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

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

Archive for the ‘Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011)’ Category

Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates)

leave a comment »

__

Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern Cali fornia Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”)


Post Technicalities: Tags may be added later. After over a week reviewing and supplementing this post, I’ve decided to “punt” (publish). It MIGHT also be split later, but the sections on exploring national DV networking over the years (from key organizations’ narratives) and “Health as an Asset,” an academy (“ABIS”) globally networking under the “Chatham House Rule” (basically, anonymity)(which brings the topic to the RIIA / Royal Institute of International Affairs in London and its historic intentions, as expressed in its founding documents) towards the bottom, which has a sequel, actually belong together. And this still IS “Domestic Violence Awareness Month,” for what that’s worth, in the USA..so I took a closer look at how certain organizations like to collaborate for a unified voice, and consequences of that collaboration, down the road a few decades….//LGH, Oct. 20, 2017


Or, you could call this “October Local & Posts-in-the-Pipeline Update” which is how it started out, attached to another post started earlier I’d hoped to publish with just a brief update.

As my About Holidays / Personal Backdrop” (posted Oct. 10)** says, I took a brief, about half-month, pause while handling (different kind of writing required) personal things and am now catching up on some of the posts already in the “pipeline” referencing, basically and most recently the themes of (a) Big Tobacco Litigation/Smoking Cessation Control (Public policy) Efforts and (b) The Problems with Problem-solving Courts (“Collaborative Justice”), which includes the development and implementation nationwide of family courts, too.  [** after next few reminder images…]


I wrote about an East Coast/West Coast connection involving one government sub-sector (Administrative Office of the Courts, under the Judicial Council of California, the ruling body of the Judicial Branch in the state) with an improperly named non-entity (it’s not its own legal business OR government entity) — the “Center for Court Innovation” in New York.  You will not find it registered under that name on CharitiesNYS.com or Business Entity search, and so far as I know, it’s not a trade name of some registered entity — because the EIN# associated with it, generally speaking, belongs to a private foundation, “Fund for the City of New York.”

Four logos show sponsorship (not membership) of the Executive Session for State Court Leaders” (click image to enlarge, for fine-print commentary) as I recall. Only 1 logo represents part of government (BJA is under the USDOJ) directly; the other 3 (including Harvard) count as “tax-exempt, privately controlled entities” even though the NCSC Board will have public officials on it. 

I talked about how organizations like the NCSC got involved and discovered yet two more (subsequent to “The California Story” published in 2005) 501©3s promoting the same “collaborative justice” concept, keying off the concept of drug courts:

Fund for City of New York is one-half (the Private) half of the Public/Private (agreement, project, collaboration — whoever it’s defined) comprising the “Center for Court Innovation”. Look at the affiliations of the Board members — former NY Attorney General, Designer of the World Trade Center, Adm. Judge of the City of NY…!

(There’s also a foundation to go with this one).

**(The rest of that title, the same link as just given above: “….Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page].”(ends “-7AD”)

The other “Collaborative Justice” non-profit showing clear judicial membership and sponsorship, as well as an MSW involved in “Children and Family Futures.”  I won’t say more on that in this post, just pointing out that the process seems never-ending:

CCJCF-related, image series labeled: “Search for CCJCF President turned up EARLY Annual Rpt (Final Draft) WITH EIN# attached and its Significant Others (Judge Lynn Duryees, Peggy Hora)”

[Image may be added here post-publication, can’t locate a certain annotated one just now. It may be on the bottom of the related page]

One post in the pipeline taken from part (b) above again (“Governance, the Final Frontier,” now in draft, full title further below) reminded me of how early (how long ago) I’d realized that the “powers that be” within the domestic violence field obtained, and maintained, control over the field with an agenda to “therapize” the nation’s language of crime and consequences under the health, social science, and behavioral modification treatment [“therapeutic jurisprudence” and other concepts] paradigm — while still claiming to be tough on crime and domestic violence. And that one of the ways of doing this to mimic popular, grassroots demand from multiple seemingly diverse platforms (organizations) was having already-established tax-exempt foundations first internally sponsor projects, then spin off the projects off into more 501©3s (nonprofits) which, while the names may be new, the world view, personnel, response to the problems and practice of letting philanthropists run government or organize with intent to run it, is not. In other words, by setting up interconnected nonprofits collectively run by people of, except perhaps subject/topic focus area, the same general persuasion, having been so persuaded possibly in part because alternate viewpoints or alternate solutions to the problem were out-funded, and out-maneuvered.    

[Phrases above in this color were added long after the original paragraph; it this is too much overexplaining, read around them.]


Both this post and the one whose title shows next, linked from the “Collaborative Justice/Problem-solving Courts” page, should be published today, Oct. 20, 2017, or within 48 hours of each other.  (That “today” date kept getting moved back as I continued adding to the top part of this post!) The one you’re reading now will be published first.

I’ll repeat that link near the bottom of this post.


VERY early on, assumptions about WHICH are the KEY POINTS IN (foundational to) any new field or regime (for the DV field, that treatments and interventions, such as batterers’ intervention, or supervised visitation, mandatory mediation, parent education, etc.) become foundational, basic for that new field or regime’s claims to even BEING a field of practice or a new profession or area of professional practice (example:  “fatherhood” or “domestic violence PREVENTION”). Assumptions and omissions of relevant information which might speak against that selection of points get “baked-into the infrastructure and system” (including to its literature and downloadable curricula, webinars, etc.) as entrenched positions, and continually a part of whatever solution is chosen.

This proprietary, linguistic control makes later protest by people harmed by such policies, even if among the classes the policies are allegedly representing in the first place — for example, survivors of domestic violence, and/or child abuse who, with full information up front might have made different choices in picking their court battles, or how and how hard to fight back once they were dragged into one — an even heavier burden and uphill battle.  The public is fed information leading (or at least encouraging) readers/viewers to believe (until personally involved) that “the experts are on it,” so where there’s evidence to the contrary, maybe it was just the family’s problem, or one of the family members.’  Or a rogue judge, or a local problem..

After all, don’t we hear about domestic violence on TV shows, sometimes in a movie, in ads, and after headlines involving recent roadkill, perhaps from experts on one of the major organizations’ comments?

A SHORT SECTION ON THIS, FOLLOWED BY MORE ON THE NETWORKS:

Who can even find the long-standing/oft-quoted SF Domestic Violence Consortium?  What does its spokesperson do for a living? Take tax-free donations (It’s not an incorporated entity, but its “Executive Director” maintains apparently a speed-dial on some local news media with each new domestic violence vitality — year after year — or otherwise disaster that has potential for making national news too.

Looking at this one, I also took a quick re-view of California’s registered and still active known major DV organizations, including (but not posted here) the “NNEDV.”  I also added a section in which one of the networked entities did us (belatedly) a courtesy summary of the networks themselves, nationally, that is. Recommendation?  Pretend this is a conversation, and just deal with its about 15,000 words as they come up.  When you see a new section coming up, so be it, and remember that some of the material that inspired a post may (in my writing style) still end up closer to the bottom, while what’s in between is, to say the least, “illuminating.”….
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 20, 2017 at 7:47 pm

Posted in Checking Out a Nonprofit (HowTo), Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Fatal Assumptions, Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011), Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Train-the-Trainers Technical Assistance Grantees, warfare: strategic, Where (and why) DV Prevention meets Fatherhood Promotion

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

Navigating My Blog: Table of Contents, Post Titles by Dates Published

leave a comment »

This page will be updated as I can.  I realized I am repeating by phone (and sometimes in post) information already blogged.   Hopefully these are good browsing, a list of subject matter in addition to the links on the sidebar, pages, and sidebar widgets with some chronological narratives.   This represents four-plus years of consistent research driven by an insatiable (so far) desire to know  “How could these things be?” and “What are the alternatives?”    Please feed the blogger; you will NOT find this information assembled elsewhere, and it should’ve been.

One of the questions I ask on this page (middle) is also, “What alternatives do you, plural, want?  Is this really what you want done with your tax dollars?”   With some visuals.

Last Dozen Posts Published  (In Reverse Chrono Order) (from the sidebar; the sidebar content obviously changes with time).

BELOW, in REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE FORM, picking up from the Dec. 24, 2013 one above:

A table of post titles going so far back to December 2012 (blog dates from 2009), in reverse chrono order, being assembled as of February 2014.  I’ll add links as I can, however this has to be done from the Admin. site one post, one paste, one row/hyperlink at a time.   Meanwhile, you can look up any post by its date through “Archives” til then.  The titles are statements in themselves of a developing understanding of the field.

“Please Feed the Blogger” Notice:

Also, “please feed the blogger.”  Any idea how much time it takes to research and put up a post?

Below is a section from the sidebar explaining why this blog, and that I’ve been exploring pretty much new and original material/territory* — including what has happened since those who first “dropped the ball” on reporting the HHS grants factor (around 1999-2002) as it affects the courts, and who, specifically dropped it.    This blog is far from book format or indexed, but it’s a very good set of footprints, and with basic commonsense tools plus “show and tell” on lookups, involved.  The information has been picked up and is being brought up, from what I can tell, in re: mid-term Congressional election platforms in two different states.  

* (with exception of the CAFR material, which has good teachers already explaining it well, although I also blogged and continue to tie its huge significance into the family court matters.  CAFRs speak to who is government.  Courts are part of  government).

I am also seeking to get some specific “consciousness-raising” funds eliminated in my own state of California, after having seen just what programs they go to, and having been an eyewitness long term of what “help” consists of (i.e., PR campaigns, technical assistance and training, website constructions, and tax writeoffs, etc.)  This is definitely a real “public interest blog”


These tasks are guaranteed not to make one friends in high places, or among those in authority over the various programs I believe should be defunded.  Much of my blog is politically incorrect, including among the arrogant (in my opinion) “save the world” Baby Boomers expert at promoting world utopia (along with “Pay no attention to our operating structures” which I do anyhow, and report on).  Some of these, it seems, learned in the 1960s, somehow, that being able to change laws then, they are apparently beyond and above the law now.    I disagree, and talk about the consequences of being distracted by “cause” rhetoric.

The same people and their multi-faceted, not-quite-filing nonprofit groups already have their eyes on desired system changes, and the parts slated for elimination are THE parts protecting due process, fiscal accountability to government, and despite all the talks of equality, simply fair play, financially. All people should learn how to understand the basic operating systems of (1) government and (2) self-appointed systems change agent and figure out how these are funded.

Pls. Feed the Blogger in re: About to go Public notice

FYI, I’m about to go public (not on this forum) with my case, naming names, putting it in chronological order, for protection of certain family members, because I am not in safe situation currently. I am in solidarity with anyone who has been put homeless, or nearly homeless year after year by this system WITHOUT having abused others or perpetrated crimes on others, and with people who have lost their children (but not their minds) through the courts, without due process and without legitimate cause.  (Obviously, there are still legitimate reasons for being prevented from contact with one’s children. Unfortunately the most obvious ones in human terms don’t seem to hold much weight in “conciliation” courts with a mind of their own and purposes of their own, like ordering services and centralizing operations).

Read the rest of this entry »

How NY’s OTDA [social services agency] runs even more fatherhood (and DV) funding through FFFS alternate circuitry

with 2 comments

From a pre-Thanksgiving draft (and in not much beyond draft shape) I simply want to illustrate how “Follow the money” is almost impossible when it comes to the entrenched systems of Fatherhood, yes, also Domestic Violence prevention categories.


Some things you can’t see without even reading some detailed Administrative Memorandum offering more perks through, as in this example, “Flexible Funds for Family Services.” [FFFS].  I provided about half a post’s worth of intro, so if you want the original (and more picturesque part) please do scroll down at least to the first set of quotes, in tables with a rich brown background. This post  relates to the “fatherhood.gov” a.k.a. “the National Responsible Fatherhood Resource Center and an Albany, New York street address on the contact page?  and who that relates to.  This field and the supposedly contrary field (domestic violence) since 1996 have been funded through the federal government. I did the best I could with formatting and hope the post further enlightens us ALL to (wake up and smell the coffee)….and make a New Year’s Resolution to start better comprehending “government” and how it’s funded.  While I’m not the expert, I do have access to some tools which are NOT taught in most schools or reported in the local mainstream media.  The tools aren’t to drown anyone with details, but the exhibit certain concepts — and from there, make a more informed decision of where you stand regarding (well, what’s to be done with your future TIME and LIFE). Read the rest of this entry »

HHS Grants Database “http://TAGGS.hhs.GOV status” is suddenly inaccessible [2wks in Dec.2013]

leave a comment »

2014 February 18 — an update on the nonresponse to HHS grants database going down may help us understand what it means to young people, and their parents, when the mainstream public engages in a universal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on their own governments operations; after a long day at work and with their family (if they’re lucky) at home, time to “unwind” with mainstream MEDIA information. The problem with this (and I do understand the need to detach and tune out by tuning in some nonsense or entertainment, believe me!) is that we NEVER get around to reading our own government’s operational “annual reports.” If we were invested DIRECTLY in a business, would we not do that? If we were contributing, say, to a nonprofit, might we not occasionally take a look at their tax returns and, as it applies, annual reports also? Let’s try this another way– if we were invested as private shareholders managing our own stuff (or, hiring a trader to) — might we not from time to time read the shareholders’ reports and SEC filings? Or want to get at least a sense of what we’re getting for the money?


Read the rest of this entry »

Spelling It Out Again, Basic Players, Basic Blueprints [yawn…][well, we’d better not, actually…] (Publ. Oct. 28, 2012)

leave a comment »

Spelling It Out Again, Basic Players, Basic Blueprints [yawn…][well, we’d better not, actually…]

(Published Oct. 28, 2012; about 12,700 words.  Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated short-link ends “-1cD”).  This information and minor (readability) format changes added June 22, 2019 on realizing the post needed a “Read-more” link, when it came up in a blog search of a specific term “Saddleback,” among about seven other posts.  //LGH

 

MDRC (1974ff), TANF (1996ff), Gov Leavitt (1998ff), Gov Keating + Wade Horn (2000ff)

Actually, don’t yawn — because this is an infinitely expanding program until the US goes bust, which it is probably just speeding up.  At which time program engineers (*including a few former US Governors, and such) plus funders (Federal Government + Major Foundations built by corporate wealth), and a variety of religious leaders who also are being enriched by this (including those that are already on the Forbes list, like David Green of “Hobby Lobby” was, as I pointed out recently, who gave (literally, a donation) over 150 acres to Saddleback Church/Rick Warren, who is already marketing HIS wares through the church and trademarks on it, too.  These are Purpose-Driven Programs, I’m just deducing some of the Purposes by observing their Practices.)…and of course the gatekeepers such as the lawyers, judges, mediators, custody evaluators and so forth . . . will be able to afford THEIR exit plans in their retirement years, potentially.  They are already internationally connected and doing business, in many cases (whether through travel, having corporations registered overseas, or simply the internet).

Heck, the US Government is investing internationally for sure, and I’ll bet that every single state’s public employee pension plan (CALPers, New York States’ Pension Plan, Pennsylvania’s — probably every single one – and you can find them on their CAFRs and look) — probably also  is investing in multiple currencies and countries, playing one against the other, plus in various corporations.

But I believe there is likely to be a continental lockdown, which may explain perhaps why so many are in privatized lockUPs..  

The number one feature I notice is treating the human population like a material resource, which (from that point of view) it is — if they are poor, because of prior policies set up (by the same crowd) — exploit it.  If they are divorcing — exploit that, too.

Then sell it to them (because any good businessperson is adept at getting other to fund its startups, and of course many things are also tax write-offs) and have their income taxes pay for it, and the income taxes of the middle classes’s taxes who hasn’t caught onto this yet because they’re working 9 to 5, detoxing from work part of their time off, and stressing out about the future while at work, etc.

MAKE SURE the Middle Class believes that the real problems are the shiftless poor, the fertile female African Americans or anyone else with dark skin, or heck any color female skin, and things like DIVORCE. ANYTHING but the bottom-line reality….  

Then go about to help the other side of the equation…. based on some profile.

Hopefully  people who read the last few posts (sorry, I don’t have any gold stars or discount coupons for the effort!) will start to understand that something less than above-board (at some levels) and “in-your-face” (at other levels) is going on involving:


  • Religious beliefs held in common by at least Mormons, Catholics & Evangelicals
  • Certain of the 50 United States well-knowon for their Mormon, or Evangelical roots (Utah, Oklahoma, specifically)
  • Certain individuals in responsible positions at the top-of-state level, whether Governor (Keating OK; Leavitt:  Utah; and a family divorce lawyer also serving as a Utah State Rep and on its Judiciary Committee, proposing legislation and getting it passed…)
  • Federal Grants to the States from HHS involving Welfare Funding.
  • Family Lawyers and Related Industries — Seeing as to get legally divorced, one often utilizes a lawyer — or at a minimum, walks into some sort of family courts to get that divorce — there is also a marketing element in the marriage promotion business by family lawyers, which capitalizes on the HHS grants and their influence in the legislature to mandate or promote purchasing of services, seminars, books, and classes by the same.I have (now) a sky-blue-background “rant” (about three inches of vertical space? or so) at the top of “Christianity and Its Sects in the Statehouse” in which I completely derailed into a NHMRC (National Healthy Marriage Resource Center) website and gave a short, but detailed reference to what money is supporting that operation — and the products, services, and goods that the FOUNDATIONS supporting MDRC (look it up) in promoting and dissemination, essentially “fatherhood” promotion, even though HHS is already granting corporations quite a bit to set up shop in this field.  MDRC was formed in 1974, I have posted on it, and a very old (why can’t such a wealthy firm update their own website with a better diagram for the public?) — pie chart, 2010, showing the main sources of its funding.
    • Another way to call that what is is, would simply be AFCC, NACC, CRC, and friends.

The sky-blue rant at the top of my Oct. 21 post “Christianity and Its Sects” shows how a visit to a federally-funded site which spins off business to the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative PR Firm (Public Strategies Inc.) and friends — then links to a nice MDRC program evaluation, which spins off money to its subcontractors, and you can follow who is supporting this from the acknowledgement in the front of the report.  Not to mention the number of the federal HHS contract used to do the study.  In short, the people getting the most employment profit from this do NOT appear to be the poor, but those studying them.

I think I have more than demonstrated that the public access database TAGGS.hhs.gov isn’t going to help us study where the bulk of the HHS money is going in any efficient or meaningful way.  I say that after three years of scrutiny, mostly showing screwups in the basic design, not just data entry and a whole lot of them seem like MORE than accidental.

I also find groups that don’t file taxes with their chief personnel (CEOs, who got over $100k salary from apparently the original HHS) then being further promoted to more responsibility — i.e., I”m talking about for example, Mrs. Charles Ballard, commonly known as Frances Ballard, sitting on the board of WIFI (Women in Fatherhood Inc.) AND being somehow involved in the administration of the “national responsible fatherhood clearinghouse” which it assures us, is funded by the US Government.  So how can a person be an “Executive Director” of what looks like a government-supported website unless he or she is a government employee?

I haven’t figured that one out yet.  Maybe you can: The first title given in her description is ED of the NRFC — which is a website!  She is doing this while also on the board of WIFI — so on HER tax return (assuming there is one) where’s the income coming from and reported as? I also note that while wifi is not a D.C. organization, most likely the clearinghouse (being a website), IS:

Frances Ballard is the Executive Director for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). In her role she is responsible for the strategic direction and leadership for activities regarding the NRFC, including the coordination of the media campaign, clearinghouse and Web site, Training and Technical Assistance (T & TA) to responsible fatherhood demonstration sites, and building relationships and partnerships for NRFC

This site is, literally, steering and setting national federal policy.  Was Ms. Ballard somehow elected as a public official, or was this website voted into existence and then privately contracted out to her?  I notice that the WIFI link has a direct link at its bottom to “childtrends.org” which is an Annie E. Casey foundation “thang.” This is certainly ALL about the children, that’s why no one need to explain to the adults– their parents — where their inheritances (or household incomes) went, or is going in the future, except out the door and from there, who knows?

This website has a *.gov address.

So, what does it mean to have an “executive director” — is that person an employee or a contractor — it should be one or the other.  To be an “Executive Director” of a *.gov site is a very interesting job title.  Is that not an accurate job title?

[next section in different background color is a quote.  Not sure why I didn’t use the “quote” function originally…//LGH comment added June 22, 2019 during post format quasi-cleanup]

Who are we?
The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse is an Office of Family Assistance (OFA) funded national resource for fathers, practitioners, programs/Federal grantees, states, and the public at-large who are serving or interested in supporting strong fathers and families.


The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) is a resource of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) Office of Family Assistance (OFA).

The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (CRA) re-authorized funding for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). The NRFC was initially funded through the Deficit Reduction Act (2005) for “the development, promotion, and distribution of a media campaign to encourage the appropriate involvement of parents in the life of any child and specifically the issue of responsible fatherhood, and the development of a national clearinghouse to assist States and communities in efforts to promote and support marriage and responsible fatherhood.”


Contact Us information:

Mailing address
National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse
307A Consaul Road
Albany, New York 12205

Federal Contact
Lisa Washington-Thomas
Branch Chief, TANF Technical Assistance
Office of Family Assistance
lwashington-thomas@acf.hhs.gov
(202) 401-5141
Read the rest of this entry »

What It’s Still About….(… in Summer 2013)

with one comment

(Post title changed to remove “Election Year Update 2012.” The message is still appropriate now….Also in reviewing this post (and adding some quotes) I’m temporarily moving the “more” link further down the page, (in other words, the “abstract” is almost post-length) to call attention to the material.)


[This post is “sticky” and stays on top.  New posts are beneath . ..Some additions, March 2013…(As I learn more, it shows up on the blog). ~ Or see “The Last Seven Let’s Get Honest Posts” links, on sidebar ~ better yet, See also my other blog Cold,Hard.Fact$]; 


This blog has VALUABLE INSIGHT on the family courts money trail (a trail of tears), and about many crisis intervention groups who are in on it (and hence, won’t blog it), and from some of whom I sought help, solace, or actionable information — and got NONE.  


Question: WHY would any group which truly wants to save lives withhold relevant information, tools to find that information, and prior ground-breaking conversations about that information — in the amounts of billions of dollars of federal incentives to the statesaffecting — custody outcomes (as to the child support system, HHS/OCSE) while feeding less helpful information to their clients?Another Question: You should also ask why — where is that money coming from, and why does our government always want to raise taxes when they can’t keep track of what they already collected (MUCH more than is commonly realized) and when a lot of that is simply fed to fraudulent or evanescent corporations that don’t stay registered at the state level?

When it’s a matter of eminent domain and someone gets sued over bribery, then it makes headlines and people get indignant. Daily News 2001, Los Angeles Area.

COURT MAY RECEIVE CLOSE AUDIT. 2001. Similarly, and around the same years, other people were asking questions about “court-connected” funds of a different sort. 2002, this one, there was a series of articles:‘SLUSH FUND’ PROBE POSSIBLE KUEHL MAY ASK FOR INQUIRY INTO JUDGES’ PROCEEDS.[one has to actually read these – I’m not outlining them for those who won’t….]
This one in PARTICULAR shows that in 1999ff Marv Bryer and others were doing what I do now — reading tax returns, looking at the fronts of checks, looking at the BACKS of checks, and noticing that what’s written out to ONE fund sometimes gets deposited into another, which fund happens to be a private judges’ association.

Here’s a yet more detailed one (best: read the series; see “related articles”):

GILDING THE GAVEL? SUPERIOR COURT PAYMENTS DEPOSITED IN JUDGES’ PRIVATE ‘COFFEE’ FUND.

(Now that you’ve read it, naturally, with attention…..)

Read the rest of this entry »

How to get No-Holds-Barred HHS Grants Info from TAGGS, and a Few Things to Do With It…

leave a comment »

Notes from 2014 Year-end on this October 5, 2012 post:


1. This post has charts and tables in it, run before I had the technical know-how to limit the right-hand-margin.


2. I acknowledge the post is unconscionably long — 17,000 words, including this intro.


3. That said, The TAGGS database does not copy well to wordpress, and is not public-user-friendly. It does not lend to us running flexible reports or sorts, as database ought to, although it’s funded apparently with public dollars. Much later, I learned (this is “as I recall” in a 600++ post blog) the software provider was later taken over by an international (Canada?) based firm, but previous to this had been sued by states or state agencies for failures regarding their performance problems. I have worked with databases before, and know that this level of dysfunction in critical issues would not fly, in small, medium, or very large corporations. It’s so bad, I even started a blog in October 2013 intending to simply print out ALL recipients (unsorted). HHS Giveaways, Government Shutdowns.


HOWEVER, it was my work on grants using this database, and then checking out grantees, which developed my understanding of at least the marriage/fatherhood funding, and what a major problem we have in the country when the average citizens DO NOT understand government fiscal accounting, as we are not intended to. I believe that if we did, there would be a major rebellion over taxation in no way limited to political fringe or other labels, such as “Tea Party.” I encourage people to get involved and get a sense of just who IS getting HHS grants. Run some reports, scan the contents, notice oddities; notice who gets the big ones, or how many 1-time grantees, for example, may get a $50,000 “compassion capital” grant, then (checked at the state registration level) the group gets administratively dissolved, i.e., “take the money and run.” Continuing this practice rewards bad behavior, and allows grants fraud and theft of public money.
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: