf on linkdn. Just recently, we began actively posting comments on the Huffington Posts’ DIVORCE page. Interestingly enough, our Facebook fan count has increased exponentially since raising our profile visibility on social networking sites.

    5. We submitted our first grant to the Administrative Office (AOC) of the Court in November, 2011. (??) This grant was submitted in a partnership with the Rally Project. If awarded, the AOC will fund low-income, noncustodial parents and their children to attend Kids’ Turn services.

    The “AOC” like “KT” contains AFCC members — and actually represents the “Administrative Office of the COurts” which is charged with administering FEDERAL grants to the states from which KT is likely to benefit.  As such, it’s not money from the AOC, it’s money via the IRS from taxpayers.

    The Rally Project” – found in a 2006 obituary of architect Allan Levy 

    I am posting in August 2011, and this is a FY2010 Annual report, so I’ll just hazard a guess that they mean 2011.  I hope there’s more accuracy when it comes to decimal points.

    the “rally project” is actually a Family Visitation center, apparently at UCSF.  I remember trying to find this before.  There are still few references to “the Rally Project’ because that’s not what it’s name is.  And this nonprofit is teaching communication skills, too!

    Allan M. Levy Died on Thursday, February 16, 2006 after a five-month battle with throat cancer. He was 60 years old. He died at home and in peace, in the company of family and friends. Allan was born and raised in Memphis, TN, and embodied all of the lovely qualities we Northerners associate with Southerners: he was kind and gracious, inclusive, an attentive host (no one ever left Pam and Allan’s house underfed or thirsty), and an avid storyteller. Allan was a creator of community. He had a small army of friends of all ages, sizes, ethnicities, and socioeconomic backgrounds from every conceivable corner of the globeHe had definite opinions. About everything. He gave quietly and generously of his time and energy to non-profit organizations like Kids Turn and the Rally Project. …Allan is survived by his wife, Pam; mother, Mrs. Emily Davis; sister, Diane and brother-in-law, Arnold Eger; brother, Donald and sister-in-law, Shelley Levy; brother, Steven and sister-in-law, Betsy Olim; sister-in-law, Kate DiGiacomo; six nieces and nephews, a whole bunch of cousins, the above-mentioned army of friends, and last, but not least, his dog Maggie. A Memorial Service is being planned for Thurs, April 6, 2006, 3pm, at the Officer’s Club at the SF Presidio. In lieu of flowers, it is suggested that donations be made to Kids’ Turn, Rally Family Visitation Services, UCSF Palliative Care Group, and The Women’s Community Clinic.

    I should note here, as it came up, Rally Family Visitation Services is listed twice when it comes to “SVN” (Supervised Visitation Network) which I imagine is (yet another!) nonprofit — and people from “Rally Visitation Services” are mentioned on BOTH SVN Standards and Guideline Committee Chairs  & on the SVN Board of Directors, right next to the AOC.  I’m sure having a Kids Turn Friend & Rally Visitation Center friend who is networked with the people distributing the access visitation grants and setting standards for who gets them (ideally) — would probably help in obtaining this grant, even if someone can’t figure out which year they applied for it in and proofread their (taproot-foundation-assisted) new website to get it up there right.

    Supervised Visitation Network Worldwide

    SVN, Supervised Visitation Network, is an international membership organization of professionals who provide supervised visitation and access services to families.

    SVN was Founded in 1991 to provide opportunities for networking, sharing of information, and training for agencies and individuals who are interested in assuring that children can have safe, conflict-free access to parents with whom they do not reside.

    Providing resources for members and families in need of supervised visitation services

    That 1991 date is kind of interesting;  NCCSDATAWEB says the ruling date was 1997.  So far I see it in Tennessee (for about 5 years) and then off to Florida (as of 2007ff) so presumably it started somewhere else, or AS someone else from 1991 to 1996.  Assuming it actually began in 1991…

     

    Most Recent Tax Period EIN Name State Rule Date IRS Sub- section Total Revenue Total Assets 990 Image
    2010  521831498 Supervised Visitation Network FL 1997 03 218,620 31,703 990

     


     

     

    As of 2009, it self-describes (on the 990) as PURPOSE:

    PROVIDE COMMUNITIES WITH EDUCATION AND SUPPORT THAT PROMOTE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CHILDREN TO HAVE SAFE, CONFLICT FREE ACCESS TO BOTH PARENTS THROUGH A CONTINUUM OF CHILD ACCESS SERVICES IN ADDITION, THE ORGANIZATION IS DEVELOPING AND DISSEMINATING STANDARDS FOR PRACTICE OF CHILD ACCESS SERVICES, MAINTAINING A DIRECTORY OF SUPERVISED CHILD ACCESS PROVIDERS, AND PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL CONFERENCES AND FORUMS FOR NETWORKING AND SHARING OF INFORMATION PRINCIPALLY, MEMBERSHIP DUES AND ADMISSION FEES TO THEIR ANNUAL CONFERENCE ARE THE MAIN SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR ORGANIZATION
     
    And like many nonprofits, simply repeats that paragraph when asked to describe its accomplishments, and then adds a figure — how much it cost:  in 2009 filing, specificallly $218,590 — funds raised from “Contributions” 67,409, “Program fees including govt contracts” $82,875, and “Dues” 62,307.”   This ALMOST adds up to what they spent, however, there’s that $92K of salaries and $5K of fees for contracting independent professionals, plus printing, occupancy ($10K) and did I mention “$143K” of “OTHER” expenses, a section I always enjoy looking at…… meaning they operated this year at a $37K loss despite all the help.  (The $143, unfortunately, displays sideways if I select & paste, but is predictably mostly on travel ($27.3) Conferences ($65.1), Committee meetings ($14.87) and a regional training ($14.68), plus a few other items.  Which makes me think that one great way to travel is to start a new professional, start a nonprofit (dues-based) in which we could meet to figure out how to promote our profession in pleasant locations across the globe, while doing business with the US government (if not a few others), soliciting from the public and/or grants, and write it all (plus some) OFF.

    SVN Standards and Guidelines Committee Co-chairs:
    Shelly La Botte, J.D., California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program, Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts, Center for Families, Children & the Courts, and Nadine Blaschak-Brown, former Program Manager, Rally Family Visitation Services of Saint Francis Memorial Hospital, San Francisco, CA.

    SVN Board of Directors (Fiscal Years 2004-2006):
    Jody Bittrich, Rainbow Bridge Safe Exchange/Visitation Center, Moorhead, MN, Barbara Flory (see above), Nancy Fallows (see above), Jane Grafton, (see above), Ona Foster, Faith and Liberty’s Place, Dallas, TX, David Levy, Children’s Rights Council, Hyattsville, MD, Teri Walker McLaughlin (President), Della Morton, Merrymount Children’s Center, London, Ontario Canada, Joe Nullet, Family Nurturing Center of Florida, Inc., Jacksonville, FL, Vayla Roberts (Vice-President), Sharon Rogers, Judge Ben Gordon, Jr., Family Visitation Center, Shalimar, FL, Virginia Rueda, Family Visitation Center, El Paso, TX, Rob Straus, (see above), Georgia Thompson, LA Wings of Faith, Los Angeles, CA., and Beth Zetlin, Forest Hills, NY.

    I think it’s time to get another crack in about the field of “Supervised Visitation” and the “SVN” network.

    First, it is a nonprofit incorporated in Tennessee.   These altruistic people (including David Levy of the Children’s Rights Council, which helped push the term “access /visitation” to start with, and which nonprofit includes several such centers, not to mention some close connections in philosophy with AFCC founder, it would seem, Jessica Pearson (see my recent posts trying to track down AFCC incorporations over the year, including one time it showed up in Colorado at the same address as Center for Policy Research (I believe) at the time:  Emerson Street, Denver).

    This is a 2003 IRS form 990-EZ for “Supervised Visitation Network,” a TN nonprofit of moderate means and large influence:

    90~IZ~~ Part III:

    Primary Exempt purpose: Public education and awareness;professional development

    28.SVNwebsite-provides information for both the general public and for professionals, averaging over 150 hits per week on the pages for parents and over 400 on the pages with information for professionals.- Expenses : $15,000

    This blog — which is free, except for my time — gets close to that on a good day, and has been steadily for a few years — including from some sources I know are professionals (like the ones I report on) and others.    Note:  as with the field of “Parent Education” (court-supported) the interest is higher among the providers than the clientele….i

    29.Conference-Trainingfor150professionalprovidersofsupervisedvisitationservices Expenses-Netgainof$14,410

    30. Publications -Distributed 500 Handbook for Parents, 160 Handbooks for Professionals; 80 Sexual Abuse Curriculums;850 informational brochures;2 Newsletters, primarily forprofessional training, to 600 individuals;.

    Expenses -$7.700

    Its revenue is about $40,000 Program Service Revenue including government fees & contracts, and about $37,000 membership fees.  Their highest expense is “Products and Promotions.”

    Most interesting is the variety of states (plus Canada) the board of directors are drawn from:  If you can’t see the graphic, the pdf is on-line for viewing:


    (Karen Oehme also directs a family violence studies institute at Florida State; many of these names are well known) in family law circles, obviously.

    At least one of these address shows up as the Office of the Attorney General (445 Golden Gate, SF) — no office given, though.

    Shelly Glapion (at that address), 6th floor, at least in 2004, (as we speak?)   was Senior Program Analyst for

    1. California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program


      File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
      Shelly Glapion, J.D.. Access to Visitation Grant Coordinator. Senior Court 

    As far back as 2004, there were concerns about financial embezzlement/fraud, shifting financial requirements for supervised visitation, at least in California.  This is part of a (available on-line) group email (I’ll post complaint and one reply) about the behavior of a supervised visitation monitor, from a mother, criticized for wearing flip-flops (in California…..) and giving her daughter a birthday cake.  it appears that the mother was under supervised visitation, although the typical auspices of this is increased noncustodial (FATHER) parent access, which was how Ron Haskins helped sell it to Congress to start with, as I understand:

    Supervised Monitoring   Message List
    Reply Message #17218 of 22083 < Prev | Next >
    Hi,
    I’m in CA. I have had this supervised monitor that stated I’m a danger to my daughter because one time during the summer I was wearing flip flops and gave my daugther a birthday cake for her birthday.
    Well, my question is this…now she is constatnly changing the financial agreement we signed several months ago. And she’s now back charging me for phone calls, emails to arrange visits and she doesn’t even respond to most of them. She is now threatening to take me to court if I don’t keep paying her for things I have never agreed to. Additionally, she charges me for cancelled visits and yet doesn’t even notify me that they are cancelled. Isn’t there any law of how she constatnly changes her fees and agreement? Originally it stated that the cancelle of visits is 100% resposnbile for the fees, well last weekend I was 100% resposnbile and she is refusing to credit her account that everyday she comes up with new fees or changes the agreement that was orginally signed. I’m hoping that when she does take me to court that I will not hav to pay for things that I never agreed to and for visits that is clearly stated that I am not financially resposnbile for. She also charges me $5 per min. to discuss any of this on the phone or email. And then she charges me a flat fee ontop of her min incurred fees. Please help me stop this insanity. I also believe that because my ex won in court because of past bribery that he must have also done this upon the monitor. The monitor did state once that the father told her to charge me more and make it exteremly difficult to see my daughter. And the monitor stated that if I wanted this information that I need to pay her for this.
    I’ve given up all hope that I’ll be allowed to see my daughter – this justice system provides no justice…because the courts don’t care that they purjed under oath (saying I have a criminal record and a bunch of lies like that..that I can easily prove false), let alone CPS closed the case because it was unfouned..and now that the courts have allowed him to do this to me of taking 50% of all my wages. At least now I’m hoping that I can get this monitor to stop asking me for money that isn’t due and to stop fabricating these charges of $5 per min. to read an email and then her $25 fee to just have it in her inbox (even if she doesn’t read them).
    Any suggestions????
    THE REPLY is to contact Shelly Glapion (of SVN board of directors, which this person probably didn’t know, and program administrator, via CFCC)
    Re: Supervised Monitoring

    In a message dated 11/27/04 10:06:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, XXXXX@… writes:

    Is she private or with a supervised visitation center?


    Especially if she is connected to a supervised visitation center, you should make a public records request for all payoffs she is receiving, and also ask for her tax returns for the duration of time since she has been providing you “service”.

    Then, go very public with the fact that what she is doing constitutes fraud, illegal and criminal misconduct, so that she will dump you as a client in order to try to conceal what she is doing wrong.

    After she dumps you, go to the press with evidence of financial and other fraud operative through your case, saying that this is another example of the type of Access to Visitation Enforcement program fraud that is rampant as the means to promote a pro-abuser agenda in the guise of fatherhood and custody programs. Use this article from NY– re: Viola Stroud of CRC being under investigation for embezzlement — to bolster your case:  Click here: Guardian under scrutiny

    Next, send a summary (brief and objective re: criminal misconduct and financial fraud) to Shelly Glapion, the CA adminstrator of the SAVP: shelly.glapion@…, asking her, as the person overseeing the AV program in CA, who has been monitoring your supervisor to ensure the integrity of the “service” she is providing. Be sure to tell Ms. Glapion that you hold her personally responsible and legally liable for the kickbacks and illegal payoffs you are sure were being used to cause intential and malicious harm to you and your child on behalf of your ex, using government program funding.

    Be sure to send me a copy (use XXXXX not the FCR board) of your complaint, along with the name of the supervisor, the county you are in, your case number, the judges, lawyers and other appointees involved (especially any mediators or custody evaluators) and I will incorporate it into the complaints that we are putting together that are addressing AV program fraud and corruption at the federal level.

    Cindy Ross
    CA Director
    National Alliance for Family Court Justice

    To this woman, who says she does not have a criminal record, and apparently CPS was told she was some sort of perp, but closed the case — she is being treated like one, which she reports as basically being cursed (spoken evil of) by the supervised visitation monitor.  The other point of view — particularly from someone on this nonprofit SVN group and probably also running a program that provides these services, it’s not a curse, it’s a blessing!  Barbara Flory, in THIS message exchange (file under “PR”)   The URL is a Florida State University address:    http://familyvio.csw.fsu.edu/messageboard/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/BB_winter_04.pdf

    The supervised visitation and exchange programs have truly been a blessingfor so many families.

    First of all, monitored visitation provides yet another level of protection for the victim and the children. This

    protection is essential to victims!

    (not mentioned — often, the victims ARE children…. this happens when there’s molestation also):

    Second, it allows contact between the perpetrator and the children, which would not have

    occurred without said programs.

    {{now that’s food for thought……  “contact between perp and children = good.”  (?)}}

    This is especially important for those perpetrators who are truly trying to improve their lives and those of their children.

    And the way to tell if a perp is REALLY sincere and wants to improve his(her) life is …..   ask a supervised visitation professional?

    Or a judge on the board of a nonprofit benefitting from access visitation (or other) grantsmanship?

    It is also extremely important for the children who sometimes do not understand why they cannot see one of their parents, but want to see that parent.

    And one tells which children DO and which children do NOT want to see their perp parent?  (See Jack Straton; I get tired of reminding us….)

    In many cases it is also the hope of being with the children and helping their children that motivates a perpetrator to understand the cycle of domestic violence.

    It’s HOPED that HOPING to see one’s kids will produce character change for a perp.  I’m not even sure we can find definite validation that batterers intervention programs do that…..

    These programs provide a safe environment for all involved and they further provide hope!

    Yes, hope of virtually guaranteed (court-ordered) income for supervised visitation providers who pay into the system!

    Other than that —

    No they don’t.  That’s false!   They can become and have obviously become nightmares; moreover, some people have been killed at or around supervised visitation, or while the family was utilizing supervised visitation!   See this chart from 2001 (i.e., in recent memory of the above message), particularly 3rd from bottom row:  The chart is from “MNCAVA” something reasonably accessible to the people involved above:

    http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/commissioned/strategies/strategies.html

    Staff of the Clearinghouse on Supervised Visitation collected examples of behaviors commonly displayed by alleged batterers who were referred to supervised visitation programs in Florida in 2001. As the examples in the following table indicate, the same behaviors of batterers described in the literature, are observed in supervised visitation programs.

     

    Table 1. Common Behaviors of Batterers Seen at Supervised Visitation Programs

    Behavior Manifestation at Supervised Visitation Program
    Denial of Abuse/ Minimizations Children may ask parent, “why did you hit mommy?” Visiting parent may deny hitting child’s mother, say it was accident or minimize his action. Or he may say it’s the fault of mother he has to see child at visitation program. One program reports a 12 year old asked his father why he chased his mother with a knife. Father denied doing it saying the mother told him to say that. This occurred despite witnesses to the knife incident.
    Blaming partner Frequently supervised visitation staff report that a batterer will tell staff “this is all my wife’s fault,” “she’s the one who brought this on.”
    Control/ Manipulation Often batterers will question, or challenge program rules or suggest exceptions to rules should be made of them. This is seen in examples of refusing to arrive or depart per requirements, bringing unauthorized individuals to visits, bringing gifts or food to visits which may be disallowed, attempting to take videos or photographs. Tearing up rules or throwing intake forms across room.
    Attacking Parenting Skills Involving staff in apparent false allegations of child abuse against parent who has been abused, trying to use staff to call Abuse Registry. Makes disparaging remarks about mother, “you need to clean up better than mommy.”
    Making Covert/ Overt Threats Program staff report incidents of batterers showing a weapons permit when asked for identification, driving around visitation site at time of scheduled visits but not coming into program as well as verbally threatening to harm staff, volunteers, judge, partner, etc. during visits. Law enforcement officers referred to programs have come for scheduled visits in full uniform wearing their weapons despite instructions to the contrary.
    Involving Children During scheduled visitations, batterers may attempt to question children about their current living arrangements (particularly if they are staying at shelter or another undisclosed location); inquire about what their plans are, where they are attending school; or, may try and find out who the child’s mother is seeing. Additionally batterers may utilize visitation times as a vehicle to get children to convey messages back to other parent.
    Stalking Following a parent who is leaving a program, recording information about parents car. One program reports two examples of cases when the perpetrator had custody. In one case he left with the child prior to his wife (non-custodial) but waited for her in a nearby parking lot. In another, a non-custodial mother picked up her child for a monitored exchange and was followed to a neighboring city by her abuser. Perpetrators may reveal stalking incidents during conviction with their children during visit Questions such as Where were you all last night? or Why weren’t you in school yesterday?
    Financial Abuse/ Manipulation Refusing to pay for scheduled visits, not going to pay to see my kids. Paying in pennies or other small coins. Saying they will not bring food for visits because they’re paying child support to mother and she should make sure food is available for father’s visit.
    Animal Abuse Batterers may inform child during visit that a beloved pet has died or had to be given away since the child was not longer in the home. One program reported a father bringing the child’s pet rabbit to the program knowing the child would not be able to take it back to the shelter where he was staying.
    Physical Violence At least three murders of [WORD missing — Freudian slip?] have occurred on-site or in parking lots of supervised visitation programs in recent years. Other programs report murders or physical assaults by non-custodial parents off site but while family was utilizing services.
    Suicide Visiting parent telling child and/or staff how depressed he is and how he might just end it all.

     

     

    Not to mention, see Joyce Welch / Brian Tippe case, where the supervised visitation monitor was in a bestiality relationship (criminal!) with DOGS and a slave/master relationship (as the slave, i.e., fairly “deviant” behavior for someone involved with children, and around the field of domestic violence, which is itself characterized by inappropriate slave/master behaviors, only without the designated slave deriving (?) sexual enjoyment from the degraded status).  The mother was ordered supervised by a commissioner who was at the time on the Board of Kids’ Turn, too….

    Guess under what banner I found that:

    Strategies to Improve Supervised Visitation Services in Domestic Violence Cases

    M. Sharon MaxwellLCSW, Ph.D.
    Karen OehmeJ.D.

    authors commissioned by
    Violence Against Women Online Resources [logo]

    Barbara Flory, MSW, LFMT (or whatever) and 2003 at least SVN board member, wrote the above glowing recommendation of supervised visitation; Karen Oehme, here, chairs the FLorida Clearinghouse on Supervised Visitation.  They are talking about strategies to have less abuse and murder occurring around supervised visitation (no mention made of financial fraud, etc., although it’s been found repeatedly) — and not whether it’s a good or bad idea, based on the fact that murders and further abuse HAS occurred around it!

    ACTUALLY, Familylawcourts.com has a page on the “AOC” and says it better than I do; it’s funny, but right:

    2.  The Elkins Task Force, which was headed by the AOC supposedly to promote accountability and listening to children, was an expensive and expansive white wash.

    How else to explain why the AOC commissioned a 50k research project to ask family court litigants questions for the entire state; and the results featured only 53 litigants and 83 AOC staff personnel?

    3.  One lasting, inept brainchild of the Judicial Council, again working in conjunction with the AOC, was to decriminalize crime via a “Supervised Visitation,” form in which kidnapping becomes the more civilized “parental abduction.”

    Thus, 12 years after the Judicial Council working in conjunction with the AOC, created the non-professional field, there remains no oversight. Which con artists have discovered.  Which explains how suspected pedophiles are now serving on the boards of some Supervised visitation agencies; and why Supervised visitation monitors are awarding custody to the suspected pedophiles.

    As such, if the AOC wasn’t so damaging to the point of lethal, it would be listed as a sub-category to Comic Gold.

    Is there anything where AOC excels?

    Yes.  The AOC excels at wasting enormous amounts of taxpayer funds for slick, expensive conferences, most of which are designed to continue prohibiting access to any real justice in the courts, such as the one below.

    http://www.familylawcourts.com/aoc.html

    (note:  I don’t agree with author in GPS issue, though).

    She sarcastically notes:

    Practice Hint:  Due to the increased number of custody exchange murders, we recommend attorneys request judges order any custody exchange to be made at the local police department.  Should a murder occur, not only is it likely the crime will be recorded on a number of video cameras in an around the area, but any number of police officers would already on hand to effect a quick arrest.  The video could later be used as part of a plea deal, which would save the state trial costs.

    Actually, I experienced so-called “parental abduction” (call it what you will) AT a law enforcement station, after having asked (in vain) previously for supervised visitation or something to prevent this (as I recall the LONG case history).  Apparently the problem is I wasn’t willing to cut some deal with CPS and let my children go into foster care needlessly to get revenge on my ex.   So, they did nothing, knowing it would be off their plate and safely in family court anyhow.   This custody-switch kept the case going, which also (FYI) meant a significant delay in child support matters, probably resulting in a little interest accumulation (at least from program funds) on the side, too.  The possible profitable (except to the children) permutations are endless in this system.

    I figured I’d just hop on over to Tennessee to look up this nice nonprofit I learned was incorporated there:  Surprise:

     

    Search:       1-1 of 1
    Search Name:  Starts With Contains
    Control #:
    Control # Entity Type Name Name Type Name Status Entity Filing Date Entity Status
    000454811 NCORP SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK, INC. Entity Inactive 09/29/2003 Inactive – Terminated

     

     

    000454811: Corporation Non-Profit – Domestic
    Name: SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK, INC.
    Old Name:
    Business Type:
    Status: Inactive – Terminated Initial Filing: 09/29/2003
    Formed in: Putnam County Delayed Effective Date:
    Fiscal Year Close: June AR Due Date: 10/01/2007
    Term of Duration: Perpetual Inactive Date: 01/11/2008
    Principal Office: 2804 PARAN POINTE DR
    COOKEVILLE, TN 38506 USA
    Annual Report
    Mailing Address:
    1223 KING STREET
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 322040000 USA
    AR Exempt: No
    Public Benefit Corporation: Yes
    Skip Navigation Links

    Name Status Expires
      No Assumed Names Found…

     

    WELL, they apparently kept it going about 5 years — with the exception of AFCC, that’s pretty average for nonprofits catering to therapeutic-jurisprudence professions in the courts, which is probably why new ones (such as COllaborative law practice) must constantly be created. ….  Maybe the moved to Florida… or just went extra-USA terrestrial…..

    TypeDateImage #DetailTermination01/11/20086178-2677Articles of Dissolution01/11/20086178-2675Administrative Amendment12/05/20076164-2457Detail Notice of Determination12/03/2007ROLL 61612006 Annual Report Due 10/01/200612/19/20065902-1491Notice of Determination12/01/2006ROLL 58932005 Annual Report Due 10/01/200510/07/20055578-01582004 Annual Report Due 10/01/200409/14/20045233-08802003 Annual Report Due 04/01/200402/10/20045032-2914Detail Initial Filing09/29/20034922-0943

    Registered as a Charity in Tennessee?

    Financial Reports for Registered Charities

    (I didn’t find out whether or not).

    I THINk the first address listed as  c/o Nancy Fallows, who shows up as someone probably good at getting grants, and on the board of a substance-abuse-prevention group, “Putnam (County) Power of One

    Nancy Fallows Secretary,
    (Grant-Writing Sub-Committee Chair)
    Tennessee Community Services Agency,
    Upper Cumberland Director
    1000 England Drive, Suite F,
    Cookeville, TN 38501(work) 931-646-4087; (fax) 931-520-0080
    Nancy.Fallows@tncsa.com

     

    Joe Nullet (also on Board, and the registered agent? in Florida for the TN corporation also) is Harvard, JFK School of Government, father of 3 boys, and:

     

    and obviously someone who knows how to obtain funding for a program.  This one is selling educational curriculums, isn’t everyone these days?

    Joe Nullet

    Joe Nullet, a graduate of Harvard University, is the Executive Director of the Supervised Visitation Network, an international membership organization of professionals who provide supervised visitation and access services to families. Joe was also formerly the Executive Director of the Family Nurturing Center of Florida, *** an organization committed to creating a community of nurturing care for our children.

     

    As recognized Trainer/Consultant for the Nurturing Parenting programs, Joe’s area of strength is in the administration, support, and successful implementation of the Nurturing Parenting programs. Since 2001, Joe has successfully obtained financial support from the Jaguars Foundation, the Community Foundation of Jacksonville, the Reinhold Foundation, the Rice Family Foundation, UPS, Publix, the Martin Foundation, and others for the implementation of Nurturing Parenting programs.

    As a father of three beautiful boys, Joe is passionate about nurturing his family and the world in which they live. Joe is available to train your agency staff to facilitate the Nurturing Parenting programs or as a consultant to develop innovative strategies to foster community collaboration, solicit financial support, and manage the effective implementation of Nurturing Parenting programs within your organization and/or community.

    Joe Nullet, Executive Director
    Supervised Visitation Network

    *** per ‘SUNBIZ.org” -a site I really appreciate where you can look up florida organizations — actually, this was incorporated in 1993 as “Family Visitation Center, Inc.” and in 2000 they did a name change (adding the “nurturing”) as we can see in 2001, Mr. Nullet helped them expand the concept, or at least get funding for doing so.     The group’s current address, 2759 Bartley Circle (same city) is apparently owned by the City of Jacksonville  (a community center) and listed with the courts, or taking business from them:

    Family Nurturing Center of Florida
    Supervised Visitation, Dependency and Family Law


    2759 Bartley Circle
    Jacksonville, FL 32207
    ServicePhone:
    Fax:
    (904) 389-4244
    (904) 389-4225
    Provides a multifaceted supervised visitation center for children to visit with their non-custodial parents when there have been allegations and/or confirmation of physical or sexual abuse, neglect, or domestic violence.
    Services: Information and referral; Other
    Victims Served: Child Victims of Physical Abuse; Child Victims of Sexual Abuse; Domestic Violence Victims
    Counties Served: Duval, Clay, Nassau, Baker, St. Johns
    Circuits Served: 4, 8, 7
    Fee: Yessliding scale for Family Law clients.
    Hours of Service: Please see website for hours of operation.
    Web Site: http://www.fncflorida.org

     

    That site shows them in the 2 primary businesses supported by A/V grants:  Parent Education and Supervised Visitation and yes, they are a nonprofit; their “For Parents” link hopefully points to the SVN, and has a hastily (or at least crookedly) scanned “handbook” coaching parents on how to pick the right type of visitation center, i.e., one of ours, listing the SVN at 1223 King Drive (although it’s not been there for a while…..)

     

    FNC is proud to partner with a number of local service providers to offer comprehensive services to clients. We have relationships with each of the certified domestic violence centers within the Fourth Circuit, and we also partner with Family Foundations, Youth Crisis Center, and many others. If you have a question about additional resources which may benefit your clients, please contact us or you can conduct your own search using the 2-1-1 system.

    Like Kids’ Turn (etc.) it is described as the 1993 brainchild of a judge — only this one, responding to complaints from parents with children in foster-care:

    We opened in 1993 as the Family Visitation Center, the first of its kind in Florida. It was the brainchild of the Honorable Judge Dorothy Pate, who was moved to act after hearing frequent complaints from parents who were not being allowed to see their children who had been placed in foster care.

    SEE ALSO HERE:

    Representatives from the Department of Children, the Children’s Home Society and the Junior League of Jacksonville met with Judge Pate to discuss a new concept called “supervised visitation.” Since that meeting, we have expanded our agency to include three programs at four locations and changed our name to reflect this growing commitment to improving the lives of families throughout Northeast Florida.

    (NoTE — that predates the 1996 welfare reform, the 1994 national fatherhood initiative and violence against women act).

     

    GONE SOUTH — literally, to FLORIDA — or at least here’s another corporation by the same name, in the same city (Jacksonville) that decided to get started up around the time the Tennessee incorporation shut down (or was shut down):

    Florida Non Profit Corporation
    SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK, INC.
    Filing Information
    Document Number N07000010935
    FEI/EIN Number 521831498
    Date Filed 11/09/2007
    State FL
    Status ACTIVE
    Effective Date 11/15/2007
    Principal Address
    3955 RIVERSIDE AVENUE
    JACKSONVILLE FL 32205
    Changed 01/06/2010
    Mailing Address
    3955 RIVERSIDE AVENUE
    JACKSONVILLE FL 32205

    By the former address, yes, this is the same corporation (see files):

    EIN# 521831498

    IT’s purpose (see sunbiz.org if this doesn’t show, click on bottom link below Annual Reports) is fairly clear — business promotion and collaboration on how to obtain access visitation funding, basically:

    Article III ” The specific purpose for which this corporation is organized” — “Provide a forum for networking and sharing of information

    between CHILD ACCESS PROVIDERS and OTHER PROFESSIONALS.  Advocate for adequate public and private funding for Child access and visitation programs.”

     

    Others at the first Jacksonville Address (1223 King STreet)  address include a window-washing service.  Now, 3995 Riverside Avenue, Jacksonville, FL appears to be a particular real estate group, “Bo Bridgeport Brokers“) which I only figured because google-mapping zooming in on the address contained that label.

    Bo Bridgeport Brokers is the premier Commerical and Residential Real Estate Firm in Jacksonville Florida. We specialize in residential and commercial real 
    3955 Riverside Avenue
    Jacksonville, FL 32205-3312
    (904) 358-3955

     

     

    It’s also listed in “Family and Child Services” in a VERMONT (how’s that for the other end of the east coast?) Child Support / Commission on Women office.  Cute:

    1. Family Division and Office of Child Support | Commission on Women

      women.vermont.gov/…/family-court-and-office-of-child-support – Cached

      1223 King Street JacksonvilleFL 32204 904-389-7800 http://www.svnetwork.net/ . SVN is a multi-national non-profit membership organization that is literally a 

    1223 King St Jacksonville, FL 32204

    http://www.corporationwiki.com/Florida/Jacksonville/1223KingStJacks – Cached
    1223 King St Jacksonville, FL 32204. Companies at this address: Vision Window Washing, Inc. Alzheimer’s Care, Inc. Supervised Visitation Network, Inc. 
    As explained nicely on the VERMONT government site, after one reads about the child support contacts:

    Family Division and Office of Child Support

    Vermont Office of Child Support

    800-786-3214
    http://dcf.vermont.gov/ocs/Provides free assistance to those paying and receiving child support. The office keeps track of child support payments, can help with getting a child support order, collects overdue payments, locates absent parents, helps change child support amounts, can help determine paternity, and offers help to child support payers

     

    Vermont Parent Representation Center, Inc.
    77 Charlotte Street
    Burlington, Vermont 05401
    802-540-0200
    http://www.vtprc.org

    An interdisciplinary team of an attorney, a social worker, and a peer navigator (a parent who has direct experience with child protective and foster care systems) represents parents at risk of experiencing the removal of their children into state custody and foster care or kin-care. A Community Action Team (CAT) works with the custodial parent to address issues that threaten the children’s safety to prevent a petition from being filed in court  (Family and Probate).

     

    VPRC is a {{YET ANOTHER…..}} not-for-profit public interest law and policy organization. VPRC’s goals include:

    To reduce the number of children removed from their families into state and other out-of-home custody; to shorten the length of stay in state and other out-of-home custody for children who have been removed, and to reduce the number of children re-entering state and other out-of-home custody after being reunified with their families.

    This says nothing about “custody-dispute” Parental alienation situations, but I’d be surprised if they didn’t handle such things and get some grants or contracts to do so.

     

    This is clearly more directed at CPS & Foster Care uses, but notice how SVN can springboard that into “custody dispute” or “estranged from the other parent” situations . . …

     

    National

     

    Supervised Visitation Network
    1223 King Street
    Jacksonville, FL 32204
    904-389-7800
    http://www.svnetwork.net/

     

    SVN is a multi-national non-profit membership organization that is literally a network of agencies and individuals who are interested in assuring that children can have safe, conflict-free {{AFCC code language;  not ‘High-conflict”}} access to parents with whom they do not reside. Some of the children who need these services live in foster homes or with relatives. Some live with one parent who is estranged from the other.

    Wonder what the percentages are.  Notice, it doesn’t even pretend to be a grass-roots organization, or even parent-originated.    “The “is-estranged” could be either, has a restraining order on because of criminal conduct, or is judged to be guilty by allegation — from a PAS-saturated official — of the “crime” of parental alienation.  See in New Hampshire, parent coordination association (and my posts on it) for HOW to allege parental alienation and cut the children off from their mothers, after obtaining parent coordinator status.

    6. The City and County of San Francisco initially reduced our 1011 grant award by 10%, but the amount was re-instated in September, 2010 raising our contract award to the original $50,000. This funding is for our very specialized, Nonviolent Family Skills Program for Juveniles.

    I presume they are probably meaning the year 2011; someone has a little data input trouble here…..    If the SF Courts ever pay off what it is SFTC has a lien for (see my other Kids’ Turns posts) perhaps they can hire a proofreader for their new website, and get their license back.  Oh, this may be a little difficult though, because so many SF Courtrooms are being closed, soon, for lack of funding, budget cutbacks, etc. . . . .   You know how it goes….

    I think that MOST businesses and charities understand (as well as shouldn’t most attorneys who are going to be sometimes doing business with them, or incorporated themselves as an LLP) that one has to register as a nonprofit with the state, and also file annual reports with the secretary of state whether for-profit or not, if doing business in that state.  But here it is stated explicitly:

     

    Florida Charity Nearly Ruined

    Sun Coast Law Enforcement Charities (Sun Coast) is a police charity benefiting police officers and their families in several Florida counties. Recently, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (Department) served the charity’s president with a lawsuit.

    Why? Because the charity failed to renew its registration with the Department, even though it had sent letters and made phone calls reminding the charity to do so. In Florida, any charity that asks for donations in the state mustregister with the department each year. It costs between $10 and $400, depending on how much money the charity raises. Sun Coast’s registration fee was $75.

    The Department’s lawsuit wanted to impose a $10,000 fine against Sun Coast. Paying that fine would have ruined the charity. According to its IRS filings, the charity’s 2008 total revenue was only $11,000. Luckily it avoided the problem.

    It explained to the Department that a former bookkeeper had ignored calls and letters from the Department. The Department took into consideration that Sun Coast had been registered since 2000 and kept up its renewals until the 2009 incident. In the end, Sun Coast paid a $1,000 fine and remains in operation.

    Registration Laws

    Many states are like Florida and require registration of charities. ArizonaConnecticutColorado, and Pennsylvania are good examples. The rules usually are different in each state, though. For example, in some states, a charity must register:

    • And pay a fee each year if it “does business” in the state
    • And pay a fee only the first year it “does business” in the state, but must submit financial and other records each year
    • Before it accepts donations, before it asks for or “solicits” donations, or both
    • By completing forms provided by the state, by submitting a copy of the charity’s IRS form, or both

    (Courtesy “Charities.lawyers.com“)

    Apparently being able to look it up on-line is new? http://www.800helpfla.com/socbus.html

    Back to the Division of Consumer Services' Homepage

    Solicitation of Contributions
    Information for Businesses

    The Solicitation of Contributions Act requires anyone who solicits donations from people in the State of Florida to register with the Department and renew annually. This applies to charitable organizations, sponsors, professional solicitors, as well as professional fundraising consultants. The Department collects registration fees and has authority to impose penalties for non-compliance. The Department provides financial disclosure regarding organizations on the online Gift Givers’ Guide or you can obtain information about a specific charity by calling our Consumer Assistance Call Center at 1-800-HELP-FLA (435-7352), or out of state 850-410-3800.

    Gift Givers Guide

     

    Looking at the SVN site, describing the backgrounds of its current Board of Directors, here’s a nice connection to “responsible fatherhood” if you don’t get it yet:

     

    Robert B. Straus, DMH, JD

    Cambridge, MA

    A psychologist and lawyer was Senior Psychologist of the Family Service Clinic from 1982 to 1988, conducting custody and visitation evaluations for the Middlesex County Family Court. From 1988, he served frequently as Guardian ad Litem in high-conflict custody and access disputes.

    In 1991, Dr. Straus started Meeting Place: Supervised Child Access Service, a program of The Guidance Center, Inc. in Cambridge, MA, providing a safe setting in which children in high-risk situations can visit parents with whom they are not living.

     

    Entity Name Identification Number Old Identification Number Principal Office
    Address, City, State, Zip, Country
    GUIDANCE CENTER, INC., THE 042199861  000013371  5 SACRAMENTO ST., CAMBRIDGE, MA  02138  USA 

    Some details about the organization, including its name change:

    The exact name of the Nonprofit Corporation: GUIDANCE CENTER, INC., THE


    The name was changed from:  CAMBRIDGE MENTAL HEALTH ASSOCI on 9/17/1997


    Mergered into :  RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY CARE, INC. on 8/21/2009

    Entity Type:  Nonprofit Corporation
    Identification Number: 042199861

    Old Federal Employer Identification Number (Old FEIN):  000013371

     

    He is a founder of the Supervised Visitation Network. He was President of the Network in 1993-94, helped draft the Network’s Standards and Guidelines for practice, and has served several terms on the Board of Directors.

     

    So maybe if I want to find what state it first incorporated in, I should go to Massachusetts?

     

    From 1995 through 2000 he was Co-Chair of the Massachusetts Coalition for Supervised Visitation, and in that capacity worked with the Governor’s Commission on Responsible Fatherhood and the Supervised Visitation Task Force of the Probate and Family Court, helping draft the Guidelines for Court Practice for Supervised Visitation.

    Dr. Straus has a private psychotherapy practice, working with couples and children, and remains the Program Consultant to Meeting Place.

     

     

    Dr. Straus (psychologist/psychotherapist) published in 1994 (as cited in AFCC publication) on traumatized children in supervised visitation.  Maybe if the kids are so badly traumatized, they shouldn’t be there to start with?  Anyhow, this abstract for the cite:

     

    Copyright (c) 1999 Sage Publications, Inc.
    Family and Conciliation Courts Review of AFCC

    ARTICLE: Traumatized Children in Supervised Visitation: What Do They Need?

    Authors’ Note:

    This article was presented as a plenary paper at the First International Conference on Child Access Services, Paris, France, November 4-7, 1998.

    April, 1999

    37 Fam. & Concil. Cts. Rev. 135

    Author

    Janet R. Johnston and Robert B. Straus

    Excerpt

    The purpose of supervised access, also known as supervised visitation and exchange services, is to provide a protected setting for parent-child contact when such contact presents risk following parental separation, child abuse, or neglect, or after an extended interruption of contact. There has been a remarkable growth in such services over the past two decades, in the United States and Canada, 1 as well as internationally. 2 Although there is a growing literature on the functioning of child access services (see, for example, Pearson & Thoennes, 1997; Straus & Alda, 1994)**, to date there has been little concentrated attention in the field on how better to respond to the vulnerable children who are the primary clients of visitation services. It seems likely that several factors have contributed to the relative invisibility of children’s individual and developmental needs in designing access programs. These factors include the urgency with which the needs of these distressed parents and their advocates call for the attention of decision makers and service providers, the fact that visitation orders (usually made in family courts where children lack their own voice) take precedence in defining how children are served, and, most important, the lacunae in clinical and research findings about the special needs of this population of children.

    Whereas supervised access is used to provide supportive services and reunite parents with their children when there has not been trauma, the majority of the child clients of supervised visitation services have not been so fortunate. This article …

    ** of course there was even then a growing literature from certain sources on access services, particularly with the CRCKIDS.org organization on, and the nonprofit board-member multiple inter-relationships in place from the start.  Abstract is from “Lexis-Nexis

    LexisNexis®

     

    Dr. Straus in Cambridge, “RSJ Corporation” filing (OLD ein# 043061365) corresponds with these dates, somewhat.

     

    RSJ CORP. Summary Screen 
    Help with this form

    The exact name of the Domestic Profit Corporation: RSJ CORP.
    Entity Type:  Domestic Profit Corporation
    Identification Number: 043061365

    Old Federal Employer Identification Number (Old FEIN):  000312860

    Date of Organization in Massachusetts:  09/11/1989 Date of Revival:  05/29/2007
    Date of Dissolution:  08/31/1998
    Current Fiscal Month / Day: 12 / 31 Previous Fiscal Month / Day: 00 / 00  
    The location of its principal office:

    No. and Street:  22 BERKELEY STREET
    City or Town: CAMBRIDGE State: MA   Zip: 02138 Country: USA

     

    Supervised Visitation Access is not suitable for long-term, has been acknowledged (?) since 1999.  Therefore, I can see how if business is to keep coming there would need to be new customers.  THEORETICALLY a good bit of supervised visitation access will heal all relationships, reform perps of course (Except parentally alienating ones?) and lead to a reunified family.  (Alternately, see Warshak….).  OR, it could provide a nice excuse to terminate relationship with the offending parent, possibly the one most offended at (and/or paying for) the supervised visitation to start with.  Another Lexis-Nexis abstract, delivered in Paris again — here:

    Copyright (c) 1999 Sage Publications, Inc.
    Family and Conciliation Courts Review of AFCC

    ARTICLE: Supervised Access: A Long-Term Solution?

    Author’s Note: This article was originally presented at the First International Conference on Child Access Services, Paris, November 5, 1998.

    October, 1999

    37 Fam. & Concil. Cts. Rev. 478

    Author

    Martha Bailey

    Excerpt

    SOME COURTS AND COMMENTATORS HAVE SUGGESTED THAT LONG-TERM SUPERVISED ACCESS IS INAPPROPRIATE

    Supervised access is ordered to develop, reestablish, or maintain a relationship between a child and a parent, or other relative, generally with the expectation that unsupervised access will at some point become possible. Some courts and commentators have said that supervised access is not appropriate as a long-term measure. Ontario Provincial Court Judge Norris Weisman wrote that supervised access is “a temporary and time-limited measure designed to resolve a parental impasse over access,” not “a long-term remedy.” 1 Lawyer Karen Oehme, cochair of the Family Visitation Program of Tallahassee, Florida, said, “Attorneys should realize that institutional supervised visitation is not a long-term solution in most family court cases, and that the programs should not be thought of as a substitute for addressing the underlying problems that resulted in the need for supervised visitation in the first place.” 2

    In a 1992 case, the Ontario Court of Appeal also emphasized that supervised access should not be “a permanent feature of a child’s life” and decided to terminate access, rather than ordering supervised access, where it was not foreseeable that unsupervised access would ever be possible3 A year later, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia, in a case called Bieganski v. Bieganski, said: “Supervised access is not appropriate as a long term measure.” 4 In 1996, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia clarified that the Bieganski decision did not mean that …

     

     

    WELL, if one looks at the history and membership of the Children’s Rights Council (which does have a chapter in paris, and the link I clicked seemed to indicate, since about 1999 — not that my French is very good.) and remember who active David Levy (also on board of supervised visitation network is) none of this is too surprising except that it’s not about time to make up some new terminology about now, because Collaborative Law is pretty well established, as is Parenting Coordination.    It’s recommended to do this before the U.S. goes bankrupt and the $$ is inflated into worthlessness and no longer the world’s reserve currency, which I can see why considering what we DO with it!

    http://www.crckids.org/about-us/who-we-are/board-of-trustees/

    David Levy

    David L. Levy, Esq. is a CRC co-founder and former CRC President. He has directed 16 CRC conferences, was editor of the 1993 book entitled “The Best Parents is Both Parents®”, and has recently published an eco-novel entitled “Revolt of the Animals.”

     

     

    Michael Oddenino, member of the CRC's Board of Trustees

     

     

    Michael L. Oddenino has been the CRC’s General Counsel since its inception in 1985.  He practices family law full time in Arcadia, CA, just outside Los Angeles.   He has written numerous amicus (friend of the court) briefs and journal articles on family law.  His CRC brief in the 1989 Michael H case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court agreed with the CRC that never-married fathers were entitled to a hearing to determine visitation rights to their children, even if the child was born within a marriage of the mother to another man.

     

     

     

    Margaret Wuwert, CRC's Chief Operating Officer

     

    Margaret A. Wuwert, Chief Operating Officer, is a retired social worker and serves as Director of CRC of Northwest Ohio. Her agency is one of CRC’s largest chapters with eight Access Centers in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana.  In 2002, Ms. Wuwert was recognized by the Lucas County Domestic Relations Court for her untiring dedication and supportive access services to the children and families in the Toledo area.

     

     

    Mark S,. Inzetta, member of CRC's Board of Trustees

     

    Mark S. Inzetta, J.D. is the Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel for Wendy’s International, Inc., based in Dublin, Ohio. Before the CRC, Mark served on the Ohio Child Support Guidelines Commission, the Supreme Court of Ohio’s Task Force on Family Law and Children, ***and Board of Directors of the Franklin County, Ohio Chapter of Court Appointed Special Advocates.

    *** Lots of AFCC influence on that one, I think I blogged it.  To get input, they simply flew the task force out to Arizona (home to an AFCC organization) to sit on AFCC presentations; I may have even blogged that.  Given Ms. Wuwert, and others, I can see possibly why CRC shows up on the Indiana Child Support site.

     

     

    Just to show how “totally” unrelated AFCC is from this SVN (that’s bouncing its corporation status from state to state?) here’s what’s scheduled for the October 2011 SVN conference, I guess tax-deductible for the SVN because it’s a regional training, and probably for attendees under education, and probably who knows what else.

     

    “2011 REGIONAL TRAINING for “SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK”:  INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA

    “Working with High Conflict and Violent Families, Implications for Supervised Visitation”

    Hyatt Regency Hotel Indianapolis, Indiana

    October 26,2011

    This One Day Institute will focus on the issues presented in Supervised Visitation when Domestic Violence is present. This Institute will provide information to help professionals who work with SV providers, and those who provide direct services, to understand how domestic violence may require changes to their services to respond to the complex dynamic involved.

     

    Scheduled one day before the AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts) Regional Conference:

    “Working with High Conflict and Violent Families: A Race with No Winners” at the Hyatt Regency.

    For more information about the AFCC Conference, go HERE

    (and you can see the great race-car graphics, too….)

     

    I don’t know about that “no winners” part.  It seems like great retirement planning if you’re in the business, particularly if you have published something that could be marketed as “parent education” or how to work with flawed parents, or such .  . . . .

    Cost: $125 for SVN Members, $150 for Non Members (Includes Breakfast and Lunch):

    Register HERE

    A rate of $135/night at the Hyatt Regency is available through the AFCC Conference: HERE

     

     

    I think we should look at the current list of AFCC Board Membership, starting with Linda Fieldstone (of Florida), now President:  Is your judge on it?

    AFCC Board of Directors

    President

    Linda B. Fieldstone, MEd, Miami, FL

    President Elect

    Arnold T. Shienvold, PhD, Harrisburg, PA

    Vice President

    Nancy Ver Steegh, JD, MSW, St. Paul, MN

    Secretary

    Richard L. Altman, JD, Napoleon, OH

    Treasurer

    Annette T. Burns, JD, Phoenix, AZ

    Past President

    Robert M. Smith, JD, MDiv, Windsor, CO

    Hon. Peter Boshier, Wellington, New Zealand Hon. Diana Bryant, Melbourne, VIC, Australia Andrea Clark, MSW, St. Louis, MO patti cross, JD, Toronto, ON

    Robin M. Deutsch, PhD, Boston, MA Hon. Dianna Gould-Saltman, Los Angeles, CA Hon. R. John Harper, Toronto, ON Grace M. Hawkins, MSW, Tucson, AZ Mindy F. Mitnick, EdM, MA, Edina, MN Hon. Graham R. Mullane, Newcastle, NSW, Australia Marsha Kline Pruett, PhD, MSL, Northampton, MA Matthew J. Sullivan, PhD, Palo Alto, CA Larry V. Swall, JD, Liberty, MO

    AFCC Staff

    Executive Director

    Peter Salem, MA

    Which reminds me, some time, to do a post or two on the Hofstra University (NY) connection to AFCC.

    Associate Director

    Leslye Hunter, MA, LMFT

    Program Director

    Candace Walker, CMP, CMM

    Business and Administrative Director

    Chris Shanahan, BA, CPA

    Office Manager & Registrar

    Dawn Holmes

    Program Coordinator

    Nola Risse-Connolly, BA

    Program Coordinator

    Erin Sommerfeld, BA

    Administrative Assistant

    Jessica Murdy, BS

    AND IF YOU LIVE IN INDIANA, be comforted to know they have the violence/danger thing all under control:

    Co-sponsored by the Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Judicial Center

     

    I notice that the Duluth Abuse Intervention Programs (aka “Minnesota Program Development, Inc.)-related “Battered Women’s Justice Project” has fully enmeshed itself now with AFCC (and continuing to receive preventing violence discretionary grants, no doubt) and as such will be just about useless when it comes to objective critiques of the AFCC and its impact on our culture and the culture of divorce in re:  murder/suicides around exchange of children or the filing of protective orders (so to speak) (I’m referring to Loretta Frederick:  Go to TAGGS.hhs.gov and see if you can find the  name, or search my blog on the organizations it’ll make more sense):

     

    4. Judicial Officers institute— interparental conflict and domestic Violence: structuring Parenting arrangements that account for the implications of abuse

    The basic implication of “abuse” is danger to the abused, or if access to hurt the abused is cut off, attempts to hurt HER children instead.   The most common sense solution would be separation.  But that concept has an “irreconciliable difference” with the fathers’ rights and perpetual new professions contingents, so we need to create more tax exempt entities to confer and rehearse how to make these situations work, even if the idea is ridiculous.

    You beat a person — you shouldn’t be around children.  GOT IT?  Why should everyone else pay an adult to be supervised in the presence of children rather than get that adult AWAY from children and let them deal with their life in an adult manner somewhere else.  This is called deterrence.

    COMMON SENSE though, wouldn’t support the word “institute” which there seems to be always another one of …….

    Research has documented that interparental conflict and violence have multiple negative effects on many aspects of parenting and family functioning and on children’s psychological functioning and dysregulation. It is also associated with multiple adjustment problems in children, including internalizing and externalizing problems, PTSD, sleep problems, and school adjustment problems and performance.

     

    IT  meaning “interparental conflict and violence.”  Is conflict the same as violence?    VIOLENCE is directional, and just might have self-defense counter-moves.  Two can have conflict, but generally one starts the violence.  ACEStudy.org (Kaiser/CDC study, an old one, but a large and 10-years-long one) talked about adverse childhood events having these impacts, two of which such events included physical violence and sexual abuse.


    Presenters in this institute will tie the latest research on [how to rename/reframe partner and child abuse] the impact of interparental conflict and domestic violence on children to the practical task of structuring parenting arrangements that account for the implications of abuse. As a result of this institute, participants will be better able to structure and evaluate parenting arrangements that account for the unique nature of the violence and conflict in the family and link the abuse to the parenting capacities of the parties.

    Loretta M. Frederick, JD, Battered Women’s Justice Project, Winona, MN

    Hon. Denise McColley, Henry County Family Court, Napoleon, OH

    E. Mark Cummings, PhD, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN

    Pamela A. Hayman-Weaner, JD, Defiance, OH Gabrielle Davis, JD, Battered Women’s Justice Project,

    Minneapolis, MN

     

    And be sure not to miss this pre-conference institute cliff-hanger:

    7. domesticabuse,co-Parentingand Parenting time

    The rubric of utilizing multiple hypotheses is essential to ensure appropriate interventions, services and parenting plans while addressing any shifts in parent-child estrangement vs. alienation. This workshop will help participants grapple with the complex and sometimes changing dynamics of families in conflict, particularly where domestic abuse is alleged or identified. Various typologies of abusers, victims, and relationships will be examined. Presenters will explore how to conduct initial assessments while elucidating the importance of ongoing assessment and monitoring of any progress.

    Amy Van Gunst, MA, Fountain Hill Center, Grand Rapids, MI

    Randy Flood, MA, Men’s Resource Center at Fountain Hill, Grand Rapids, MI

     

    Make sure to read aloud the portion in red 3 times fast.  Then cogitate on the concept of putting “abuse” and “parenting” in the same place at all.  Then think about whether you’d like to have people who speak like that to decide where your child lives, or influence others who do.

    SUPERVISED VISITATION very linked in with the AFCC and with, at least the California Courts

     

     

    1. [PDF]

      SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK (SVN) STANDARDS FOR 

      http://www.afccnet.org/…/Supervised_Visitation_Nework-Standards%20Final%2…

      File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
      of the Supervised Visitation Network (SVN) Standards Task Force (the “Task …. 1 TheSupervised Visitation Network acknowledges that the concept of both 

    2. California Courts: Self-Help Center: Families & Children: Custody 

      Jul 28, 2011 – Why can supervised visitation help in cases where there is or has been  and education requirements of the Supervised Visitation Network

     

     

    WELL, that’s enough fun for one post….  Perhaps it will illustrate a few points for my next one, about the SF Courthouses closing down, but still there are ongoing grants to SFTC from a very interesting few sources….

    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….

    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: ///

    Yes, Child Support Industry IS a For-Profit Government Fraud (“F.R.A.M.E.D.” and other topics)

    with 18 comments

    (after update notes, 2 paragraphs):

    Posted originally July 17, 2011. I see from some of the charts that I updated it since (there are tables from HHS of Access Visitation grants showing from year 2014, 2015), probably to clean up the table formats. Visiting it again because of a recent comment (approved 2/17/2016). Searchable terms, “undistributable child support collections.” Beware challenging stockpiles of improperly withheld (by government) wealth — a long time ago, attorney Richard Fine representing John Silva (a father) — did this. Fine also challenged illegal payments to judges from the County after judges’ salaries were officially transferred to the State level (ongoing process of removing local control), and some powerful RE developers. He spent 18 months in solitary coercive retirement (designed to produce behavioral change) and as an old (69,70 yrs old) and lost his law license (was disbarred) as a result.


    Since 2011, I became aware of a source of reading government financial statements (“CAFRs, see more recent posts), and and more aware of fund accounting within government. I recommend people (the public), particularly in your areas of subject matter priority, including child support, go hunt down some of these funds, demonstrate you have read and comprehended the basics in those statements, and start asking hard questions.


    This blog discusses

    Child Support is a For-Profit Government Fraud” From:  “F.R.A.M.E.D.” (framedfathers.blogspot.com) Saturday, May 15, 2010  / Bruce Eden

    And while agreeing with the title, makes a few other points by commenting on it.

    Family Court Judges order such onerous child support amounts in some cases, along with alimony, daycare, medical expenses, and other expenses, that the father can’t survive. He ends up becoming despondent, leaves his job and drops out of sight. He loses all contact with his child(ren) as a result. This is the government’s ultimate goal.** Breaking up of father-headed families (and then mother-headed ones when there are no more fathers, wherein, the government will come for the children without any resistance)

    2014 update, (next few paragraphs in italics)

    **The government’s ultimate goal appears to be power and control, for profit.  The entire population, if it became fully aware of the actual profit retained by all levels of government entities (as expressed on their “CAFR” reports I learned in spring 2012 and have been reporting since), many of us would be justifiably outraged, and some of this outrage would not be expressed in nice, compliant, obedient manner.

    By keeping us economically strapped through these institutions of perpetual warfare,  against individual rights, constantly eroding them under the premise it’s for our own good (and usually what’s being held over anyone’s head at any point of time is someone else’s poverty.  Put up with more erosion of rights “for the good of the group.”  

    At times, the government doesn’t just strip children off their mothers, but gives them back to the fathers after the domestic violence protection has been removed.  That’s the game, folks.  Promise protection, then fail to deliver.  Take situations in crisis (for a variety of reasons, but definitely may include abuse), and exploit them – – – for profit.  What I do, and what I recommend both mothers AND fathers do, is find that profit.  To find that profit, one has to, after the anecdotes and narratives, which speak to the emotional, wounded, and high-charged issues, get clear, cold, hard, focused and analytical — and use that analytical truth in its own words, to expose the systems.  These are not just one system with one results, but multiple systems with multiple goals, depending on what sector they are in.
    Read the rest of this entry »

    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:

    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, 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 .  . . .

    @@@