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 ‘History of Family Court’ Category

Even More Considerations on NASMHPD (and DBSA, and NAMI), and MHA. See Also Recent Epidemic? of Attorneys-General Suing Big Pharma over the Opioid Abuse Epidemic [July 2, 2017 review + updates]

with one comment

The theme, continued, is still …”DO YOU KNOW YOUR NGA, NCSC, NCSL, NCSEA, NCJFCJ, NCCD, NACC,  NASMHPD, not to mention ICMA?”

This post being published July 6, 2017 evening is about 8,000 words (shorter, for a change!). It comes in two basic sections — ICMA-related, and The Four Organizations (NASMHPD, DBSA, NAMI, and MHA) related.  I might later add more images showing the networked DBSA entities, but as written, I feel it’s written clearly enough (especially with the visuals) to be published now.

An aside, for this post, who is ICMA? 

It takes a few paragraphs and several images, but I’ve used the reference in post titles and themes often enough I felt it time to identify the acronym “ICMA” here again.  While I’m including information from its website, on a related entity and a partnering entity before getting into the main subject matter, remember that this ICMA section and information near the top of this post is included now only for a point of reference in the landscape of membership organizations involving public employees, and for awareness of its existence, and some of its scope — not as main post content.  As I showed before, along with the NGA and others, ICMA is considered part of the “Big Seven Associations” by those so-associated (!):

The “Big 7” is a coalition of seven national associations in Washington, D.C., whose members represent state and local governments. The leadership of these organizations works together regularly to discuss issues of mutual interest affecting state and local governments. Members of the “Big 7” include: The National Governors Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, The Council of State Governments, the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, The U.S. Conference of Mayors and the International City/County Management Association.

There’s a wikipedia “stub” (doesn’t say much, except that they are influential in lobbying for their interests) on “the Big Seven,” and as you can see, the ICMA (the “C” standing for the two-word descriptor (adjective) “City/County” seems to show up in its logo):

The Big Seven is a group of nonpartisan, non-profit organizations made up of United States state and local government officials. The Big Seven are:

These groups are influential in national government, often lobbying Congress to represent their members’ interests.

References[edit]

  • Patterson, Bradley H., Jr. (2000). The White House Staff: Inside the West Wing and Beyond. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. pp. Ch. 13. ISBN 0-8157-6951-2.

Bringing up the “power of the GASB” (a post I’m still working on talks about how), know that a tax-exempt foundation in Norwalk Connecticut, the “Financial Accounting Foundation” (FAF”) actually set up and controls both the GASB (Government Accounting Standards Board), some time after the FASB (Financial? Accounting Standards Board) for the private sector, in the early 1970s.  They delegated powers to the respective boards, but still maintain ultimate (veto, etc.) power over them.

(This diagram also on FAF “About” page, shown nearby)

FAF outlines its identity and purposes (FASB and GASB)

Rules change from time to time, and rule-changes can make or break a city county, or possibly even state — and often around the issue of pension funding.  So in 2012, “The Big Seven” responding to a rules-change drafted a policy response for how much people should contribute to their own pension plans (ARCs and Annual Designated Contributions):

Big Seven” Focus on Pension Funding Policy October 01, 2012 (found at “leg.Wa.Gov”)  WASHINGTON—The executive directors of the Big Seven state and local associations today released draft “Pension Funding Policy Guidelines” for state and local governments.  [Same announcement on the same date provided through National League of Cities, this one with a link to the (2page) guidelines.**]

The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) recently issued new standards that focus entirely on how state and local governments should account for pension benefit costs. However, they did not address how employers should calculate the annual required contribution (ARC). To assist state and local government employers, the seven associations are engaged in an ongoing effort to develop policy guidelines.  [[some points raised.  Note:  this doesn’t have an active link to that released draft, just advertised it on an NGA website, apparently.]]

“Government leaders have to make difficult budget decisions every year, said Robert J O’Neill, ICMA executive director. “Having a rational way to calculate their annual required contribution helps them stay on track to meet their retirement obligations.”  [[Para. listing “The Big Seven” omitted]]

The National Association of State Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasurers; the Government Finance Officers Association; the National Association of State Retirement Administrators and the National Council on Teacher Retirement helped draft the guidelines.**

**Link to the Pension Guidelines (now almost five years old) shows why (see last para. in quote) those particular organizations helped draft — because the Big Seven asked them to! (next screenprint) as convened by a “Center for State and Local Government Excellence” which the guidelines don’t bother to mention is taking ICMA Retirement Corp funding and working with them:

Natl League of Cities Oct 1 2012 Link to 1209PensionGuidelines

(annotated excerpt from 10/1/2012 Big 7 Pension Guidelines (a 2pp release)

What’s ironic about this — the Big 7 Associations advising governments how to address pensions are themselves subject to FASB (not GASB) standards — because they are in the private sector.  This information was a search result on “The Big Seven” but included because in the ICMA section below, an entire corporation managing public employee retirement plans for ICMA (it’s called ICMA Retirement Corporation) comes up.  The convening organization is an LLC listed in ICMA-RC’s “Sched R -Pt I” (disregarded entities, at the same street address and floor like its other Sched R Pt. I Disregarded entities.  It is controlled and apparently funded by ICMA RC to conduct research on municipal and local retirement plans, specifically.  Website says it was created for this purpose in 2007.

Take a look at the FY2008 ICMA RC Salaries (totaling $13M for Part VIIA — includes not just Directors and Officers, but also Highest-Paid and Key Employees).  In later years it’d be $19M !!  I see the President at this point had a salary of four million dollars and at least three others, over $1M each….



It’s not the primary purpose of this post, which focuses more on the four entities in the title, all dealing with and named after topics surrounding “mental health,” and involved individually and at times with each other in the strategic push for a paradigm-shift, intended to make and keep, nationally and by communities, provision of mental health services a regular part of basic primary health care, and so covered by insurance for that primary health care. To do this, considerable marketing and social communications sector, and affiliate organizations are involved.

I’m including the short(er) section on ICMA up front because I think it’s time to do so. There’s also a certain element of comic relief — well, at least of comedy.  You’ll see….

(These might be separate entities also; however I saw that the California group merged into the main one).

After looking more closely I see what ICMA’s acknowledged partner “Alliance for Innovation, Inc.” f/k/a The Innovation Groups” is doing, or at least how it’s been operating (since 1979, it says), although why ICMA would partner with such incompetence (speaking as to their tax returns), one wonders….  The Innovations Groups is plural because it has regional offices and at least one merger (for the region “California-Colorado-Nevada-Arizona”) in its 40-year-plus history.  (See two images from their “founding documents” — link part of the California OAG link provided below).  “The Innovation Groups, Inc.” is the prior name (one of several) for what is now “Alliance for Innovation, Inc.”

Alliance for Innovation, Inc. also registered in California (now as a Florida Organization with an Arizona Entity address) since 1991, but quit filing with the Office of Attorney General Registry of Charitable Trusts  (“OAG RCT”) its required annual tax returns and RRFs — with the annual fees based on revenues — (as a 501©3) since 2006, was not marked “Delinquent” until August 2010, despite its last known annual revenues being over $1M, and remains active as a corporation.  In other words, it wasn’t “FTB Suspended” by the Secretary of State, nor is there even any uploaded information that the California OAG even ASKED it for the about eight years of missing tax returns AND RRFs, or threatened suspension if they didn’t cough them up — which it does for other entities.  I wonder why not…and am tempted to compile enough related facts to write a letter (anyone reading this, also feel free to, or call to find out if there is some legitimate reason).

If you’re curious about that aspect, look here (about 2pp): AllianceForInnovatn (does bus w ICMA) Calif OAG Chart Details EIN# 591936650 No Filings Since FY2006 not marked Delinq til Aug2010 – WHY?  I didn’t address the OAG delinquency in the section on ICMA (tan background color) below; there’s plenty of other things to report. Note:  The many links on the above pdf to uploaded filings that were made (towards the bottom of its about 2pp) should still be active; they won’t fade with time unless the OAG moves the documents.

ICMA INFORMATION:

“ICMA is the professional and educational organization representing appointed managers and administrators in local governments throughout the world. It sponsors, develops and implements a number of programs that provide local government managers and administrators with expertise on a variety of topic areas.”

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
International City/County Management Association DC 2015 990 65 $15,057,789.00 36-2167755
International City/County Management Association DC 2014 990 63 $15,570,124.00 36-2167755
International City/County Management Association DC 2013 990 58 $16,443,151.00 36-2167755

Since 1914 (odd timing, 1 year after the income tax was established through US Constitutional Amendment).   Tax returns show it’s an IL corporation with a D.C. address and two related (Sched R) entities, one I reference below, and the other is an REIT holding their D.C. Headquarters.  They receive income from both (see Sched R), and spent around $7M in overseas activities (Sched F) the last year shown above, FY2014 only.  They took in $11M+ Contributions and $11M “Program Service Revenues” (including membership fees, a good chunk” and, per page 1, spent over $12M on salaries (158 employees) and over $12M in “Other Expenses” resulting (when combined with $349K grants to others) in an about $250K Deficit.  The year before they had radically higher contributions ($18M) but still overspent the budget.  The related “ICMA Retirement Corporation” while I’m here, has its separate tax returns.  WOW..  An entirely different picture.  Also, this one is FY1972 (it says, started with help from a Ford Foundation grant) and a Delaware Corporation — same street address except the Suite#.  The difference in size is predictable because after all, it’s handling retirement plan benefits:

Total results: 3Search Again.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

July 6, 2017 at 8:54 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Mental Health Movements + Orgs, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Train-the-Trainers Technical Assistance Grantees

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

Speaking of Projects and Nonprofits Funded by The Broad Foundation…. How about The Broad Institute (and its role in waging Patent Wars over CRISPR (Gene Perturbation, RNA/DNA cutting-edge research) with UCBerkeley?)

with one comment

Speaking of genetics, here’s the geneaology of this post Speaking of Projects and Nonprofits Funded by The Broad Foundation…. How about The Broad Institute (and its role in waging Patent Wars over CRISPR (Gene Perturbation, RNA/DNA cutting-edge research) with UCBerkeley?) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-720” that “0” is a zero, not O as in “Ohio.”).  

My unpaid, ad hoc “developmental editor” (sounding board for coherence, flow, and how it communicates the central ideas, not personally involved in the primary content I report on, by now familiar with the blog and my writing style), suggested I not dilute the middle of the previous (parent) post (“Why Bother to Unravel….”) with this fascinating information on another Broad Foundation project at Harvard & MIT.

I didn’t want to add this fascinating information to the end of the “Why Unravel…?” post (full title and starting sentences — see image below left)  — it was too relevant and interesting to be that far down — so a new post it is as of June 15, 2017 (so far). (and now published..//LGH)

I already had a second, more detailed (older sibling?) post** started on the same topic, so this can stand in as a preview. (**The Broad Institute (MIT,Harvard, TBF*, 2008) and Stanley Family Foundation (see MBI, Inc.)-funded Psychiatric Research (“schizophrenic, bi-polar”) Testing & Treatment Advocacy (TAC) and Gene-Editing (CRISPR-Cas9) USPTO Patent Wars with UCBerkeley et al. (case-sensitive short-link ending “-71z” and post started June 14, 2017, currently in draft published in July). I’ll post the link again at the bottom.

After following that ad hoc editor’s advice, I then somewhat ignored it by still leaving in a shorter section, (a “footprint”– image below-right with extended caption) then expanding further upon another of the organizations of the type I was blogging, that is, upon the Council of State Governments, an association of the same generic “type” as the one which had received a $10.5M grant long ago for a MIA (“Missing-In-Action” that is, not to be found in anything resembling $10.5M worth of product, or as described) project by the Council of Chief State School Officers.  From the earlier version of The Broad Foundation (dba of “The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation.”)

Snapshot of my June 16 2017 post, the section referring to The Broad Institute (involving Harvard, MIT & The Broad Foundation) and their recent patent wars with UCBerkeley over CRISPR processes), and the “footprint” of Broad Institute info left at the “Why Unravel” 6/16/2017 post more on private associations named after public officials or entities (State legislators, Governors, Mayors, City Managers, School Facilities Planners, or, case in point, Chief State School Officers).


But first, a bit of “genealogy” of The Broad Foundation, or as they now say “The Broad Foundations.” (their financial statements identify what’s meant by that — includes one related to art).

I’ll pick up the narrative with a reminder below this section.

First, A Bit About The Broad Foundation

(Some consciousness-raising from its website, global financial history events in mainstream media about an insurance company it bought for $52M, sold for $18B a generation later, after which the US Taxpayers had to bail out the insurer for $85B, AND they also paid some of its CEOs $165M to stay on and straighten out the mess they’d made, and pay a nearly $1 billion settlement to shareholders.  As I’m reviewing this, and the startup of the Broad Institute at JUST ABOUT the same time, I’m also remembering how the Broad Foundation (will summarize below again) switched its EIN# and corporate Entity#s, moving assets smoothly from one to another, while persuading the IRS it wasn’t a real termination of the earlier one.

In addition (as it reminds me) exceptions were made for their “Broad Center” (with both old and new nonprofits focused on training urban education leaders) on its 990s, despite being primarily funded by The Broad Foundation (old & new EIN#s both) in stating that the major philanthropic foundation wasn’t “really” a related entity (as the IRS form prompts to reveal), despite being the major funder and having major overlap of board of directors in common (typical indicators).  I won’t post that info here (might have previously), or it might overburden this post, but will respond to any comment asking for the details.  Or, you can go through the process I did, and read the involved Form 990s of all four entities around the time of transition.  I posted some of it near the bottom of my recent (June 16, 2017) post.)


“Broad” in this foundation is not pronounced like a derogatory term for women, but to rhyme with “road” or “Rhodes” as in a Rhodes scholarship.  

Current website features education first (Education, Science, and the Arts) and uses very large font, many pictures and bright colors, while (as I found with theBroadCenter.org) no easy link to find the financials. A link to “Foundation Report” will instead lead to descriptions of their projects.  No audited financial reports and certainly no Form 990PFs (next two images).

It also has the short version of their astounding success from humble origins (Detroit Public Schools, Michigan State, married straight out of college, Eli Broad went from CPA to homebuilder [nationwide AND France], making homes without basements therefore more affordable to young people, Kaufman & Broad for a while, also purchasing SunLife (retirement savings for the Baby Boomers he was already selling homes to), and moving to Los Angeles by 1963:

In 1971, Eli acquired SunLife, a small insurance company founded in 1890, for $52 million and transformed it into a new business that would answer another essential public need: offering secure retirement savings to aging Baby Boomers—the same customers who bought homes from Kaufman and Broad. SunAmerica, as Eli renamed the company, provided retirements for a generation of Americans. The company was the best-performing on the New York Stock Exchange for a decade, brought thousands of jobs to Los Angeles and created wealth for its employees, shareholders and Eli’s family when he sold the company to AIG for $18 billion in 1999.

AIG was world’s largest insurer.  Only nine years later, after the Broads got out of it, with MAJOR profits creating no doubt debt to be funded, in 2008, the U.S. taxpayers bailed out AIG…. Wall Street Journal article (see image.  Unfortunately, WSJ  wants a subscription to read it all; but I’ll bet most of my readers over the age of 20 may remember events of 2008).  (U.S. to Take over AIG in $85 Billion Bailout: Central Banks Inject Cash as Credit Dries Up | Emergency Loan Effectively Gives Government Control of Insurer; Historic Move Would Cap 10 Days That Reshaped U.S. Finance)

WSJ on AIG Takeover (date: Sept. 2008)Click image if needed to read the preview shown

An April 11, 2017 retrospective in “The Balance.com” by Kimberly Amadeo, recounts how the AIG bailout made (then-chairman of the Federal Reserve) Benanke angrier than anything else.  A good reminder of how it happened and how many were involved, I’d read it…
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 18, 2017 at 5:36 pm

Agenda 21 Lawsuit AGAINST| FISCAL AGENTS |The Strange Case of Edward Charles Foundation (Inc. 2009 in California as a Delaware Org.) | Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (Inc. December 2011 in California; First Revenues ($1.4M) not acknowledged until 2013)

leave a comment »

See also preceding post, published yesterday 8/22/2016, “What is an NGO?  Is the International Institute for Peace, that UNESCO affiliate at Rutgers an “NGO”?  In fact, What is Rutgers? (See State of NJ’s–and Rutgers’ — CAFRs)”  I am in the process of moving the pipeline of in-production posts into public view.  This information intersects both at UNESCO and Rutgers and through the question — why that fiscal agent (Edward Charles Foundation) to process contributions, and why, as it turns out, that registered agent, too?  

Shortlink to THIS post:  Agenda 21 Lawsuit AGAINST| FISCAL AGENTS |The Strange Case of Edward Charles Foundation (Inc. 2009 in California as a Delaware Org.) | Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (Inc. December 2011 in California; First Revenues ($1.4M) not acknowledged until 2013)

See also shortlink to next post (being published 8/24/2016) “Case in Point, NEVER skip the Business 501(c)3  Entity Lookups, and Watch the “Fiscal Agent” organizations! (Edward Charles Foundation, Fiscal Agent to “FreedomAdvocates” and, apparently, the Stars (post begun 7/3/2016)” <==<== This post looks more at Edward Charles Foundation and at Freedom Advocates tax returns, and shows a different name used by the latter for the IRS filing than at the State level, as well as that Freedom Advocates only filed in 2006 and 2008, that I can see.  ECF is how I found out about the Whitaker Initiative for short, in part looking for its contributions to “Peace Foundation” business entity, not found).  Meanwhile, the original incarnation (name) for the Whitaker Institute showed a website “peacearth.org” (no longer valid), while a Form 990-N, which has a blank for “website” in 2012 showed “none.” Odd, for an organization talking about the media campaigns it is running overseas and as part of original articles of incorporation statement of intended activities.


Forest Whitaker as an Academy-award-winning actor, I don’t think anyone could speak against it being deserved.  He’s got the body of work over time in film after film.  If I had a choice to see a film between, say,  Tom Cruise or Forest Whitaker, I’d pick the latter every time, because the film — not just the acting — would be worth seeing.  He seems to have real heart, to pick meaningful topics, and is obviously a great communicator, in many ways an actor for these times.

So I have had a little trouble coming out with the information on these posts, but — to be honest — the information is relevant.  Promoting world peace and engaging in convoluted financial arrangements between multiple name- AND address-changing nonprofits and for-profits just does not add up.  What’s peaceful or sustainable about engaging in inappropriate fiscal behavior at home, that is in these US-registered entities?  The backlighting on this one casts some shadows, in my opinion, on the credibility of the up-front declarations of what is really intended here.  Also, as pointed out, what is the point of raising money in So Cal under these conditions and sending it to a New Jersey State University (Rutgers) and for an “Institute” which doesn’t seem to have its own fiscal identity, and where the cash flow accountability would, most likely, get lost in transit.


At UN, Forest Whitaker calls on leaders to ensure benefits of global goals ‘touch everyone’ (Breaking News — April 21, 2016 — from UN News Service):

I have some objections to how the Sustainable Goals Agenda is being pursued by an organization bearing his name, let alone the concept of one-world government as determined by the United Nations and these goals.   This post documents some of that “HOW” with my basic, volunteer toolkit (time and access to a computer and the internet, and some very basic public databases).

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Advocate Forest Whitaker, addresses the General Assembly High-level Thematic Debate on Achieving the SDGs. UN Photo/Loey Felipe (quote, below):

I also believe that if Mr. Whitaker is truly concerned about the “Sustainable Development” goals including gender equality for everyone, that is, including women, then he ought to speak up here at home (the USA) against the misogynist social services policy targeting low-income black males in urban communities and involving them in   or using them as subject matter for social science R&D in the myriad HHS-funded court-connected nonprofits which are unmonitored, basically unregulated, ongoing, and under-reported, affecting our family court systems with a view towards privatization of services and removing children from, or reducing children’s time with, nonviolent, competent mothers who are not staying married or living with the fathers of these children.  (Title IV-D and Title IV-A programming involves partial, grammatical propaganda reducing the use of the word “mother” or “motherhood” as a positive value regarding children except in federally-approved family structures.  At their essence and in their origins, these programs were BOTh racist and sexist (and elitist), as per the 1965 Moynihan Report, still popular today.

He talks about “Peace and Reconciliation” but I am still not reconciled to federally-funded quasi-religion in the form of fatherhood.gov or, more recently, ‘FRPN.org“!

At UN, Forest Whitaker calls on leaders to ensure benefits of global goals ‘touch everyone’

21 April 2016 – Peacebuilding advocate and Academy Award-winning actor Forest Whitaker addressed world leaders today at the United Nations, asking them to ensure that the benefits of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can touch everyone worldwide.

Last September, UN Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development which features the 17 global goals to wipe out poverty, fight inequality and tackle climate change over the next 15 years.

As Special Envoy for Peace and Reconciliation for the UN’s Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as well as one of 17 SDG advocates appointed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in January, Forest Whitaker took to the podium of the UN General Assembly at the opening of a High Level Thematic Debate on achieving the goals.

The Agenda deals with hunger, eliminate it, eliminating poverty, educating our people, allowing women to have complete gender rights along with everyone.“[I wanted to get leaders] to, in an inclusive way, have the people themselves help to push forward these SDGs, to give the individuals this concept that they need to have of empowerment to know that they actually can make a difference and make a change in some of these motions,” Mr. Whitaker said at a press conference.

 

File the Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (“WPDI”), along with my related post which starts telling of this UN/UNESCO-affiliated story through the tax return of its fiscal agent organization the “Edward Charles Foundation”, under apparently Noble, Worthy, “Who could Protest That?” or at least UN-by-way-of-UNESCO-Sustainable Development-Endorsed, Causes to the tune of Weird Supporting Foundation Fiscal Behavior)  


Before a look at the website’s self-descriptions under “Our Leaders” and “Our Work,” ….

Image from “WPDI.org,” main subject of this post.

http://wpdi.org/our-leadership Whitaker Peace & Development Initiative, Inc.

Weird choice of registered agent too.  The light-blue background section at top, shows the evidence and in simple terms, how I came across it today, August, 23, 2016.  The rest of the post was written July 2, 2016, almost two months ago.

Don’t miss also two tables at the very bottom of this post; I rarely do this, but have in my own efforts to keep the related organizations and timeline straight, posted ALL available links from the California Registry of Charitable Trusts on this organization, showing the “from Zero to $1.4M” revenues in a single year (2013)* — and not showing revenues received, probably, before that from the Edward J. Charles Foundation as its fiscal agent.  [*Year and amount corrected post-publication to reflect 2013, not 2014 amounts as first showing on California Charitable Trusts Registry, below; I had written Zero to $1M in 2014].

And (discovered only late-August 2016, on further scrutiny of founding document names and addresses, as well as a simple look-up of the current registered agent for WPDI) Strange Choice of Registered Agents in Brandon Chapnick.

In a previous post (published 8/22/2016) I brought up the street address of this entity, 1000 N. Alameda Street #140, Los Angeles, as shown below, and connected it with “Centers for Healthy Communities” (or similar name) and The California Endowment (a $3.5B+ assets tax-exempt foundation which files a Form 990-PF).

Today — and it didn’t take much more than an hour –I looked up the registered agent street address after discovering from CorpWiki that Mr. Whitaker had filed another, probably for-profit corporation, “Significant New Media, Inc.” just months before this one. From my reading of the Articles of Incorporation, it became clear how important the internet aspect of this initiative would be, and forming a for-profit media company, right before the foundation, was interesting timing…

And that Mr. Chapnick, Mr. Sukler, and Chapnick, Sukler & Chapnick have just been sued by the FTC and stipulated to a judgment for operating a consumer scam involving nutritional products, and multiple filings from at least two different states (Nevada and California) all out of the same street address, which judgment references consumer damages of $105 Million — and they have ordered them to pay the FTC back.   Several companies one source says is also associated with Mr. Whitaker are also showing out of that same street address. (see next section).


Preparing to publish this post, I reviewed the Founding Articles link (bottom of this post), and again noticed the address 9000 W. Sunset Boulevard #709, West Hollywood, California and original registered agent Paul Papile plus original Incorporator — Kent E. Seton.
  Kent E. Seton also an incorporator (or was it agent?) for that Edward Charles Foundation… From “kepler.sos.ca.gov” (Calif. Bus Entities search)
Entity Name: EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION
Entity Number: C3191148
Date Filed: 03/05/2009
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: DELAWARE
Entity Address: 269 S BEVERLY DRIVE STE 338
Entity City, State, Zip: BEVERLY HILLS CA 90212
Agent for Service of Process: KENT E SETON
Agent Address: 269 S BEVERLY DRIVE STE 338
Agent City, State, Zip: BEVERLY HILLS CA 90212

During my searches I noticed that over the years (1987-2011) five different entities in California had been formed involving Forest Whitaker (per CorporationWiki).  That alone is not unusual, and certainly not illegal, but I specifically noticed that “Significant New Media, Inc.” was formed just 8 months before the IIP, in April, 2011. At this point, I went looking up each business entity address.  See next image and link:

CorpWiki lists 5 still-Active Entities assoc with Forest Whitaker=Adagio Productns (1987) Spirit Dance Inc (1996) Salako Inc (1998) Significant New Media Inc (2011) International Institute for Peace Foundation (2011) -- %22President%22 for all CorpWiki lists 5 still-Active Entities assoc with Forest Whitaker=Adagio Productns (1987) Spirit Dance Inc (1996) Salako Inc (1998) Significant New Media Inc (2011) International Institute for Peace Foundation (2011) — %22President%22 for all

 

This is how I noticed the registered agent “Brandon Chapnick” and its associated address (see below) and found about the FTC prosecution started in Oct., 2014** (“HealthFormulasComplaint” says part of the URL) and with a Stip and Order in US Court, Nevada District, dated February, 2016 (quoted below).

**In 2014, the Federal Trade Commission sued (filed a complaint against) Brandon Chapnick, Keith Sukler,  individually and in their capacity as officers and/or managers of (several health companies in California AND Nevada, out of the same address apparently), as well as and Chapnick Sukler and Chapnick, Inc. FTC sued under sections of the FTC act, of the EFTA (Electronic Funds Transfer Act), Section 5 of ROSCA (Restore Online Shoppers Confidence Act), and of the “Telemarketing” Act (Telemarketing Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act) !

 The seriousness of this is shown in the Stipulation which included payment of $105,000,000 to the FTC and indications it was not dischargeable in bankruptcy.  Some of the details, below my reminder that Chapnick is still showing as the registered agent for the Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative.  See the three addresses at bottom of image with map, above.

Both Freedom Advocates and International Institute for Peace Foundation (now Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative, Inc.) used the same fiscal agent — Edward Charles Foundation.
> > > > So, just as I ask why a group (“Freedom Advocates”) protesting and having filed a lawsuit protesting “Agenda 21” (which is a UN goal) in Northern California but uses a name-changing (in addition to their own unexplained name-changing EIN#) foundation which clearly supports Agenda 21 and UN-identified goals, out of Southern California …. I have to ask why a famous actor with noble, global intentions would choose a registered agent who has been under FTC investigation for deceptive on-line sales practices towards consumers, since it seems about 2014.   < < < < < < 

Read the rest of this entry »

Yes, Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, and the Parade of Fools: (Pt.1(a) Intro, Context)

with 14 comments

 [Published June 29, 2014; Post in edit mode late July-Aug. 2014;  expanded to almost double the size,nearly 24,000 words; with background info….In most posts, a lot of the length is simply quotes,  my style is not just tell, but  “show and tell.”]

February 2016 Personal Update:

Without changing the contents here (except one paragraph or so,  cleaning up some formatting and adding tags), I’ll mention that the MAJOR break in posting anything between June 29, 2014 and early 2016 came because my personal situation heated up so much after I went public on fiduciary abuse by an older sister — who’d played a crucial role in supporting/enabling (if not inciting) our original “custody war,” after playing a negligible, passive, codependent, domestic-violence-enabling role the previous decade, after learning that I was a battered wife and mother and seeking intervention.

From summer 2014 – early 2015, the situation went into probate court — lasting in total, nearly a year, to finish transition.  Throughout 2015 I was working with and renegotiating standards with personnel in control of my resources, and continuing to withhold access to evidence of the paper trail….From summer 2014 – 2016, I was still writing things up, investigating, communicating privately with some individuals — but also had to spend major time, that’s writing time, and to lawyer, sister, starting with unearthing a written commitment on her part, yes/no — are you resigning or not? Then, requesting to settle out of court (which is possible under California code and the individual trust), which (of course) was rejected, stringing the process out, adding more professionals (not that I had some for protection on this end).

In 2015, a major transition dealing with new people — major negotiation time, and now as the year 2015 closed out  and so far in 2016– I find myself again fighting for housing, and to obtain financial records, which certain people don’t want found. Both my (so to speak — father no longer involved, and I was prevented from continued involvement years earlier) young adult children now being out of the state, I had hoped to move on with life, and promptly move out of present housing.  I found — “not so” from certain personnel, and that “not so” is in one of the most effective forms of messing with other human beings — litigation absent the supporting facts (and here, even proof of standing) as a form of extortion, which like some of the other things this blog talks about (child-stealing, wife-beating, stalking, terroristic threats on individuals, statements under penalty of perjury which are, well, known to be falsehoods by those speaking, these are criminal issues.

In these conditions, struggling with wordpress HTML and getting out a post, wasn’t going to happen. I’ve been working at a different format to start uploading what did, still, continue learning during the non-posting time. We shall see…. Anyhow, that’s why no follow-up parts to this post occurred, much as I would’ve liked to complete them.  There are plenty in draft, and I am posting again.   There are still plenty of survival-level challenges, which means that about the only relief  or “down-time” still involves this kind of blogging anyhow —

and in continuing to blog I am still thinking about the next generation, particularly of those who may have been trafficked, traded and repeatedly disrupted (UNLESS they come into an abusive home, it seems — then the “don’t disrupt” theme seems to prevail) like commodities between and among parent/non-parent caretakers — all rationalized and presided over in the institutions run by privately-networked in organizations & with those in government positions  people (judges, experts, and social science research & demo projects building their resumes and journaling their findings) “IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST” and in the name of “NON-ADVERSARIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS,” “REDUCING CONFLICT” and of course Treating and Healing the scourges of wife-battering and child abuse [“SUPERVISED VISITATION / BATTERERS INTERVENTION”], for “Futures without Violence” “Safe Horizons” “Justice” (a common label on oh so many organizations), FAMILY reunification, preservation, (…. Responsible Fatherhood, Healthy Marriages, Access and Visitation — all such good, wonderful, noble things…) and my favorite term when applied to what allegedly MUST happen between perps and those perpetrated-upon: “CONCILIATION.” Unless parental alienation was perpetrated upon someone in a high-conflict relationship, in which case cold-turkey quarantining of the offender with de-programming for the alienated minor children.

Maybe we should call these courts something more appropriate to what takes place in them — like virtual auction blocks, or stock markets in human lives, with some able to profit so well in the field, they can as majority shareholders, demand changes in management, streamlined efficiency and increased return to shareholders, futures, options, the whole deal, on the profits of churning individual human beings’ relationships under the banner of helping society — and of course anyone “low-income” adjust to business as usual.

// Thanks for Readers’ Patience,  including with some of the formatting in reading through existing posts, or if you were expecting new ones that didn’t come timely…., LGH (“Let’s Get Honest) 2/6/2016.

 Between “Pts.1” [1a and 1b] and “Pt.2” I expect to post more material on the Family Court Enhancement Project (“FCEP”), which I understand is all the talk about town (i.e., on the internet in these circles (use your search function to find some of it…).   So the title of this blog refers to a series.  It is a natural continuation of the recent (and from May 2012) “Parades, Charades and Facades,” and my posting this is keeping a personal promise (to myself) for the year 2014, to expose what’s underneath the rhetoric.

These parades, charades, and facades have become a problem for the people who match the profile of what they claim to represent, “Protective Parents” and/or “Battered Mothers,” specifically. I am among that class and a witness of the practices, tactics, and censorships of dialogues involved. I believe collectively the groups involved comprise a cult, and exhibit all primary cult practices.


Before a few mental circuits of distressed parents disconnect, or melt from the heat of their own righteous indignation, (“But my children were abused; I am an incest survivor” etc.), this post is not about whether or not incest or abuse took place in those cases, or children are being placed in the care of batterers or dangerous parents. I’m a survivor, and I know that plenty of times, abuse, sometimes incest did take place and children ARE being placed in the care of batterers.  Mine were….


This post is about what kind of parents are taking a road trip (real, or virtually) with ANY advocacy organizations whose articles of incorporation (if any) boards of directors on their tax returns and patterns of incorporation, charitable filings they have not yet even identified (let alone read and understood), and what’s worse to a destination they have not evaluated as sensible, based on analyses of those organizations in the larger context.

It’s about the dangers of tunnel vision.  Focus is one thing, but tunnel vision, an entirely different thing. it’s about how even spending days, weeks and months on a combination of social media, group -emails, individual emails, and even supplemented by various published articles on a certain topic can still be like eating white bread and peanut butter only, and wondering why you can’t make it through the marathon.

It’s so easy to get a sense of TIME (date of origin of a group), PLACE (where did it originally incorporated, and if it’s one of those state-skipping chameleon corporations, make a note of it, and find out where it’s been before), SIZE (for that, see the financials), and POSITIONING (who else is it interlocking agenda with; and — this is important — is it talking from a religious-exempt institution, or from a law school, or center/institute (etc.) at a university, or individually.  Universities, hospitals, government represent considerable clout, prestige and authority, and lesser accountability for said “Center” or Institute” when it comes to tracking the funding = tracking the influence.  Is it a regular HHS grantee? On which federal funding streams?

How much does anyone involved really know, as an abuse survivor or simply as a taxpayer, about the USDOJ/OVW (Office of Violence Against Women) funding streams proceeding from passage and subsequent re-authorizations of the Violence Against Women Act (1994ff) and who’s on them, who’s advising them?  What about the people who have been directors of that Office? (Two — Bea Hanson and the Hon. Susan B. Carbon — in this post).  What are their affiliations, where did they come from policy-wise and professionally?


For some clues:  See the 31 tags I added in 2016 from skimming the contents of this oversized 6/29/2014 post?


Who could, from having looked at these things, give an impromptu list of at least six key nonprofit associations, institutes, or organizations involved in these matters and give a two-minute summary of how they interact with each other, or characterize the six groups involved?


I could, but I certainly didn’t learn it overnight. I did, however, learn by continuing to pay attention year after year, and understand some of the key indicators. I don’t see why anyone else who decides to pay attention couldn’t also become knowledgeable and an alternate INDEPENDENT, and at least REASONABLY AUTHORITATIVE point of reference for distressed parents and confused bystanders, let alone for personal understanding of the times we live in.

Does it file separately — or has it got another organization as its fiscal agent?  If that status changed (example in this post), when, and probably why?


This post is about advocacy group supporters and followers failing to set standards and keep their own leaders ethical. In a larger sense, the same goes for all of us as citizens, supporting by personal energy and labor (i.e., government revenues) — how can we keep leaders honest or ethical if we don’t have a grasp of what they are doing, what they are paid to do, and how the system is organized?


Consider: If as a parent, you would NOT want your kids to get into a strange cars with smiling strangers and start hitch-hiking with them, for years, recruiting others as you go, why have you demonstrated this same behavior by failing to do basic look-ups, and obtain those fiscal identities and trade-association connections?

[Example: Child-Justice, Inc. (Eileen King, fall 2012] connections to First Star = connections to NACC = connections to AFCC. Another: Battered Women’s Justice Project [“BWJP”] connections (ongoing) to AFCC AND to Duluth, MN’s “Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs” [connection to Ellen Pence, the HHS and DOJ-funded DV industry programming] AND recently, presenting at “BMCC” (Battered Mother’s Custody Conference).


Why would BMCC (and Mr. Bancroft and Mr. Goldstein) keep a ten-year silence (as if they were unaware of its existence) on what has been a $150 million/year federal since 1996 financing program around marriage and fatherhood promotion by way of diversions from Title IV-A, welfare, or the $10 million/year since 1996 (though first financed in 1988) Title IV-D (re: child support enforcement incentives, including percentage-based quotas) access visitation grants? Possibly because out of some of this funding comes the batterers intervention and supervised visitation networked industries, with solid income streams from court-ordered services, courtesy US taxpayers and privately, individual, extorted parents?


One significant “Why?” unanswered ought to indicate something seriously “off,” but there are many — far too many — significant unanswered questions in this company. Suggestion: Come to a decision on the “why” and act on it. Insist on answers as a condition of telling your stories through these channels, lending credibility as the voice of the victims, as a condition of attending rallies, or advertising rallies, etc. BE WISE!


WHO are the friends of those empathetic friends? WHO are they leading you to?
Get the group corporate, fiscal, identity first (the process is simple)! It is a basic indicator and a source of valuable information. It’s unbelievable what a single EIN# and, from there, tax return (Form 990) will tell. Groups tend to cluster around favorite themes (and shun conflicting themes) and even named groups, simply on-line associations, may be dealing with — or have been started by — a tax-exempt organization with an agenda. In fact, every organization is supposed to state its purpose on their tax return — so if one exists, why not go read it?
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 29, 2014 at 1:37 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Checking Out a Nonprofit (HowTo), Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, Lethality Indicators - in News, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, PhDs in Psychology-Psychiatry etc (& AFCC), Train-the-Trainers Technical Assistance Grantees, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

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

My Posts, Just the List (June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012. From Jan. 23, 2016 forward now available @ “Table of Contents 2016 ONLY” Post)

with 3 comments

 

Full post title with shortlink:  My Posts, Just the List (June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012.  From Jan. 23, 2016 forward now available @ “Table of Contents 2016 ONLY” Post)

Table of Contents

(June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012

I started this blog in spring 2009. It is my continuous show-and-tell learning curve exposing, as the motto says, Family –and Conciliation — Court Operations, Practices, and History from the early 1990s and earlier.

Nothing was posted or added to this table of contents from June 29, 2014 (Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, Parade of Fools) throughout 2015.  On January 23, 2016 (2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers)) I resumed publishing posts.  My personal situation wasn’t particularly better at this time, it had just progressed, and I felt it urgent to continue this line of reporting, as I had not stopped investigating (or writing it up off-blog) meanwhile.

This BLOG has two separate Tables of Contents in two different posts, both near the very top of the blog: [Update: as of 1/8/2017, I’m starting one for the new year also…]
Read the rest of this entry »

A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment [Original, March 23, 2014. Reformat + Reminders March 14, 2017][+July2017]

with 6 comments

Post title with case-sensitive, WordPress-generated short-link ending “-2qm”:

A Different Kind of Attention develops Sound Judgment  [Original, March 23, 2014.  Reformationting and Reminders March 14, 2017, Three Years Later].

(Apparently I am not showing solidarity within “the movement,” said a comment below (see “Comments”).  I responded to the assumption that the “movement” (coalitions, groupings of professionals towing traumatized parents around for show-and-tell, and encouraging them to tell their stories as a platform to the reforms wanted by the groupings of professionals [“Let’s get yet more Technical Assistance and Training (domestic violence consultants — aware of the custody issues) in there” — like us and our friends”] was “the movement” and that those so engaged had battered mothers’ or the public best interests even as a priority.
That they needed such mothers to tell their stories to get an image of legitimacy the desired reforms seems evident, but the accounting and corporate registration records, and what they were NOT saying, I say, better evidences what is the agenda.  [last two paragraphs copyedited for grammar (long sentence was an incomplete sentence) and clarified, 7/9/2017].
In responding below some years ago, I see I’d also asked if anyone could identify the business filing of a certain group which was being promoted among “the movement” in Northern California, training custody evaluators to recognize parental alienation and taking, apparently, fees for ongoing-trainings for the same as approved by the California Judicial Council.  Yet the group calling itself an “Inc.” and a nonprofit, has not filing footprint on either the secretary of state or the registry of charitable trusts level, or with the IRS.  So far, no responses…FYI, that’s a “tell.”  ).

Post in Update Process.  Recent (October 2014) introductory material will be reduced shortly. 

I felt inspired to elaborate some more on the role of the Ford Foundation, Center for Court Innovation, MDRC, and the economic influence on setting in motion systems-change elements (including court changes) at public expense. I tend to revise published posts as my understanding increases, and often in the process or drafting a related one.

This is a recent find when I was explaining and showing the Center for Court Innovation to a person completely unfamiliar with it.  It didn’t take too long for the individual** to “get”once the tax returns and other materials were shown in person.  It probably also helped the understanding process that the individual was familiar with project development and budgets, and hadn’t been indoctrinated NOT to talk  finances or economic systems through any court advocacy group which is more interested in selling books, promoting conferences, and getting in on the “train the trainers, educate the judges” routine…. **Incidentally, I was explaining my discoveries to a man, not a woman with a cause, or in trauma or fight-or-flight mode regarding the safety or even location of minor children.

It’s not rocket science– it’s just a different kind of attention, and yes it does take some sustained attention and awareness of what kind of information one is focused on absorbing.

 NYC 2014 BUDGET — READ! Center for Court Innov got $400K (Fund for City of NY not mentioned), Man Up, LIFT, Vera — ec (439pages…)

Qualifiers (added 2017, now that I can do screenprints) — this Report is a Schedule C, dated June 2013, of adjustments to the FY2014 Budget for the City of New York.  I wished to point out the use of the name “Center for Court Innovation” instead of the EIN# and name “Fund for the City of New York.”

In, fact the Fund (in association with this “Center”) was identified a few times up front (the phrase “Fund for the City of New York” does occur repeatedly throughout the document, the words Center for Court Innovation” just a few times.  However, that “CENTER” is not its own entity, neither government nor business, but (as described on its website) a joint project from the Unified NYS Court System AND the (tax-exempt foundation) Fund for the City of New York.

Here are some screenprints from the front of that budget, and a few showing the use of both the Fund for the City designation (with EIN#) and the “Center for Court Innovation” (without; in fact an “initiative” is actually named CCI).  MY main point is — be aware of this powerful combination, and of the CCI, as its intents (tax returns and related entities do show) are to test programs, then go national (outward from NY) and international with them.  Click any image (in this section on FCNY+CCI) to enlarge; you have the NYC 2014 Budget (Sched C Adjustments) link above.

Among those shown, the light-blue captioned image here, top line of the chart refers to a certain Adolescent Portable Therapy Program under agency DOP (Probably Dept. of Probation)  The second row reads “Alternatives to Incarceration (ATI) and was recommended to receive much funding, and the third, “Center for Court Innovation,” $400,000.

Here a “Center for Court Innovation “Initiative” through Agency “CJC” is allocated $400K. Notice also the Adolescent Portable Therapy Program (APTP) by the Vera Institute — this is an “import” from a UK group (Anna Freud Centre), or at least featured by it.

 

I took a closer look at “Adolescent Portable Therapy” in NYC and who’s referring youth and their families into it.

The light-blue caption (Image referencing “Adolescent Portable Therapy Program”) in association with the CCI initiative under “Criminal Justice Services” (from that Budget Adjustment Schedule C).

Enough was found to move to a separate post, however I’m leaving one of the referring agencies, nicknamed “CASES” and showing its recent increases in Total (Gross) Assets for a joint of reference.

Total results: 3Search Again.

re: Adolescent Portable Therapy topic (in NY): Note 1 to CASES audited financial statemts.

Click to enlarge – this refers to a subcontracting organization Youth Represent with board overlap. Meanwhile, CASES itself shows NO independent subcontractors paid over $100K and major government grant dependency. Also, how can an entity (Youth Represent) subcontract when it shows no program service revenues? (This statemt subject to fact-recheck; it’s As I Recall after less than one day’s exposure to the tax returns of both orgs.)

Here, an Initiative is called “Center for Court Innovation”

Here a “Center for Court Innovation “Initiative” through Agency “CJC” is allocated $400K. Notice also the Adolescent Portable Therapy Program (APTP) by the Vera Institute — this is an “import” from a UK group (Anna Freud Centre), or at least featured by it.

 

 

 

 

Commentary:

 

This link and discussion added below under the post’s’ heading “Center for Court Innovation.” [Click through to the website and bookmark, please!] Making for one very long post indeed, but covering some very important ground….

This NYC 2014 BUDGET link above (the adjustments to a NYC budget) shows that the name “Center for Court Innovation” was identified with an EIN# that matches the $86 million (in assets) tax-exempt corporation called “Fund for the City of New York as a fiscal item on the NYC budget, and having been characterized as running several types of courts in the city, while receiving budgetary contributions from the City for this service.

I think this should interest readers from both the size of operations and the setup (see pp. 7, 8, 9). It takes some sustained attention, to grasp, however.

Question:  Why would writers of the NYC Budget Adjustments who surely know the difference between a corporation or nonprofit organization (such as Fund for the City of New York) and a project which is not a corporation (such as “Center for Court Innovation”) forget to use the correct name when listing the budget adjustment of, that year, $400,000, with (it says) funding having begun in 2005 and this CCI being the designated lead for that type of project?  More visuals below under that Title.



Neither the CCI nor this Fund should be ignored, for what they represent to USA and, it’s been made clear, the internationalization of justice reform according to “best ideas, as defined by those in power to fund demonstration projects, AND evaluations of the same demonstration projects” via tax-exempt fund and tax-supported court system.

(2017 Update from the table below, showing must current assets had grown to $86M.  Look at the more recent version, up from $86M to $115.8M in a few short years):

Total results: 3Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Fund for the City of New York, Inc. NY 2015 990 51 $115,865,634.00 13-2612524
Fund for the City of New York NY 2014 990 79 $110,822,126.00 13-2612524
Fund for the City of New York NY 2013 990 105 $86,222,421.00 13-2612524

As displayed (far) below in this post, in the company of other Ford Foundation tax returns, Years ending 2011, 2012, and 2013:

CCI is self-defined as “a public/private partnership.” That means both public and private funds go into it and moreover, that those funds are not easily traceable by looking at EITHER the public (NYS Unified Court System) budget OR the tax returns of the Private (Fund).  And yet they are also self-defined as innovative, and systems change oriented.

An attempt is being made to engineer this change, obviously, without public awareness of who, really, is paying for it, although depending on what type of change, we  ALL pay the price if it’s in a more, versus less oppressive direction.  So which direction the money and which direction the change IS going, should be watched.  You watch the influence by watching the organizations; and you watch the organizations, in good part, by getting tax returns where available (or other financials) and considering what’s seen, who’s involved, and WHAT is the organizational or corporate purpose.


CCI is an item on others’ tax returns and budgets, but not being a specific corporation OR arm of government, it would be quite a project to get a picture (layout) of its finances, and from that, its influences, on a major court system such as the NYS UNIFIED Court System.

We are supposed to take it on faith that being in the hands of the experts is good news.

I have been in such hands (in California, but with similar flavor and programming) and know better than to accept “just trust us” when it comes to bright new ideas on how to change the courts bypassing regular public input, because the public is too broke to get that input in there, and those pushing the ideas are, well, the opposite.

Founded as a public/private partnership between the New York State Unified Court System and the Fund for the City of New York, the Center for Court Innovation seeks to aid victims, reduce crime, strengthen neighborhoods, reduce incarceration, and improve public trust in justice. The Center combines action and reflection to spark justice reform locally, nationally, and internationally.

Fund for the City of New York was (funded/incorporated as a nonprofit) in 1968 by the under-funded (?) Ford Foundation, with significant involvement in other systems-changes elements of the courts around the country; CCI is hardly its only project.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 23, 2014 at 9:26 am

New Here? A Roadmap with some Chronology, Links, Issues (Sidebar-Plus) originally published Feb 24, 2014

with one comment

Read the rest of this entry »
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.

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: