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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for the ‘HHS & HUD fraud’ Category

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 »

How many “governments” are there? What do they do? What’s the Collective Cost? Example, funding of NFLG (Nat’l Fatherhood Leaders Group, in DC) and others

with one comment

This post, in draft since 12/17/2013, is hereby posted about a month later (1/14/2014) in the context of If we don’t even know who government is, how can we know where the money goes?


And, I added some more examples to the “certainly aren’t staying incorporated” factor of certain groups. While I’m hitting pretty hard (it’s appropriate) on the “IRS tax-exempt status involuntarily revoked” pattern of KEY and STILL-CITED fatherhood groups, resulting in “lost funds” (public is clueless where they went–into pockets, for kickbacks or other bribes, or for ???), the original section was still follow-up on the U.S. Census of Governments link — which I’m splitting it into a second post…. I literally searched the IRS Select-Exempt Organization Site (nationwide), checking “Involuntarily Revoked” list option, keyed in the word “fatherhood” (and no other words) and stood back in awe at just how many groups there were.  Whether or not they all got funding, or never got funding, it still is a message to the fad of forming such groups, then dropping their status!  However, groups are coaching other groups in how to form up such nonprofits to go after the grants.  Who’s minding the shop, then once they turn that waterspout of federal fountains ON?


…If we don’t know how many governments, how can we know where the money goes?  And guess what:  “government” and the groups it funds (nonprofits) don’t stay HONEST voluntarily.  

My point is to point out these loopholes — and say, we (plural, collective, more people — lots of people) have to talk about this! 

Here’s Ron Haskins (in some ways “Mr. Welfare Reform”) himself posted under:

[The Logo is the Link, to his biography under this group’s website] Ron Haskins is a senior fellow in the Economic Studies Program at the Brookings Institution and senior consultant at the Annie E. Casey Foundation in Baltimore. From February to December of 2002 he was the senior advisor to the president for welfare policy at the White House.c Prior to joining Brookings and Casey in 2000, he spent 14 years on the staff of the House Ways and Means Human Resources Subcommittee, first as welfare counsel to the Republican staff, then as the subcommittee’s staff director.   [[timeline:  translates to from about 1986 – 2000, i.e., past two terms of a Democratic U.S. Presidential Administration, i.e., former US President Bill Clinton]] From 1981-1985, he was a senior researcher at the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He also taught and lectured on history and education at UNC, Charlotte and developmental psychology at Duke University. Haskins was the editor of the 1996, 1998, and 2000 editions of the Green Book, a 1600-page compendium of the nation’s social programs published by the House Ways and Means Committee that analyzes federal social programs and domestic policy issues including health care, poverty, and unemployment. Haskins has also co-edited several books, including Welfare Reform and Beyond: The Future of the Safety Net (Brookings, 2002), The New World of Welfare (Brookings, 2001) and Policies for America’s Public Schools: Teachers, Equity, and Indicators (Ablex, 1988), and has contributed to numerous books and scholarly journals on children’s development and social policy issues. He is also the author of Work Over Welfare: The Inside Story of the 1996 Welfare Reform Law (Brookings, 2006).

He has lent his name and clout to NFLG.  Look for the similar yellow-box below and you’ll find out, the group incorporated a certain time, had its nonprofit status INVOLUNTARILY REVOKED by the IRS in 2010, kept functioning throughout (apparently without a hitch – PROBABLY BECAUSE NO ONE BOTHERED TO CHECK WHEN FACED WITH RESPECTABLE (WHETHER LIKED OR DISLIKED) AUTHORITY FIGURES, SUCH AS THIS ONE!!!).  You will also see that the same characteristic likely applies to some of the outfits (corporations/nonprofits) IRS Select Exempt Organization Check [read intro paragraphs carefully, they are self-explanatory on the three categories of data you can search] shows it didn’t file tax returns for three years in a row, to get to this “Revoked” status!  more similar organizations listed below:   First date is effective revocation, second, the date it was published by the IRS on their “involuntarily revoked” list:

[[2017 update: The logo doesn’t display because “NFLGonline.com” isn’t a current link.]]

45-4542131 NATIONAL FATHERHOOD LEADERS GROUP WASHINGTON DC 20001 US 00 15-May-2010 12-Nov-2012

ALSO listed on the board of this NFLG (see list); in fact, this habit is a character trait of the entire field, as I have pointed out before on this blog, and demonstrate again by an expansion of “Fatherhood” nonprofits who got their IRS status revoked within the last few years — which means over 5 years of non-filing.   Whether the last name is Haskins, Ballard, or Stoica (California Healthy Marriage Coalition) or some of their spouses, or famous-female-friends, such as those on WIFI (Women In Fatherhood Inc).

So, when you get the next paycheck (if the shoe fits, i.e., you have a job that issues some!) or buy something at the store which has a “tax” category — remember that, where it goes — nobody knows (unless — they find out! = learn how to find out and follow through!).    Happy New Year 2014, yours truly, Let’s Get Honest

(and there’s a Donate button on the right side to help support this work, and I’m NOT a nonprofit, either.  I filed a corporation in 2011 in hopes to find a way to make a living which didn’t require a geography I cannot protect from stalking, assaults, and ill-timed frivolous lawsuits, child-stealing events and other trauma-inducing (and unprovoked) behaviors.  ….I am on the phone daily (most days, that’s 7 a week) speaking to others going through similar situations and encouraging/teaching to follow up on the funding; usually these are people who read the blog, or read my comments on other blogs keeping this information at least on the radar in the “family court” and “domestic violence” blogs — those not dominated, of course, by industry professionals.  I approach it as professionally as anyone in my situation could.  From the sidebar:


Donate Button with Credit Cards

There’s been a real “feeding frenzy” in this type of programming. WHY?? In part, see “sheep” section, above. But also, courts can order participation


[[Also — because so few people are tracking what happens to the grants. If they are not followed, if public funding isn’t understood — then they very easily could be used for kickbacks, bribes, or anything else — not necessarily just for private fun and pleasure on the conference circuit. It is a PUBLIC responsibility to participate in the checks and balances of power towards government. This is most effectively done with at least a LITTLE basic concepts and instruction on how it works, and what’s been done, the ability look at some of the obvious and call it what it is! Of course it takes time, but stopping money-laundering is worth the time!! ]]

For “Ballard” (Charles Augustus), do a google search on “Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Neighborhood Revitalization” — and ONLY my link is going to be talking grants accountability and corporate records.  (The link also looked up as best I could at the time, the clearinghouse in its title, which led me to Mr. Braswell (also NFLG membership) and HIS corporate/incorporation wanderings — and also below, I show how fatherhood funding can be “facilitated” through Social Services Flexible Fund account, in fact — good luck ever trying to follow the trail, but I have left some footprints. The question ought to arise — as our country is OBVIOUSLY dumping money to dishonest corporations run, often enough, by civil servants and/or respected professionals — who can we quit funding the “pump, slush, and come back for some more” process, and at which point in the process?

“National” “Responsible” “Fatherhood” “Clearinghouse” – Let’s Get Honest

and I did blog earlier, as well as more on the corporate habits of another NFLG board member (who is probably also still? a public employee over at the New York State ODTA, and the contact for a state-funded fatherhood initiative): Kenneth Braswell – Bio Father’s Incorporated 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 »

Outstanding in their Field. Now, about that Field… (Fatherhood Grantees/Practitioners)

leave a comment »

Again, I am only sampling a field that was sent in place decades ago, has major foundations supporting it (one should ask WHY) as well as the many resources of the HHS, and the “yeah, man — right up our alley!” of one too many tax-exempt religious foundations. Or, as you will, faith-based.

TAGGS.hhs.gov on this group (I searched by its EIN# — which is below).

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION  WASHINGTON DC 20019 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA $ 2,549,350

 

Before we get too far into the economics of this field, I’d like to post a sample of what some of the DYNAMICS of it are about.  This 2001 Appeal is interesting because it incorporates how the court responds to evidence of injuring a child on visitation and severe violence (breaking a woman’s sternum and grabbing her by the throat) — that woman being the 2nd wife // stepmother — and because the man in question is on the board of (another — not the above) Fathers’ rights group based in WDC (ACFC).  This is one child — a girl, born in 1989 (divorce, 1991, first evidence of post-separation bruising of the girl, ca. 1996) and it covered two states, Michigan and Louisiana.  It’s a short-double-spaced read, and I hope you do.  Because at least in part — no offence to non-abusive Dads — this is also what the “FR’ movement is about — that FR are FR even when these things happen:

Lauren Hollingsworth v. James Semerad,

Appeal from 3rd Judicial District Court, Parish of Lincoln, Louisiana Trial Court No. 43,428~  Honorable R. Wayne Smith, Judge.

(Dad, see very far below same photo, looks like a very upstanding man):

Similar personnel to the ACFC group (far below) found on this one also:  Baskerville, Semerad, Mike McManus (who wants to do away with no-fault divorce), etc.  Click on link:

The Center for Marriage Policy

Dads of Michigan Related site, it says (read to see the spheres of influence involved & connection with another WDC organization, “ACFC”):

Rebuilding heterosexual marriage as the social norm is the necessary structural foundation for successful American socioeconomic reconstruction.

Among this testimony we can see both parents being court-ordered to attend a class, one of the (3) experts calling “parental alienation” but the testimony of the others (who felt the child to be credible, and not coached, esp. with the bruises) were concerned.  Moreover, it appears that the same father had literally broken the stepmom’s sternum and grabbed her throat’ they were divorcing.  he lied under oath about that event and had a new girlfriend to whom apparently the daughter was exposed.  It appears that the court’s response is simply to adjust the supervised visitation, not terminate it!  This Appeal in question comes fully 10 years after their divorce.  Get the picture?

Seriously, it’s a short read and covers many typical issues in family court these days in a case which divorce pre-dated welfare reform but still had the PAS charge…

Read the rest of this entry »

HHS’ Grants Database (TAGGS) isn’t “Close enough for Jazz.”

with one comment

[this post is about 9,000 words.  Like most of my posts,

that includes a lot of quotations… Showing how HHS,

the US agency in place to help Humans be Healthy,

isn’t Helping us Track its Grants well enough.

Data elements that the users should be able to sort on, aren’t even menu choices...and of the fields they CAN sort on, those aren’t always even entered.

I pick on a few examples, including an Abstinence/healthy marriage grantee, of course]



HHS Data Quality in the TAGGS Database.  ~ ~ Accessible Data for the Public

Business is Business — and some VERY sophisticated software is available to those doing business with the US Government, or those whose functional engineering projects, or fundraising, depends on excellent and relevant, reliable software.  At the bottom of the last post, I also clearly showed how fortunes are being made in the field of software platforms to government (and elsewhere), i.e., a prosperous Private Equity Firm in SF investing in several software companies (sometimes, at once) is doing VERY well; they also became the majority shareholder in BlackBaud, Inc. — which provides software Cloudfund raising to nonprofits, including our Minnesota TechnicalAssistance and Training provider to OVW Grantees (and if anyone else can afford to attend, like a battered woman), Duluth Abuse Intervention Programs.
Blackbaud is an international company whose founder was from the UK and answered an ad from a NYCity school for a software design.  Tony Bakker is majority owner of a Charleston South Carolina soccer team, a real estate investor and “restaurateur,” after buying and restoring a 1760 property in Charleston, sold it for $7.6 million, having found a $5 million property on the waterfront they just couldn’t turn down.
And think about it — HHS and DOJ funding to train people how to work with people that batter, people that are being battered, and how to provide supervised visitation services, and to an organization promoting that Community Collective Response will help stop evil behavior in a community.  In studying further how to do this, one of its sub-projects (BWJP) also chose to “collectively” associate with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, an organization of dubious origins in Southern Los Angeles (according to some), which has sought to UNdo the concept of criminal law and replace it with the language of behavioral science, and which promotes a psychological terminology as a legal technique to re-frame children saying “no” to abuse as parental alienation, and which believes that “CONFLICT,” if high, is bad.
They have no conflict, however, with centralized control if it includes them, or taking grants to expand their technical capacities, or web presence.
MEANWHILE — if the public is expecting representative government still, at this late date — this is what they get:  A database of HHS grants which is incomplete, inaccurate, whose entries are inconsistently entered below the level of what basic support staff would accept — and in which one CANNOT sort on the most relevant fields in Advanced Search format.   I have almost never run across someone even LOOKING at this database as a layperson because they were curious about the use of its funds (and I’ve talked and corresponded with hundreds of heads of household involved in the courts; funds to the courts are recorded in here! — who even looks at TAGGS.HHS.GOV unless they got this habit from my blog, or people who associate with Liz Richards’ “national association for family court justice” from which I got the idea to look it up (and just kept going….).
Some of these fields are below.  Fiscal Year is shown — but
 http://taggs.hhs.gov/HelpStatus/datadictionary.cfm
Appropriation Fiscal Year Fiscal Year of the appropriation used to fund this action. Note: An appropriation is a statute made available by Congress that provides the authority to incur financial obligations and to make payments associated with DHHS grant programs.
Appropriation Number Treasury account code identifying the appropriation used to fund this action. Note: An appropriation is a statute made available by Congress that provides the authority to incur financial obligations and to make payments associated with DHHS grant programs.
Appropriation Title Full title of an appropriation. Note: An appropriation is a statute made available by Congress that provides the authority to incur financial obligations and to make payments associated with DHHS grant programs.
Authorization Legal authority cited in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) upon which an HHS program is based (acts, amendments to acts, Public Law numbers, titles, sections, Statute Codes, citations to the US Code, Executive Orders, Presidential Reorganization Plans, and Memoranda from an agency head).

The matters in blue remind us that spending isn’t supposed to happen without authorization and appropriation.   Yet look at the “Advanced Search” page and see if you can find those fields.

There’s one link to “Advanced Search” (explore on your own time), and several shortcuts to other menu items, and some pre-planned reports.  Yet I found in a general search, there are plenty of grants missing codes — DUNS code, some missing a CFDA Code (plenty missing a principal investigator; do not yet know if these are specifically block grants only).  Of the principal investigator there really ought to be a first name, last name designation and no title unless there’s a title field.  that’s BASIC.

http://taggs.hhs.gov/AdvancedSearch.cfm

Any feedback on how someone may get to this data via the public access site — I see many fields described which do not show up on “Advanced Search” options — please let me know.  For example, nothing should be paid out which Congress, Executive Order, or some other authority has awarded, right?  But we cannot search on it.  You can do only these types of searches & run some pre-formatted reports.
Read the rest of this entry »

Why Governments (Corporations) Whine so much, What They Aren’t Telling Us, and How to Look It Up . . . .

with one comment

Individuals believe that “the budget” and “governments” are one. This is false“*
How does one tell the American people that governments are stealing from them? They will not believe it. They believe the government and the elected officials. Only a nut would attempt to demonstrate that politicians are not completely honest. Well, I am that nut and I have the qualifications to prove that governments are stealing from them.”  *
(from a site put together by a retired USAF and “Former: Auditor/Commander, Air Force Audit Agency Federal Accountant,”).  Others are also reporting this, such as Catherine Austin Fitts, formerly FHA.  It just happens to be true! And needs to be seen in this light:

Do you have any idea what it’s like to have been on welfare, got off, then listen to the talking heads on TV? [Expired Link, see “2016 updates” some paragraphs, in fact an entire discussion, below]

This background color inside the maroon borders = 2016 updates. In April, 2016, I am completing the Blog’s “Table of Contents,” linking to posts retroactively from 9/24/2012 back to its beginning in 2009.  I still remember writing most of these posts and where my head was at, shortly after discovering the existence of “CAFRs” and then listening more critically to public debates about what makes people poor, and the progressive/conservative versions of what’s good or bad about welfare reform…Along the way, reviewing some posts, I sometimes update broken links, clear up some tables or margins, and may even add some identifying post tags, or an excerpt.


[[2016 comment: I believe that this Tavis Smiley Interview with Peter Edelman, “The anti-poverty advocate discusses his text, So Rich, So Poor.” 24:40 |Episode].  I do not have a transcript]] may have been one of the interviews I was referring to.  Several links to his promotion of the book exist on-line.  I started to update with replacement info and links, but this turned into a new page, or post.  Will (hopefully) link to that here if it’s published — or it’ll be on the updated table of contents!]]

(Both of whose corporations and agenda I’ve looked at:  Robert Rector of Heritage, and Peter Edelman, Professor of Law at Georgetown ) playing Us versus Them on TV, over welfare reform?  (While Mr. Edelman is also selling his book).

This deserves a separate post — but FYI, Welfare reform was targeted against single black mothers (too fertile, and needed a kick in the behind to get to work, plus the fathers needed carrots and sticks also) — and so who are the authorities for or against it?

Two esteemed white men...( with all due respect for — not Mr. Rector, but Mr. Edelman — see this blog, and get real!) —  knowing that HHS is full of slush funds, HUD probably IS being run as a criminal organization (People better qualified than I have explained it QUITE well and I’ll continue linking to it) and we — actually — are by contract with USA, Inc. — collateral for its debt?

Both are up in arms about the poor aren’t WORKING enough, the lazy bums (Rector) OR, they aren’t paid enough (Edelman) — when in fact in this post and others, I keep documenting people whose “work” is forming fake corporations and getting the courts to do their fishing for business, plus the corporation franchise set up by the federal government, and so forth.  Or taking money from the taxpayers in a state to meet secretly with a top honcho on how to promote marriage (steer marriage-promoting grants to cronies) — for example.

It’s a corporation and apparently what’s really going on over here is that when those HUGE corporate debts come due (about every 70 years), there’s a restructuring.  I just read this site through — it’s only a few pages — but if blended with thought (thinking) about its significance, SOME things won’t be the same again.


 


 

For example, the words “New Deal.” — — Here you go:   Start with “The District of Columbia Act of 1871”  At the bottom of each (not too long) page is a link to the next, as in “Myth #22,” etc.   There is no short cut for going through this — and because it is focusing on DEFINITIONS, and in Sequence — this is a MUST-READ

ALSO NOTE:

“A large portion of the information flying around the patriot and tax protest communities is false, baseless or worse.  Don’t believe anybody, just because they sound good. …”

I have no idea who “Team Law” is — but this is who the site says they are, or rather, what they’re into.  Also check out their chronological and short (but it packs a punch) “History of Our Nation.”

What is Team Law?   

Team Law is a self-help educational organization founded to help people:

  • Learn how to learn the law;
  • So they can learn how to apply the law;
  • So they can save our country and even the world.

Regardless of who you are, you are required to know the law. Yet in today’s society most people know very little about the law and or about our actual history; instead, they simply rely on others to tell them what to do. Thus, regardless of their actual rights and or nature they remain subjects to those that they rely upon for that guidance. Thus, because the people are generally ignorant of the law they are easily controlled and manipulated by others. If the people were to learn the law and its history they could:

  • Recognize mankind’s sovereign nature;
  • Secure our original Constitutional Republic form of government;
  • Preserve our Constitution and Laws;
  • Assure that our children learn and know the Law;
  • Preserve our actual history;
  • Inspire industry; and, develop wealth that continues to grow and be controlled by the people in their own hands.

THAT SAID — the entire rest of this post is transplanted from just a few over at Scranton PT – which wouldn’t fit.  COMMENTS ON “CAFR” and an example of one from Pennsylvania, dated August 10, 2012, same gravatar as here:

Could anyone LOCATE SOME OF THAT MISSING FUNDING.  GO GET THE CAFRs — as it explains (bottom link) — GOVERNMENTS LIKE US TO “FORGET” ABOUT SURPLUSES WHEN THEY SHOW BUDGETS.

HOW SOMEONE FOUND $54 million excess in California, where to look  “Advance Liability Funds”

Los Angeles Times | July 20, 2012 | 0:22 PM

California’s state parks system secretly stashed away $54 million even as it was cutting services and threatening to close parks, officials announced today. The department’s director, Ruth Coleman, resigned, and her second in command was fired as the hidden surplus was revealed. The state attorney general’s office is conducting an investigation.

The announcement means the department has plenty of cash, even though it has been soliciting hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations in what was thought to be a desperate scramble to keep parks open. ~ Officials from the agency that oversees the parks department said the department has under-reported tens of millions of dollars for the last 12 years. 

For the full story and latest information go to http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-state-parks-20120721,0,3462998.story

This site (a blog, 7/2012) talks about how pension funds (PSERS, or CALPERS) are used to fund corporations — but who knows what those corps are doing?

As a taxpayer, you should know that many 100′s of billions of dollars are ripped out of the tax-base each year and force fed into the nation-wide pension system (including Social Security) in the form of ”on-behalf” taxpayer “contributions” for federal, state, local, and district pension employees. This world-wide phenomenon has created an international pension investment system that, in January 2008, Morgan Stanley estimated held over US $20 trillion in assets, and are collectively the largest investment platform in the world. Others with a less personal and unbiased interest in these pension funds make this estimate to be many trillions higher.

They are getting profits on these investments, overall — not losses.  Governments are corporations and it is their business to get profits.  Hence, showing lowest possible budgets (to the public) is good for getting more money from (the public).  There are a number of tricks to it, like — not reporting their holdings as well as their cash flow, as these blogs explain..

Calpers, for example (2011) invests in these other currencies: (that’s their “CAFR” link 2011):  (see PSERS, last comment).  ..

AUSTRALIAN DOLLAR BRAZILIAN REAL CANADIAN DOLLAR CHILEAN PESO COLOMBIAN PESO CZECH KORUNA DANISH KRONE EGYPTIAN POUND EURO CURRENCY HONG KONG DOLLAR HUNGARIAN FORINT INDIAN RUPEE INDONESIAN RUPIAH ISRAELI SHEKEL JAPANESE YEN MALAYSIAN RINGGIT MEXICAN PESO (NEW) MOROCCAN DIRHAM NEW TAIWAN DOLLAR NEW ZEALAND DOLLAR NORWEGIAN KRONE PAKISTAN RUPEE PERUVIAN NOUVEAU SOL PHILIPPINE PESO

THAILAND BAHT TURKISH LIRA UAE DIRHAM

POLISH ZLOTY POUND STERLING SINGAPORE DOLLAR SOUTH AFRICAN RAND SOUTH KOREAN WON SRI LANKA RUPEE SWEDISH KRONA SWISS FRANC

in a kazillion “corporate”  (securities, I DNK), domestic cash (like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,etc.),and in these SOVEREIGN (other nations) BONDS:

BRITISH COLUMBIA PROV FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FED REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL HYDRO QUEBEC HYDRO QUEBEC HYDRO QUEBEC HYDRO QUEBEC   KFW (huh?),  KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN NOVA SCOTIA PROVINCE ONTARIO (PROVINCE OF) PROVINCE OF QUEBEC PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REPUBLIC OF CHILE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY REPUBLIC OF ITALY REPUBLIC OF ITALY REPUBLIC OF KOREA REPUBLIC OF KOREA REPUBLIC OF PANAMA REPUBLIC OF PANAMA REPUBLIC OF PERU REPUBLIC OF POLAND REPUBLIC OF POLAND REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA RUSSIA FOREIGN BOND STATE OF ISRAEL STATE OF QATAR STATE OF QATAR SWEDISH EXPORT CREDIT UNITED MEXICAN STATES UNITED MEXICAN STATES UNITED MEXICAN STATES UNITED MEXICAN STATES UNITED MEXICAN STATES UNITED MEXICAN STATES

 AND IN US GOVERNMENT STUFF, INCLUDING H.U.D.: FANNIE MAE FANNIE MAE FANNIE MAE FANNIE MAE FANNIE MAE FARMER MAC GTD TR 07 1 FREDDIE MAC, FREDDIE MAC GOVT TRUST CERT TUNISIA HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMNT TENN VALLEY AUTHORITY TENN VALLEY AUTHORITY TENN VALLEY AUTHORITY TENN VALLEY AUTHORITY TSY INFL … US TREASURY N/B (A TON OF US TREASURY). .   book value, $18 billion, Market Value, $22 billion  

IT ALSO IS INVESTED IN PAGES & PAGES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES (can you spell, real estate debt?), DEBT OF OTHER SOVEREIGN STATES (Germany, Canada, Belgium, France, Japan, Austria, Poland, Chile, Scotland, Sweden, Wales, Singapore, Finland) — it’s definitely an international “Player” and investor.

but they are raising tuition for their students . . . 

Resource from retired USAF colonel, very clear teaching and forms to find, review and report on these CAFRs — the man died in 2004.  But before then — for example, in NJ, when they found out about this resource, some people began reading it aloud — over the airwaves; they got people organized to look up the CAFrs in their counties, etc.  And then (naturally) came under attack for a while.

This “CAFRman.com” site says in 2003, Pennsylvania had $21 BILLION surpluses.  The key is — to know that the BUDGET for governments does NOT include money not spent the previous year — or all its holdings.

1. The budget only covers a small portion of the State’s financial condition. There are a group of funds not part of the budget process.

  • The CAFR covers, he says, four kinds of funds:  1.Government, 2. Proprietary, 3. Fiduciary and 4. Component Units (of gov’t).  The budget  — what they squawk loudly about — is only from #1 of 4.

The complete list of funds and budgetary requirements are found in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). This report depicts thecomplete financial status of the State. The budget only covers a portion of the financial resources of the government.

2. Next year’s budget consists only of next year’s estimated revenues and next year’s estimated expenditures. Previous years’ revenues not used (spent) are normally not considered in the next year’s budget, but should be. In other words, the previous years’ revenues (as shown in the CAFR) are not recycled back to the budget process.

Historically, a budget consists of three parts: 1) Funds brought forward (funds not previously spent); 2) Next year’s estimated revenues; and 3) Next year’s estimated expenditures.

But somewhere along the way the funds brought forward category was lost. In accounting,the previous years’ revenues are no longer called revenue but have been converted to Cash and Investments. Since they no longer called Revenues governments have forgotten about them to the public. They are there but not considered in the budget process, but should be.

**sounds like the public should start reminding the government about these — after locating them!

Very good site to help look for that stuff that’s NOT being talked about.  It also tells people how to go for it…need not be a computer geek..  “there are approximately 83,000 governments and government-like entities in the U.S. We can only start you at the State, county, township, and/or city level. From there you will have to do some digging and ask questions.”

Finding a CAFR // Review Process “very simple — only 2 schedules — just need the CAFR, a pencil, a calculator & two forms:   Find the funds/subfunds & totals with surpluses add’em up, divide by population for “per capita.” (also often in “Exhibit A”).  (this is very methodical and laid out here….)

(from the conclusion of this straightforward site, put up by  Gerald R. Klatt Lieutenant Colonel, USAF (Ret.)Former: Auditor/Commander, Air Force Audit Agency Federal Accountant [[Friend of Walter Burien, apparently]]

The Wealth Gap and Communism

10% Own 73.2% of U.S. Wealth

 When Does Communism Exist, 73.2%, 90%, or 100%?

Remember, communism is a concept or system of society in which the major resources and means of production are owned by the community (governments and a few individuals who control governments) rather than by individuals. In theory, such societies provide for equal sharing of all work, according to ability, and all benefits, according to need. Some conceptions of communist societies assume that, ultimately, coercive government would be unnecessary and therefore that such a society would be without rulers. Until the ultimate stages are reached, however,communism involves the abolition of private property by a revolutionary movement; responsibility for meeting public needs is then vested in the state.

The special elite decide on how the wealth will be distributed among the people. All life styles, standard of living, actions, thoughts, and even life itself is decided by the state because the state owns and controls everything. Is it possible that communism could be created within a capitalistic society without a revolution? Have we already reached that point?

Reforms Come From Below. No Man With Four Aces Howls for a New Deal. 
(Fundamental Tenet of Reform) 
(see above).   cf. at what point does it become communism — when gov’t plus a very few control resources AND means to produce?  I don’t know, but if we don’t know what collective government is holding, I know that’s dumb!
OTHER QUOTES (from same source):
 

America’s Unified Family Courts (UFCs)– forget! due process, this is about “Treating” the Whole Family

with 3 comments

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation + ABA + HHS/DOJ (+Monsanto, CIGNA + Ford) = Unified Family Courts = Treat the Whole Family


This post is three of (my) comments from the “(Kids for Cash)” topic at Scranton Political Times…   Those who teach about “abuse” should be teaching about this — because how these courts were set up DOES rather explain why they have spawned (comparison intentional), literally, protest movements across the country, from their horrid treatment of litigants, particularly ignoring facts, law, and due process in individual cases).  They are horrible wastes of time and mind (a mind is a terrible thing to waste, is it not?) — and exist to dominate and intimidate, literally, the human spirit and eliminate the “unalienable rights” that SOME believe are innate (“unalienable”) to every man. . . . .And now that “every man” is to include more men – -and women . . . . those crying out for “Children’s Rights” don’t even endorse what’s right to start with — the REPUBLIC (representative government under rule of law) of the United States (plural) of America — not the Oligarchy, the Aristocracy, or the THEocracy of the USA!! — and turning the entire country, starting with children, adding youth, and expanding upwards into adults — into a treatable-at-will population — is hardly a Republic!

I was checking NAFCJ.net for a link to “the money trail” and happened across an unexplored link on there to grants by this Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to help the ABA create Unified Courts.  These grants spanned the period 1996-1999; my attention was hooked, and this is what developed:

It is worth processing if you are concerned about these topics.  I believe we need to FULLY understand who’s running the Justice and Legal Systems of the country, particularly if we are in the situation of attempting to squeeze some water out of a stone in those halls. . .   . . . .

I AM WRITING as a single woman who could never have anticipated, as a 20, 30, or 40 year old how dangerous this country has become for ethical, moral, working, and competent women who are also mothers, and value that role as they also value pulling their own weight.  Such women are horrors to this system — as they don’t need treatment, nor do their kids — but after a few years in it, ALL will!

So this is, literally, HOW the ABA (incl. AFCC) and others USED the family law system to turn “divorce” into a disease and treat every one for it, as collateral in treating for substance abuse and of course mental health problems.  That divorce is NOT a disease hardly matters in the face of such a policy backed by such power.

PART I (first comment on the topic from Scranton PT):

Since the idea sucks,
WHOSE IDEA WAS “UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS,”

ANYHOW, and WHY?

 

Hey, remember “unified family courts” and “drug courts” (I believe there have been some complaint about Lackawanna County’s right?) and so forth? – – – I just found an old article detailing how the ABA and specific funders were pushing “treating the whole family” and “changing the justice systems” to address substance abuse by youth. An unexplored link over at NAFCJ.net, and the timing of 1996 with welfare reform.

The goal, and the whole point, was to change the justice system — from the outside, not the inside.  Foundations pushing a concept and working through the ABA & Judges, plus money didn’t hurt either.  HHS/ACF happened to agree — so once that door was open (that it’s OK to revise the courts based on somebody in power’s got a bright idea) — it stayed open.

This is a  link from the ROBERT WOOD FOUNDATION grants page.  They also helped AFCC, I believe:

Liz Richards (NAFCJ.net) had linked to it long ago from:

which leads to:
Grants 

$$$
How our money is misused to discriminate against women and children
http://www.statejustice.org/grantinfo/chifam.htm [broken link]
http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/029319s.htm [UFC link]

And here we can read:

Unified Family Courts: Treating the Whole Family, Not Just the Young Drug Offender

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is powerful one, focused exclusively on health fields (and the largest philanthropy with this focus; been doing this for 40 years; influences medical education field, etc.)and Unified Family Courts (for substance abuse treatment) were one of their projects

SUMMARY

From November 1996 through June 1999, the American Bar Association (ABA) developed six Unified Family Court (UFC) systems in three U.S. states and one territory and created a network of national groups to help educate the public about Unified Family Courts.

UFCs combine the functions of family and juvenile courts to provide a comprehensive approach to treating and educating young drug offenders and their families. This approach recognizes that substance abuse results from a combination of problems related to health, family structure, economics and community support. UFCs offer an effective alternative to a justice system that frequently treats substance abuse solely as a legal problem.

Key Results

  • See Grant Detail & Contact Information   Notice the Baltimore Connection (I have — it’s an AFCC stronghold) — this group helped Chester Harhut & Lackawanna County set up ITS “UFC”, remember?
  • In Baltimore, Md., a pilot UFC was established in September 1998. The state legislature approved $1 million for the Baltimore pilot UFC project and $4 million to create Family Divisions in four other judicial districts. For each case, judges can order social services, including substance abuse and mental health counseling, and diversion programs. The Baltimore Family Court has also developed an assessment/evaluation procedure that the project director believes provides a replicable model for evaluation at other UFC sites.

I blogged this (with some sarcasm) in March 2012:

  • Marylands Family Court Expansion, AFCC Model, takes Unifying Symbols to a New Level: Paper, Cotton, Leather, Fruit, Wood, Iron . . .”First of all, they are about as unbelievingly condescending and patronizing (move over, let us experts handle your family give us your kid, etc.) as it is possible for any human relationship to be, apart from some truly unhealthy (i.e., violent/abusive) ones.  They deal in force, and subterfuge when it comes to proliferating the program, and like any good, truly disaster capitalism enterprise, they deal with distressed populations, exploit them, and call that service.”  [My blog connects Barbara Babb of Baltimore to Lackawanna County pilot program in UFC]

After the Grant
The ABA continues to work with the six sites and has provided technical assistance to eight other states. It also is involved in a project funded by the Scripps-Howard Foundation to examine literacy as a way to address substance abuse in four family courts.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) launched a national program, called Reclaiming Futures: Communities Helping Teens Overcome Drugs, Alcohol & Crime®. It is building community solutions to substance abuse and delinquency by developing the systems infrastructure necessary to deliver comprehensive care within the juvenile justice system. See the program’s Web site for more information. . . .Funding

RWJF provided a $481,605 grant to the ABA for its work on UCF systems..(they mean “UFC — Unified Family Courts”)

In 1994, ABA adopted a resolution calling for the promotion and implementation of UFC systems to make the courts more responsive to family problems. {{??}} By 1996, six states had established versions of UFCs statewide, and four states had some UFCs operating on the county level.

[That, friends, is how the ABA operates…] [NOW for the FUNDING]:

Other Funding The ABA solicited and obtained additional project funding from the private sector and government, including:

  • the US Department of Justice ($100,000),
  • the ABA’s Standing Committee on Substance Abuse ($90,000),
  • CIGNA Corporation ($30,000),**
  • Monsanto ($10,000),** and
  • Ford Motor Company ($5,000).  [Ford is into most govermental things, and in the 1970s had helped from MDRC, which runs demonstration programs onw elfare and the courts, etc.]]

Those names should ring a few bells.  Look at some of them!

* *”Grrreat” — Monsanto is “only” the food giant that’s trying to put non-GMO and organic farmers out of business and basically co-opt the US Food supply. (Ya gotta read this one) Monsanto, Wikipedia:

… multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. It is the world’s leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate, marketed in the Roundup brand, and in other brands. Monsanto is also the second largest producer of genetically engineered (GE) seed; it provides the technology in 49% of the genetically engineered seeds used in the US market.”. . .Monsanto’s development and marketing of genetically engineered seed and bovine growth hormone, as well as its aggressive litigation, political lobbying practices, seed commercialization practices and “strong-arming” of the seed industry[4

In 2009 Monsanto came under scrutiny from the U.S. Justice Department, which began investigating whether the company’s activities in the soybean markets were breaking anti-trust rules.[4][5]


What better corporation to contribute to an ANTI-Drug Abuse program which creates  genetically modified seeds, bovine growth hormone, and strong arm tactics + lobbying to maintain it — and financial clout to help create an alternate justice system (treatment versus accountability….)!!

Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear (Vanity Fair Article):

Monsanto relies on a shadowy army of private investigators and agents in the American heartland to strike fear into farm country. They fan out into fields and farm towns, where they secretly videotape and photograph farmers, store owners, and co-ops; infiltrate community meetings; and gather information from informants about farming activities. Farmers say that some Monsanto agents pretend to be surveyors. Others confront farmers on their land and try to pressure them to sign papers giving Monsanto access to their private records. Farmers call them the seed police and use words such as Gestapo and Mafia to describe their tactics.

[Starting to sound like the Unified Family Court “treatment Gestapo police” now in place?  Birds of a feather..]

in 1980 the U.S. Supreme Court, in a five-to-four decision, turned seeds into widgets, laying the groundwork for a handful of corporations to begin taking control of the worlds food supply . . .Monsanto patents SEEDS; farmers who use theirs sign an agreement to NOT save seeds, they are suing farmers into whose fields Monsanto seeds may, for example, drift (i.e., by wind).

With an agenda like this, it’s understandable why Monsanto may want a role in dismantling the US legal system!   !!!  (Other Monsanto Gov’t ties)  http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/index.cfm

Millions Against Monsanto

CIGNA’s quite a player also: 

(from 1982 merger of Connecticut General Life — dating to 1865! and INA (Insurance Company of NA)  Before selling its international property and casualty business to the Bermuda-based ACE Insurance company in the late 1990s, CIGNA was among the companies with the largest international network in the league of Allianz, AIG and Zurich.  . . .CIGNA now operates in 25 countries, has in excess of 42,000 employees and manages around US$110 billion in assets . . .In October 2011, CIGNA has agreed to buy HealthSpring Inc. for $3.8 billion to jump-start its business selling Medicare plans from 46,000 Medicare Advantage members to almost 400,000 Medicare Advantage members. The payment would come from issue new equity to cover about 20 percent of the value, with the rest funded by additional cash and debt.

Gee,  I “can’t imagine” why — right around the time of “block grants to the states” welfare reform — CIGNA, being a global “health service” company might want to help the ABA turn large parts of the US Justice system into a treatment-philosophy-based system, including treat the whole family for one member’s substance abuse!

So, here’s the ABA creating all these Unified Family Courts  (hint:  The ABA membership includes subset no doubt of AFCC membership, who also are into unified courts = more business for the mental health membership..)

“Other in-kind support was provided by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) of the federal Department of HHS, the Administrative Office of the Courts in Maryland (AOC), and ABA volunteers.  “

In short — have to watch out for these outfits… (that’s the UBaltimore one — see blog post)

Contact CFCC

Here’s how the ABA overcame opposition to UFC in Washington DC:

In Washington, D.C., the ABA worked on a strategy to establish a UFC. Judicial opposition to family court reform, based chiefly on economic concerns, blocked significant progress toward the UFC model. The ABA met with the Chief Judge, the primary opponent, and worked with UFC proponents in the District. Family and Child Services, a branch of the District of Columbia’s Child Protection Agency, and an ad hoc group of representatives from the judicial leadership and social service providers, have assumed the lead in efforts to explore the feasibility of a UFC approach in the District.

Does this part of the ABA seem like it’s going to take “No thanks!” as an answer?

Publicizing by ABA:

The ABA developed a network of national organizations to support UFCs. The American Judges Association, the Conference of Chief Justices, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, {{OBVIOUSLY this group would be in favor of UFC’s – gets its membership more customers!!}} the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, [NCJFCJ] and Join Together (a national organization created by RWJF that provides technical assistance and information** to communities on issues involving substance abuse and gun violence) distributed information and/or collaborated with the ABA on UFC programs

– – – – -**The phrase “technical assistance and information” ANYwhere should be better read “indoctrination — do it OUR way; but if anyone asks, we’re just “helping” (and not responsible if it backfires).- – – – – – –

Apparently in 2006, “Join Together” was phased out by RWJF to be replaced by a “VULNERABLE POPULATIONS” project:

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), which for two decades has been the most generous and visible private funder of addiction treatment and prevention programs in the U.S., has announced that it will no longer have a separate program area for funding addiction-related programs.

“Instead, any new grantmaking related to addiction will take place under the foundation’s Vulnerable Populations portfolio, said foundation president and CEO Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, M.D., in a recent letter to RWJF grantees. Often the neediest populations such as the chronically homeless, new immigrants, victims of domestic abuse** are faced with multiple health and social issues, including addiction, that must be addressed in an integrated way for these individuals to succeed. The Vulnerable Populations grantmaking effort focuses mainly on these populations.

**the substance abuse is often related to other kinds of abuse, which is already known (acestudy.org) from other longitudinal studies.  Perhaps if someone could focus on stopping the INJUSTiCE (including violence towards family members) instead of constantly TREATING it (both victm and perp as if both were responsible) there’d be less substance abuse!  (who knows?)

So now they’re going for “supportive housing” to keep kids out of the foster care system.  Guess who’s helping with THAT project?

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) has partnered with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (ACF) and three private foundations to jointly fund a $35 million initiative to further test how supportive housing can help stabilize highly vulnerable families and keep children out of the foster care system. . . .Collaborating foundations include the Annie E. Casey FoundationCasey Family Programs, and the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation
This groundbreaking initiative is based on a successful pilot effort in New York City, known as Keeping Families Together (KFT) that took place between October 2007 and July 2009

This is actually an upcoming grant opportunity, $5 million available, per HHS. It’s under CAPTA (child abuse prevention).

What’s Wrong with this Picture? (coming….)

Interesting:  AFCC cite to the foundation:  see note at bottom of the page:  http://afcc.crinfo.org/action/search-profile.jsp?key=14482&type=web

This beta-test, demonstration gateway has been developed to demonstrate the structure of the Conflict Research Consortium’s joint gateway program to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

This test site has not, in any way, been approved by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess, Co-Directors and Editors
c/o Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado
Campus Box 580, Boulder, CO 80309
Phone: (303) 492-1635; Contac

— Edited by Outlaw_Wild_DoubleBill-KickbackCourts on Wednesday 4th of July 2012 11:06:09 PM on Wednesday 4th of July 2012 11:23:37 PM


PARTS II & III:

The powers that be (like ABA, foundations, HHS, etc.) determined among themselves that treatment is better than justice.  That some of them happened be in the treatment business must just be coincidence.

From November 1996 through June 1999, the American Bar Association (ABA) developed six Unified Family Court (UFC) systems in three U.S. states and one territory and created a network of national groups to help educate the public about Unified Family CourtsUFCs offer an effective alternative to a justice system that frequently treats substance abuse solely as a legal problem

Notice:  justice system — or treatment system.  Which would you rather have when walking into a courtroom?  Would you like to know which one you’re up for when it says “court” on the outside?

So, here comes that Robt Wood Johnson Foundation:

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) launched a national program, called Reclaiming Futures: Communities Helping Teens Overcome Drugs, Alcohol & Crime®.

… USPTO and trademarking social service reform (see that “®”?)

  • Search  . .Reclaiming Futures: Communities Helping Teens Overcome Drugs, Alcohol & Crime and get:

Sure ‘nuf that’s a robert wood johnson trademark:

Serial Number Reg. Number Word Mark Check Status Live/Dead
1 76117473 2592702 RECLAIMING FUTURES TARR LIVE
2 75627894 2540943 PROTECTING OUR FUTURE BY RECLAIMING OUR PAST TARR LIVE

They trademarked the act of giving grants!

IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Charitable services, namely, providing grants to programs to combat substance abuse and delinquency. FIRST USE: 2001/01/25. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20010125

{interesting, executive order GWBush establishing faith-based office was 2001/01/29…}{Filed for opposition: August 24, 2000}

Owner (REGISTRANT) Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The NON-PROFIT CORPORATION NEW JERSEY Route One & College Road East P.O. Box 2316 Princeton NEW JERSEY 085432316
Attorney of Record Richard C. Woodbridge

Reclaiming Futures logo

(the logo is also a hyperlink)

In 2001, with a $21 million investment from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 10 founding communities located throughout the United States began reinventing the way police, courts, detention facilities, treatment providers, and the community work together to meet this urgent need

Amazing what a $21 million investment can do . . ..

“Reclaiming Futures has been evaluated by The Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., in collaboration with the Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.”  (RWJF helped pay for the evaluation also)
Now there are six partners, including from OJJDP, HHS (SAMSHA), another foundation, Portland State, and a research institute at Portland state.

“Re-engineer the justice system in your state” (how-to manual):
Bring Reclaiming Futures to Your State or Tribal Lands »
Re-engineer the juvenile justice system in your state or region to avoid unnecessary costs and cut recidivism. Here’s how to get started.

RWJF + ABA = UFCs + Drug Courts (cont’d.)

For the Record, American Bar Association is listed at HHS as “Private Profit (large) Business.”  

HHS has donated over $20.6 million of grants to the ABA per TAGGS.hhs.gov. So taxpayers are supporting it, too, even if they’re not engaged in litigation.

ABA activism (from site below about Unified Family Courts):

From 1992 to 1996, RWJF funded the ABA Standing Committee on Substance Abuse’s Community Anti-Drug Coalition Initiative to mobilize lawyers, judges, and justice system leaders to help create new justice systems and structures to solve the substance abuse problem (see Grant Results [] on ID#s 019838 and 023195).

The ABA was also instrumental in persuading legal community leaders to support drug courts for juveniles, which link juvenile justice and community treatment resources to juvenile drug offenders and their legal caretakers.

OK, get JUVENILES into treatment, what next?

The ABA then helped cities nationwide set up drug courts for adultoffenders, which offer defendants who have been charged with a drug offense (typically first-time, non-violent offenders) court supervised substance abuse treatment in lieu of incarceration. Drug courts can motivate drug users to enter rehabilitation programs and reestablish productive lifestyles. These courts have dramatically decreased recidivism rates and drug use among participants.  [have they?]

UFC’s complement the work of the drug courts. UFCs combine the functions of family courts (which handle family-related legal issues) and juvenile courts (which handle [criminal or status offence, they should’ve said] cases in which minors are involved) into one entity and provide a comprehensive approach to helping “families in crisis. UFCs incorporate treatment for young substance abuse offenders into the wide range of cases heard in civil court involving family matters.

– – – – -OK, what’s that mean?

– – – – Basically, where family court would’ve been perhaps about custody and divorce primarily, UFC’s tempt the judges to order more services, and treat the entire family — although the case may be as simple as a custody/visitation plan or a divorce, NEITHER of which are criminal matters.  Also omitted — juvenile courts are not just for people of a certain age — they are for juveniles who’ve caused (or allegedly caused) some problems, committing a legitimate crime (breaking and entering, robbery, rape/sexual assault, etc.) OR “status offence,” i.e. violated some rules that wouldn’t apply to adults, like a curfew, or attendance at school (truancy violations).

Changed the entire climate, definitely affecting people with straightforward business in the FAMILY court who may not be sick or criminal.  This was less for the families than for the court’s convenience, and for its liaisons with treatment-providing organizations.

You can look up ABA HHS grants around this time and see:

#90CW1087 
Award Title: CHILD WELFARE RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATIONS 
OPDIV: ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (ACF)
Organization: CHILDREN’S BUREAU (CB)
Award Class: DISCRETIONARY
FY Recipient City State CFDA Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
1998 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 5 0 ACF 09-17-1998 $ 700,000 
1998 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 4 1 ACF 09-30-1997 $ 80,000 
1998 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 4 2 ACF 04-15-1998 $ 26,004 
1998 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 4 3 ACF 06-24-1998 $ 21,276 
Fiscal Year 1998 Total: $ 827,280
FY Recipient City State CFDA Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
1997 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 4 0 ACF 09-10-1997 $ 450,000 
1997 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 3 1 ACF 12-19-1996 $ 0 
1997 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 3 2 ACF 03-29-1997 $ 0 
1997 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 3 3 ACF 08-20-1997 $ 3,369 
Fiscal Year 1997 Total: $ 453,369
FY Recipient City State CFDA Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
1996 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 03 000 ACF 09-25-1996 $ 400,000 
1996 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 03 001 ACF 12-19-1996 $ 0 
1996 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 03 002 ACF 03-29-1997 $ 0 
Fiscal Year 1996 Total: $ 400,000
FY Recipient City State CFDA Budget Yr of Support Award Code Agency ActionIssue Date Amount This Action
1995 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 02 000 ACF 09-29-1995 $ 400,000 
1995 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 02 001 ACF 09-29-1995 $ 38,947 
1995 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 02 002 ACF 09-30-1995 $ 3,310 
1995 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 02 003 ACF 01-22-1996 $ 0 
1995 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  WASHINGTON DC 93608 02 004 ACF 07-15-1996 $ 55,125 
Fiscal Year 1995 Total: $ 497,382
Total of all award actions: $ 2,178,031

AND:

Award Number: MCU11A301
Award Title: PARTNERS IN PGRM PLANNING FOR ADOLESCENT HEALTH 
OPDIV: HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (HRSA)
Organization: MATERNAL CHILD HEALTH / SYSTEMS EDUCATION AND SCIENCE (MCHB)
Award Class: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT

Showing: 1 – 2 of 2 Award Actions

FY Recipient City State CFDA Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
1997 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION  CHICAGO IL 93110 02 000 HRSA 09-02-1997 $ 100,000 
Fiscal Year 1997 Total: $ 100,000
Fiscal Year 1996 Total: $ 100,000
Total of all award actions: $ 200,000

Showing: 1 – 2 of 2 Award Actions

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATN
KATHI GRASSO 7 $ 100,000

So, ABA is a partner in “HEALTH SERVICES.”  Principal Investigator “Kathi Grasso”:

Ms. Grasso worked for the ABA Center for Children and the Law, OJJDP atsome point and is a member of NACC based in WDC.   She has a degree from Catholic University.  .She’s very active around the country and publishing on these matters:

  • (footnote to an NACC publication) A Judges Guide to Improving Legal Representation of Children, edited by Kathi Grasso, ABA Center on Children and the Law, © ABA May 1998.
  • Kathi Grasso  [From OJJDP “staff” list]
    Senior Juvenile Justice Policy and Legal Advisor
    202-xxx-xxxx
    kathi.grasso@usdoj.gov
First she worked for the (activist) ABA center for children, then she moved over to OJJDP which is a large agency which allocates GRANTS in Judicial Programs; as there she also functioned (I see) as OJJDP Liaison to other ABA commissions on Youth At Risk (etc.) causes.
(presented at some workshop on representing Indigents, in Texas)

Video 2: Keynote: Effectuating Reform in Juvenile Justice
Presenters: Kathi Grasso, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention with the U.S. Department of Justice
Link to handout and Juvenile Ten Core Principles

_ _ _ _ _
Curious about who was over the “Child Welfare Research and Demo” Grant (above), I looked — it’s a Mark Hardin, who retired in 2009 after 30 years of this type of advocacy:
Award Number Budg Yr Action Issue Date CFDA Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
90CW1087 02 09/29/1995 93608 MARK HARDIN $ 438,947
90CW1087 02 09/30/1995 93608 $ 3,310
90CW1087 02 01/22/1996 93608 $ 0
90CW1087 02 07/15/1996 93608 $ 55,125
90CW1087 03 09/25/1996 93608 $ 400,000
03 12/19/1996 93608 $ 0
03 03/29/1997 93608 $ 0
3 12/19/1996 93608 $ 0
3 03/29/1997 93608 $ 0
90CW1087 3 08/20/1997 93608 $ 3,369
90CW1087 4 09/10/1997 93608 $ 450,000
90CW1087 4 09/30/1997 93608  (etc.) $ 80,000
90CW1087 4 04/15/1998 93608 $ 26,004
90CW1087 4 06/24/1998 93608 $ 21,276
4 03/24/1999 93608 $ 0
4 04/26/1999 93608 $ 0
90CW1087 5 09/17/1998 93608 MARK HARDIN $ 700,000
5 04/26/1999 93608 MARK HARDIN $ 0
PROFILE from ABA shows:

Mark Hardin, National Child Welfare Law Authority, Retires

WASHINGTON, D.C., Oct. 13, 2009 — The American Bar Association is announcing the retirement of Mark Hardin, director of child welfare at the ABA Center on Children and the Law and an Oregon attorney.  A legal pioneer in the field of foster care and the role of the courts in aiding abused and neglected children and their families, Hardin spent 35 years utilizing his legal skills and knowledge to improve the plight of children removed from their homes due to child maltreatment.

Beginning as a legal aid lawyer in Portland, Ore., Hardin handled family, juvenile and welfare cases, giving him practical insight into the lives of vulnerable children and families.  In the late 70’s, during two years at Portland State University, Hardin forged development of the law on “permanency planning” for abused and neglected children and wrote several early publications helping social workers and policy analysts understand the legal aspects of a child’s placement in foster care.  He was among the country’s first trainers of lawyers and child welfare agency staff, educating them in their legal responsibilities relative to children removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect.

Hardin joined the Center on Children and the Law in 1980 where, according to ABA President Carolyn B. Lamm, he became “the country’s foremost legal scholar on foster care legal and judicial reforms.”

Hardin’s experience includes having directed the ABA’s National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues, a program of the Children’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

  • Wait a minute.  is this “child welfare resource center on legal and judicial issues” something belonging to the ABA (a large, private, FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS) or the HHS (a dept. of the US Federal government, Executive Branch, of, by and for the people?  How can it be an ABA thing AND a program of the Children’s Bureau?  Conflict of interest, much?

. . .With nearly 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional membership organization in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law.”

     [Was that supposed to be a JOKE?  We are having frequent issues with lawyers BREAKING the law!]

AN AWARD NAMED AFTER MARK HARDIN:

First Annual

Mark Hardin Award for Child Welfare Legal Scholarship and Systems Change

The Mark Hardin Award for Child Welfare Legal Scholarship and Systems Change, created by the ABA Center on Children and the Law in 2011 with approval from the ABA Board of Governors, honors the work of Mark Hardin. Before his retirement, Mark served for almost 30 years on the staff of the ABA Center on Children and the Law as director of child welfare. Mark has long been recognized by those who work in this area of law as an early innovator in the child welfare legal field. He is recipient of the “Adoption Excellence Award” bestowed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; an award for “extraordinary contributions to children” from the administrators of the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children; the prestigious “Outstanding Legal Advocacy Award” from the National Association of Counsel for Children; and an award for interdisciplinary collaboration between law and social work.

This is understandable, given common interests in these goups

ANYHOW, now there is a MARK HARDIN AWARD, and the FIRST (2012) recipient of it is the Director of CALIFORNIA’s “AOC” “Center for Families & Children in the Courts,” — which is part of the Judicial Council — DIANE NUNN.


May 23, 2012AOC Director Receives ABA award for Work on Behalf of Families and ChildrenRecipient of ABA’s First Mark Hardin Award . .SAN FRANCISCO—Diane Nunn, Division Director of the Center for Families, Children & the Courts,Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), is the recipient of the First Annual Mark Hardin Award for Child Welfare Scholarship and Systems Change

DIANE NUNN (along with “Depner” along with Isolini Ricci) is AFCC — and the AOC in California — this year, last year, and in recent years — has been split with scandal over fiscal/financial irresponsibility, a bloated bureaucracy, overbilling and fraud in the creation of a new, huge statewide computer system (CCMS) and to my recall, several of its leadership suddenly stepped down:  Ron Overholt (administrator), his replacement, and another person — after a whistleblower suit.  (see this topic at “courthousenews.com” [back issues]).
This AOC/CFCC also administers and distributes the federal grants to nonprofits around the state for the “treatment programs” parents and kids are ordered into, as well as the Access/Visitation Grants.  i can see why a systems change award might go to one of their own!
” In 2000 she became the director of the Judicial Council’s AOC/Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC), the first entity devoted exclusively to family and children’s issues in a statewide administrative office of the courts. As Division Director, Nunn leads a nationally-recognized team that provides an integrated, multidisciplinary approach to serving the state’s family and juvenile courts. ”
…  {{“multidisciplinary” is code word referring to AFCC many times.  It’s their hallmark.  Why just have the rule of law when you could have social workers and psychologists as well?}}
“Describing the Award & Mr. Hardin:   He is recipient of the “Adoption Excellence Award” bestowed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; an award for “extraordinary contributions to children” from the administrators of the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children; the prestigious “Outstanding Legal Advocacy Award” from the National Association of Counsel for Children; and an award for interdisciplinary collaboration between law and social work.”
ABA is a private, for-profit business, supported by business(es) in the form of foundation grants, and with a little too close for comfort cooperation with HHS and the Adoption Incentives, plus the theme of we, the elite, know better how to rule society, so let’s change a few laws, and court practices!  After all, who’s going to complain — the indigent?
martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

iakovos alhadeff

Anti-Propaganda

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: