Archive for the ‘Mandatory Mediation’ Category

Certifiably Irregular Behavior among Certified Specialist Associations, and other Dispensers of Training…

Warning:

Warning: This article contains language that some will find offensive, but that others will find refreshingly honest.*

(*cite, and this quote again, below)

INSPIRATION FOR THIS POST:

WAS THE “ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW PROFESSIONALS.”

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1955108	12/04/1995	ACTIVE	ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS, INC.	LYNN MARIE PFEIFER

NOT JUST THE CONCEPT OF CERTIFYING A FAMILY LAW PROFESSIONAL TO START WITH, BUT THE CONCEPT OF A CERTIFIED SET OF ASSOCIATES THAT SEEM BELIEVE PSYCHOLOGY IS SCIENCE, AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, ISN’T, WHICH INCLUDES A CRIMINAL DEGREE OF PROFIT FROM PROMOTING SPREADING THIS “COGNITIVE DISSONANCE” AMONG OTHERS, WHILE QUITE CONSCIOUS OF THE PROFIT IN SO DOING.

First, the public face — clearly this is a hot shot, and professionally alert group:

See?

Welcome, from the Association of Certified Family Law Specialists in California, an independent association of California attorneys who specialize in family law.

ACFLS was formed in 1980 following certification of the first group of Family Law Specialists under the “pilot” program, now a permanent program of the State Bar. ACFLS monitors administration by the State Bar of the specialization program, legislation and court rules, develops and promotes Family Law practice skills, and provides advanced educational programs for the bar, judiciary and public.

In the 28 years of ACFLS’ existence, membership has grown to 490 of the approximately 982 California Certified Family Law Specialists, 50% of those certified by the California State Bar Association. . . .

This means one’s chances of hiring an ACFLS member in California is approximately 1 out of 2; 50%. I wonder who certifies the other 50% of family law specialists?

Membership in ACFLS requires Certification by the Board of Legal Specialization of the State Bar of California, and payment of the annual dues. Members receive all ACFLS Newsletters, notices of meetings, are eligible to participate in ACFLS activities (including seminars at reduced cost), and are listed in the ACFLS Referral and Membership Directory published each year and on our web site: www.acfls.org.

It is the Mission of ACFLS to promote and preserve the Family Law Specialty. * * * To that end, the Association seeks to:

Advance the knowledge of Family Law Specialists;

Monitor legislation and proposals affecting the field of family law;

Promote and encourage ethical practice among members of the bar and their clients; and

Promote the specialty to the public and the family law bar.

**notice nothing is mentioned about the best interests of the children.

They have monthly meetings and occasional regional conferences. Attorneys know how to through nice conferences, and I’m sure these do too. For qualifications (of membership) notice:

Because couples who split up also must deal with custody of their children, family law practitioners must also understand child development and other topics touching on emotional and psychological concerns of families. Part of the certification requirement involves psychological and counseling education.

(which can get written off where? and is provided by whom?)

There is a link for attorneys on Domestic Violence issues — the website intro claims to have “culled the best.” After the disclaimer, the site says:

Domestic Violence Sites on the Worldwide Web

By Leslie Ellen Shear

Any search engine will turn up thousands of Domestic Violence sites on the internet. I spent many hours culling some of the best. These web sites represent many different perspectives and resources on domestic violence. **(Please note that sites appear, disappear, change or move to new locations regularly. If the link doesn’t work, try searching for a key word or phrase from the description.

** OK, let me review this. ON a page by an association of lawyers addressing lawyers whose work likely influences where children will live after domestic violence has been reported, Leslie Ellen Shear’ believes that a few hours on the web will sufficiently inform her to post a resource for — lawyers? (Some of who are abusers, or have been victims of this too, no doubt). This was put up when? A clear look at the link shows that she’s basically posted parts of references beginning with the letter “A” (with one or two exceptions). Many links, yes, are inactive, or domain name has been sold.

Every web page needs a list of benefits to readers from plowing through it, right? So the one on Domestic Violence for Attorneys from this great group, has 20 bulleted points (unprioritized and some of them ridiculous) — of which point# 17 reads “keep your client alive,” thankfully at least one or two higher priorities than “write a great appellate brief,” and — naturally — right next to an ALMOST acknowledgement that some serious risk is involved, “prepare a competent defense to false or inflated allegations” See?

Keep a client alive.

Prepare a competent defense to false or inflated allegations.

Write a great appellate brief.

fourth DV link is:

Access to Visitation Grant (which redirects to the AOC courtsite, and a persistent person might be able to locate the information on this program).

It’s important, yes, to know about this grant program,which has profited some attorneys of fathers saying “false allegations,” and which, on the other hand, has made it possible for some children to be murdered through its premises, and financial incentives to ensure noncustodial parent contact, even if that noncustodial FATHER is in jail, and also supervised visitation (a tool useful in silencing mothers who report abuse, by forcing them to pay to see their kids). Yes, I believe that any family law specialist, being psychologically trained in child development, should know about this grant system — but it belongs under “endorsing” domestic violence.

Other than that, what’s with this one?

A.P.A.R.T. The website reads “parentalabductions.org” the Banner reads “Wives’ Tales’ and it’s simply about single-parenting tips.

A big deal is made about the ACFLS role in the (if you’re from a custody case in California, this should ring a bell) Elkins Family Law Task Force. I was a standby witness to how little value on actual parental feedback was desired during this task force; read who was on it, and concluded that a task for is a task force is a task force. Parents are not considered “stakeholders” and a mothers’ group was contacted after the fathers’ group had already been heard. One could show up and speak for maybe a minute in public, or submit comments on-line (which is not anonymous) while engaged in an active case. However, their nicely laid-out newsletter goes into great detail on the AFCLS response to the Task Force Recommendations. Predictably, which includes this:

(paragraph 1, to set the tone — and the time here, 2009):

ACFLS’s Board of Directors unanimously adopted the group’s Family Law Reform Committee’s Comments on the Elkins Family Law Task Force Draft Recommendations. The action came on December 5, 2009 at the last meeting of the 2009 Board of Directors, chaired by 2009 President Joseph J. Bell.

(many ACFLS members were on this task force, as it says):

Since the formation of the Elkins Family Law Task Force, ACFLS has been proactive in contributing to the develop- ment of recommendations for reform of California’s family courts. Diane Wasznicky (2010 ACFLS President-Elect) chairs the Family Law Reform committee. Members are David Borges (Ex-Officio Director, Central Coast), Sharon Bryan (former Past President), Vivian Holley (Director at Large, North), Frieda Gordon (Director at Large, South), Michelene Insalaco (Director-Elect, North), Lynette Berg Robe (Legislative Coordinator) and Leslie Ellen Shear {{WHOSE suggested Domestic Violence links on the ACFLS site I just reviewed; unbelievable that an adult would take the intro — or the set of links — seriously. It shouldn’t pass a 12th grade essay standard, or even 10th!}}

On page 16, they get down to recommending co-parenting education (can’t miss that, can we?):

Parties to contested custody disputes should receive education about parenting plans and co-parenting. Every county should offer the following FCS services in contested custody- visitation cases:

1. Confidential mediation of custody disputes–including cases in which there is no family law action pending.**

**not to get boringly monotonous, but there’s potential for double-billing around access/vistation grants, county-appointed & paid mediators, and possibly even charging non-indigent parents for this. Of course it should be offered in every county. That’s standard AFCC (who are a mediator-promoting group if anyone is….). . … And it’s also been shown repeatedly that domestic violence advocates — earlier, when the word “grassroots” meant something — FOUGHT AGAINST forcing mediation on DV victims. See Barbara J. Hart writings from the 1990s on this. Having been through that gauntlet — I have to agree. There aren’t enough options once a crooked mediator (or a lying one) (or one breaking rules of court) gets that recommendation in.

The next paragraph is utterly ridiculous, as applied in real situations:

2. Same-day emergency screenings for high risk cases.

3. Prompt,brief assessments with recommendations for cases or issues that are not resolved in mediation.

MAYBE this would be tenable IF FIRST — all cases involving abuse and violence were completely removed from the family law jurisdiction, and either handled in criminal court — where they belong, and should be PROSECUTED, after which assuming the abuse really did take place, there should be NO joint legal custody, no overnight visitations, and there should be prompt prosecution of any and ALL violations of court orders by the offending parent, in the criminal venue, not the civil and not the “family.”

This is not going to happen — because this family law exists primarily to defuse and derail people seeking to protect children, or themselves, from physical molestation, violence, threats, and severe destruction that by a stranger would likely lead to jail time.

I had my children stolen and held truant during an UNsupervised visitation — after I’d requested this and been turned down (being female) because “there’s no money” for it (meaning, in our parents). years later, absent my kids, I learn about the A/V grants stream (and that one of my judges was on the Kids Turn board, too). Now that it was clear to their father that he was above the law, but could attempt to throw it at me, I had to go again to the same mediator — or not get in front of a judge to get the kids back, knowing that police wouldn’t either. Basically, nobody gives a damn if a potential program fund could be called into play somehow.

In the subsequent YEAR, after first permanently eliminating child support for our kids (My income was trashed, and his current obligations ceased — within 30 days, and no action on arrears for over a year, and the arrears was significant to the family), the court managed to recommend counseling for the children (both of who said they weren’t interested), which was a friend of a friend of one of the parties who stole them. Then a court-appointed attorney was called in after yet more noncompliance by the father and complete cessation of visitation, holiday times together, and even phone calls — add a little stalking in there — and we’ve got some serious situations at hand. This attorney’s apparent role (other than getting paid) was to finish putting the nail in the coffin of my ability to get legal protection in any form, or retain a relationship with my children, having asked the court to state its reasons for switching custody and having that question first mocked, then derailed (never answered).

In other words, zero legal or factual basis was ever stated for switching custody, and I was not given an opportunity in court to cross-examine the father on his allegations, to counter them in writing, and being in a state of shock a few months later, unable to speak (in pro per — what else?) in the matter, my kids lost their mother and all I had to offer them, and had been. Shortly after, they lost their father too (it happens) in the household, meaning not one legal safeguard to their lives (or mine) existed.

In situations like this — and believe me, they are common — no one needs a damn co-parenting education class. Co-parenting and joint custody have often been tried. People who separate from abuse are trying before separation to co-parent with criminal behavior. So why let them out, then force them back in just to please the court and someone who couldn’t get business in a free, competitive market otherwise?

(I’m sure you feel my heat in the matter . . . . ) ACFLS newsletter continues:

In other words, after co-parenting education, the parties in each contested custody-visitation case should go on to confidential parenting plan mediation. Where the parties fail to resolve all or some issues, they should move on to a brief assessment and recommendations by a different FCS staff member before the matter is adjudicated. Same-day screen- ing should be available for emergencies – such as safety or abduction risk issues.

Waiting times for appointments for mediation and brief assessments need to be very short – the long delays at this stage of custody cases are damaging to children and destabilizing to families.

(hypocrites! The long delays free up more grants, and justify not disbursing collected child support, too. Long delays are what the courts feed off!)

Mediators are not engaged in a systematic process of gathering and assessing data for the purposes of making recommendations. Either they compromise mediation or their recommendations are an afterthought. Mediating parents behave differently when they think their bargaining will influence a recommendation.. . .

and of course, market expansion into downloadable modules assembled by existing family court nonprofits is desirable:

It may be helpful for the Center for Families, Children and the Courts to develop a uniform curriculum for the co- parenting education programs, and to make on line classes available. Many parents cannot afford childcare or time off work for these programs. Others are out of state or out of the country. It would be helpful to offer these programs in many languages. The programs could also have various modules addressing children of different ages, long-distance parenting and relocation issues, domestic violence and child abuse, and special needs children. * * *

If domestic violence and child abuse issues impact on “Parenting!” can be handled in downloadable curricula, then why is California paying ONE nonprofit contracting out of Sacramento over $6 million a year for all kinds of counseling and interventions for victims of child abuse, trauma, and for sex addicts, drunks, and victims of crimes? See Terra Nova Counseling (meaning — see their tax returns and charitable registry page, which shows this).

I wonder what Marcia Fay might have to say about that one.

(* * *In case you didn’t get it, that was the ACFLS’ plug for more Kids Turn stuff, since Gov. Gray Davis vetoed legislating this a few years earlier, which I blogged in “Kicking Salesmanship Up a Notch” post. It’s interesting how many visitors to this site are following “Let’s Get Honest about Kids’ Turn and Judges’ Profits” yet still miss the follow up post there…

OK — so I added this intro on 12/8/2011 before posting what I wrote probably last week:

Here’s where the proof hits the proselytizing:

Statement: ACFLS was formed in 1980

Actuality:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1955108	12/04/1995	ACTIVE	ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS, INC.	LYNN MARIE PFEIFER

It’s the same group. Here’s a nice letterhead, with board members all along the left side, of ACFLS wish to get involved (i guess) with a certain marriage case: http://www.acfls.org/uploads/files/ACFLS_ltr_to_JaffeClemens-4.pdf, “In re marriage of Valli” (August, 2011). They are writing to rally to (addressees) who had some objections to writing by (see above) Leslie Ellen Shear who is head of the Amicus Brief Committee of this wonderful group).

OK, so now I’m really curious how anyone with a legal mind could’ve in their right minds put up that webpage suggesting that a few hours on-line (apparently going alphabetically on “Abuse” and not getting past the letter “A”) would qualify someone to write a great appellate brief, protect innocents against false allegations of domestic violence, (above that,) draft a supervised visitation plan, educate one’s experts — and “oh, yeah, I better include this for appearance’ sake”) “Save your client’s life.”

This is a section of what turns out to be a Super Attorney’s Bio, the same person, from the site with url “custodymatters.com”

Selected as One of Los Angeles Magazine L.A.’s SuperLawyers (2004-2011)

PRACTICE EMPHASIS

Family Law Trial Court Proceedings

Representation and consultation in complex child custody, complex parentage and assisted reproduction, interstate and international jurisdiction (including Hague Abduction Convention and UCCJEA) cases.

Representation of children in family court by court appointment.

Consensual Dispute Resolution

Trained in mediation, parenting plan coordination (child custody special master), collaborative family law.

Why doesn’t this next part surprise me — at all?

Association of Certified Family Law Specialists (ACFLS). Current Past President; President 2010; various board positions including Newsletter Editor, Technology Coordinator and Secretary from 1997). Author of many ACFLS amicus curiae briefs, current co-chair of Amicus Committee.

Editorial Board and contributor, Journal of Child Custody, published by Taylor and Francis.

Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC),** Past Board Member, California Chapter, director at large, co-chair 2001 Statewide Conference, steering committee 2003 Statewide Conference, frequent speaker at state and international conferences. Contributor to Family Court Review.

** File under “walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, certain things (like evidence of DV) roll right off its back, probably is a duck”

Fellow, International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

Faculty member, 1981 Vallambrosa Retreat: Mediation of Child Custody and Visitation Disputes (trained statewide court staff mediators for California Courts following enactment of mandatory custody mediation legislation)

Which probably explains (i live in California) why my mediator, under such auspicious culture of mandated mediation and calling serious issues “disputes” — consistently ignored court-order-breaking and otherwise felony behavior by the father of my children, and countless others. He was employed over the span of my entire case, and when I requested a less biased one (post-abduction) none was available, so it was either forget seeing your kids again (while they were MIA) or go to this dude, again.

ANYHOW — I just showed you — this group incorporated in 1995. That means that unless they had some other corporate identity, their own website has falsified the record by FIFTEEN YEARS, aka, lied. And the head of the Amicus Brief Committee of ACFLS, Ms. Shear — is considered by her colleagues a Super Attorney (does this mean, excellent and articulate liar? Wouldn’t be the first one I know (which comment I put in for said attorney), and by me, a person who doesn’t know squat about domestic violence, but considers such knowledge good enough to advise attorneys on it on-line. Another Super Attorney (Jennifer Jackson) out of SF area came up, apparently, with the concept for kids turn and helped a family law judge set it up, too, in the late 1980s)

Is this personal (except the one I said I know?) — NO. But I see what product they are putting out regarding situations I’ve lived and know others who have also lived. Obviously, it’s a matter of viewpoint! This is why (a long time ago) i contrasted the court’s opinion of a judge I didn’t even know (The Hon. Slabach) with the “Silenced Mamas” (see poormagazine.com) feedback on the same judge. (That’s how I habitually get in trouble on this blog, but that’s what blogs are for, i.e., airing differing points of view).

How about we go take a look at their registration as a nonprofit — after all this is a membership organization set up by people already working in, and sometimes FOR the courts, and messing with other people’s custody matters through Amicus Briefs (remind me to read in re: Valli and what the ACFLS objected to, in said letter I linked to above).

(AFCC & proud of it on Ms. Shear’s website): work includes:

Ohmer v. Superior Court (1983, 2nd District) 148 Cal.App.3d 661 Child custody evaluations, due process. Validity of former Los Angeles Superior Court policy barring custody litigants from cross-examining child custody investigators, and prohibiting custody litigants from obtaining and presenting evidence of investigator’s lack of mental health education and training. Affirmed. (Appellant)

That sounds like an interesting one… Here (2008) is more evidence of pushing Parenting Coordination. Like my post says, these people are pretty pushy:

In Search of Statutory Authority for Parenting Coordinator Orders in California: Using a Grass- roots, Hybrid Model Without an Enabling Statute, 5 Journal of Child Custody 88 (2008)

A few years into a custody dispute, and most mothers couldn’t afford to keep current with this journal, if they even know enough to do so, in their own best interests of knowing what they’re up against… This is recent, cited all over, and I recommend MOMS read it! Obviously it’s not displayed in proper format below — see that link. Randy Rand v. Board of Psychology and the other attorney involved in the brief is Stephen Temko from San Diego.

CASE NO. C064475 SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 34-3009-80000359

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

__________________

RANDY RAND, ED.D. Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY, Defendant and Respondent. __________________

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS __________________

LESLIE ELLEN SHEAR, CFLS,* CALS* SBN 72623 16133 Ventura Boulevard, Floor 7 Encino, CA 91436-2403

Telephone: 818-501-3691 Facsimile: 818-501-3692 lescfls@earthlink.net

STEPHEN TEMKO, CFLS,* CALS* SBN 67785 1620 Fifth Avenue, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-2792 Telephone: 858-274-3538 Facsimile: 619-238-0851

Attorneys for Amicus *State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization

Curiae ACFLS

Paragraph from the amicus brief shows that FIRST parenting coordinators are appointed, then a clamor to legitimize it occurs. Sounds (at first look) like the amicus wants only professionals already licensed somewhere else in on the show — but in classic “we want to have our cake and eat it too behavior), they don’t want those professional boards to have disciplinary power (What, are there some NON-AFCC or CRC powerhouses on any of those associations?) because ‘parenting coordination’ is quasi judicial and the best entity to discipline them would be — like, the family court that appointed them (sure, THAT”S a bias-free basis for some real ethical accountability! ) SO we’d best read this one all of it — and I do mean “we.”

“California has failed to adopt legislation and court rules governing parenting coordination despite the growing use of these service models in our family courts.** This leaves parents, parenting coordinators, courts, and licensing boards without clear directives about what practices are required or prohibited.”

**perhaps even California, in heart, agrees with Gov Jeb Bush of Florida’s (2004) objections to the practice of parenting coordination. I know I sure do! I read that PCANH handbook, apparentl lifted from Indiana practice? (nice touch throwing the word “parents” in that sentence about “lacking clear directives!” as if that was the concern!

(the site I chose to post the link from was Matthew Sullivan, Ph.D.’s site called (appropriately) “californiaparentingcoordinator.com” (got the message yet?) and says of him:

Matthew Sullivan, Ph.D. is a clinical psychologist (California Lic. # PSY10214) in private practice in Palo Alto, California, who specializes in forensic** child and family psychology. He has been in private practice in Palo Alto for 20 years, specializing in Forensic Family psychology.

He is a pioneer in the field of Parenting Coordination, which he helped develop in Santa Clara County more than 15 years ago,*** and has led the development of Parenting Coordination across the U.S. He is one of the most experienced Parent Coordinators (called Special Master in California) in the country. Some of the other roles he serves for families going through divorce include:

**Child psychologists are frustrated child psychiatrists, some of who are probably frustrated MD’s. They love to throw around the word “forensic” to lend credibility.

***Since he helped develop the field, he might want to rethink posting Ms. Shear’s amicus which states the field basically emerged.

{{Like most AFCC material does when describing some program AFCC has devised and wants legislated & mandated for VERY potentially high-conflict case (i.e., cases where someone — possibly a mediator trained b the sam people — made a really bad custody recommendation, which was enacted, and is having consequences, such as the other parent protesting it. Voila! ! We have high-conflict, so we get to do parent coordinators, and maybe even some federal grant streams, too!)}}

OK, now that the very active ACFLS cannot ? show its origination, as claimed, in 1980 as a legitimate California corporation, but rather it was incorporated in 1995 (at least the one with “, Inc.” after its name is the only one I could find on SOS site) here’s the Charitable Registration:

From the California Office of Attorney General (Charitable Registry Search Site) — YES ! ACFLS DOES exist and at first glance, it’s charitable status is labeled “Current”:

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS, INC.	EX548531	Charity	Exempt – Active	SAN RAFAEL	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

which is odd – because if one the looks inside — no EIN# has been assigned yet, it has never filed any IRS or RRF reports (annual requirement for CA nonprofits and for corporations too, for that matter). Allegedly, per this record, their charitable status was issued in 1990 (10 years after they claim they started, and 5 years before the Secretary of State admitted that they did). (or perhaps this is just the boilerplate charitable registry BLANK format?).

They have NO EIN# and apparently ever bothered to register — NO founding documents are viewable – and obviously if the association is charging its (ATTORNEY) members any dues, they aren’t producing (all 490 members, all those nice monthly meetings and annual regional conferences involving hotels, golf, etc.) any income worht reporting? And though they are actually selling stuff from their blog — they aren’t producing program service revenue enough to require reporting to the IRS?

Yes — and I have some land under the Brooklyn Bridge I wish to sell, also.

Full Name:	ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS, INC.		FEIN:
	Type:	Mutual Benefit		Corporate or Organization Number:	1955108

Registration Number:	EX548531
Record Type:	Charity	Registration Type:	Charity Registration
Issue Date:	12/31/1990	Renewal Due Date:	5/15/1991
Registration Status:	Exempt – Active	Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:

Address Information

Address Line 1:	15 CORRILLO DRIVE	Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4:	SAN RAFAEL CA 94903

Annual Renewal Information

+ + + + + + +

I have a question. In fact, several questions:

Have you, has a family member or friend, been operated on recently? Was your doctor officially vetted by the hospital, and is his or her degree valid?

Is the institution from which your doctor graduated, or was, it a real institution?

When they are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Cornell, UCBerkeley, Stanford, etc. — there aren’t that many questions whether or not the schools actually exist, and are “accredited,” for what it’s worth (and it is worth something, as to colleges!). The only question becomes, did your particular professional actually go there, and has the school not, to date, disowned or otherwise dishonorably discharged them.

Generally, we expect more of Medical Doctors, although this is sometimes not delivered. See “California prison doctors get millions while not working“, Associated Press article posted 11/29/2011. Who wants to actually think about a government paying anyone over $226K per year to sort mail while figuring out whether this person was mal-practicing or not? Not a thought good for the average digestive system, or blood pressure, probably….

At least 30 physicians and mental health professionals collected an estimated $8.7 million since 2006 as they went through a lengthy appeals process to determine whether they should be fired or reinstated, the Los Angeles Times (http://lat.ms/vOJLlY ) reported Monday. The newspaper cited records from a court-ordered receiver now in charge of the state prison system.

Doctors who were alleged by colleagues to have committed negligence or misconduct — in some cases involving patient deaths — received their full six-figure salaries, even though they were not allowed to treat prisoners. Some did menial work [like, sorting mail…]

Sounds like a lose-lose proposition to me, either the original system, or attempting to “clean up” the systems.

But what is it about the fields of family law and psychologists that attracts people who LOVE to form nonprofit, trade-promoting, dues-paying (membership) associations which:

don’t even file tax returns, especially with the state they are registered in, after getting tax-exempt status? or, alternately
don’t file period, and/or
cite each others names proudly on websites and on biographies in long strings of apparent officialdom before ording one parent into a situation doomed to bankruptcy, another child to go live with a molester he or she has already reported on, extort fathers into starting a custody battle they didn’t want — or, if they are in arrears somehow — into participating in some ridiculous (psychoeducational) program, typically in 6 to 10 sessions that someone pays for, no one would otherwise take if there were an alternate choice besides going back to jail?[FN1] Before adjusting upward or compromising downward child support for a noncustodial parent without notifying the custodial one of the discussion (or programssssssszzsss, plural) that led to this backroom deal? and/or
hold conferences to figure out how to expand their profession, which profession exists at all over public distress and at public expense, i.e,. those who practice are already on state (judges) or county (county commissioners, family law commissioners, child support commissioners — and ANYONE among the support structure of the entire local child support agency, including attorneys, directors, specialists, clerks, data entry people (presumably) and office staff for derailing parents who want a direct answer about their own case. This also includes court transcriptionists, court clerks, etc.
Bill attendance at these conference, and travel to/from them (wherever possible) to their current employer, usually a county or county-level court [FN2])

How is it that people who graduated from an institute that gave a degree to an imaginary cat can actually be practing and making custody recommendations for young children? This literally is true, and a lot more than one thinks. Surely Dr. Doyne must be a qualified professional (WHAT profession was it, again?) because he got a degree from this place. However at least one man (see Request to file Amicus Brief in Tadros v. Doyne) decided to challenge (see Tadros v. Doyne; in fact this link summarizes and actually shows the “Specialty Diplomate” and how both the person who issued it, and the court, are retaliating against this M.D. for reporting it! Many mothers and fathers know already about the “Zoe the Cat” fiasco, but still the custody mill (and other association-certification-mills) continue, one of which I found recently, hence today’s post.) How can one be silent in the face of material like this?

(1). . .

for $350 dollars, Robert O’Block, who honored a Specialty Diplomate to a house cat named Zoe (which states on the certificate Zoe has a PhD), and who also granted a Specialty Diplomate to Custody Evaluator Stephen Doyne, is threatening to sue the co-founders of California Coalition for Families and Children (CCFC) with a defamation lawsuit seeking penalties of 1,000,000 Dollars. Robert O’Block is seeking to shutdown The Public Court for exposing the truth about the “cat credentialed?”

If Dr. Tadros and CCFC do not keep quiet or “shut down” public exposure about Zoe the Cat getting a PhD and Diploma, they will be sued for this huge sum of money?

To the solid fact that Zoe the Cat is Dr. Tadros’s best witness, he is left with no other choice than to pursue the timely filing against Robert O’Block’s owner of the ACFE, who according to Professor carol Henderson issued a house Cat with “Diplomate (and Phd)” certificate, (read below) with the filing of Tadros MD vs. American College of Forensic Examiners International (ACFEI), dated January 10, 2011…

(2) . . .Well, here, from, the News Article on Doctor Doyne, but “thepubliccourt.com” is informative*

Custody Evaluator’s Credentials Questioned In Lawsuit

Dr. Stephen Doyne Has Been Involved In 3,000 To 4,000 San Diego Custody Cases

Lauren Reynolds
10News I-Team Reporter

POSTED: 7:10 pm PDT July 7, 2009

SAN DIEGO — Dr. Stephen Doyne, PhD, is widely used in the San Diego Family Court as a custody evaluator. His job is to advise the court on where children of divorce should live, which parent is more fit. The evaluations can be costly, both in emotion and dollars. Clients told the 10 News I-Team they paid Doyne between $5,000 and $30,000. (That’s per evaluation — do the math)

“A child custody evaluator has tremendous power and influence,” said Marc Angelucci. He’s an attorney representing Dr. Emad Tadros in a civil lawsuit against Dr. Doyne alleging fraud and negligence. . . .

Dr. Doyne is one of a dozen custody evaluators repeatedly used by San Diego Family Court. The court had no response to the allegations against Dr. Doyne. The court also clarified that it does not verify the professional licenses or the resumes of the custody evaluators.

Apparently, per this article, he also falsely claimed to be an adjunct professor at UCSD (University of California, San Diego). Reminds me of this Sandra Brown, M.A. (Liberty University) I was looking up recently, and her “IRHPE” (Institute for Relational Harm and Pathology Education”), not to mention the “Relationship Training Institute,” also (coincidentally) at San Diego where she was listed as a Guest Lecturer (to my recall), this RTI being a business which takes business from the courts, also. Speaking of which, …

The “Relationship Training Institute” (EIN# 470942805), which you can (and should) look up on the California Attorney General’s site (http://ag.ca.gov/charities/, and select “Registry” on left side) where charitable organizations are required to register and then file ANNUALLY, and where one can look up their EIN#s) — registered here in 2006 (File issued date) and from the IRS, evidently it’s clear it showed assets of $1.5K and Revenue of $90K in 2005, and by 2010, assets of $13,569 & revenue of $271K. In 2011, their assets went down by over $4K, but their revenue went up to $291K — and finally, in August 2011, the OAG decided to slap them on the wrist (who knows why), with a letter saying, you didn’t file your fee.

However, in the section where EVERY charity required to register under state law is to file 3 things (that I know of) (two of which the public should be able to look at, right here): (1) a State return (RRF), (2) a copy of their IRS 990 return which the OAG can upload, and (3) a ‘Schedule B”* which lists their contributors’ names and addresses. This is also to come with (4) an annual fee, which varies by size of the group.

(*which public doesn’t see, but the OAG, whose purpose here is to prevent Californians from being scammed by tax-exempt organizations and false fundraisers, i.e., professionally organized thieves, public financial predators, and money launderers, etc. SPeaking of which, did I mention that a previous attorney general (Bill Lockyer) had his (3rd) wife installed, on pay from the DAs office, as the CEO of the “Alameda County Family Justice Center” — an idea from San Diego City Attorney’s Office Casey Gwinn plus the DV Council, Gael Strack, J.D. (as I recall) — which, somehow in the process of hiring the first CEO, got the slated salary moved from $65K to $90K, and the appointment process of which looks a little slimy (thank you, investigator Steve White, aka boatbrain or similar quirky username). Nevertheless, we hope and expect the OAG to keep a lid on these things for our (public’s) sake. They even went after the San Diego based Kid’s Turn for its charitable status, right?

Organizations larger than the RTI have been noticed by the same OAG for failing to file fees and schedule B of contributors. The far larger Futures Without Violence (formerly, like until 2010, Family Violence Prevention Fund, EIN# 943110973) received one notice in 2010:

1. The $225 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

and another, August 2011, under separate cover, in stern terms, this time writing reflecting the corporation’s name change:

RE: IRS Form 990, Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors

We have received the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF submitted by the above-named organization for filing with the Registry of Charitable Trusts (Registry) for the fiscal year ending 12/31/10. The filing is incomplete because the copy of Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors, does not include the names and addresses of contributors.

The copy of the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF, including all attachments, filed with the Registry must be identical to the document filed by the organization with the Internal Revenue Service. The Registry retains Schedule B as a confidential record for IRS Form 990 and 990-EZ filers.

Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please submit a complete copy of Schedule B, Schedule of

Contributors, for the fiscal year noted above, as filed with the Internal Revenue Service

Futures Without Violence, now ensconced at the San Francisco Praesidio (a high-profile address to locals and international visitors), does big business: In 2010, per information the California OAG apparently gets from the IRS (as opposed to the organization), it reads:

Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-10

Fiscal End: 31-DEC-10

Total Assets: $36,603,585.00

Gross Annual Revenue: $17,118,149.00

RRF Received: 14-JUN-11

Returned Date:

990 Attached: Y

Status: Rejected

I would ask too. 2010 is an increase in ASSETS of roughly $5.5 (million) and in INCOME of $10.5 million. As Dolly Parton quipped once (possibly in a movie), “it takes a lot of money to look like this!” Yet FVPF has been fairly regular in filing — up til 2008, anyhow. Its primary program purpose, as of the last available 990, reads:

Significant activities: TO PIONEER NEW STRATEGIES TO END VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN AT HOME AND ABROAD.

“FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE” SETS ITS EYES “Abroad”

And well it might — having continued to ignore a steady stream of violence against women, and children (including some that results in deaths, a relentless litany, the background to their wonderful conferences and PR campaigns, and training institutes about “Fatherhood” as tool practitioners can wield against family violence. Sure, OK. So, MOTHERS lveaing abusive relationships safely (and this group helped get VAWA enacted in 1994), still can’t — because of family court in USA is trending towards sharia law, at least in its “logic” and priorities.

Speaking of “Going Abroad”. . . .literally and allegorically

(I warned you at the top of this post…we are going to talk about defecation, and allegorically, why some nonprofits constantly need to shift localities, names and WHERE they are p*ssing on people’s due process rights, and covering up evidence of this in the family law system, lest they step on the wrong local toes, or bite the han)

The phrase “going abroad” in previous times meant going to take a whizz outside the camp, or home, where one eats and sleeps, so as not to pollute it. When encased in a wood shelter over a large pit, with or without a porcelain chair, this progressed to the “Outhouses,” topic of many comedies and eventually we progressed to indoor plumbing, which can then get backed up and require a plumber to fix. The practice of sitting UP to do this, I gather another Western creation, has helped create health problems too, per some.

I’m late reporting this – as it seems November 19th was “World Toilet Day” according to an article, “What would you Do without a Loo?” and another historical discussion points out that civilization and the development of sanitation go together; Rome, for example, could not ignore the problem.

The Medieval Ages (plus emergence of Fundamentalist RC theories related to original sin, and the nobility of suffering, including if necessary in filth, had their impact). I hope you scan that — it’s a quick read. “The massive deaths by reason of the plagues had some people rethinking hygiene” (year 1210) . . .”Since the 1820s there have been no fundamental changes.” (parallel — when was the last time any change in what to do about death-causing domestic violence actually surfaced, i.e., that wasn’t “treatment, intervention, publication, and training”?)

Meanwhile, it’s just as healthy not to use “the throne.” In Fact, Bill Gates is working on re-inventing the toilet (how did my thinking go here? It’s easy — the phrase “going abroad” — and I believe it’s necessary to use symbols and one systems of meaning to understand another, although if one gets STUCK in a symbol system (i.e., DV as a sickness, conflict as bad, professionals as actually helpful, etc.) the society and its process of observation, labeling, and logic (reasoning) can get, well, “constipated.” So, I have a little fun connecting the absurdly different (a highly respected organization with an annual revenue of around $36 million and lofty claims to basic human functions that MUST be needed, and if not heeded with sanitation (and sense) can wipe out a civilization, i.e., plague. Or, for example, we are told that the early settlers in the US didn’t wash in the ocean, and didn’t dig for clams or catch much fish — yet certainly that would’ve fed them and cleansed them.

Bill Gates Seeks to Reinvent the Toilet

Analysis by Nic Halverson
Tue Aug 16, 2011 09:11 AM ET

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation recently launched a “Reinvent the Toilet” competition and have already awarded $3 million to researchers at eight universities to redesign the porcelain throne. The challenge? Develop an economical toilet that is doesn’t need to be connected to a sewer system, or to any water or electricity grid.

Healthcare Districts, Associations of Healthcare Districts and their Watchdogs:

This blog is not about water, healthcare, or for that matter school boards. However it IS about use of taxes. I got derailed into matters of “Water” simply by comparing one Domestic Violence Funds proposition that we (taxpayers) collectively support its $36million plans to create Futures Without Violence Abroad to the practice of pissing outside one’s home area, which of course (how my mind works sometimes) got me on just how complex it becomes when people are crowded together so closely that there IS no backyard to go piss in, at least not for years on end, and thus the community pools its funds to elect people to take care of their shit (literally). I believe that assaults and violence could (generically speaking) be lumped in that category, as the (stuff) of overcrowding and too many people codependent on others to protect them, feed them, educate their young (handle their money), regulate their parenting practices (?) and in general, nurse them from womb to tomb. Perhaps that model is a little over-rated, as this example I hope proves.

SUPPOSE BILL GATES DEVELOPS SUCH A TOILET THAT COULD BE USED IN URBAN AREAS TOO? HOW MANY OF THE PEOPLE AND GROUPS BELOW WOULD BE OUT OF A JOB?

AND WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT THE ROMAN EMPIRE’S FALL HAVING SOMETHING TO DO WITH LEAD IN THE PIPES? ….

I mean, why the chair portion? Consider how complicated it gets; from a travel article:

How to Use a Squat Toilet (Frank Burres in Worldhum, 9/25/06)

“Warning: This article contains language that some will find offensive, but that others will find refreshingly honest”

Background: Squatting is an ancient practice, but knowledge of it has recently been lost in the West. The flush toilet wasn’t even invented until 1596. And toilet paper didn’t become popular until the 1900s. According to the Toilet Paper Encyclopedia, pre-TP, humans used corn cobs, Sears Roebuck catalogs, mussel shells, newspaper, leaves, sand, hayballs, gompf sticks and the end of old anchor cables on ships. Ouch!

But the good folks at the TPE seem blissfully unaware that most of the world’s people still use neither toilet paper, nor western sit-down crappers. Nor do they use corn cobs, gompf sticks or anchor cables. Because, while most of us in North America and Europe sit, people on just about every other continent squat, using water and their left hand. In much of Africa and Asia you can be hard-pressed to find anything else besides the squatter.

Beginning Squatting: I called Doug Lansky, a traveler and travel writer who knows the hardships of squatting. “It’s difficult,” said Lansky, who edited a book called, There’s No Toilet Paper on the Road Less Traveled.

I wish Bill Gates well in his exploration of alternates to the water systems that make the economy go whirr and hum, some of which so reduce people’s self-reliance (and thinking about the basics of life) that they willingly allow commissions associations, agencies and task forces to try and keep up with the agencies (and commissions) to take their hard-earned (or, easily earned) income (taxes) and, such that they need a “Local Agency Formation Commission” (I kid you not) to study whether to dissolve another agency — which no longer has a hospital, but is still collecting funds. I cannot find this particular agency (maybe it’s been dissolved?) as a corporation or trust anywhere in the state — and the attorney which was hired to determine whether to dissolve the nonexisting entity — who was in 2010 head of an Association of (such) Agencies — which does not exist as either a corporation or charity in California, meaning, if anyone is getting paid for this association of (unregistered entitites), it’s not reporting to the public without a FOIA request, WTF (that’s an acronym for an expletive) it’s doing, financially.

Association of California Healthcare Districts — and where is this “Mt. Diablo Healthcare District to start with? I don’t know (I don’t see it registered as nonprofit or corporation), but here comes a news reporter to inform us that the attorney hired to decide whether to dissolve it doesn’t follow the rules either. So rules were changed accomodate his inability to handle a $5,000 services cap. Weird:

Mt. Diablo Health Care District lawyer billed beyond board limit

By Lisa Vorderbrueggen
Contra Costa Times

Posted: 11/28/2011 04:15:57 PM PST

An outside attorney hired to help save an imperiled Contra Costa public health district billed the agency nearly three times more than what was authorized.**

Heavily censored invoices obtained through the California Public Records Act show Sacramento lawyer Ralph Ferguson billed the district for 52.3 hours totaling $14,000 in September and October. The district capped his pay at $5,000 when it hired him.

It’s the latest development in the increasing scrutiny of the Mt. Diablo Health Care District, an agency that lost its hospital 15 years ago but has continued to collect and spend hundreds of thousands of tax dollars. Roughly 200,000 residents in Concord, Martinez, Clyde, Pacheco and portions of Lafayette and Pleasant Hill live in the district.

It hired Ferguson three months ago as its liaison with the Contra Costa Local Agency Formation Commission, which is studying whether to dissolve the agency.

**Note: He’s an attorney. So this surprises us, why? Same reporter, earlier this month (11/5/2011), in “Riding in to Rescue a Flailing Agency”

The lawyer behind the strategy to rescue the ailing Mt. Diablo Health Care District will be remembered as a visionary or an opportunist.

Ralph Ferguson, the former chief of the Association of California Healthcare Districts and Mt. Diablo’s new attorney, believes the embattled public agency could model itself after the successful Beach Cities or Camarillo health care districts.

By way of background, a regulatory agency could dissolve the taxpayer-funded Central Contra Costa health care district. It has been criticized by four grand juries and others for its failure to do little more than pay its overhead and keep up the health insurance for a current and a former board member.**

Like Mt. Diablo, two Southern California districts no longer operate hospitals.

**perhaps this is what many agencies are for to start with? Remember the Phoebe Factoids and the problems with Georgia’s chain of nonprofit hospitals, that stiffed uninsured parents and kept huge profits offshore? Then apparently had enough clout to personally threaten the family of two men reporting on this?

This Commission to control Agencies and “Special Districts” really does exist, and has authority and a staff. This authority seems to relate largely to taxes, incorporation, annexing or detaching land to one city or another, and things that relate to things we need — like water, schooling, healthcare, and such. Authority:

▪ Annex land to cities or special districts,

▪ Detach land from cities or special districts,

▪ Consolidate two or more cities or two or more special districts,

▪ Form new special districts and incorporate new cities,

▪ Dissolve special districts and disincorporate cities, — WOW. And the commission has six people. Only.

▪ Merge cities and special districts,

▪ Allow cities or special districts to provide services outside of their boundaries.

I hope that the term “SPECIAL DISTRICT” is required, by law, to be taught in all K-12 Special Unified School Districts so that, as adults, they can know who helps determine what low-income jobs global marketplace their education is preparing most of them for, which will increase their odds of becoming part of the welfare caseload (or target in a drive-by- shooting) they will be able to work at, decrease their odds of giving those who know what a special district is — and how to obtain control over it — and cities. After all, their JOBS provide tax income for these people to hire pricey lawyers to investigate waste of their own taxes. . .

I don’t know any individual that has the time to write “FOIA’s” (Freedom Of Information Act letters, requesting, obviously, information) – for every entity that is affecting that indivual’s personal, well, — Freedom. Do you?

So JUST PERHAPS if a Bill Gates and friends can figure out that the rest of the west never needed the white throne, either (toilets) — we might be able to figure, as much of the non-Western, Pre-AFCC world, in fact Pre-1913 world — how to live life without a parenting class. And that would put enough administrative and bureaucratic educators, and real estate, out of work to make OCCUPY THIS look like a children’s birthday party.

Why? Because once people develop the habit of thinking, non-drug-induced, about HOW their world is run, the habit is catching, and many more taken-for-granteds will topple.

Put that next to a recent news article with the title “Agency in hot water over fees.” This turns out not to actually be attorney-exaggarated fees on a Health Care District, not about water — however this one, “An End to Padded Water Bills (Metropolitan Times, Los Angeles, 2009) IS. This 2010 notice by “Californians Aware” on ” Subject: Notice of Strict Enforcement Concerning Certain Common Brown Act Violations is addressed to people at four different associations involved in basic business of — living — in California. It is from another association, “Californians Aware” — the Center for Public Forum Rights.”

League of California Cities
Association of California Water Agencies
California School Boards Association
California State Association of Counties, and
Association of California Healthcare Districts, Ralph Ferguson, Executive Director (see next)

In a very well-fleshed-out-website, the group’s (or lack of a better word reflecting their tax & incorporation status) mission is stated: “The Association of California Healthcare Districts serves and advances the diverse needs of all California Healthcare Districts through advocacy, education and member driven services. “

The “Association of California Healthcare Districts, INC.” is “Not Registered” as a California Charity (or corporation, that I can see) and “Ralph Ferguson” is the attorney in question mention as overbilling (etc.) in the article “Agency in hot water over fees” I linked to, above. Go figure!

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICTS, INC.		Charity	Not Registered	RANCHO CORDOVA	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

The Secretary of State Site shows zero listing for the same Association. IN fact, when I searched on only the words “healthcare District” there only 3 local ones showed, one o whose corporate status had been suspended. If so, why a need for an Association of Healthcare Districts to start with? Either have them — and force them to expose their corporate status– or don’t have them, at all, and quit playing games with the public. I believe (?) the word “District” here means a region of people/residents who can be sold on the idea of accepting a tax to support, er, “Healthcare.”

Which of course, have been the topic of some scandal as to use.

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1993854	11/05/1996	ACTIVE	BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE DISTRICT FOUNDATION	HELEN WALSH
C2439485	03/11/2004	SUSPENDED	HEALTHCARE DISTRICT INSURANCE AND MARKETING SERVICES, INC.	JAMES L. BEYERS
C2858426	02/21/2006	ACTIVE	THE CLOVERDALE HEALTHCARE DISTRICT FOUNDATION	JAMES F DEMARTINI

While the phrase “healthcare district” on a charitable registry search produces zero results, which leads me to speculate that this multiple field search site does not have the ability to search phrases in the middle of the group’s name – unlike other states’ corporate searches. For such a large state, California has a lousy corporation search website!

So I looked up “Bear Valley Community” on the OAG (Charity) site and find SIX charities (and one raffle) beginning with those three phrases. TWO of the sex are not registered, but our 1996 one (above) is. One of the “not registered” charities is “Bear Valley Community Hospital.” If I lived in Bear Valley, California — I’d get on this quick. The BVHC District tax return of 2002 lists $13K of government funding, of 2004, $26 of public (but no government) and apparently the charitable registration didn’t start until 2006. Since I’m a nice person, I”ll list what Bear Valley Community anythings are still around (the church — active as a charity — is no longer active as a corporation, but they began in 1946. Besides (see row one, below).

Entity Number

Date Filed

Status

Entity Name

Agent for Service of Process

C1137770

03/24/1983

ACTIVE

BEAR VALLEY CENTER FOR SPIRITUAL ENRICHMENT, A RELIGIOUS SCIENCE COMMUNITY

CAROLYN DAWLEY

C0208456

08/02/1946

SUSPENDED

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY CHURCH

DONALD FOOR

C2233852

05/08/2000

SUSPENDED

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

TERRY WOODROW

C1993854

11/05/1996

ACTIVE

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE DISTRICT FOUNDATION

HELEN WALSH

C1287435

09/30/1985

ACTIVE

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AUXILIARY

DOROTHEA SCHWAIGER

C0306083

07/07/1955

DISSOLVED

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FUND, INC.

C1604740

01/19/1988

SUSPENDED

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, INC.

VI COLUNGA

C0482507

12/16/1964

ACTIVE

BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY NURSERY SCHOOL

AMY PREY

C3189110

01/30/2009

ACTIVE

BEAR VALLEY SPRINGS COMMUNITY RECREATION FACILITIES FOUNDATION

MARGARET WANGLER

C1764347

05/30/1995

ACTIVE

BIG BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY ARTS THEATER SOCIETY

KAREN SARGENT RACHELS

Bear Valley appears to be a Ski Resort area. Cloverdale has a multitude of corporations, this is only a sample. Notice the “Status” column:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C0978805	03/28/1980	SUSPENDED	CLOVERDALE BOOSTERS ASSOCIATION, INC.	DONALD SATO
C0175845	06/02/1938	SUSPENDED	CLOVERDALE BRIDGE CLUB
C0412712	04/18/1961	ACTIVE	CLOVERDALE CABANA CLUB	NOE LONGORIA
C1602586	12/18/1987	ACTIVE	CLOVERDALE CABINETS, INC.	ARNOLD M. HAUG
C3098377	05/05/2008	ACTIVE	CLOVERDALE CANINE ALLIANCE, INC.	MICHAEL P CAMPBELL
C1235613	01/11/1984	SURRENDER	CLOVERDALE CASTINGS INC.	C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
C0576616	07/31/1969	SUSPENDED	CLOVERDALE CB-ERS
C0767052	04/02/1976	SUSPENDED	CLOVERDALE CHAPTER #2430 OF AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS, INC.	DIANA TREANKLE
C0772429	06/24/1976	DISSOLVED	CLOVERDALE CHILDREN’S CENTER, INCORPORATED
C1934975	05/15/1995	SUSPENDED	CLOVERDALE CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP	JACK REGO

Cloverdale is in Sonoma County (California Coast, wine country) and in 2010 had a population of 8,618 in 2010, and is in California’s 1st Congressional District (FYI)

Cloverdale is located in the northern portion of Sonoma County, and is the farthest city north in the San Francisco Bay Area, about 85 miles (135 km) north of San Francisco. U.S. 101 runs through the town, as does State Route 128.

The city has a total area of 2.6 square miles (6.7 km²), all of it land.

Cloverdale is located in the Wine Country, being part of the Alexander Valley AVA.

(Thank you, Wikipedia)

That’s a whole lotta business for a population of 8,000….

Californians Aware: The Center for Public Forum Rights (who warned the above 4 association heads (at least one of who is an attorney) to mind their legal compliance on the Brown Act as to closed-door meetings) registered as a corporation in 2004, which indicates they filed articles of incorporation and paid a fee, and have a board of directors of at least one person. THey probably even have a bank account.

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C2646702	04/16/2004	ACTIVE	CALIFORNIANS AWARE: THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC FORUM RIGHTS	EMILY KATHLEEN FRANCKE

They even dutifully filed with the IRS for years 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, with a VERY modest budget (under $50K) and then stopped filing, meaning as of 8/23/2010, they are Delinquent as a charity. However, their letter to the 4 association heads was written in November, 2010. They do not appear to ever have sent anything to the OAG at all (either IRS return or RRF):

ull Name:	CALIFORNIANS AWARE: THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC FORUM RIGHTS		FEIN:	201008855
	Type:	Public Benefit		Corporate or Organization Number:	2646702

Registration Number:	125817
Record Type:	Charity	Registration Type:	Charity Registration
Issue Date:	12/31/2006	Renewal Due Date:	5/14/2008
Registration Status:	Delinquent	Date This Status:	8/23/2010

They apparently lost a leader very recently, but are still collecting donations — possibly illegally — from their website, not that this would put them in different company than groups they are reporting on, who financially I’m sure leave this group in the dust. The foundation number shows no (none whatever) returns under this EIN# above, but the California OAG has information from somewhere that is posted. Then again, neither does the “Association of California Healthcare Districts” show its face — at all under this name, on the foundation finder. How could it, without even an EIN# to go on?

Notice: The IRS has announced processing errors on electronically filed Forms 990 for filing years 2007-2009. Learn more»

Search criteria: ( Name: association of california healthcare districts State: CA )
0 matching documents retrieved (0 displayed)

Be that as that may, their board of directors is scheduled to meet this week, December 2, 2011.

The Brown Act in California deals with closed-door meetings on actions of public interest.

Perhaps in this case, the term applies. Futures WIthout Violence has outgrown its britches, and I will not cease reporting on this.

(They’d better go abroad, because word is getting out — principally from me, that I can see — is that media campaigns don’t result in character transformations, and failing to report on the family court scams, and DV organization sell-outs is still getting families killed. Last one — in the same general locality as this group — is a recent headline — a San Jose Policeman and his wife, apparent murder-suicide, and they have two teenagers. (Not sure about this incident, it looks almost staged from the reporting, and the word “apparently” shows up a lot. I also note it was a second marriage (or, he had a stepson). San Jose is not too far from San Francisco, however in the Bay Area there are drive-by-shootings hitting young people (recently a one-year old child) and in more than one neighborhood. I believe that a $36 million annual revenue, even after subtracting several salaries over $100 million and Esta Soler’s of over $200 million (per year) should demand — not just suggest — some proof of effectiveness before getting one more cent — and this every five years at a minimum. FVPF (FVW) claims to have begun in 1980. If the Washington, D.C. corporations search bears this out, then it did — but in SF at least, it only began in 1989, meaning, a company that (now) specializes in media based campaigns and trainings, has been lying in its own self-descriptions. 1980 v. 1989 = nine years’ difference in reporting incorporation is not a minor issue, and I hope my suspicions on that one prove wrong.

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C2583174	05/17/2004	ACTIVE	RELATIONSHIP TRAINING INSTITUTE	DAVID B WEXLER

Surely Relationship Training Institute (which falls under this category) also has to — but not one RRF or IRS hyperlink has been uploaded to the public website for it) while – there is not one single RFI filing from 2006 – 2011. And the OAG somehow, hasn’t commented on this, and the charitable status remains labeled “Current.” I figure this means someone is receiving money somewhere, and the “slap you on your wrist” letter may have indicated said someones wasn’t paid their (kickback, or payoff) this time. Whether this is instinct, speculation, or error will not be known until other facts are known.

I certainly don’t buy that no one in the criminal branch of California Government (with the Attorney General being the top) knows about this group, for one, on their “About Us” page (including the “Guest Faculty list with Sandra Brown, M.A. (Christian “Liberty University” with on-line degree programs) and no known bachelor’s degree, plus CEO of her group whose corporate and charitable (if any) identity isn’t know either), not to mention “Brian Erickson, Esq., San Diego City Attorney’s Office )(do a FOIA, get the payroll and reimbursements!), says:

The Relationship Training Institute is approved by the San Diego County Probation Department to provide clinical training for all authorized county domestic violence treatment programs for court-ordered offenders.

and it (RTI) is running certification programs for “Domestic Violence Providers,” probably receiving some help (whether as direct or subgrantee) from an OVW STOP program grant:

The STOP Program: Understanding & Treating Domestic Violence
40-HOUR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TREATMENT PROVIDER CERTIFICATION COURSE

May 3,4,5 & 11,12, 2012

Domestic violence is not a crime, but a disease that can be treated. Sounds like the AFCC plan to transform language is indeed working….)

So, it just seems odd that this group doing quite a bit of business with the California legal and judicial systems (cf. “court-ordered” “Probation”) has somehow escaped the OAG’s radar as to filing its annual statewide returns. Unlike many sites, I don’t see any claim of when they started (“ask me no questions, I will tell you no lies”), but from the registration site it’s been fully 4 years, from the Secretary of state site (above), fully let’s say 6 (allowing for the 2011 year to end) of its not doing anything. Does this make you go hmmm? in context? (it should).

I think I know “what is it” about this — it’s simply that the profits from these practice are pretty hard to profile (trace).

I’ve heard it said (NOYB where) that a psychiatrist is a would-be physician, in other words, the field has a bit of an inferiority complex, even though they can indeed prescribe medications. And psychologists are would-be psychiatrists, there is a professional jealousy, hierarchy and wish for glory. I think the evidence supports this characterization, don’t you? They like to pronounce, but without enough trade promotion, who’s going to give a hoot about what they say?

When psychologists begin to rule a nation – which FYI has already happened — it’s just about gone. Not much difference from when religion does, which I think is my point in the ridiculous term “faith-based” with which we are now drenched in the field of social service, thanks to President Bush, President Clinton, and a while back (like 1994), Congress slipping up and letting a single HHS grant go to jumpstart the National Fatherhood Initiative, which story EVERy parent (male or female) should know in detail. This now has morphed and multiplied to HHS funding groups with six-letter acronyms (and only one vowell, or none) like:

NRFCBI

GOFBCI

NCJFCJ

or 5-letter ones such as I’m going to profile today

ACFLS (“Inc.”)

Respectively, “National Responsible Fatherhood Capacity Building Initiative” (translation, more HHS funds and a Certfication College), Governor’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (this is in Ohio; translations — grabs more HHS money, in the form of TANF funds, for starters), National Center for Family and Juvenile Court Judges (HHS and DOJ supported, in Reno, NV), and the Association of Certified Family Law Specialists (as opposed to what kind of Family Law Specialists?) based in California.

Here’s a glimpse at the purpose and method of the “NRFCBI” — think Wade Horn, Don Eberly, Don Blankenhorn, Institute for American Values (another nonprofit), etc. Thanks to the web and well-trained trainers fo trainers (and not a few on the Congressional Legislative Task forces of NFI, see its site), one can simultaneously be meeting behind closed doors with a new Governor or head of the Social Rehabilitation Services for an entire state — and be training others, and get a whole dang lot of this soaking up public funds to do it.

About NRFCBI

In partnership with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Family Assistance,National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) has designed the National Responsible Fatherhood Capacity-Building Initiative (NRFCBI) to aid grassroots and community-based organizations through a series of capacity-building grants.

These grants will empower community-based organizations by:

developing each recipient’s organizational infrastructure

enhancing its leadership; introducing sub-awardees to new programming recommendations, and

improving each awardee’s connections in the community-at-large

Ultimately, the NRFCBI aims to strategically improve sub-awardees’ capacity to provide services to local fathers and families.**

The NRFCBI was developed with funds and support from the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Family Assistance. Each awardee receives a one-time $25,000 award to strengthen fathers and families in communities throughout the United States.

** local mothers — including those dealing with said fathers, to their risk — can go jump in a lake. Particularly if they hope to actually get the access visitation local sub-grantee, which allegedly is for noncustodial parents (not exclusively men) when there are problems with — access and visitation.

What — really, when you examine it, IS this National Responsible Fatherhood Capacity-Building Initiative? If you had to explain it to an alien, new to earth, new to the financial system, barely understanding the Internet, and someone who thinks instead in more concrete (versus “virtual” wordy) terms — what would you say?

Let’s try:

And most of these are “nonprofits,” which of itself means ??

Think about it: Tax-Exempt = an IRS Perk that lets others pick up the “Social Services”

Tax-exempt status implies (this isn’t actually true, but the theory goes) one is providing a legitimate public service, so this group should be exempt from the indentured service the people they serve (theoretically), that actually results things the public can use — cars, food, steel, paved roads, clothes — things that wage-earners labor at for their business employer, some of which the public actually needs (like homes to live in). (I omitted the public school system in their intentionally).

Most of my close look at family law fields comes down to the same point:

The presence of the IRS and the accumulation of wealth, per capita (unless people know or figure out how to become tax-exempt or work under the table, which we know happens) — has enabled more inflated programs, initiatives, institutes, centers and for that matter has simply centralized wealth in the wrong hands — in the hands of people with global aspirations, historic to their family (Bush) and associations (Project for a New American Century, Family Research Center, etc.). Billionaires and millionaires with apparently time on their hands (boredom – “let’s go find someone else to abuse,” and “play dominoes with countries”) and worlds to change, or as it may be starve into oblivion, attack without cause (Iraq), colonize — although supposedly the USA was “independent” of the empire on which the Sun never set, or simply blow off the face of the globe.

No wonder at the individual and family level, such societies have trouble with so many people who do this at the local and family level. Perhaps it’s the “trickle-down” effect. The wealth didn’t trickle down, but after enough decades of abuse and deprivation of rights, angry crowds assemble, without sufficient outlets, and they explode — or go home and kick the wife. Or husband. Or child.

One guy in France recently, just murdered his three-year-old son in a washing machine, allegedly for misbehavior (he was THREE!) at pre-school. He was 33. The mother, of seven (age 25), tried to cover for him. The neighbors knew of prior abuse in fact the five-year old sister of the three-year old knew, and reported (probably at the same time). I cannot pardon this mother for lying — but I sure do wonder what conditions had her marrying at age 19 (married to get away from abuse at home) and having one child a year, approximately, with the bastard. Now the surviving six are going to be in foster care. I sure hope THAT Grandma won’t put up a fight for custody, after no reporting in time to save her grandson’s life.

I cannot give an answer articles like this (as a mother, I tried), but I sure did notice that the AMERICAN article, reporting on this — had 89 comments, and the summary made no mention of where was the mother. Only 1 in 10 comments (about 8-9 maximum) even mentioned the mother which (to me, not having read all the links) for all I know was not in the picture. She wasn’t in the reporter’s picture. Those who mentioned the mother verbally crucified her along with the Dad. Others debated contraception and abortion. A Dad or two got on to say, hey, c’mon, we’re not all bad! And I couldn’t do a 1500 word response, because more than 1500 word circumstances led to this situation.

What good did the preschool do? Did it have any concept of abuse going on of a little kid at home, or were traumatized, or acting-out little kids so normal to them, or shut-down emotionally ones — who knows? Perhaps — barring families like this — preschool just isn’t an appropriate place for three-year olds; maybe they need to be taken care of by the Moms, not by the state, or parochial schools, or daycare centers. Maybe if there weren’t such a push for early childhood systems (YES< I know this was France, not the USA, but think about it), there’d be more money for other social services — like FOOD — to help support even married or cohabiting mothers while they take care of their children.

What really bothers me was a comment from a woman in Atlanta, Georgia — “don’t they have children’s services in France?”

Don’t they have awake citizens in Georgia? So many problem situations lead back to there, including people who began in GEorgia and now are so problemmatic in (Scranton), PA area that some parents who began reporting, and getting payment records from one of the dynamic duo of parent coordinators (Boyan, Termini — Boyan was the Georgia connection, but both are among professionals recommended — from Kentucky Courts — in:

Active Parenting Publishers

www.activeparenting.com/

Active Parenting programs are built to help educators create successful parent … Active Parenting Publishers has provided award-winning, video-based parenting classes for helping professionals since 1983. …Kennesaw, GA 30144-7808 …

These professionals (on that roster and others), one of them was so “helpful” that between her, a local judge and a local GAL, apparently, the FBI went and raided the courthouse, walking out with evidence — before a man who’d filed a lawsuit against inappropriate use of public funds could complete the lawsuit. The thread is here:

http://scrantonpoliticaltimes.activeboard.com/t45346544/family-courts-co-parenting-coordinator-ann-marie-termini-vs-/?page=4

These parents and activists banded together on a forum, and have posted things such as a questionable professional’s contracts, payment vouchers, and made connections, for example (one post) Oct. 4th, from user “Toss Ross” (meaning — see below) — noticed (from the payments posted, presumably):

Is this just a coincidence or was there a natural huge spike in Termini’s income with the county?

January of 2008 is $2,320.00 total for her services.

January of 2009 is $3,220.00

January of 2010 is $4,110.00

January of 2011 is a huge increase to $7,050.00

Isn’t 2008 when Chet started appointing cases like crazy to Ross?

And all of a sudden Termini sees over 300% increase in business since Ross got all those case? Did Termini get all of Ross’ cases. Wow, if that’s the case Termini sure got lucky.

Coincidence? I think not Mr. Fed. I think not.

How about LiBassi? Did he get lucky, too? Thank you, Mr. P. What a treasure of information. I hope the investigators note the luck and the coincidences.

Ross is the GAL, and Termini the Parenting Coordinator. He noticed a payment spike in 2008. Well (coincidence?) in Georgia in 2008 a Boyan-Termini Business lost its incorporation status (National Association of Parent Coordinators), etc.

not here (note: “0 comments”)

FBI searches Lackawanna County (Pennsylvania) court administrator’s office

BY BORYS KRAWCZENIUK (STAFF WRITER)

Published: November 15, 2011

FBI agents executed a search warrant on Lackawanna County Court Administrator Ron Mackay’s office Monday afternoon as part of an investigation into a program that provides lawyers for children in family court cases.

Mackay declined to answer questions about the visit and answered “no” when asked if he would provide Times-Shamrock newspapers a copy of the search warrant.

The visit lasted less than an hour. . .

A source familiar with the visit told the newspaper the search warrant was related to the county’s guardian ad litem system.

The FBI has been investigating the county’s guardian ad litem system, which is in the hands of one lawyer, attorney Danielle Ross. The county court sometimes appoints a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of children in family court disputes between parents, often in cases of divorce or when custody is at stake.

Late last month, agents served subpoenas at the county courthouse and administration building as part of their investigation. In September, a federal grand jury subpoena ordered County Controller Ken McDowell to produce all bills, invoices, receipts and statements for every case assigned to Ross.

As we have been talking about groups which are not filing consistently with the State (of California, mostly) for their Charitable Returns — or not doing so correctly — while doing sometimes (Futures without Violence) mega-business within the state — it seems appropriate to remind us about the strange financial relationship between KIDS TURN (SF) and the SFTC:

As below:

Record

Date

Document

Doc Type

E/R

Name

Show Name Detail

Show APN Detail

12/14/2010

J099605-00

NOTICE LIEN

KIDS TURN

Show Name Detail

Show APN Detail

12/14/2010

J098917-00

NOTICE LIEN

KIDS TURN

Show Name Detail

Show APN Detail

12/11/2009

I887047-00

NOTICE LIEN

KIDS TURN

Show Name Detail

Show APN Detail

01/27/2004

H647258-00

NOTICE LIEN

KIDS TUR

You can see the four dates. Every single one of them shows that “SFTC” actually has a LIEN on Kids Turn, meaning (apparently) that at some point in time, the nonprofit Kids Turn RECEIVED some money (or other thing that would be due back) from the SF Courts. They now owe this to the courts, creating a Recorded Lien (?). This has happened in 2004, 2009 and twice in one day in 2010, generally around the end or beginning of a year (Dec/January). Was this for tax reporting purposes as well?

A BIG — very big — stink was made in California about Judges — who are to be paid by the state — receiving payment from the states, and not counties. Legislation was passed to retroactively immunize the state of California’s Judges from prosecution for this (after Richard Fine casework) let the entire judicial system have to be shutdown. Then they got back to disbarring the honest man, and throwing him in jail improperly, not to mention somewhere in there cutting off his legitimately earned fees as an attorney. We should review this from time to time as a reminder of JUST who one is dealing with in the august legislators and judicial authorities of the state with the largest court system in the country, and which is looked to as a model. I fear that Big Brother in this case has been setting a lousy example, and I cannot hold common Californians responsible for having high-conflict families, either, or being “flawed,” problemmatic, or most recently, having multiple personality problems troubling the court professionals (Bill Eddy High Conflict Institute language, etc.) as we are so often described in AFCC conferences.

KT was founded and “board-ed” as we know by judges, attorneys, and supported by foundations, donations, and of course some of the attorneys and judges on the board at times no doubt also contributed to Kids’ Turn) — which is a parent education model that tried to get iits name — SPECIFICALLY — written into California Law as THE standard, and which model has been followed in other states.

OK, let’s do a hypothetical situation here. Again, I’m speculating — which so far, is not seditious, it’s simply expressive and cogitational. I do not believe this is prohibited activity (other than we’ve already discerned that reporting criminal activity against one’s self or one’s kids, including kidnapping, assault, battery, molestation, stalking or other threats — is a self-defeating in the family law forum. The ROI is just not worth it! You will be labled and ordered into parenting services, and have another court professional assigned to your high-conflict-parent self.

But let’s just suppose: At any given time (given the rotating board membership of Kids’ Turn), let’s suppose that a presiding judge, commissioner, or other person is ALSO involved in litigation on a specific case, and a parent, or a parent’s business, makes a nice fat donation to Kids’ Turn at the time. Money is clearly changing hands between this group and the courts (not to mention, it also showed up as a nonprofit vendor in the City and County of SF 2007, 2008 & 2009) — wouldn’t that compromise the integrity of any ruling?

And because the general public doesn’t have access to the list of contributors in any timely fashion (the OAG does), unless the ruling judges were scrupulously honest (something they don’t exactly have a reputation for) how could any parent wishing to check impartiality, once aware of this particular financial relationship, protect his or her custody case? Without access to the information. As we can see below — (I think it was San Francisco) one of the groups had had its corporate license suspended, but now is reinstated (after I reported….):

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1657442	12/29/1989	ACTIVE	KID’S TURN	CLAIRE BARNES
C1970774	06/05/1996	ACTIVE	KID’S TURN, SAN DIEGO	JAMES REYNOLDS DAVIS

Here’s the previous version, as I blogged Aug 31, 2011 in “Chasing Down Charitable & Corporate Registrations for (more) Court-Connected Nonprofits”:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1657442	12/29/1989	SUSPENDED	KID’S TURN	CLAIRE BARNES
C1970774	06/05/1996	ACTIVE	KID’S TURN, SAN DIEGO	JAMES REYNOLDS DAVIS

Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania (which is working on also passing a Faith-based initiative; I hope the bill stalls in suspended animation) civil rules of procedure were amended to specify REQUIRED use of “Kids First” (a fictitious name registered to Chet Muklewicz) a Kids’ Turn knockoff (same idea, same setup basically, different name); only this time, some of the locals caught on, reported, and in comes the FBI. Believe me, I’ll teach them everything I know in the noble effort. These are some seriously “high-conflict” parents (they have a serious conflict with court corruption) and may they never settle down, at least in that regard.

The forum was even shut down inappropriately without notice to the moderators, but the resulting suit pulled in the ACLU and up they went again

TIt’s self-evident that (given how simple it is to incorporate) the average “consumer” (litigant or “client” of any Family Court Services setup — even if they become aware of their local professionals’ addicition to forming nonprofits, & related for-profits marketing what the nonprofit sells, and memership associations to sell franchise opportunities for the same — while taking public funds as county employees, or contractors (etc.) — there is no way to keep up.

Nor should we have to — or be forced to spend the valuable ours of our lives as parents — or anyone else — tracking down crooked behavior on behalf of our own government that can’t (or doesn’t) keep up with it!

Just as certain parties wish to legislate their pet parent education (or abstinence education, for that matter) into mandated status — I believe that anyone who disagrees with this better think about how to get some legislating that starts with “JUST SAY NO!” to allowing ANY court employees or County employees staffing the courts, to form, be employed by, or be on the boards of, ANY nonprofit to which the court, jails, or county — will defer business.

The kazillions of diversionary programs presume that the US population has simply become unmanageable, riotous, incapable of monitoring themselves, dangerously volatile, horrible to children (universally, judging by how popular the foster care and adoption industries are) and in general incompetent idiots incapable of managing themselves or their neighborhoods.

I do not share this view. Yeah, it applies often enough — but I have a problem with the parties stating this so often having been the ones riding herd for decade after decade anyhow — so this should be taken into account. Starting with the public education system. Talk about handing over one’s children to the current Administration the moment they go through the doors, and/or metal detectors. No sir! This is an institution that doesn’t handle competition very well, and the more centralized it gets, the less freedom the US has, and we’re pretty far down the fascist road already (referring to centralizing control and setting policy without going through Congress). The more it fails, the more money it demands to compensate.

Taken as a whole, it is quite similar to the family court system, which people universally like to say is “broken” –but it seems to be working according to plan from what I can tell. It’s the PLAN I have issues with — and which needs to be changed, if it cannot be tolerated by the public any longer.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

December 8, 2011 at 8:32 pm

Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Lackawanna County PA Corruption Protests, Mandatory Mediation, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Parent Education promotion, Parenting Coordination promotion, Psychology & Law = an AFCC tactical lobbying unit, Vocabulary Lessons, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

Tagged with "Californians Aware" (Watchdog nonprofit) status suspended after only 2 years for nonfiling (but see RTI), "In Search of Statutory Authority for Parenting Coordinator Orders in California", ACFLS & Elkins Task Force, ACFLS-Association of Certified Family Law Specialists (CA), Active Parenting Publishing (GA), Bogus ACFLS (not filing Charitable returns in CA) group LOVES to file Amicus Briefs and help Reform the Courts, Boyan/Termini Combo, Futures Without Violence (FVPF) 2010 return $11mil revenues $36mil assets rejected-Sched B omits names&addresses of contributors, Kids' Turn Incorporations -then & now, Leslie Ellen Shear-ACFLS AFCC, mediation, NRFCBI National Responsible Fatherhood Capacity Building Initiative=HHS/OFA (taxpayers) fund Train the Trainers to spread the gospel (of fatherhood) at public expense, Parenting Coordination, Ralph Ferguson-Mt Diablo Healthcare District, Relationship Training Institute (San Diego) does bus with courts-neglects to file state Charity returns for SEVEN years - slap on wrist in 2011!, Scranton Political Times forum, Special Districts in Govt (Isn't that "special"?), Stephen Temko San Diego, Tadros v. Doyne & Zoe the Cat, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., WHat's AFCC got to do with it?

ABOUT THIS BLOG (@11/2011) There’s (still) No Excuse For Abuse, Including Economic Abuse of Taxpayers to Allegedly ‘EndAbuse.’

NOPE. It is different. So I hope you will call or tune in next Tuesday at 9pm EST (til further notice):

THIS TUESDAY NIGHT @ 9pm, Abuse Freedom Presents: The 66/34 Effect Radio Show,

Funding in the Courts

With Host Athena Phoenix

November 15, 2011 at 9:00 p.m. EST

This week ABUSE FREEDOM UNITED welcomes our newest team member, Athena Phoenix to help us improve the justice system by bringing reformation to the apathetic and corrupt divisions of our state and federal governments.

Dear Abuse,

(From the Show Description, continued):

Have you ever wondered why the justice system and the media ignores some predatory CPS or child support enforcement programs which target and exploit families? Are courts and the Department of Children and Families receiving financial incentives from the Federal government to increase conflict in family court cases by awarding custody to unfit and unwilling parents, and even taking kids out of good homes and into the system?

Abuse Freedom Radio invites you to tune in this Tuesday night at 9:00 EST to welcome Host Athena Phoenix to the AFU family and support our newest program, The 66/34 Effect: Funding in the Family Courts with host Athena Phoenix. Guests this week will be:

LIZ RICHARDS, Founder of National Alliance for Family Court Justice (www.nafcj.net) For over 20 years, Liz has been a pioneer in the mother’s rights movement a national expert on HHS funding research, fraud, and political reform.

FRED SOTTILE, President of the LA Chapter of Fathers 4 Justice, author, radio host, and a prominent TANF Title IV-D abolition activist.

JACK KELLY, Democratic party political activist, Boston based blogger and columnist who wrote about the Penn State scandal.

See Jack Kelly’s article here:

A Message To PennState Prez

Rodney Erickson: Clean House!

November 12, 2011

By Jack

Find out from special guest Fred Sottile why father’s rights groups are joining the fight to cut $5 billion in wasteful spending on IV-D TANF programs, including fatherhood programs funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS]. Also learn about Fred’s work on judicial reform and transparency with activists like Richard Fine, Full Disclosure Networks, and Judicial Watch.

Liz Richards will educate listeners on the politics of HHS Fatherhood and Healthy Families program funding, and how these funds are used to effect the outcome of court cases. Are grant programs administered through child support enforcement agencies, such as Responsible Fatherhood programs and Access and Visitation programs meeting their funding and accountability requirements? Is there a connection to the Penn State scandal and Occupy Wall Street?

Please join us, and feel free to call in and join the discussion as we find ways to improve the system.

Sincerely,

Jane Boyer & Josie Perez

Abuse Freedom United

IF HHS PROGRAMS ARE FAILING FAMILIES, WHY DO WE KEEP FUNDING THEM? What can we do to reform them?

Why is child support enforcement creating TANF programs which waive due process, collecting billions in child support, then fail to disburse it to the children it is intended to benefit? How much does your judge know about HHS funding and family services? How much of your tax dollars is being used to support programs like CPS, foster care, The Second Mile nonprofit, and Penn State who failed to protect the children raped by Coach Sandusky? Tune in and find out.

Join Athena Phoenix
Tuesday Nights at 9:00 p.m. EST

GUEST CALL-IN #
(646) 595-2134
PRESS #1 TO SPEAK WITH GUESTS OR ATHENA

9:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time

4:00 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time

5:00 p.m. Alaska Standard Time

6:00 p.m. pacific Standard Time

7:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time 8:00 p.m. Central Standard Time

Or tune in on the web http://www.blogtalkradio.com/abusefreedomlive

I believe this 11/15/2011 show is now available to hear, and it will be weekly (though with which guests, I don’t know). However, the “64/34 Effect” — which has nothing to do with what most “expose the impact of domestic violence” or Train The Judges to recognize it — movements talk about. That 64/34 effect, however, has had greater influence in preventing families from getting out of it.

You’ll also note that there are both men and women on the show, and (for the record) that’s not men and women who are all pro-feminist, or pro-father. Rather, at least some people have started figuring out it’s time to stop playing the Good Cop Bad Cop (Men v. Women) themes that have been fed us by media campaigns — and instead look at some of what I have begun to (for some years now) report on this blog. I report on organizations, nonprofits, foundations, and funding behind the policies that messed with my family (yes, even my ex, who was also a batterer) and compromised our futures –badly.

(I hope the show is helpful//for the record, I’m not a regular listener and don’t know about previous episodes), or the hosts Boyer & Perez)

NOW —

ABOUT ME (& the Let’s Get Honest BLOG)

I am What I am, which is changing with time. . .. (so is the blog, only it’s an it).

I don’t tag consistently, so if you’re hunting for something, use the search field.
I don’t proofread, copyedit, and once the thing is off my chest and published, usually that’s it’s format (love it or leave it).
I know — and deduce, from who’s watching it — that this blog has information on it you will NOT typically find elsewhere. I know that, because I’m a diligent person and voracious reader, and I explored the usual alternatives –consistently and hard — during a seven-year period (and thereafter) between filing a domestic violence restraining order with kickout, and watching my children have a custody-switch overnight (not getting to say goodbye to them, or vice versa) after which they basically disappeared out of my life. This was a planned event, and an enabled event — and in this blog, I am going to talk about the CONTEXT in which planned and enabled events of this sort take place.
I quit dealing with nonprofits, or asking them for help, after I realized who they are actually answerable to — and that’s their funders, NOT their clients, who represent warm bodies that come and go through their doors, justifying the funding. This includes all kinds of nonprofits.
The most important things needed for a mother (specifically, but it can also help nonabusive fathers) to know in the court system — to possibly stop getting screwed with (pardon the French) will NOT be found on domestic violence prevention sides, family court self-help sites (naturally), or even protective mothers sites.
I can document a family law case (Sacks v. Sacks) that had all of the above type groups backing it from Florida to the Supreme Court of the USA (where it was declined for a hearing) and back, which chose to ignore what I blog, and think that the case was “about” their individual judges, custody evaluators, attorneys, or situation. It’s not. Get over it. Deal with it. Grow up. What happens in the courtroom — in the bottom line — is NOT about you, and in many cases, the outcome is often settled before you get there (if you have the privilege, which some don’t).

(Sample of the language — notice the drama — and people are supposed to write the judges about all this:) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

WE ARE ALL WITH YOU LINDA MARIE

We thank you Linda Marie for your courage, faith, and strength to speak for those who have been silenced by their abusers and the courts.

CASE UPDATE: JUNE 27, 2011 CASE

US SUPREME COURT: “WE DONT DO FAMILY LAW”

THE US SUPREME COURT DENIED LINDA MARIE SACKS PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IN SACKS V SACKS. WE ARE DISSAPOINTED BUT NOT SHOCKED AT THE US SUPREME COURTS COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN. DESHANEY V WINNEBEGO, CASTLE ROCK V GONZALES, TITELMAN V TITELMAN ARE PRIME EXAMPLES OF OUR NATIONS HIGHEST COURT IGNORING THE PLEAS OF PARENTS TRYING TO FIND JUSTICE FOR THEIR CHILDREN WHO ARE SEVERELY ABUSED OR MURDERED. OVER AND OVER AGAIN THE STATE SUPREME COURTS AND THE US SUPREME COURT REFUSE TO PROTECT VICTIMS AND POLICE THEIR OWN. WHY HAVE SUPREME COURTS THAT ARE DEAF TO THOSE MATTERS THAT REALLY COUNT. IS BURNING OUR FLAG, STRIP SEARCHING OF SCHOOL CHILDREN, SCHOOL PRAYER, AND THE LIKE-MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE RIGHT OF PARENTS TO PROTECT THEIR CHILDREN FROM ABUSE AND MURDER?

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN: FACTS FOUNDER ADELE GUADALUPE INTERVIEWS LINDA SACKS ABOUT HER CASE

Click on this link and then go to bottom of blue page to download and read full petition to the US Supreme Court

Battered Mothers-A Human Rights Issue

READ MORE www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org

Write the judges in SACKS V SACKS

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ All the groups involved should thank her for free (negative) publicity at her children’s expense. However, ignorance — and this WAS ignorance, and pigheaded refusal to smell the coffee – – – – is no excuse, either. (I wouldn’t say this, but tried to present information to this mother as well.) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

This Petition for Writ of Certiori, i.e., to be heard by the US Supreme Court under “Other Authorities” cites Dr. Phil and the O (Oprah’s) magazine, a SF online weekly, a radio interview of Linda Sacks, and basically a laundry list of the nonprofits and individuals that did NOT inform this parent about what just happened to her. Or why a Supervised Visitation Center — or having a person on her case (Dr. Deborah O. Day) who just happened to be a founding board member of the Florida AFCC, and a Certified Family Mediator and is big on Munchhausen’s by Proxy — might relate to the problems she, like others, has been having. Instead, she focused on being “squeaky clean” and how unfair the system was to her — rather than studying the system. The groups cited (see the writ) don’t talk about AFCC, either, nor does a recent tome called Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and Custody (see the groups listed).

Meanwhile — in Lancaster, Pennsylvania very recently– a forum exists “Expose Corruption” exists, which reports on its local courts and potential corruption, and the moderator (I think it’s the moderator) simply sent off a “Right to Know” information request on one of the court personnel, and got payment vouchers,* (*it doesn’t look like Ms. Sacks ever did this) discovered no contract exists for the person in question, found out what a nice living she is making at public expense, as either Guardian Ad Litem or Parenting Coordinator. She sued him for inadvertently posting SS#s that the responding officials “forgot” to redact on the vouchers, and the game’s on. But it began with someone noticing that judges were steering cases to certain profiteers, and inquiring about the profit.

FBI searches court administrator’s office

BY BORYS KRAWCZENIUK (STAFF WRITER)

Published: November 15, 2011

FBI agents executed a search warrant on Lackawanna County Court Administrator Ron Mackay’s office Monday afternoon as part of an investigation into a program that provides lawyers for children in family court cases.

Mr. Mackay declined to answer questions about the visit and answered “no” when asked if he would provide The Times-Tribune a copy of the search warrant.

The visit lasted less than an hour. For a while, as agents worked in his office, Mr. Mackay was required to stand in a waiting room outside the suite that houses his office. An FBI agent stood near Mr. Mackay guarding the entrance to the suite. Eventually, four men dressed in plain clothes, only one of whom acknowledged being an FBI agent, walked out, with one carrying a box with white papers sticking out of the top.

. . .The FBI has been investigating the county’s guardian ad litem system, which is in the hands of one lawyer, attorney Danielle Ross. The county court sometimes appoints a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of children in family court disputes between parents, often in cases of divorce or when custody is at stake.

Late last month, agents served subpoenas at the county courthouse and administration building as part of their investigation. In September, a federal grand jury subpoena ordered County Controller Ken McDowell to produce all bills, invoices, receipts and statements for every case assigned to Ms. Ross.

Now THAT’s how you investigate!

Funny how Sacks’ coaches and/or centers of reference: Battered Women’s Custody Conference, Barry Goldstein, The Leadership Council, California Protective Parents Association, Center for Judicial Excellence, etc. But ordinary citizens (well, perhaps some “extraordinary” is involved here) on a forum can pick up:

(etc.)(who you know I’ve been looking at too — as I can’t see where Termini & Boyan are currently incorporated — and I don’t think they are. Termini’s making a good living in Lancaster County at the courthouse, since (it seems) about 2008. Coincidentally? The “National Association for Parent Coordination” in Georgia got dissolved in about 2008 (same dynamic duo in charge). now they run advanced parent coordination training (for a stiff price) and well they should — because in Lancaster at least, it seems to net $60/hour, plenty of referrals (and without a contract even??). . . We, too, can do “right to know” or “FOIA” inquiries, and should do more.

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

On the other hand, knowledge — and knowledge you can act on locally — is empowering, even if the scenario is daunting. I have learned so much by having all systems fail in the family law, family, (religious institutions), criminal justice system (i.e., law enforcement), and a few more along the way. I know I am a better woman for it, though sorry it took so many years (i.e., I got older in the meantime) Forgot to add

I’m longwinded. The posting has really gotten out of hand, and while it may be a warm blanket to me, I’m getting ready to let go of it and go Facebook, Twitter, or something else. I don’t seriously believe anyone reads the entire posts. It’s where I keep (SOME, FYI, not all), of my research, for the record. The research has borne out, and there IS a clearer picture (in my understanding) of what to ignore and what to pay attention to in these systems. And of the country I live in (shudder!) as a woman, particularly a woman beyond kicking out some more babies, or with an appetite for raising someone else’s. That frees up a lot of thought time .. … ….
Oh yes — there are about 9 different pages on here. But only the main page, generally, is added to. It’s structured like this. I write until I’m done (and only a small portion of the screen is visible at a time; no hardcopy printouts or second drafts). When I’m done –or sometimes several paragraphs beyond that, then I stop, and usually hit “Publish.”

Whatever I am saying, visits are steadily coming from state & county & city governments, various court systems, law firms, the California Judicial Council,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Alaska Court System (209.165.166.194) [Label IP Address] 0 returning visits
Anchorage, Alaska, United States

		(No referring link)
16 Nov	13:00:29

– – – – – or, say:

Total Visits:1

Location:San Francisco, California, United States

IP Address:City & County Of San Francisco (204.68.210.39) CA CityCnty of SF – KT artklReferring URL:

(No referring link)

Visit Page:

familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/lets-get-honest-about-kids-turn-and-judges-profit/

– – – – -or, say:

Total Visits:1

Location:San Francisco, California, United States

IP Address:American Lawyer Media (208.8.241.6) [Label IP Address]Referring URL:

(No referring link)

Visit Page: familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/lets-get-honest-about-kids-turn-and-judges-profit /

– – – – – or …

State Of New Jersey (12.195.10.99) NJ State of (undistrib CS) 0 returning visits

(No referring link)

16 Nov05:35:30

familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/66-to-34-undistributable-child-support-collections-and-why-hhsoas-is-more-concerned-about-its-share-than-kids-getting-theirs /

Total Visits:

South Amboy, New Jersey, United States Show Full URLs

1Location:Baltimore, Maryland, United States

IP Address:Psinet (38.112.73.146) [Label IP Address]

Referring URL:(No referring link)

Visit Page: familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/tag/parents-day-comes-from-true-parentsunification-church /

[[that post has a lot of corporation / charitable regisration lookups on some well-known California Marriage Promotion groups — more on that later]]

or, ..

County Of Los Angeles(159.83.4.157)[Label IP Address] 0 returning visits

(No referring link)

15 Nov14:02:52

familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/pc278-5-arresting-moms-at-least-for-felony-child-stealing/

Long Beach, California, United States

or … (i’m not sure if this is good news, or not good news….).

Executive Office Of The President Usa (198.137.240.197) WDC EXEC OFC PRESIDNT! 9/2/11 0 returning visits
Washington, District Of Columbia, United States Show Full URLs
(No referring link)
2 Sep	08:55:24familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/page/18/?pages-list
(No referring link)
15 Nov	05:53:57familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/ocse-child-support-enforcementfederal-grants-to-states-lets-look-at-the-taggs-hhs-charts-cfdas-93-563-93-564/

Executive Office Of The President Usa(198.137.241.197)WDC Exec Ofc Pres!198137241197 0 returning visits

Washington, District Of Columbia, United States Show Full URLs

(No referring link)

2 Sep

08:55:17 familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/category/wheres-mom/page/2

(No referring link)

15 Nov

05:53:55

familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/ocse-child-support-enforcementfederal-grants-to-states-lets-look-at-the-taggs-hhs-charts-cfdas-93-563-93-564/

– – – – – Or (just one last one!):

Calnet2 St Of Ca Judicial Council (aoc San Francis(63.202.171.143)CA SF CalJudiCouncil SFAOC 0 returning visits
San Francisco, California, United States Show Full URLs
(No referring link)
26 Jul	12:23:39familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/05/28/whats-money-got-to-do-with-it-calif-legislators-judges-at-play/
(No referring link)
4 Aug	11:34:38familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/06/18/afcc-coordinates-parenting-coord-and-the-courts-democrats-spearhead-next-fatherhood-legislation-hr-2193/
(No referring link)
18 Aug	14:28:21familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/how-nonprofit-status-all-nonprofit-status-large-small-leads-to-abuse-of-individuals-money-flows-towards-the-visionary-dictatorial/
(No referring link)
14 Nov	09:22:46familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/say-no-to-sb-557-contd-local-connections-faith-focused-ovw-grants-all-in-the-family-but-whose/

(I’m not going to keep posting visitors here, but the posts they chose to look at are an indicator of possibly something YOU might want to look at. Also, I believe we should keep certain public entities on their toes (if possible), particularly ones that have been on our HEELS, dogging us, driving us — and for what? For profit? For someone’s career track? To bring world peace or solve world poverty?

(besides which it was seriously difficult to get those stats into the WordPress margins… )

IN THE BOTTOM LINE, THE QUESTION BECOMES — WHOSE LIFE IS MINE? WHOSE MONEY IS THE MONEY I EARN?

WHAT ABOUT CHILDREN? IF A MOTHER AND FATHER HAVE CHILDREN AND A CUSTODY DISPUTE, WHOSE CHILDREN ARE THEY?

By law, the ANSWER is here, and the answer is NOT his or hers….

The UCCJEA talks about which STATE has jurisdiction, when it’s a multi-state custody matter. But what about within a single state?

JURISDICTION:

So what is jurisdiction? It is the right, the power, and the control that the court will have over a certain legal issue or subject. Thus there is geographical jurisdiction (where can the case be heard?), subject matter jurisdiction (which court has authority to hear and decide this particular legal issue?), personal jurisdiction (does the court have the power to make a person obey its orders?) and there are other jurisdictional questions.

What we normally call FAMILY COURTS ( as I am understanding this) are actually by statue “CONCILIATION COURTS….Now the type of people going to the family law system are not typically the happily married couples, but couples with often “irreconcilable differences” this may come of a bit of a shock — while you are figuring out how to separate, the court is actually (by legal purpose) trying to get you back together, apparently (I’ll use that word a lot so no one thinks about accusing me of practicing law ….).

No, seriously …..

WHAT IS A “CONCILIATION COURT” (ever heard the term?)

Conciliation Courts

California was one of the first states to establish conciliation courts. The purpose of a conciliation court is to encourage families to attempt reconciliation and reduce litigation in family law cases. In California counties with conciliation courts, parties may petition the court for help in resolving disputed family law matters prior to, or even after, filing an action for dissolution. While the matter is under advisement by the conciliation court, neither party may file an action for dissolution without permission of the court.

(taken from Robert L. Lewis site; San Jose Family Lawyer)

How many mothers or fathers are even aware that in having ANY custody dispute and going before a judge to settle it, they have entered “Conciliation Court Land” (I think. NOTE: I’m not an attorney, and reader is advised to consult, law, a licensed attorney or a better source before acting on any FYI information I post, from other sites, hereon!)

Basically when there is a custody DISPUTE (parents cannot work it out separately) in — I believe most counties in the US, but don’t know for sure — that opens the doorway for all THIS:

(CALIFORNIA LAW — which may explain where all the behavioral scientists get off in studying your children and collecting data from courthouses about this or that):

FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS (California Code 1800ff (part, below:)

1814. (a) In each county in which a family conciliation court is
established, the superior court may appoint one supervising counselor of conciliation and one secretary to assist the family
conciliation court in disposing of its (ITS, not YOUR) business and carrying out its functions. In
counties which have by contract established joint family
conciliation court services, the superior courts in contracting
counties jointly may make the appointments under this subdivision.
(b) The supervising counselor of conciliation has the power to do all of the following:

(1) Hold conciliation conferences with parties to, and hearings
in, proceedings under this part, and make recommendations concerning
the proceedings to the judge of the family conciliation court.
(2) Provide supervision in connection with the exercise of the
counselor's jurisdiction as the judge of the family conciliation
court may direct.
(3) Cause reports to be made, statistics to be compiled, and records to be kept
as the judge of the family conciliation court may direct.
(4) Hold hearings in all family conciliation court cases as may be
required by the judge of the family conciliation court, and make
investigations as may be required by the court to carry out the
intent of this part.
(5) Make recommendations relating to marriages where one or both
parties are underage.
(6) Make investigations, reports, and recommendations as provided
in Section 281 of the Welfare and Institutions Code under the
authority provided the probation officer in that code.

(7) Act as domestic relations cases investigator.
(8) Conduct mediation of child custody and visitation disputes.
(c) The superior court, or contracting superior courts, may also appoint,
with the consent of the board of supervisors, associate counselors of conciliation
and other office assistants as may be necessary to assist
the family conciliation court in disposing of its business.

Which, for the record, may or may not relate to YOUR business or intents in being there.
In fact, the two purposes are often at odds.  But did you know what its business was to start with?
This is not told you in the basic self-help legal center, but it appears to be so....

The associate counselors shall carry out their duties
under the supervision of the supervising counselor of conciliation
and have the powers of the supervising counselor of conciliation.
Office assistants shall work under the supervision and direction of
the supervising counselor of conciliation.
   (d) The classification and salaries of persons appointed under this section shall be determined by: 
(1) The board of supervisors of the county in which a noncontracting family conciliation court operates.

(2) The board of supervisors of the county which by contract has the responsibility to administer funds of the joint family
conciliation court service.

OK, Let’s review this: COUNTY (financial) vs. STATE (pays judges) responsibilities and associations:

And State to Federal ….

The county commissioners (or, “Board of Supervisors of the County”) in which a conciliation court operates appoint the classification and salaries of people helping there work. Got that? (Judges, in California, are to be paid by the state — not the counties).

SO — when here comes the United States (federal) Child Support & Welfare System and says — “we will fund you, only it’s a $2/$1 relationship (or the 66/34% effect), …

provided you follow our rules — some of which includes, we want to do social studies on your families, (Just whatever the Head (Secretary) of HHS says to ….)

and we also believe that you should be running some marriage, fatherhood promotion, abstinence education, supervised visitation, mediation, counseling and parent education classes too, or other “access/visitation” programs — to reduce the overall divorce rate, which WE assert relates to the overall POVERTY RATE for which we are (see?? ) giving your state $XX b/million per year — if you want it that is…”

— GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE STATES (AND COUNTY SUPERVISORS OF CONCILIATION COURTS) ARE GOING TO LISTEN.

AND JUDGES ARE LIKELY TO ORDER SERVICES — THAT’S HOW WE GET THE INAPPROPRIATE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SOME OF THESE NONPROFITS AND INDIVIDUAL JUDGES ON SPECIFIC CUSTODY CASES THEY ARE TO HELP PARENTS SETTLE THEIR “DISPUTES,” and this JUST — PERHAPS — MIGHT INVOLVE FORCING THAT COUPLE TO GO SIT IN FRONT OF A COUNTY-PAID COUNSELOR (OR MEDIATOR), OR TAKE CLASSES BY A JUDGE- LAWYER-RUN PROGRAM THAT QUALIFIES FOR SOME OF THE GRANTS. . .

.Which may explain why American Lawyer Media — (or quite a few others visiting the same site) are somewhat interested in my post on “Kids Turn” . . . or why the California Judicial Council/Administrative Office of the Courts (perhaps) may be interested in my reporting on the A/V grants, or OCSE — or “AFCC” which includes personnel with a penchant for ordering a whole lot of these types of income-producing programs:

(CODE, continued — but in more normal print so it will wrap to the margins right):

1815. (a) A person employed as a supervising counselor of conciliation or as an associate counselor of conciliation shall have all of the following minimum qualifications: {{NOTICE THE FIELDS}}

(1) A master’s degree in psychology, social work, marriage, family and child counseling, or other behavioral science substantially related to marriage and family interpersonal relationships.

(2) At least two years of experience in counseling or psychotherapy, or both, preferably in a setting related to the areas of responsibility of the family conciliation court and with the ethnic population to be served.

(3) Knowledge of the court system of California and the procedures used in family law cases. {{notice this is qualification #3, not #1}}

(4) Knowledge of other resources in the community that clients can be referred to for assistance.

(5) Knowledge of adult psychopathology and the psychology of families.

(6) Knowledge of child development, child abuse, clinical issues relating to children, the effects of divorce on children, the effects of domestic violence on children, and child custody research sufficient to enable a counselor to assess the mental health needs of children.

(7) Training in domestic violence issues as described in Section 1816. {{notice this is #7, not #2, although DV issues do result in disputed custody situations that come before this court!}}

(b) The family conciliation court may substitute additional experience for a portion of the education, or additional education for a portion of the experience, required under subdivision (a).

(c) This section does not apply to any supervising counselor of conciliation who was in office on March 27, 1980.

Does that explain why your life as a disputed custody parent (if that’s you) are now filled with these social science, behavioral modification, psychopathology & psychology of families & psychotherapist personnel?

NOW — a voice from 1977. I notice that it was published in the National Council on Family Relations.

Who are they? Well not in this post, but this is the grant they got recently from our government (HHS) to keep marriages together or help persuade more people to marry

Recipient Name	City	State	ZIP Code	County	DUNS Number	Sum of Awards
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS	MINNEAPOLIS	MN	55421-3900	ANOKA	078679974

$ 1,286,457

(click on name to see what the grant 90FM0001 was about, from 2004-2008)(then click on the grant# and see that its 2011 continuation for only $785,612 was continued at Utah State U. Utah appears to be a very marrying state, one might think, given the prevailing religion..

“CONCILIATION COUNSELING: THE COURT’S EFFECTIVE MECHANISM FOR RESOLVING VISITATION AND CUSTODY DISPUTES“

(excerpt)

The Family Coordinator © 1977 National Council on Family Relations

Abstract

Counseling processes utilized by the Santa Clara County Conciliation Court in in resolving litigated visitation and custody disputes are described. The responsiveness of parents and their children is discussed as are the roles of both counselor and judge in these matters. A sample case reflecting a broad range of family dynamics is presented and the procedure by which cases are received and evaluated is reported. The practical and salutary features of this court-oriented program are set forth.

(Excerpt): “It has been acknowledge for some time by judges and lawyers, as well as those inviduals affected (note order — judges & lawyers 1st, affected people, 2nd) that the process by which custody and visitation issues are decided is in need of change. With that in mind, THE CONCILIATION SERVICE OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY (California) SUPERIOR COURT IN 1972 LAUNCHED A PILOT PROGRAM WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN FULLY INTEGRATED INTO ITS FAMILY COURT PROCEDURES (caps & emphases= mine). PROFESSIONAL MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COUNSELORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM’S IMPLEMENTATION….

At the calling of the Family Court Calendar each morning and each afternoon, all those awaiting hearing on visitation matters are promptly and directly referred to the court’s Conciliation Service. (etc.)

That’s how the counselors get in there. . . . Note the date –1972. The AFCC (which is an association of judges, lawyers, and exactly these types of counselors — must be coincidence!) didn’t actually finish getting caught and forced to incorporate (in IL) til around 1975. No-fault divorce was here or near, and FEMINISM was on the Ascent in America…. This caused some marital issues, obviously. ….

WHAT I WAS NOT TOLD — EVER — BY ANY COURTHOUSE I ENTERED< ANYWHERE< OR ANY MEDIATOR:

WERE YOU? WHOSE CHILDREN ARE THEY?

WHO HAS JURISDICTION IF YOU HAVE A CUSTODY DISPUTE?

THIS IS A 2009 blog from an attorney who works in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties. It’s not hard to understand, it’s fairly clear — but were you told?

L.A. Divorce Blog (Nov. 24, 2009)

When a controversy exists between spouses, or when a controversy relating to child custody or visitation exists between parents (regardless of their marital status), and the controversy might otherwise result in divorce, annulment, legal separation, or the disruption of the household, and there is a minor child of the spouses or parents whose welfare might be affected thereby, the Family Conciliation Court has jurisdiction over the controversy, the parties to the controversy, and all persons having any relation to the controversy. Where the controversy involves domestic violence, the Family Conciliation Court has jurisdiction over the controversy, whether or not the parties have a minor child.

The purpose of filing a Petition for Conciliation is to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction to preserve the marriage, to effect a reconciliation of the parties, or to amicably settle the controversy to avoid further litigation over the issue.

While this is talking specifically about someone wishing to stop the divorce via a “petition of conciliation,” the existence of this code – has affected all “custody disputes” and also how domestic violence is adjudicated. Cindy Ross (also of California, and who writes better) described:

(notice — this is an older post, 2/19/2003) and talks more about the impact.

AFCC was originally established in California as the means to enact Conciliation Court Law (CA Family Codes 1800-1852), an obscure set of codes used to prevent divorce in counties where the court itself deems it necessary to “promote the public welfare by preserving, promoting, and protecting family life and the institution of matrimony“. [15] While the Conciliation Court identifies children’s rights to “both parents”, it is used only to assist fathers take custody away from mothers and/or to otherwise gain inappropriate or illegal “access” to children.

Enacting Conciliation Court Law gives the family court jurisdiction over domestic violence cases, in violation of appropriate family codes and “child’s best interests” laws. For example, in California, while Family Code §3044 establishes a presumption that sole or joint custody for a parent convicted of domestic violence is not in the best interests of children, Conciliation Court codes are used not only to assist abusive men get custody, but to help them avoid criminal prosecution. [16] Because blame is shifted to mothers by concealing evidence of paternal crimes against women and children, in the Conciliation Court, victims of abuse (not perpetrators) get convicted in accordance with PAS “threat therapy”. [17]

PAS court-ordered threats include jail terms for mothers and institutionalization of children to convince them that the abuse never occurred, but their mothers are crazy. [18] PAS threats have been linked to the death of at least one child. When forced to “choose” between visiting his violent father in a positive frame of mind, or having his mother jailed for his refusal, Nathan Grieco chose suicide instead. [19]

The Conciliation Court uses PAS methodology to give abusive men the legal upper hand. However, “shared parenting” has become the rallying cry of the fathers’ rights movement, primarily because joint custody also means no child support obligations. When AFCC affiliates assist fathers get custody and get out of paying child support, they instigate frivolous litigation for their own financial gain. They take kickbacks and other improper payments to rig the outcomes of the cases.

She hasn’t reported on a few others factors, but at least this explains why, when coming in for a divorce, the court seems more interested in assigning you a few (dozen) experts. As also explained (again, long ago) on

Dedicated to Exposing Illegal and Immoral

practices in the court

… Particularly the Family Law System which includes the Courts, Attorneys, Family Services, Psychologists and Therapists,Visitation Monitors, Ad-Litems, Social Workers, Child Protection Agencies and all of the agencies that support these so-called professionals.

Collusion among individuals within the family law system takes place to extract assets from troubled parents. The system is designed to increase the wealth of the family law professionals at the expense and heartbreak of families. Corrupt practices abound. This website is dedicated to exposing the corruption in detail. Areas where corruption exists are identified below.

To which I’d add — and related federal programs, as they may be available.

To people who file civil restraining orders — this information is not shown them (last I heard), but if children are involved, they are then escorted (at least in my area) to a quick run by the local family mediator –who just happens to be in this conciliation court. The place looks, acts, and sounds like a courthouse, but in fact it is a support service, under conciliation law, to a conciliation court. Funny that, when divorce actions sometimes read “irreconciliable differences” — and yet someone is going to give it a try, for public benefit. Or at least pretend to. Heck, it’s a job, right?

I know many women who filed for safety and ended up in this court before they knew what hit. Sometimes the actions are consolidated Ex Parte to get them into this venue. Then we wonder why, when we talk about matters of law, due process, (particularly DV law), or even crimiinal matters, the judges, GALs, and evaluators jsut cannot hear — and talk a different language (as above, see the code).

The entity which lobbied for conciliation code to start with, in California, is known as the AFCC (association of family and CONCILIATION courts — get it?). Their job is to extract as much wealth as possible for as long as possible (this may include from extended family, foster care situations, adoptive families, you name it) and try to convince — or force — you to believe that this is in the best interests of what you think are YOUR children, but they know (by knowing about this section of code) are actually NOT your children — not until you and the Dad can agree.

Your judge or lawyer is bad? Your ex done you wrong? Start a blog and unload there — but I am more interest in system change and reporting how systems have changed over time. When I feel I’ve said this well enough (or as well as I can on this blog), then I’ll stop saying it. Don’t hold your breath.

SO, ABOUT THIS BLOG:

Scroll down to “READ THIS FIRST” page for a history of family law starting from the consequences of it, back down to the shady beginnings, one generation after women got the vote and between the world wars. Yep, that’s when the first law was passed, which eventually morphed, evolved, or as one summary puts it, “metastasized” into what we have now. And, like Hollywood, and other exports, this one seems to have originated in Sunny California, Southern part…

This post doesn’t contain any porn, graphic violence, or disgusting images (as I recall), but it is going to include plain talk on what comes from papering over these things.
[2011 update]. I investigate and report on corporations and nonprofits taking business from the court system, and taking diversionary monies from needy families through the 1996 TANF welfare reform and OCSE loopholes.
Originally the blog was intended to develop and report on matters covered (since ab. 1993) at http://www.NAFCJ.net and others, which at least gave a sensible explanation for weird behaviors by family court officials. I continued researching, observing, and learning.
A good deal also covers the “Faith-Based Behaviors” which have been enabled to expand beyond even the “Fatherhood Factor Funding” of 1994 & 1995. In 2001, GWB began office with two executive orders, 13998 and 13999, which opened the door for these (crooks).
Recently, articles are hitting the press about the scandalous “take the money and run” grantees, the “steer the money to our friends” process exhibited by program managers at the state level, and more. Not to mention, the black hole of undistributed child support collections, which (as reported in part by Richard Fine in 1999) shows a system of bribery and kickbacks are steering custody results, and kicking too many kids into bad situations — or state care.

I also note that tools available to the public to study these things are indequate and limited; that there exists — both on database and (some indications) literally, a dual-docketing system, such that decisions made with a parent’s or child’s name on them — which bring federal program funding opportunities — can continue without that parent or child’s knowledge. Some of these do not seem to require a judge’s signature. Others may have such signature, but litigants somehow can’t get a copy of their own files. The database TAGGS is not set up to produce truly flexible reports which would help track down who is doing what and for whom. It is there for an appearance of transparency, as far as I am concerned. Before I re-read NAFCJ.net (Liz Richards’ site) and began my own research, I didn’t run into a single protective mother or DV advocate who even used this database, or told women — or men — about it.

Above all, it’s time to let the idols, the myths about justice hit the dust (which is where idols belong anyhow) and go roll up the sleeves and start looking things up.

My blog is dense to read, and shows affects of PTSD (many times) — BUT I’ll bet you will not find many others reporting what I do.

Fathers in custody battles need to know — it’s NOT about you, or your story, or a particular judge; it’s about the system. Fathers also need to know that SOME of us mothers, while we do not back up one inch on abuse is wrong, or buy your stories about how much false allegations of it exist, we do know that you, too, have been extorted by at least the OCSE system, and we will work along the non-rabid community of fathers to do something about the kickbacks and lack of accountability.

And I personally wish to tell leaders of domestic violence coalitions and certain other agencies receiving major HHS and/or DOJ funding that — we mothers exiting abuse do NOT appreciate our legitimate needs having been SOLD OUT by your groups, to take funding for speculative theories and PR/educational campaigns on what “prevents family violence” let alone “poverty.”

NOW –that’s the N.O.W. — has no excuse for basically dropping the ball, not when in 2002 an excellent Family Court Report laid out the roadmap, and 2005 your California Leader called for an investigation of HHS use of Fatherhood Funds. (What she didn’t realize then is WE have to do this investigation, then bring it to legislators). NOW is still active in matters of domestic violence, and has a Family Law Task Force — but other priorities. NOW has done a lot (and I think them), but here — for all to see — is a clear indication that (as with other DV groups) the “Family Law” issue is not seen as a Violence Against Women issue:

Key Issues

NOW’s Top Priority Issues: (the top 6, and the “other important issues”)

Other Important Issues:

Suffice it to say, I think a more singular focus is needed, and as NOW didn’t continue to report some of the material about Bush, Fatherhood, Welfare Reform, and other issues. I don’t even share 100% of those issues, or agree with all of them. I want to stay alive and exercise my rights, and my kids to NEVER have to repeat what happened and what they witnessed, while growing up, half in violence, and half in a custody war with a basis in extortion from more than one sector, with them, their distress, their simply being minors, as the bait. But we all need some NOW — because without a dose of them, it’d be The USA of Shari’a (Christian, Jewish, Muslim & Mormon versions, plus the same general themes among the agnostics and atheists). It’d be off the deep end and in over our heads. But they lost the focus on the HHS matters, which are also national matters because they involve the economy and systems change to push marriage and fatherhood programs (notice, I didn’t say to push marriage, or fatherhood — but to push the programs).

LIKEWISE:

The NCADV and Domestic Violence Statewide Coalitions have no excuse. Stop SELLING stuff (including conference attendances, memberships) and start reporting — for free– on welfare reform and what it did to battered women who are also mothers’ chances of EVER getting completely free from such dangerous relationships. You do NOT speak for mothers who have their lives or kids’ lives on their line.

Family Violence Prevention Fund is now “Futures Without Violence” (facelift, namechange, physical move to the SF Praesidio). I went up down and around the SF Bay Area looking for help, only to find out (once I got regular internet access and knew to look) that you, too, believe that the real way to prevent violence by men against women is to take funding from wealthy foundations who believe that the way to stop violence against women is to make sure that there is a man in all their homes, and a father in every abused child’s life. Then I learned you were a resource center for women like me, and I know lots of us in the area.

Recipient Name	City	State	ZIP Code	County	DUNS Number	Sum of Awards
FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	CA	94103-5177	SAN FRANCISCO	618375687	$ 22,368,114
Family Violence Prevention Fund	SAN FRANCISCO	CA	94103-5178	SAN FRANCISCO	618375687	$ 31,000

FY	Award Number	Award Title	Budget Year of Support	Award Code	Agency	Action Issue Date	DUNS Number	Amount This Action
2005	90XA0109	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT	1	0	ACF	08-03-2005	618375687	$ 496,000

That’s from Health and Human Services. Overall (not that this site is usually complete) USASPENDING.GOV shows the OVW funding as well:

Total Dollars:$41,512,886
Transactions:1 – 25 of 92

$34 million of this was straight grants, some was contracts…..

Somehow (when I check “Grants/HHS” at USASPENDING.gov — only $13 million shows up)

so often, “Discretionary”:

Program Office	Recovery Act Indicator	Award Number	Award Title	Budget Year	Action Issue Date	CFDA Number	CFDA Program Name	Award Class	Principal Investigator	Sum of Actions
CB		90XA0109	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT	1	08/03/2005	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	DISCRETIONARY	ESTA SOLER	$ 496,000

Used to write up a report on yourself?

Title: International Center to End Violence: Addressing Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and Neglect. Final Report to: DHHS/Administration on Children, Youth and Families under CAPTA. Grant Number 90-XA-0109. October 31, 2007.
Published: 2007

Available from: Children’s Bureau
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/
Administration on Children, Youth and Families
1250 Maryland Avenue, SW, Eighth Floor
Washington, DC 20024

Abstract: This final report discusses the activities and outcomes of the federally funded Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF), an organization committed to building safer and stronger families by ending domestic violence, sexual assault, and other forms of abuse against women and children. Major activities and accomplishments of the FVPF are described, including: the development of an Interactive Learning and Exhibit Center, the development of the International Center to End Violence,** and the implementation of training programs and experiential learning for engaging everyday gatekeepers and young students. Activities of the FVPF’s Teacher Training Academy are also highlighted, as well as public educational and engagement activities and school-based programming.

Results 1 to 1 of 1 matches.

by Philip V. Scribano, Pediatrician

and here:

New International Center for Family Violence Prevention Fund

(in case graphic doesn’t show…)

“Violence against women is an issue that cannot wait . .. and we know that when we work to eradicate violence against women,

we empower our greatest resource fro development; mothers raising children; lawmakers in parliament;

chief executives; negotiators; teachers; doctors; policewomen; peacekeepers and more.”

..Ban Ki Moon, Secretary General, United Nations

And we were the first to engage men – as coaches, mentors, and positive role models to boys.

New Home, new name – in the SF Praesidio (while – in this area — I know women who went homeless after custody-switch in the family courts; I almost did. That’s partly a child support matter, and a child support motivation. Where’s your blog — your website — your publication of how child support and the state of the OCSE/welfare reform affects custody decisions?? Which, in the case of women leaving violence — affects their and their kids’ safety and well-being?)

Montgomery Street Barracks

Built in the 1890s, the six red-brick Montgomery Street Barracks that frame the Main Parade have become Presidio icons. All will be rehabilitated and will feature activities and services for visitors, such as restaurants, galleries, and cultural institutions. Activities will spill out on to the Barracks’ expansive front porches and the Main Parade Ground. The Walt Disney Family Museum opened in one of the barracks in fall 2009 and the International Center to End Violence will open in another in spring 2011.

(OVW grant for this center includes a 2009 one of $2,000,000)

Yes you did engage boys and men — jumped on the bandwagon: Fatherhood as a tool to stop domestic violence.

I saw the funding surge behind the change of tune, too:

National Institute on Fatherhood and Domestic Violence

Fatherhood can be a strong motivator for some abusive fathers to renounce their violence. Some men choose to change their violent behavior when they realize the damage they are doing to their children.

In partnership with the Office on Violence Against Women, we have trained practitioners from over 40 communities across the US, including: DV advocates, supervised visitation, batterers intervention and fatherhood programs, judges and other law enforcement, and child protection workers

Did you train whoever trained Scott McAlpin? Scott DeKraii? Cody Beemer?

(yet — no mention, for the sake of the single, female-headed households in the State of Ohio, that it has a Fatherhood Commission, Fatherhood Practitioners, Fatherhood Summits, and that a Legislator is still running around strengthening fatherhood to stop child abuse (like that’s the solution); that it had an Governor’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, that is ripping off the public – in a large way — in an effort to turn back the clocks to the 1950s, pre-feminism and pre-VAWA?

in 2011, it’s up to $3,000,000

FY	Award Number	Award Title	Budget Year of Support	Award Code	Agency	Action Issue Date	DUNS Number	Amount This Action
2011	90EV0401	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	2	0	ACF	08-04-2011	618375687	$ 250,000
2011	90EV0414	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND SERVICES	1	0	ACF	09-17-2011	618375687	$ 1,100,000
2011	ASTWH110025	PROJECT CONNECT: A COORDINATED PUBLIC HEALTH INITIATIVE TO PREVENT VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN	1	00	DHHS/OS	08-26-2011	618375687	$ 1,650,000
Fiscal Year 2011 Total:								$ 3,000,000

Never-Ending Education . . .

2010

ASTWH090016

FY09 HEALTH CARE PROVIDER RESPONSE TO VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN – EDUCATION, TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

DHHS/OS

11-17-2009

618375687

$ 1,500,000

And taking money and direction from Annie E. Casey Foundation, which virtually ensures that NONE of your media campaigns are going to tell women such as myself the relevant facts about 1996 Welfare Form, of the existence of the National Fatherhood Initiative (from the start, 1994, same year as VAWA) or how these funds have been used in family court situations. It sure has changed the tune — if, indeed, the tune ever was anything other than media campaign, technical assistance, and training since about 1997ff… While I am very thankful to be informed that strangulation, for example, is a high indicator of lethality, as a mother experiencing it in the home, I had that figured out (particularly in contexts of the talk that went along with it). Or that my dentist should’ve reported or further questioned (he didn’t) a certain suspicious & bloody incident involving my teeth.

Sample Annie E. Casey Fatherhood program (this is a small one)

“On Thursday, October 20th, eighteen men graduated from the Newark Y Fatherhood Program. Funded through the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 167 men have participated in our workshops during the past year. …A major highlight of theFatherhood Graduation was the presentation of awards from President Barack Obama to the Y’s CEO, Michael Bright and the Director of the Fatherhood Program, Daryl Brown. ThePresidential Award was given in recognition of their “devotion to service and for doing all you can to shape a better tomorrow for our great Nation.”

FVPF Program purpose (from the tax return, the 2009 Form 990, below):

“1. TO PREVENT VIOLENCE WITHIN THE HOME, AND IN THE COMMUNITY,

TO HELP THOSE WHOSE LIVES ARE DEVASTATED BY VIOLENCE BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO LIVE FREE OF VIOLENCE.”

4. Describe the exempt purpose achievements for each of the 3 largest program services by expenses:

INTERNATIONAL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE – THE FVPF HAS HELPED CRAFT LANDMARK FEDERAL LEGISLATION, CO-FOUNDED A NATIONAL NETWORK TO END VIOLENCE AGAINST IMMIGRANT WOMEN , AND CONTINUES TO MUSTER THE FINANCIAL, POLITICAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE RESOURCES TO SAFEGUARD IMMIGRANT WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN – AMONG THE MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS. THE FVPF HAS FORMED PROGRAMMATIC PARTNERSHIPS AROUND THE WORLD IN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CLINICS TO EXCHANGE WISDOM, IMPROVE HEALTHCARE, AND RAISE PUBLIC AWARENESS.
HEALTH – THE FVPF HAS HELPED EXPOSE A CONNECTION BETWEEN HISTORY OF ABUSE AND CURRENT HEALTH,** FURTHER SPOTLIGHTING THE CRITICAL NEED FOR SUSTAINING ASSESSMENT, INTERVENTION, AND ADVOCACY IN CLINICAL SETTINGS. THE ORGANIZATION PROMOTES A HEALTHCARE RESPONSE THAT CONSIDERS THE ENTIRE LIFESPAN AND THAT INCLUDES PREVENTION. THE FVPF OPERATES THE NATION’S HEALTH RESOURCE CENTER ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROVIDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND INFORMATION TO THOUSANDS OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS AND OTHERS EACH YEAR. THE ORGANIZATION HAS ALSO DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED STATE-WIDE PLANS FOR A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

**astounding. And this was figured out when? …..

(this is the “We Got Fatherhood Funding” segment) PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS – THE ORGANIZATION LAUNCHED THE FIRST-EVER NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION CAMPAIGN ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – THERE’S NO EXCUSE FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – IN 1994. {{yes, but this is 2009!}} NOW THE ORGANIZATION IS REACHING YOUNG MEN AND BOYS THROUGH THE COACHING BOYS INTO MEN CAMPAIGN, ENCOURAGING MEN TO TALK TO THE YOUNG MEN AND BOYS IN THEIR LIVES THAT VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IS WRONG. THROUGH MEDIA AND THROUGH WORK WITH ALLIED ORGANIZATIONS, COACHES, AND OTHERS WHO REACH MEN AND BOYS, THE FVPF IS DELIVERING THE MESSAGE THAT MEN CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE ORGANIZATION’S RELATED FOUNDING FATHERS CAMPAIGN ENCOURAGES MEN TO STEP FORWARD ON FATHER’S DAY AND JOIN IN MAKING A PUBLIC STATEMENT ABOUT ENDING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN.

ORGANIZATION NAME	STATE	YEAR	TOTAL ASSETS	FORM	PAGES	EIN
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2009	$26,157,567	990	16	94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2008	$22,018,363	990	31	94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2007	$17,917,034	990	33	94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2006	$13,612,574	990	33	94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2005	$9,114,506	990	31	94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2004	$7,045,197	990	24	94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund	CA	2002	$6,261,569	990	22	94-3110973

EIN# 94-3110973

Also described by them at

Grants — $11.5 million

Program income — $181K

Salaries this year — $4 million

One resource is ERI (Economic Research Institute or “http://www.eri-nonprofit-salaries.com”) which runs comparisons on non-profit organizations salaries;

the search I just did shows their assets about $22million — and their contributions and expenditures similar, at around $13 million. It shows a nice chart (I searched by EIN#)and has nice summaries, bar chats, etc.

Salaries in 2009 — not that running a large non-profit shouldn’t be well-rewarded. They have offices (it says) in Boston, Washington, D.C. & San Francisco.

Except that this group — in an area where women are still being stalked, robbed of (their children, among other things), having child support reduced to nothing or being forced to pay their former batterers (innumerable), finding next to no response with law enforcement when this occurs, women have been burnt and found hogtied around a road sign (2006, unidentified, Oakland-Temescal), kidnapped from their homes, stabbed repeatedly, then dropped off on the side of the road to bleed to death in front of motorists (Oakland/Orinda Elnora Caldwell), shot at work while IN tollbooths (2009, Ross), shot in church parking lots on a weekday morning (2007, McCall, Oakland), doused with gas and burnt alive, murdered and put in car trunks, shot (along with 6 others in beauty salons (2011, Seal Beach, CA Fournier 8 killed, 2008 Torres, Martinez 3 killed including responding officer),. . .

killed at court-ordered weekend exchanges and buried in a shallow grave only to be found when the murderer father plea-bargained it down by agreeing to locate the body (Wife missing 2006, conviction 2008, Oakland Reiser). Children have been also kidnapped galore, sometimes being murdered afterwards by overentitled fathers, while D.A.’s are soliciting campagns to standardize their Family Justice Center model in D.C. and in the California Legislature. I haven’t even linked to children and bystanders in this list; nor is it complete — but a LOT of it happened around divorce, separation and child custody — and yet where is even a mention of the AFCC, CRC, or the welfare reform that funds “increased noncustodial parenting time” and forces women to try to co-parent with their batterers under fatherhood theory — such as you also have??

Here is the California Charitable Registration results for their 2010 filing (as “Futures WIthout Violence”):

Fiscal Begin:	01-JAN-10
Fiscal End:	31-DEC-10
Total Assets:	$36,603,585.00
Gross Annual Revenue:	$17,118,149.00
RRF Received:	14-JUN-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached:	Y
Status:	Rejected

(For the record, it was incorporated as a nonprofit in California, in a simple filing with Esta Soler and a few others, in August 1989. To get the VAWA passed in 5 years is indeed an accomplishment, or may reflect connections the women had initially, I do not know.)

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

C1648791 08/30/1989 ACTIVE FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE ESTA SOLER

September 10, 2010 notice from California Attorney General — they forgot their fee:
FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND CT FILE NUMBER: 077397 383 RHODE ISLAND STREET, NO. 304 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103-5133

RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT

The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

1. The $225 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

LETTER from California Attorney General, who handles charitable registrations:

RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT (August 26, 2011)

The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

1. The $225 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.

Must’ve just forgot — I’m sure they can afford $225.

Another notice says they forgot to attach a list of contributors; also 8/26/2011.

FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE CT FILE NUMBER: 077397 100 MONTGOMERY STREET, PRESIDIO – MAIN POST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94129

RE: IRS Form 990, Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors

We have received the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF submitted by the above-named organization for filing with the Registry of Charitable Trusts (Registry) for the fiscal year ending 12/31/10. The filing is incomplete because the copy of Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors, does not include the names and addresses of contributors.

The copy of the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF, including all attachments, filed with the Registry must be identical to the document filed by the organization with the Internal Revenue Service. The Registry retains Schedule B as a confidential record for IRS Form 990 and 990-EZ filers.

Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please submit a complete copy of Schedule B, Schedule of

Contributors, for the fiscal year noted above, as filed with the Internal Revenue Service. all correspondence to the undersigned.

I think that along with this many people earning over $100K per years, someone should’ve taken – I did — maybe an hour of their precious PR time to read some of the material put out by UNpaid mothers who have watched and documented what the family court systems is doing to their current safety levels. It’s not as though we aren’t on the web and aren’t talking !!!

2009 SALARIES OF FVPF, or, currently the ICEV: (Salary to left, “estimated other compensation from other organizations”) to the right of each name

$234,229 ESTA SOLER PRESIDENT + $71,069

$168,216 THOMAS FERGUSON CFO,CAO + $14,717

$ 166,265 DEBBIE LEE SR.VICE PRESIDENT + $34,928

(also a program director for a joint project with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, “Start Strong, Building Healthy Teen Relationships”)

“Start Strong: Building Healthy Teen Relationships is a national program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in collaboration with Futures Without Violence, formerly Family Violence Prevention Fund. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Blue Shield of California Foundation* are investing $18 million in 11 Start Strong communities across the country to identify and evaluate best practices in prevention to stop dating violence and abuse before it starts.

Or — take a look at the assemblage of personnel on the campaign to end teen pregnancy, underneath this study of “What Research Tells Us about Latino Parenting Practices and their Relationship to Teen Pregnancy” starting with Thomas Kean, Chair of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (and former Governor of NJ). These are, basically, the rich studying and categorizing the poor — by ethnicity and about every other category — in order to better manage the population. They are particularly interested in breeding habits, which I think is borne out of fear of being outbred (take a look at the U.S. Congress by ethnicity and gender, and make an educated guess why….)

$ 163,251 LENI MARIN SR.VICE PRESIDENT + $50,806. (That would probably, with creativity, feed & house 3 families in the Bay Area on those benefits alone….)

$ 196,620 RACHAEL SMITH DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR + $21,418

$ 148,996, BRIAN O’CONNOR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC COMMU + 13,426

$ 148,841 MICHAEL RUNNER DIRECTOR OF LEGAL PROGRA + $20,176

$ 136,681 KIERSTEN STEWART DIR OF PUBLIC POLICY PRO + $18,891

$ 125,685 LONNA DAVIS DIR OF CHILDREN’S PROGRA + $16,601

$ 112,139 COLLIN CASEY DIR OF ADMINISTRATION + $29,491 (any relationship to the Annie E. Casey people?)

In addition, contractors over $100K included:

LAURA HOGAN, PETER D. HART RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC., (WASHINGTON, DC), DEBORAH KARNOWSKY

@ $144,737. $143,855. $139,731. == for respectively: Project Building, Project Building, and Campaign Building.

Other projects on the 990 — grandiose in scope — described on Schedule O:

FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4D, OTHER PROGRAM SERVICES:

WORKPLACE – THE NATIONAL WORKPLACE RESOURCE CENTER ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE FVPF, EMPLOYERS, AND UNIONS AROUND THE NATION THAT HAS REACHED MILLIONS OF AMERICANS. THIS PROJECT MAKES POSSIBLE EMPLOYER AND UNION DISSEMINATION OF HELPFUL, EASY-TO-FOLLOW INFORMATION TO EMPLOYEES AND UNION MEMBERS ON PREVENTING AND REDUCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DEVELOPMENT OF WORKPLACE POLICIES ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND WORKPLACE SUPPORT OF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE VICTIMS. THE ORGANIZATION PROVIDES RESOURCES ONLINE THAT GIVE WORKPLACE LEADERS WHO WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE CLEAR AND IMMEDIATE EXPERT ASSISTANCE.

EXPENSES $ 110773.

and for “CHILDREN / YOUTH / YOUNG FAMILIES: EXPENSES $709,895 (no description) and “PUBLIC POLICY / NEW PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT” exp. $80,900.

and the plan to end all plans:

INTERNATIONAL CENTER TO END VIOLENCE – THE ORGANIZATION IS CREATING AN INTERNATIONAL CENTER IN SAN FRANCISCO AS A HUB OF EDUCATIONAL AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY TO ADVANCE US TOWARD A VIOLENCE-FREE SOCIETY. THE CENTER SEEKS TO PROMOTE THE VALUES OF RESPECT, EMPATHY, AND RESPONSIBILITY; EXPOSE THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE AND ITS IMPACT ON FAMILIES AND SOCIETIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD; ASSIST THE PUBLIC IN EXAMINING ROOT CAUSES OF VIOLENCE AND ITS INTERCONNECTIONS TO BIGOTRY AND HATE; AND ROUSE INDIVIDUALS EVERYWHERE TO TAKE A STAND AGAINST VIOLENCE, HATRED and BIGOTRY.

EXPENSES $ 220,101

and of course: another expense was “LEGAL $501,366

Well, I’ll find some of the descendants, if any, of the women mentioned above and tell them they didn’t die in vain, the

International Center to End Violence has a plan...

I believe a better use of time would for be for these directors to go hang out in homeless camps and at soup kitchens and ask the people how they came to be homeless, and in need of eating at soup kitchens. In the years that FVPF funds were doubling and increasing, I have noticed more and more women in those lines. Preach for hire in an open marketplace– not at their expense! While this group is not actually (that I can see) taking money direct from money dedicated to welfare, they ARE taking a helluva a lot from the HHS pot to forward the fund’s personal (shared by others, but it is personal to the fund) belief (or assertions) that more training will stop violence. Really? You just want my children and future grandchildren, currently this is in the USA, to fund your vision about fixing the WORLD? While in the entire time of their childhoods here, I can’t identify ONE thing that this group did to stop the battering in my home, or the family court gauntlet that followed. (And under what name is it doing business in San Francisco, anyhow?)

Incidentally (see TAGGS grants) — many of the grants which would otherwise go to shelters are going to this type of “training and technical support” activity – it’s lumped under the same labelThen.

To be fair, here is a 2010 statement with a California Assemblyperson naming FVPF (Futures without Violence) founder Esta Soler his 2010 Woman of the Year. It also says the organization was started — with a federal fund — in 1980 30 years ago. Perhaps in DC or Washington – the charitable and sec of state records in California both say about 21 years ago (as of 2010), i.e. 1989 – 1999 – 2009 -that’s 20 years.

Assenblymember Ammiano Names Esta Soler as ‘Woman of the Year‘

Contact: Quintin Mecke @ (415) 557-3013

Sacramento, CA – Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) chose Esta Soler, the head of the Family Violence Prevention Fund, as his 2010 Woman of the Year.

“I am proud to announce Esta Soler, one of the world’s foremost experts on violence against women and children, to be Woman of the Year for Assembly District 13”, said Ammiano. “Esta is a pioneer who founded the Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF) nearly 30 years ago and made it one of the world’s leading violence prevention agencies.”

Under her direction, the FVPF was a driving force behind passage of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 – the nation’s first comprehensive federal response to the violence that plagues our families and communities. Congress reauthorized and expanded the law in 2000 and again in 2005.

“It’s a tremendous honor to receive this award from Assemblymember Ammiano, a wonderful friend to all of us working to end domestic, dating and sexual violence and help victims,” said Family Violence Prevention Fund President and Founder Esta Soler. “At a time when state funding for domestic violence programs is in peril, we especially appreciate champions like Tom Ammiano.”

Esta Soler first established the organization with a federal grant in 1980.

This 1980 is commonly cited — BUT unless it’s in Washington, D.C. (a corporations search page I can’t seem to sign into yet), the SF one was definitely 1989 — and thus the 1980 statement is an exaggeration. If the grant was received in 1980, I’d like to know how much, from which department and under what name. Most on-line databases don’t go back that far. I hope to research this a little further perhaps to better understand this organization.

It has become the nation’s leading expert on violence against women and children, the source of numerous trailblazing prevention and intervention campaigns, and a major force in shaping public policies that prevent violence and help victims in the U.S. and worldwide.

Soler, along with the honorees, was recognized today in the 2010 Woman of the Year ceremony. Each year, members of the California State Assembly and California State Senate honor a woman from their district who has distinguished herself in service to her community.

MINNESOTA-STYLE DV ORGANIZATIONS

The Minnesoh-tans (DAIP, MPDI, BWJP, Praxis, et al.) have done heroic things — but that’s no excuse for ‘taxation without representation” and the early-on insistence that your model CCR and its institutional ethnography become a nationwide model, without proof it works. And, it doesn’t. I hit on this particular set of nonprofits pretty hard throughout this blog, s am giving them a break today, except to mention that it took me a long time to realize that what “MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT INC.” was actually about — (and which its name says) — developing (and selling) programs,

Not stopping domestic violence

and some pretty good grants behind that business, too….

STATEWIDE COALITIONS AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Standardized & co-opted, used as heat shields for marriage entitites, didn’t include enough mothers leaving violence in their plans. DIDN’t PUBLICIZE FATHERHOOD COMMISSIONS, FAITH-BASED OPERATIONS, IN THEIR RESPECTIVE STATES. Didn’t teach women the 1996 welfare reform information in its context.

This sounds harsh, so here’s an example:

Tim Carpenter reportedrecently some juicy details about a secret April meeting to design Brownback’s marriage agenda. The Topeka Capital-Journal uncovered some information on Brownback’s plans through a Kansas Open Records request.

The Kansas government spent $13,000 to bring together 20 mostly far-right marriage “experts” for the closed door meeting.

Organizations represented included the Heritage Foundation, Institute for American Values, Georgia Family Council, National Center for Fathering, Stronger Families, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, Marriage Savers, Kansas Healthy Marriage Institute, and National Center for African American Marriages and Parenting.

Thanks to information from Carpenter and sources, we know something of what Brownback has in mind, even though the details of the meeting remain confidential.

And (from a link in this article to another one) — ALL of these characters should be knowledgeable, household names, to anyone sitting under CADV state teachings or in their meetings. They deserve to know how things got started, and where they are going now, above the din of same-sex marriage and abortion rights issues. This affects mothers AND fathers:

Brownback program promotes marriage

Brownback is pushing a program to increase wedlock, cut divorce rates

July 2, 2011, Tim Carpenter, the Topeka-Journal

(listing attendees)

Wade Horn, who redefined President George W. Bush’s faith-based initiatives in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, preached a gospel that encouraged poor women to marry their way out of poverty.

Marriage Savers creator Mike McManus said clergy members typically did a lousy job preparing couples for marriage and secular therapists were more likely to increase divorce among spouses in crisis.

This threesome was among 20 people who met behind closed doors in Topeka to share marriage program ideas with Brownback and executives at the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services.

…In his follow-up letter to Brownback obtained by The Topeka Capital-Journal, [[Mike]] McManus said Kansas should prohibit no-fault divorce unless there was proof of physical abuse or adultery. A Kansas law ought to be passed, he said, allowing judges to select a “responsible spouse,” which would always be the person opposed to divorce. The statute would allow the responsible adult to receive up to 66 percent of child visitation and 100 percent of family assets in the divorce.

Any idea what this exposes women to? (read on). They are already being used as disposable wombs in too many marriages; if the beatings or abuse or virtual slavery (it happens!) can be severe enough that SHE wants out, then in Kansas he doesn’t even have to go through the motions of fighting for most of the kids and ALL of the assets! This does not protect women or children!

Horn, who resigned from HHS to take a job with Deloitte Consulting, departed the Bush administration amid reports of cronyism in awarding federal grants to the National Fatherhood Initiative he founded.

Helen Alvare, a member of the law faculty at George Mason who also was invited to Topeka, said she admired Sarah Palin’s devotion to family and professional achievement. In 2008, Alvare said Palin was “what a lot of women aspire to be on their best day.”

California writer Christelyn Karazin, who had a child out of wedlock before marrying, believed so strongly in the power of a man and woman to raise children she organized an event called “No Wedding, No Womb.”

This is portrayed as spontaneous blogging “NWNW” — so what was she doing in a secret meeting in Kansas? Flown in at Kansans’ expense, and in the company of people such as David Blankenhorn and Wade Horn? !! She saw the light (is now married) and so everyone else must see it the same way? Listen to some ex-married women, girl!

It was primarily a call to the black community to take action against the birth of children without the “physical, financial and emotional protection” of a father and mother, she said.

Joyce Webb, who works with Catholic Charities’ Kansas Healthy Marriage Institute, recommended SRS divert $1 million from federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to pay for a new marriage program. TANF money is earmarked for families living in poverty.

Syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher, who was included in one published list of participants but didn’t attend, said during a speech about the pro-marriage movement that Catholics and Christians had to be the “visible light” for people failing to grasp intricacies of the institution of marriage.

SRS Secretary Robert Siedlecki, responsible for implementing the governor’s marriage initiative, said thousands of Kansans who divorce each year lacked the skills and knowledge to form sustainable relationships.* Brownback wants SRS to help fill that information gap, he said.

*that “lack the skills” phrase is a buzz word to bring on the marriage educators, which is also a growing HHS trend and probably public law by now.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, a Topeka Democrat who voted against confirmation of Brownback’s choice of SRS secretary, said he was intrigued by the governor’s simultaneous talk about removing government from the lives of the average Kansan and creating a state marriage program drenched in faith-based advocacy.

Siedlecki hired Richard Marks, the Jacksonville, Fla., director of the Marriage for Life, to join SRS and be involved in the initiative

(A little QUICK research on my part here See the URL above: He’s Baptist, Regent University, a Minister, adapted the PAIRS (which I think got HHS funding) curriculum for Christians, and just changed the FLorida nonprofit’s name to “CONNECTUS4LIFE, INC.” in 2002 (per Florida corporations search page called “sunbiz.org.” EIN#562283483. This is specifically incorporated as a “faith-based organization” and talks about the preachers involved. This one (I just looked) seems a tidy little income — $60K raised, he gets $16K as head of the nonprofit, and gets to write off $42 of expenses running marriage enrichment seminars.

“Believing that marriage is a covenant relationship ordained by God,

we as pastors and ministers in the Greater Jacksonville area are committed

to ensure that these marriages (WHICH ones?) will endure til death.”

That’s a creed — not an incorporation!

“we are dedicated to strengthening marriages as we seek to”

I attended domestic violence support groups, being a Christian, towards the end of my “cohabitation” (with my spouse). Getting there was not easy; they were night-times. Want to know what % of the women there were pastor’s and deacon’s wives? I can’t name names, but the answer is — PLENTY. At least one had tried to kill his wife; the deacons knew, and it was a LONG time before he lost that position….

He also had a role in Florida Government: Served “four years on FLorida’s Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives.” That commission name was a new one on me, so I just looked up, to find out, from “www.Floridafathers.org” that:

The 2003 Florida Legislature passed Senate Bill 480, replacing the Florida Commission on Responsible Fatherhood with the Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives as of July 1, 2003.

The new commission will take a broader approach to strengthening families by detailing comprehensive statewide strategies for Florida to promote safe, violence-free, substance-abuse-free, respectful, nurturing and responsible parenting; including connection or reconnection of responsible parents, both mothers and fathers, with their children.

From the Kansas article, above, we now know what is meant by “responsible” parent. It means the one that, if he resists divorce, will get 100% of the assets and (at least) 66% of the children. Mom can struggle to enforce 34% of her visitation after she’s kicked out of the house with 0% of the assets, which has already been the case when women FLED the home for safety (with or without kids). So, is this progress? But the CADVs should’ve been monitoring and reporting on these things — although I know that FL CADV had their hands full with FL-AFCC on “parenting coordination” matters, around this time as I recall.

The Governor, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives will each appoint six members to the commission by August 1, 2003, with at least half of the commissioners representing the private sector

The wording starts like this – and yes indeed, Florida did vote this Commission into existence in 2003:

383.0115 The Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives.

(1) LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND INTENT. The Legislature finds that:

(a) Families in this state deserve respect and support. Children need support and guidance from both mothers and fathers, and families need support and guidance from community systems to help them thrive.

(b) There are many problems facing families.

(and it gets even more brilliantly deductive from there. I provided the link).

. . .

(e) Assisting states to end dependence of low-income parents by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage and assisting states in encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families are the two of four stated purposes of federal welfare reform enacted in 1996 which have been largely neglected by states and for which states are now urging Congress to designate 10 percent of all welfare funds, specifically for relationship education and skills development, responsible fatherhood programs, and community support as it seeks to reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act in 2002.

. . .

(2) ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.

(a) There is created within the Department of Children and Family Services, for administrative purposes, a commission, as defined in s. 20.03(10), called the Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives. The commission is independent of the head of the department. The commission is authorized to hire an executive director, a researcher, and an administrative assistant. The executive director shall report to, and serve at the pleasure of, the commission.

This “independence within a department” is key to steering grants to cronies. I’ve seen it in Ohio and we’re (above) witnessing it in Kansas, 2011, as we speak.

To understand some of this subculture — and after I’d been looking at the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative website for a good long while I finally noticed who was pushing the statewide Marriage Initiative, starting with at GRAB of TANF funds, and this was held up to other states as an example . . . .

I noticed “Jerry Regier” — and, for an example, here is the Wikipedia Timeline of his Job Descriptions. He came from OK in 2002, and by 2003, Florida is voting for a Commission on Marriage and Families within the Children and Family Services. (Mr. Regier eventually had to quit this post in FL under some scandal about steering grants to his, as I say, cronies — but ended up, for our purposes, in yet a worse place — back at HHS as Assistant Secretary of the ASPE (evaluates things) where he presided over glowing reports about his former work in Oklahoma. That’s how the Bush-based Babies Cookie-cutter commissions (etc.) generally crumbles. Scandal, scoot to another state, repeat… So look at this chart with some care, OK?

Jerry Regier
Florida Secretary of Children and Families
In office 2002–2007
Preceded by	Kathleen A. Kearney
Oklahoma Secretary of Health and Human Services
In office April 6, 1997 – January 16, 2002
Governor	Frank Keating
Preceded by	Ken Lackey
Succeeded by	Howard Hendrick
Executive Director of the Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs
In office April 6, 1997 – January 16, 2002
Governor	Frank Keating
Preceded by	Ken Lackey
Succeeded by	Robert E. Christian
President of the Family Research Council
In office 1984–1988
Preceded by	Post created
Succeeded by	Gary Bauer

So, Jim Marks’ “Marriage for Life” organization was formed (I just learned) in 2002 as a “faith-based” organization — i.e., in the wake of GWBush’s open door executive orders for faith-based organizations of 2001. Many of these groups form to get the grants, spend the money, and then RUN, disbanding, or being dissolved for failure to file with the IRS (or their state).

In Kansas (this is yet another article on the same issue):

SRS says Faith-based initiatives are still around, just not getting as much attention**

Oct. 23, 2011 by Scott Rothschild in “LJworld.com”

**I have 1 or 2 comments on there on these matters. You’ll recognize which ones (just submitted another).

In a pre-Memorial Day (2011) announcement, Siedlecki reorganized SRS, which included putting Anna Pilato in a new position called Deputy Secretary for Strategic Development and Faith-Based Community Initiatives.

Are you getting a feel for this yet?

Pilato had served for five years in the Bush administration, including as director of the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

But Pilato, who is making $97,500 per year, says that in her job she wears two hats — strategic development and faith-based initiatives — and that the strategic development part of her job, which includes overseeing the design and development of staff for SRS, is by far the larger of the two.

. . .

Recently, SRS applied for a $6.6 million grant to pay for either faith-based or secular counseling that encouraged unwed parents to marry. Under the proposal, if the couple completed counseling, the state would pay the $86.50 marriage license fee.

But the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services rejected the grant.

Kansas Health Initiative published the list of who attended. Recommend Memorizing. Coming to your state (or what’s left of it) soon. What’s kind of funny — Occupy Wichita made an appearance in the middle of a speech by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation. (Protestors Disrupt Governor’s Poverty Forum (apparently, today 11/16/2011, KHI News service. I’m starting to like KHI…)):

Protesters interrupted the second of Gov. Sam Brownback’s town hall meetings on childhood poverty Wednesday, standing up during the keynote speech and reciting some of their objections to Brownback’s policies.

One of the 14 protesters was arrested and another was detained for a short period.

The protest began as Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation fellow invited to give the keynote speech, delivered his remarks advocating marriage as a key way to end poverty. Protesters, most of them members of Occupy Wichita, stood silently with their backs to Rector for about 10 minutes, then began chanting their grievances once he completed his speech.

Organizers stopped the meeting for about 15 minutes, resuming after the protesters had left the downtown hotel where it was held.

That Rector should’ve had the podium at this second town hall, or the first, is a dire sign for Kansas: (article links to this):

By Jim McLean
KHI News Service
Nov. 14, 2011

KANSAS CITY, Kan. — Reducing the number of children born to single mothers is the most effective way to combat childhood poverty.

That’s according to Robert Rector, the Heritage Foundation fellow picked by Gov. Sam Brownback to keynote the first of his administration’s three planned meetings on childhood poverty this week.

. . .

Strong reaction

Shortly after Rector finished his remarks, Kari Ann Rinker, Kansas coordinator for the National Organization for Women, left the meeting room in anger.

“I was offended in there,” Rinker said. “The things he said, the inferences he made about women and women’s worth were offensive. As I looked around the room, I saw many other people looking to each other in shock and amazement.”

Rinker said the steady increase in births to young, single women was a cause for concern. But she said making available low-cost birth control and improving the women’s self-esteem and education would more effectively address the problem.

“The silver bullet is not wedded bliss,” she said.

Ms Rinker (appears very young, no?) should — with Kansas NOW — have been on top of this situation, should be teaching women about welfare reform and how the fatherhood movement got its two bits in on the situation diverting programs to promote fatherhood and marriage. (The information has been available on the web since 1993). For example, Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation (the article says) was instrumental in Welfare Reform. The Congressional Record debates ON this welfare reform are framed in concern about too many women of color having babies ! (in other words, it has severely racist overtones). To let him get up there and spout off, the same rhetoric — which is PAID FOR INFORMATION!

The number one factor behind poverty here in the state of Kansas is the death of marriage,” he said, noting that 38 percent of children in Kansas today were born to unmarried women, compared to about 5 percent in the 1960s. “This is the most dramatic social transformation in the 20th century.”

OH? How about a few world wars (creating untold orphans) and women getting the vote, the creation of the personal income tax, taking currency off the gold standard, and the assassinations of JFK and Martin Luther King, Jr.? How about the advent of the internet, the decline of public education, — and how about the 2001 enablements of people like Robert Rector to get up and speak at government functions and expect faith-based organizations to drive the primary institutions around?

Kari Ann Rinker, President of the Kansas Chapter of NOW,

on how the Budget Cuts have Affected the Justice System

Kari Ann Rinker is the President of the Kansas chapter of NOW and she joins us to talk about the budget problems in Topeka that led to end of prosecuting domestic violence cases.

Listen or Download Audio MP3

The protests illustrated how serious the issue of poverty is, said Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, D-Wichita.***

“These people are using this as an avenue to voice their opinion and exercise their freedom of speech,” she said.

(***search her name on my blog. She supported the last round of fatherhood initiatives in Kansas…. I commented on this).

The Heritage Foundation in Kansas is neither surprising, nor to be ignored. It explains a whole lotta backwards movement when it comes to safety for women and freedom for Americans — both genders, all ages.

I remember this site from a long time ago on the Heritage Foundation.

POWER ELITES: THE MERGER OF RIGHT AND LEFT

A. K. Chesterton once said: “The proper study of political mankind is the study of power elites, without which nothing that happens could be understood.”

He added: “These elites, preferring to work in private, are rarely found posed for photographers, and their influence upon events has therefore to be deduced from what is known of the agencies they employ.”

Chesterton described those agencies: “Their goal was to work through such agencies, and financial support received from one or other or all three big American foundations–Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford — provides an infallible means of recognizing them.”

The Rockefellers made $200,000,000.00 from World War I. Henry Kissinger’s brother Walter heads the Allen Group. The super-wealthy (with the exception of some Du Ponts and the Fords) have long supported the Republican Party — the party of plutocratic oligarchy. “If not kings themselves, they are king-makers.” They have quick access to the White House no matter who is President. Other super-rich, such as the Rockefellers, affiliate with the Democratic Party. Politics in the U.S., no matter what party, is under the control of the super-rich, large corporations and the international bankers.

A 1995 Wall Street Journal observed the formidable influence of the Heritage Foundation on government policies since the Reagan era:

“WASHINGTON — With the Republicans’ rise to control Congress, think-tank power in the nation’s capital has shifted to the right. And no policy shop has more clout than the conservative Heritage Foundation.

“When GOP congressional staffers met in June with conservative leaders to help map current legislative efforts to cut federal funding for left-leaning advocacy groups, the closed-door meeting took place at Heritage headquarters. The group’s involvement wasn’t unusual. ‘Heritage is without question the most far-reaching conservative organization in the country in the war of ideas.’ House Speaker Newt Gingrich said early this year.

“Think tanks have long churned out studies that have wound up in official policy proposals. During Democratic times of power, the more liberal Brookings Institution has been a leading player here. Now, the 21-year-old Heritage Foundation, which rose to prominence in the Reagan years, is taking academic involvement to a new level.

“Over the first 100 days of the current GOP Congress, Heritage scholars testified before lawmakers 40 times–more than any other organization, Hill staffers say. Its scholars are credited by congressional members and staff as key architects of the House-passed welfare-overhaul plan and with inspiring some provisions in the GOP balanced-budget plan. ‘They talk to me sometimes 12 times a week,’ said Heritage budget analyst Scott Hodge earlier this year, explaining his ties to the staff of the House Budget Committee. ‘We–I mean House members–are putting together a final list of cuts.'”(5)

FACIST CONNECTIONS
Paul Weyrich – considered the architect and mainstay of the conservative revolution – calls for “reclaiming the culture” and a “second American Revolution.” A look at the inflammatory, extremist rhetoric with racial and Inquisitorial overtones on the Free Congress Foundation web site should alarm Christians as to Weyrich’s real intent:

(etc.)

I encourage people to read this write-up on The Heritage Foundation from “SourceWatch.org” and understand (as I am beginning to)its relationship both financially and in purpose (ending TANF completely and eliminating the public education system in the United States) follows up on some serious international influence in the 1980s and 1990s. It took me a while to keep running across the information and understand it — but the Heritage Foundation, The Unification Church and its leaders’ intent to establish ONE world religion with him at the top (yep!) and the means by which the “faith-based operatives” (as I call them) move in and out of state-level, national-level posts and agencies, restructuring them IMMEDIATELY upon being hired (as happened with the Kansas SRS, above) – these are related. The fight is on. Read a segment — but don’t forget to go to the site and consider the international influence in covert wars by the US as well:

HERITAGE FOUNDATION – SOURCEWATCH

The Foundation also leaped to the defense of Ronald Reagan’s description of the former Soviet Union as an “evil empire,” a description that generated wide global rebuke as potentially inviting nuclear conflict and, at the very least, further poisoning East-West relations. But with strong support by Heritage and other influential conservatives, Reagan stood by the statement, refusing to retract it until the Soviet Union began to crumble.

In an attempt to build on its foreign policy influence, the Foundation also engages in domestic and social policy issues, but its effort in these two areas has never quite matched the influence it wielded (in the late 1980s and early 1990s) in altering the debate over American foreign policy. Yet, the Foundation continues to weigh in on these topics with varying levels of success. One of its undeniable successes has been serving as a breeding ground for many of the nation’s leading neo-conservative activists and intellectuals.

The following comments by former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey, published in the summer 1994 issue of the Heritage Foundation’s Policy Review, exemplify the Heritage philosophy:

(Dick Armey being a Texas Republican during the “Contract with America” years. Below this quote…**)

Liberation is at hand…. A paradigm-shattering revolution has just taken place. In the signal events of the 1980s – from the collapse of communism to the Reagan economic boom to the rise of the computer – the idea of economic freedom has been overwhelmingly vindicated. The intellectual foundation of statism has turned to dust. This revolution has been so sudden and sweeping that few in Washington have yet grasped its full meaning…. But when the true significance of the 1980s freedom revolution sinks in, politics, culture – indeed, the entire human outlook – will change…. Once this shift takes place – by 1996, I predict – we will be able to advance a true Hayekian agenda, including…. radical spending cuts, the end of the public school monopoly, a free market health-care system, and the elimination of the family-destroying welfare dole. Unlike 1944, history is now on the side of freedom.”

(**Contract with America

In 1994, Armey, then House Republican Conference Chairman, joined Minority Whip Newt Gingrich in drafting the Contract with America. Republican members credited this election platform with the Republican takeover of Congress, rewarding Gingrich with the position of Speaker and Armey with the number two position of House Majority Leader. Gingrich delegated to Armey an unprecedented level of authority over scheduling legislation on the House floor, a power traditionally reserved to the Speaker. Armey has been accused of being involved in a 1997 attempt to oust Gingrich as Speaker,^[7] something Armey has strongly denied. In 1995 Armey referred to openly homosexual Congressman Barney Frank, as “Barney Fag“. Armey said it was a slip of the tongue.^[8] Armey and his staff, especially spokesman Jim Wilkinson, took the lead in spreading the idea that Al Gore claimed to have “invented the internet.”^[9]^[10]^[11]

then-President CLINTON had to do something to respond to the Republican “Contract with America” — and 1996 TANF (Welfare Reform) was what he did — or at least signed. This 1996 TANF is a major topic of the post and has affected custody situations for years in “Conciliation Court.” It is also affecting the economy, diverting welfare money to support needy families into more and more brutal and upfront declarations that women should marry their way out of poverty — when many women are poor and single because they fled domestic violence in the home, which might have resulted in their deaths (and sometimes still does, after separation) had they stayed, valuing “marriage” good enough to satisfy these people. So, important to understand some of the context. More on Armey from Wikipedia (as the above segment was):

Focus on the Family

According to Armey, he also sparred with Focus on the Family leader James Dobson while in office. Armey wrote, “As Majority Leader, I remember vividly a meeting with the House leadership where Dobson scolded us for having failed to ‘deliver’ for Christian conservatives, that we owed our majority to him, and that he had the power to take our jobs back. This offended me, and I told him so.” Armey states that Focus on the Family targeted him politically after the incident, writing, “Focus on the Family deliberately perpetuates the lie that I am a consultant to the ACLU.”^[20]Armey has also said that “Dobson and his gang of thieves are real nasty bullies.“^[21]

Yes they are! Of course, here’s how they describe themselves:

They are just — and this whole divert welfare into marriage promotion and abstinence education and “responsible fatherhood” etc. — are just “helping families thrive.”

(The individual, especially not the individual female or mother, does not exist.…)

Whereas the truth is a lot closer to this:

2009-02-2

God’s Batterers: When Religion Subordinates Women, Violence Follows

The Washington Post | On Faith blog

by Rev. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite

Evangelical Christian ministries such as those run by Rev. Rick Warren at his Saddleback Church or James Dobson of Focus on the Family all stress “submission” as the Christian family role for wives. At the same time, these Christian Evangelical ministries staunchly deny that submission is a cause of violence against wives.

Some Evangelicals strongly disagree and have explicitly charged that it is submission that is responsible for wife battering in the “Christian” home. James and Phyllis Alsdurf, in Battered Into Submission: The Tragedy of Wife Abuse in the Christian Home, have noted that conservative Christian women can’t even get help because of this religious ideology of submission. “When she [the battered wife] musters up the courage to go public with ‘her’ problem (very likely to her pastor or a church member), what little human dignity she has retained can soon be ‘trampled underfoot’ with comments like: ‘What have you done to provoke him?’ ‘Well, you’ve got to understand that your husband is under a lot of pressure right now,’ or ‘How would Jesus want you to act: just submit and it won’t happen again.'”

In fact, Jesus gets invoked a lot to justify wife battering, especially as a model for suffering.

2006 Budget

In calendar year 2006 the Heritage Foundation spent over $40.5 million on its operations. That year the foundation raised over $25 million from individual contributors and $13.1 million from foundations.

While corporations provided only $1.5 million – 4% of Heritage’s contributions in 2006 – they none the less have significant interest in the foundations policy output. There’s defence contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin, finance and insurance companies such as Allstate Insurance, Mortgage Insurance Companies of America, and American International Group (AIG), auto company Honda, tobacco company Altria Group (Philip Morris), drug and medical companies Johnson & Johnson,GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation, oil companies ChevronTexaco and Exxon Mobil, software giantMicrosoft, and chipping in over $100,000 each, Alticor (Amway), Pfizer, PhRMA, and United Parcel Service (UPS). ^[2]

Historical funding

Between 1985 and 2003, Media Transparency reports that the following funders provided $57,497,537 (unadjusted for inflation) to the Heritage Foundation [4]:

Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation

Scaife Foundations: Sarah Mellon Scaife, Scaife Family, Carthage

John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.

Castle Rock Foundation

It goes on — but these are foundations that are to be found behind (funding) so many fatherhood and responsible marriage studies, “Fragile-families” “Strengthening Families” etc. type projects.Whether or not these projects produce as they are supposed to, they continue getting funding and supporting Ph.D.s (Sarah McLanahan of Princeton? comes to mind) to justify more of the same.

When Dobson told Dick Armey that Focus on the Family (& friends, no doubt) “Delivered” the Christian conservatives, now they want something in return — he was probably telling the truth: Look at the amounts:

ORGANIZATION NAME	STATE	YEAR	TOTAL ASSETS	FORM	PAGES	EIN
Focus On The Family	CO	2006	$94,999,184	990	45	95-3188150
Focus On The Family	CO	2005	$97,414,767	990	59	95-3188150
Focus On The Family	CO	2004	$107,423,724	990	38	95-3188150
Focus On The Family	CO	2003	$102,442,464	990	35	95-3188150
Focus On The Family	CO	2002	$98,175,843	990	37	95-3188150
Focus on the Family	CO	2010	$79,825,383	990	53	95-3188150
Focus on the Family	CO	2009	$90,996,703	990	61	95-3188150
Focus on the Family	CO	2008	$93,072,558	990	45	95-3188150
Focus on the Family	CO	2007	$92,427,223	990	43	95-3188150
Focus On The Family Action	CO	2008	$3,565,169	990O	23	20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action	CO	2007	$2,452,377	990O	20	20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action	CO	2006	$3,035,923	990O	21	20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action Inc.	CO	2009	$3,953,111	990O	39	20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action Inc.	CO	2005	$4,286,071	990O	19	20-0960855

RIGHTWING WATCH partial bio of James Dobson gives an idea of the scope of influence and pull:

Dr. Dobson has been heavily involved with Republican administrations as an expert on the “family.” Dobson was appointed by President Ronald Reagan to the National Advisory Commission to the office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1982-84. From 1984-87 he was regularly invited to the White House to consult with President Reagan and his staff on family matters. He served as co-chairman of the Citizens Advisory Panel for Tax Reform, in consultation with President Reagan, and served as a member and later chairman of the United States Army’s Family Initiative, 1986-88. Dobson served on Attorney General Edwin Meese’s Commission on Pornography, 1985-86.

Dobson also consulted with former President George H.W. Bush on family related matters.

In December 1994, Dr. Dobson was appointed by Senator Robert Dole to the Commission on Child and Family Welfare, and in October, 1996, by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission.

James Dobson also founded and helped establish another successful conservative group, Washington, DC’s Family Research Council. Established in 1981 by Dobson, the group was designed to be a conservative lobbying force on Capital Hill. In the late 1980’s the group officially became a division of FOF, but in 1992, IRS concerns about the group’s lobbying led to an administrative separation.

James Dobson has a PhD in child development from the University of Southern California.

Read PFAW’s in-depth report on James Dobson.

The Family Research Council (nndb listing of who’s on the board.)

Erik Prince Business 6-Jun-1969 Founder of Blackwater Worldwide

Military service: US Navy (SEAL Team Officer, 1993-96; Bosnia, Haiti)

Erik Prince is a multi-millionaire fundamentalist Christian, who co-founded the security and mercenary firm Blackwater Worldwide in 1997 with Gary Jackson, a former Navy SEAL. He is a major Republican campaign contributor, who interned in the White House of President George H.W. Bush and for conservative congressman Dana Rohrabacher, campaigned for Pat Buchanan in 1992.

His wealth came from his father, Edgar Prince, who headed Prince Automotive, an auto parts and machinery manufacturer. Prince’s sister Betsy DeVos is a powerful conservative in her own right — married to the son of Richard DeVos(Republican bankroller and co-founder of Amway), she served as chair of Michigan Republican Party in the 1990s.

Father: Edgar Prince (d. 1995, billionaire)

Dobson’s family background (He’s on the board too, obviously) included:

Dobson’s own family was a bit out of the ordinary. His father was a preacher who often told the story that he had tried to pray before he could even talk. His mother routinely beat their son with her shoes, her belt, and once, a 16-pound girdle. His parents somehow instilled so much guilt in young Dobson that he answered his father’s fervent altar-call, weeping at the front of a crowded church service and crying out for God’s forgiveness for all his sins, when he was three years old. “It makes no sense, but I know it happened,” Dobson still says of being born again as a toddler.

Families will fall apart, Dobson argues, if homosexuals have the right to marry, adopt, or raise children. For this reason, Dobson and FOTF support a Constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one women. Dobson and FOTF are also against abortion, against feminism, against pornography, against the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child, against Oregon’s law allowing euthanasia, against Take Our Daughters to Work Day, etc.

(yes, women should stay home, that’s their business, really….)

He has proposed an innovative end run around “liberal” judges. The Republican-controlled Congress should, Dobson suggests, simply stop funding courts where judges make too many “liberal” rulings — stop paying salaries, stop sending security guards, stop paying the electric bills. “Very few people know this, that the Congress can simply disenfranchise a court,” Dobson says. “They don’t have to fire anybody or impeach them or go through that battle. All they have to do is say the 9th Circuit doesn’t exist anymore, and it’s gone.”

Well, he was raised with abuse at home, and bullying, and has grown up basically the same, as Dick Armey said.

or ….

Kenneth Blackwell	Government	`28-Feb-1948`		Ohio Secretary of State, 1999-2007
Elsa Prince Broekhuizen	Relative	`c. 1932`		Conservative financier, mother of Erik Prince

Under Blackwell:

State Treasurer Ohio (1994-98)

Council on Foreign Relations
Family Research Council Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment
Federalist Society
Freemasonry (!!!)
The Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow
(etc.)

Well, in case you want to know why I’m becoming more and more activitist — these are the stakes. The principles of

LIFE
LIBERTY
PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

Bear a slightly different tone when one is dealing with the corporate giants and conservatives complaining that the republican congress and presidency they’d helped deliver weren’t delivering their constituency enough of the “goods” they wanted. While these people (most of the time) themselves have become unbelievably wealthy through corporations, foundations, or simply being born into it (Erik Prince, for example) — the society they are structuring is how to create “responsible fathers” who are willing (like them) to tweak the judicial AND legislative process, go get jobs — most likely low-paying ones — in (whose???) corporations and make sure they don’t let their females get too uppity. When legislative restrictions get in the way, they figure out an end-run around them. I have been seeing this in state after state (thanks to the internet, and networking with others).

I also witnessed this philosophy completely destroy 3 generations of my family line when I fought for the right not to be battered in the home AND the right to work independently to support what was left of this household in a profession of my choosing and for which both my own parents sacrificed to get the college training in. Throughout the court craziness — that would put any normal business underground within a year, without being propped up artificially — I had situations where a 20 minute hearing, or a short rubberstamping by an official who didn’t know our family, obviously hadn’t read the court record, and didn’t respect the existing laws (or court orders), even ones in his own hand — would completely restructure my, and my children’s lives.

We should be aware that the act of going before a “Conciliation Court” is going to expose people — your family & friends — to this treatment.

We should be aware that the act of taking ANY form of welfare (whether for food, cash aid — or, Moms, child support) is also exposing you to the same thing. I tried to get out – -and was pulled back in, as are others. We need forms of living which enable us to fight back against the complete undermining NOT of “Family Values” but of the US Constitution (which is probably in suspension by now, but it should not be so easily forgotten).

The public pays — and I have blogged this, after becoming aware — for public employees to pay membership in private nonprofits designed to help them run the child support business. At these meetings — in my state it calls itself a “COALITION OF EXPERTS COLLECTING BILLIONS FOR CALIFORNIA’S CHILDREN” — the collaborate and plan how to EXPAND the welfare state, not reduce it. They look for ways to have more families become “Title IV-D” families, which brings on the programs, brings program funding to the counties, and etc.

It’s a ridiculous state of affairs — and as far as I can tell the groups in this chart below have not been reporting on it or doing anything about it:

Recipient Name	City	State	ZIP Code	County	DUNS Number	Sum of Awards
ALABAMA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	MONTGOMERY	AL	36101	MONTGOMERY	004344078	$ 3,793,073
ARIZONA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Phoenix	AZ	85012-1263	MARICOPA	867401366	$ 3,204,336
CONNECTICUT COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	EAST HARTFORD	CT	06108	HARTFORD	088978429	$ 3,204,334
D.C. COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	WASHINGTON	DC	20013	DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA		$ 35,000
DC COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	WASHINGTON	DC	20001	DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA	942435124	$ 3,204,341
DE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	WILMINGTON	DE	19899	NEW CASTLE	025256293	$ 5,391,930
FLORIDA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	TALLAHASSEE	FL	32301-2756	LEON	053274101	$ 7,878,370
HAWAII STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	HONOLULU	HI	96819-2391	HONOLULU	160292587	$ 3,214,275
ID COALITION AGAINST SEXUAL ABUSE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	BOISE	ID	83712	ADA	129850590	$ 4,104,341
ILLINOIS COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	SPRINGFIELD	IL	62703-1716	SANGAMON	168547040	$ 3,204,337
INDIANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC	INDIANAPOLIS	IN	46202-1002	MARION	024387230	$ 1,184,809
INDIANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC	INDIANAPOLIS	IN	46205-2460	MARION	105913375	$ 2,019,532
IOWA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Des Moines	IA	50312-5259	POLK	942559469	$ 3,204,336
KANSAS COALITION AGAINST SEXUAL & DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Topeka	KS	66603-3706	SHAWNEE	179971957	$ 5,646,199
LOUISIANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	BATON ROUGE	LA	70879-7308	EAST BATON ROUGE	837763630	$ 3,204,339
MICHIGAN COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	OKEMOS	MI	48864-4209	INGHAM	027986889	$ 7,025,767
MISSISSIPPI COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	JACKSON	MS	39296-4703	HINDS	927529420	$ 3,204,340
MISSOURI COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Jefferson City	MO	65101-7801	COLE	184477318	$ 2,438,927
MISSOURI COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Jefferson City	MO	65101-7801	COLE	868492646	$ 718,239
MONTANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	HELENA	MT	59624	LEWIS AND CLARK	036541035	$ 5,648,340
NEW MEXICO COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Albuquerque	NM	87102-3842	BERNALILLO	847508405	$ 3,274,336
NEW YORK STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC	ALBANY	NY	12206	ALBANY	009343934	$ 5,453,061
NEW YORK STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC	ALBANY	NY	12206	ALBANY	790031702	$ 1,814,609
NH COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE	CONCORD	NH	03303	MERRIMACK		$ 35,000
NORTH CAROLINA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	DURHAM	NC	27701	DURHAM	957020266	$ 5,926,704
Nassau County Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Inc.	HEMPSTEAD	NY	11550	NASSAU	947923397	$ 381,000
OREGON COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE	PORTLAND	OR	97202	MULTNOMAH	790033500	$ 2,921,826
PENNSYLVANIA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	HARRISBURG	PA	17112-2669	DAUPHIN	156527558	$ 39,965,461
PENNSYLVANIA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	HARRISBURG	PA	17112-2669	DAUPHIN	166527558	$ 945,000
RHODE ISLAND COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	WARWICK	RI	02888-1539	KENT	025869715	$ 5,688,523
SOUTH CAROLINA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	COLUMBIA	SC	29202-7776	RICHLAND	035406367	$ 3,204,339
SOUTH DAKOTA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Sioux Falls	SD	57103-7029	BROWN	556435980	$ 718,239
SOUTH DAKOTA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Sioux Falls	SD	57103-7029	BROWN	614771058	$ 2,486,098
SOUTH DAKOTA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	PIERRE	SD	57501	HUGHES		$ 34,271
TENNESSEE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE	NASHVILLE	TN	37212-0972	DAVIDSON	787712454	$ 3,204,339
WASHINGTON COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	OLYMPIA	WA	98501	THURSTON	059534409	$ 3,254,000
WEST VA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	CHARLESTON	WV	25302	KANAWHA	192491629	$ 3,204,338
WISCONSIN COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	MADISON	WI	53703-3517	DANE	171537392	$ 6,931,703

(this has been rather an exhausting page to put up… but… it may prevent some detours in understanding the FAMILY courts specifically — which, after all, are really conciliation courts.)

Just a few words on the NCADV which is a Denver, Colorado-based nonprofit, and what they are marketing:

http://www.ncadv.org/membership/MembershipBenefits.php

(http://shop.ncadv.org/)

It is a membership organization (you don’t see it on the above states list, right?). It has sliding scale membership fees — but the public IS paying its dues, because the state organizations pay by % of their budget or — well, as it goes:

State Coalitions and National Organizations—0.1% of your annual budget, ($500 minimum) . . .

I think you can deduce at least some things they are selling, along with memberships — and it’s information and conference attendance, plus some other perks:

Programs and Agencies:

Non-Profit DV, SA or Dual Program—0.1% of your annual budget, ($250 minimum)

15% discount on NCADV products and merchandise

Special discounted registration rates to NCADV’s national conferences and trainings

NCADV electronic newsletters

Access to NCADV special publications such as The Voice: The Journal of the Battered Women’s Movement

One National Directory of Domestic Violence Programs for $84.95 (reg: $99.95)

Savings on Mutual of America’s Hotline Plus Retirement Plans

Discounts on ReadyTalk audio and web conferencing rates

Discounts and savings on AmCheck payroll processing services

Unlimited job and event postings on NCADV’s website

Other Non-Profit* or Government Agency** (includes law enforcement and military)—$250*/$300**

10% discount on NCADV products and merchandise

Special discounted registration rates to NCADV’s national conferences and trainings

(etc. etc.) Great deals — if you’re in the business. As you can see, they are marketing to DV PRACTITIONERS. . They also do the conferences, where more speakers can also cross-market to attendees. Here’s 2012:

NCADV’s 15th National Conference Domestic Violence
and
NOMAS’ 37th National Conference on Men and Masculinity

Preserving Our Roots While Looking to the Future

July 22-25, 2012
Denver, CO

Special Keynote Speaker: Ellen Pence

The fact that Ellen Pence is speaking (who is a Duluth person) shows the similarity of approaches.

Denver Registration: NCADV has been around since 1992 in Colorado (as a “foreign” corporation):

Found 1 matching record(s). Viewing page 1 of 1.
#	ID Number	Document Number	Name	Event	Status	Form	Formation Date
1	19921036251	19921036251	NATIONAL COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE	Application for Authority/ Entity Name	Good Standing	FNC	04/07/1992

and in 2008 picked up another trade name (good to check out where one can):

#	ID Number	Document Number	Name	Status	Form	Effective Date	Comment
1	20081544805	20081544805	Domestic Violence Protection & Prevention Coalition	Effective	FNC	10/13/2008 03:53 PM

I found a group called “CFC” which lists (that new name) as “Best of the CFC” and links to an automated payroll deduction for contribution to it.

WHAT I WiSH TO SAY:

Our kids were not your kids to bargain their rights away for supervised visitation, batterers intervention, parent education classes, or for that matter the more recent “Family Justice Centers.” I personally am recommending a boycott of Verizon (which helps fund these) for that very reason, after a season of being unable to even obtain a single cell phone to help replace the last lost job through the “HelpLine” or anywhere locally that promised this.

I am not very hopeful for the USA, but I live here, so this is part of my contribution as a citizen to report, and part of the legacy I could NOT leave my daughters because they were taken overnight, illegally, and with no remedy: primarily to satisfy someone’s too-large ego, and enabled by what law enforcement, in our case, was not. What was the price? They don’t even have all the facts in their own case, yet, or why society wouldn’t let me simply live and let live after throwing out, or why pro bono legal services for women basically won’t touch this with a 10-foot pole; they are focused on the low-income noncustodial males, and their career tracks, while enabling the rich ones to torture insubordinate exes through the courts. (Note: not my situation, but I see the cases).

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

November 17, 2011 at 9:36 pm

Posted in "Til Death Do Us Part" (literally), 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), AFCC, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Bush Influence & Appointees (Cat added 11/2011), Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Child Support, CRC Childrens Rights Council, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011), Lethality Indicators - in News, Mandatory Mediation, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

Tagged with "Responsible Spouse" law, Access-Visitation, Check TAGGS Database!, CHECK YOUR 990s!, DV agency sellouts, Family Research Council, fatherhood, Feminists, Focus on the Family, FVPF becomes Futures without Violence, Healthy Marriage perks for Healthy Marriage promoters, Heritage Foundation, Heritage Foundation (DeVos funded), HHS-TAGGS grants database, Kansas SRS Scandals, NCADV, Robert Rector (Heritage), Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..

Yet another AFCC-style wet dream… Someone needs to mop up around here. [‘Conflict Happens'[like in the Seal Beach massacre?]/High-Conflict Institute’, Publ. Nov. 16, 2011]

with one comment

This Image from Oct. 2011 AFCC Regional Training Conference“ (“Pdf” of full conference brochure from AFCCnet.org website~~>)Working with Violent and High-Conflict Families: A Race with No Winners” in Indianapolis added during May 2018 post update. The phrase “high conflict” (no hyphen, only) used 18 times in the brochure. For a change, the word “alienation” was used only twice…

Yet another AFCC-style wet dream… Someone needs to mop up around here. [‘Conflict Happens'[like in the Seal Beach massacre?]/High-Conflict Institute’, Publ. Nov. 16, 2011] (Case-sensitive shortlink here ends “-UD”)

(Some format & minor amount of content updates (such as the image to the right and some others and post title extension starting at the ‘[” added May 14, 2018: I had occasion to reference this post on Twitter). Almost 24,000 words, but still important basic reading though originally written barely two years into this blog:

HAVE YOU HEARD THE LATEST LANGUAGE BLIP FROM THE ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY & CONCILIATION COURTS CULT?

From the “High Conflict Institute”

“CONFLICT HAPPENS“

No longer are DIVORCEs or FAMILIES “high-conflict” but “People” are. In fact, the issues are not the issues either.

When someone comes up to you with an issue — he or she (<=the usual application) doesn’t really mean what s/he says and is not to be taken at face value (ask the forensic psychologists). The REAL problem with family courts isn’t the family courts, and it isn’t even high-conflict families, or high conflict all by its rocky-mountain-high* self. The REAL problem is high-conflict people. Buy this book [“Splitting”] to know if you’re dealing with one:

AFCC 47th Annual (2010, Denver), Traversing the Trail of Alienation

<=**AFCC 47th Conference, Denver, CO, June 2010 (“Traversing the Trail of Alienation,” a trail with “Mile-High Conflict and Mountains of Emotions”)

[BELOW: Image link from 2011 broken, update provided 2018 from New Harbinger Publications 5/14/2018, of Mr. Eddy who I notice is also law professor at Pepperdine University (Conservative Christian, has a Pat Boone Center for the Family promoting marriage & relationship classes (the kind run through nonprofits that get HHS grants), etc….]. I also added image of the other author, “Walking on Eggshells” Randy Krieger. Notice (it’s small print, but visible) “Splitting” as a book says it offers “the legal and psychological information you need.” Coincidentally, AFCC composed (essentially, if judges are included under “legal”) of lawyers and psychologists/behavioral health practitioners, etc.). ]]

Promo for “Splitting” from New Harbinger Publications

Bill Eddy image from publications page, Click image to enlarge. Note his affiliations.

Randi Krieger, from publications page (for “Splitting” book out 2011)

Splitting

Protecting Yourself While Divorcing Someone with Borderline or Narcissistic Personality Disorder

By authors: Bill Eddy LCSW, JD, Randi Kreger

This book is advertised with others on alienation at the NCRC (more, below), as they are in the same professional circles. In fact, it appears he’s on the payroll here (2018 comments: link was to Canadian Bar Association. Search of “high-conflict” brought up just 3 articles, but not accessible without sign-up, which I didn’t at this point). (or is “Senior Family Mediator”) as well as his own split-off “High conflict institute” (see last sentence at the link I just provided).

Books by William Eddy, LCSW, Esq.

Bill Eddy provides Divorce and Family Law Mediation at NCRC as well as training for family law attorneys and other professionals at the High Conflict Institute. Please visit HCI atwww.highconflictinstitute.com for more information on Mr. Eddy’s trainings. He has written numerous books on the subjects of families and high conflict personalities, listed below.

High Conflict People in Legal Disputes
Splitting: Protecting Yourself While Divorcing a Borderline or Narcissist
Understanding & Managing High Conflict Personalities (DVD Set)
Don’t Alienate The Kids! Raising Resilient Children While Avoiding High Conflict Divorce

It’s All Your Fault!

Bill sure was ahead of his AFCC time. While others were simply developing and lobbying for more parenting coordinator rights in Florida, Texas, and wherever — he was writing this book explaining that the Issue is not the Issue, and all the conflict in the family law venue really comes from disordered personalities in the court system.

Protect Yourself from Manipulation, False Accusations, and Abuse

Divorce is difficult under the best of circumstances. When your spouse has borderline personality disorder (BPD), narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), or is manipulative, divorcing can be especially complicated. While people with these tendencies may initially appear convincing and even charming to lawyers and judges, you know better—many of these “persuasive blamers” leverage false accusations, attempt to manipulate others, launch verbal and physical attacks, and do everything they can to get their way.

Splitting is your legal and psychological guide to safely navigating a high-conflict divorce from an unpredictable spouse. Written by Bill Eddy, a family lawyer, therapist, and divorce mediator, and Randi Kreger, coauthor of the BPD classic Stop Walking on Eggshells, this book includes all of the critical information you need to work through the process of divorce in an emotionally balanced, productive way.

I find it odd that he’s working with the author of “Stop walking on Eggshells” which someone gave me about halfway through the divorce fiasco, post-restraining order. They meant well, but like Lundy Bancroft’s “Why Does He DO That” — and regardless of some truths it may have held, neither one (conveniently) mentions the custody racket, financial incentive, fatherhood funding, welfare reform or in short anything which would give me a concise narrative of why the courts don’t take death threats followed by family suicide, or a stalking combined with previous death threats and violence, seriously — and insisted on psychologizing all terms.

People who have lived with this (and I acknowledge it exists) don’t need guides — they need out of the relationship.

Which is precisely what people working with the organization Mr. Eddy helps market through, are not going to let happen. Nope. If we wish to detach from a borderline personality, abuser, or simply an ex (and birth happened in there somewhere), we WILL be forced, most likely, to deal with an AFCC-devotee somewhere along the way — or most of the way along the way.

I have the book “Stop Walking on Eggshells” and it didn’t take to long to recognize it was an updated rebuttal of a 1970s feminist classic, (shown in 2005 version) Women and Madness (by Phyllis Chesler, PhD)

(Link expired: but see 12/31/1972 Review by Adrienne Rich. Reading it again now (2018) with my perspective, both experientially in the American family courts (post-battering interventions, 21st century) and having read so much anti-woman, anti-mother, values-driven (garbage) from the same sources she critiqued originally in this book, I have to basically agree. (I also FYI had this book as a young woman).

It asks:

Why are so many women in therapy, on psychiatric medication, or in mental hospitals? Who decides these women are mad? Why do therapists have the power to deem a woman mentally ill when she asserts herself sexually, economically, or intellectually? Why are women pathologized, but not treated, when they exhibit a normal human response to abuse and stress – including the lifelong stress of second-class citizenship?

Phyllis Chesler confronts questions like these and persuasively argues that double standards of mental health and illness exist and that women are often punitively labeled as a function of gender, race, class, or sexual preference. Based on in-depth interviews with patients and an analysis of women’s roles in myths and history, Women and Madness is an incomparable work.

Originally published in 1972, this classic has sold over two-and-a-half million copies. Passionate and informative, with a new introduction that examines the trauma of psychiatric labeling and envisions a psychology of liberation for the ages, this special twenty-fifth anniversary edition of Women and Madness remains frighteningly up-to-date.

By now there should also be one called “Children and Madness,” for the labeling children get when they report abuse, when they are active and assertive, and when they need to be controlled after any of the above. That’s been documented elsewhere, and comes under

Psychotropic Drug Abuse in Foster Care Costs Government Billions :

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

November 16, 2011 at 10:48 am

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Mandatory Mediation, Parent Education promotion, Parenting Coordination promotion, PhDs in Psychology-Psychiatry etc (& AFCC), Psychology & Law = an AFCC tactical lobbying unit, Where's Mom?

Tagged with AFCC, AFCC Conference Rhetoric, AFCC language mixups, Alienated Definitions: Cal Penal Code v Custody Evaluators define "Domestic Violence", Alienated from Reality - CourtTalk vs StreetFacts, Allana Krause case, Beltway Sniper, Bill Eddy LCSW JD, CA extradites & jails another protective mother- Schmidt -Saavedra case, early Richard Gardner Quotes, Education, HHS-TAGGS grants database, High Conflict Institute, Incorporated Where? The Institute for Relational Harm and Public Pathology Education, Interstate Custody Wars, John - Mildred Muhammad Beltway Sniper Case, John Slowiaczek Omaha AAML, Loretta Frederick BWJP-AFCC alliance, Megan Hunter AZ courts, MPDI, NCRC National Conflict Resolution Center, parental kidnapping, Parenting Coordination, PAS High-Conflict Families and Promoting Treatment in the custody process, Phyllis Chesler Women and Madness, RTI Relationship Training Institute (San Diego), Self-Defense from DV, social commentary, Supervised Visitation, The Baker Act (1970 involuntary psychiatric incarcerations), Where's Mom?-Dad beats 5yr old daughter in head for alphabet mistake (Christopher D. Curry - Akron Ohio), women's rights

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

with 3 comments

….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oct. 21, 2011 update:

Concern #1:

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

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

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

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

Concern #2:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE PRESS RELEASE LIST OF GRANTEES:

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

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

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

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

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

NATIONAL

RESOURCE CENTER

for

STRATEGIES

PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE

= NRCSPHM, “obviously”

How grandiose.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ICF Incorporated, LLC (NRCSPHM)

Fairfax

$1,500,000

			Award Title	Sum of Actions
2011	ACF	I C F, INC	NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE	$ 1,500,000

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

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

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

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

ICF Incorporated, L.L.C. Wins $107,631,975 Modified Federal Contract

02/1/2011

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

ICF Inc Win $8,462,890 Federal Contract

12/25/2010

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

ICF Inc. Wins $4.92 Million Federal Contract

09/30/2010

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

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

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

AWARD ACTIONS

Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions

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

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

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

FY	Award Number	Award Title	Budget Year of Support	Award Code	Agency	Action Issue Date	DUNS Number	Amount This Action
2007	90LH0001	NATIONAL CHILD CARE TOLL-FREE HOTLINE	1	0	ACF	09-21-2007	072648579	$ 882,080
Fiscal Year 2007 Total:								$ 882,080

Total of all award actions:

$ 3,656,370

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

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

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

In 2011, ICF acquired AeroStrategy LLC

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

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

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

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS in Fairfax, VA

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Administration for Children and Families (ACF)

Office of Family Assistance (OFA)

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

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

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

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Faith-Based Community Organization (FBCO) Collaboration

With our strong research capacity and experienced practitioner-consultants, ICF is improving state and local TANF services by connecting local programs with high-performing FBCOs already serving similar populations.

Welfare Peer Technical Assistance (WPTA)

ICF administers technical assistance to WPTA, which facilitates the sharing of information between and among States, Territories, Tribes, and localities and helps establish linkages between organizations serving the needs of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) participants.

National Healthy Families Technical Assistance Project

ICF supports OFA and its technical assistance teams in providing seamless, comprehensive technical assistance (TA) to support the needs of Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Education grantees.

National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC)

ICF leads content management and direction for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse, which serves as a national repository and distribution center for information and research relating to responsible fatherhood programs, initiatives and activities.

Office of Family Assistance (OFA) Targeted Technical Assistance

ICF provides technical assistance planning and delivery, research, writing, training, and wraparound product development to OFA Targeted Technical Assistance, an innovative technical assistance and project support contract.

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

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

ICF INTERNATIONAL INC.

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

(notice its name shows different here, too).

USASPENDING.GOV:

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

For example, this grant:

Transaction Number # 5

PIID: HHSP23320110015YC (Definitive Contract)

Recipient:	ICF INTERNATIONAL INC. 9300 LEE HWY , FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA
Reason for Modification:
Program Source:	75-1536:Children and Families Services Programs
Agency:	Department of Health and Human Services : Office of Asst. Sec. for Health except national centers (disused code)
Product/Service Code:	R408 : Program Management/Support Services
Description:	CHILDREN’S BUREAU CLEARINGHOUSE SERVICES

Date Signed:
September 30 , 2011Obligation Amount:
$9,481,719

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMMENTARY on USASPENDING.GOV (various, random):

OMB falls short on USASpending.gov data, GAO says

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

By Matthew Weigelt

Mar 15, 2010

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

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

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

Or, from 2011, from “SUNLIGHT FOUNDATION”:

House Oversight Subcommittee Discusses Problems with USASpending.gov Data

Kaitlin Lee

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GRANT ANNOUNCEMENT for this NRCSPHM:

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

Summary

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

Post Date:	06/28/2011
Application Due Date:	07/28/2011

Description

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

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

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

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

Apr 28, 1999

AT-99-007

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

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

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

AT-99-07

ISSUED: April 28, 1999

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

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

BACKGROUND: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs is a recent program to enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parent’s access to and visitation of their children. $10 million per year has been granted to States since 1997; it is a continuing capped appropriation. Funds are granted to states based upon the number of children in single family households, a $50,000 minimum per state will be increased to $100,000 this year. The range of grants is from $100,000 to nearly $1 million per year. State programs are managed by agencies designated by the Governor; many states do not operate the program through the IV-D agency. Funds may be used for the following activities: mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pick up), and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.

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

REGULATORY REFERENCE: 45 CFR Parts 303.109

DATES: This regulation is effective April 29, 1999

INQUIRIES: ACF Regional Administrators

__________________________
David Gray Ross
Commissioner
Office of Child Support Enforcement

. . .

SUMMARY: This final rule implements provisions contained in section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and establishes the requirements for State monitoring, reporting and evaluation of Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs. Access and Visitation programs support and facilitate non-custodial parents’ access to and visitation of their children by means of activities including mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pickup) and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.

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

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

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

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

AT-9907, Issued April 28, 1999

History of Federal Involvement in Access and Visitation

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

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

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

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

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

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

Personal/Anecdotal re: Mediation:

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

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

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

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

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

“This is NOT a comprehensive list of all U.S. fathers who have killed their children in situations involving domestic violence and/or child abuse. This list is limited to articles I have found where there is an identifiable child custody, visitation, and/or child support angle in the children’s deaths. Even then, I can’t claim that this is a comprehensive list of child custody, visitation, and or child-support- related murders. Quite often, newspaper articles just don’t provide enough information to make a judgment call.”

This person was simply reading the newspaper accounts, and keeping a count. Notice — PLENTY from 2008 – 2010. There is no question that the presence of these access and visitation grants enabled and encouraged some very bad behaviors, such as murder. It has also made it nearly impossible for marriages which really should have been split up and NOT have continued involvement by a perpetrator of violence upon mother Or child(ren) — to become separate entitities.

Why? Because sometimes the child support arrears literally extorts the father into waging a custody battle he may not even want.

Recently (for Pete’s sake!) an assistant deputy attorney (I forget exact title), a mother working for the California Attorney General, had her little girl abducted on a court-ordered (?) visitation, and despite her frantic calls to get the baby back, FBI didn’t issue the Amber Alert (per procedures to WAIT LONGER when it’s parental involvement) and there was a murder -suicide. GUESS WHAT: THIS POLICY ENABLED THAT (Samaan/Fay). If even someone working in this arm of government cannot save her own child’s life, what have we come to?

IF they do persuade/encourage/facilitate (or bribe) fathers to pay child support better, or GOOD Dads to be more involved with their children in cases where there were BAD, VISITATION-OBSTRUCTING MOMS (and NOT prior abuse, violence, or threats in the relatioship) —

ANYHOW, here was the 1999 response to what I’d call women’s rights organizations to this policy and these grants:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

EVALUATION OF CHILD ACCESS PROJECTS

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

Purpose

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

Background

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CHILD ACCESS AND VISITATION: PROMISING PROCEDURES

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

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

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

SECTION 3 SERVICES FOR HIGH-CONFLICT FAMILIES

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

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

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

SECTION 3 SERVICES FOR HIGH-CONFLICT FAMILIES

INTRODUCTION

More approaches listed (on this page, anyhow):

Multi-session, psycho-educational interventions for parents for whom domestic violence has been an issue, with the objective of helping them parent apart and understand the dynamics of domestic violence.

Monthly meetings and/or telephone contact on a more frequent basis with mental health professionals to resolve ongoing issues and disputes about access

Explanatory materials on supervised visitation and exchange services for parents and providers in many languages.

Supervised exchange services for families who display conflict during drop-off and pick-up of the children

Supervised visitation services for families with allegations of domestic violence, abuse, and/or other forms of parental misconduct or conflict.

␣␣ Teaching inexperienced parents how to interact with their children during supervised visits by providing instruction and feedback.**

ThedevelopmentofastandingorderofthePresidingJudgeoftheFresnoCountySuperior Court that police can invoke requiring parents to use supervised visitation services if the police are called out two or more times to assist with the exchange of the children.␣␣ Thedevelopmentofa12-weekcurriculumfornever-married,separated,ordivorcedparents where domestic violence has been an issue.

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

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

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

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

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

Multiple Initiatives Grant

A Profile of Former-TANF and NON-TANF Clients in the IVD Caseload
Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., 01/24/2000.

A Study Of Interest Usage On Child Support Arrears State Of Colorado Final Report
Jane Venohr, Ph.D., David Price, Ph.D., Esther Griswold, M.A., 06/01/2000.

County Policies and Attitudes Towards Incarcerated NCPs
Esther Ann Griswold, M.A., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., 04/24/2000.

Longer Term Evaluation of Colorado’s Driver’s License Suspension
Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., 02/24/2000.

Survey of State Child Support Policies, Procedures, and Programs for Incarcerated Parents
Esther Griswold, M.A., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., Christine Allison, M.A., 09/24/2000.

The Effects of Repeated Driver’s License Suspensions Among Parents Who Owe Child Support
Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., 09/24/2000.

Updated Colorado Staffing Standards for Child Support Enforcement
Jane C. Venohr, Ph.D., David A. Price, Ph.D., 07/28/2000.

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

Jane Venohr, Ph.D.

David Price, Ph.D.

Policy Studies Inc.

999 18th Street, Suite 1000

Denver, CO 80202

(303) 863-0900

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

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

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

Jane Venohr, Ph.D., Research Associate

jvenohr@centerforpolicyresearch.org

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

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

Found 2 matching record(s). Viewing page 1 of 1.

# Name Address Type Count

1 PRICE, DAVID A. 930 ACOMA ST., #415, DENVER, CO
80204, US Registered Agent 1

2 PRICE, DAVID A. 200 GRAND AVE STE 315, GRAND
JUNCTION, CO 81501, US Registered Agent 1

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

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

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

Found 1 matching record(s). Viewing page 1 of 1.
#	Name	Address	Type	Count
1	POLICY STUDIES INC.	1515 WYNKOOP ST STE. 400, DENVER, CO 80202, US	Trade name Registrant	12

[Next 2>]

1 2

Found 12 matching record(s). Viewing page 1 of 2.
#	ID Number	Document Number	Name	Status	Form	Effective Date
1	19951078593	19951078593	COLORADO CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES	Effective	DPC	06/16/1995 12:00 AM
2	19961012292	19961012292	PRIVATIZATION PARTNERSHIPS, INC.	Effective	DPC	01/29/1996 12:00 AM
3	19961012293	19961012293	PSIBER TECHNOLOGIES INC.	Effective	DPC	01/29/1996 12:00 AM
4	20001166186	20001166186	CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES OF COLORADO	Effective	DPC	08/25/2000 12:00 AM
5	20001209751	20001209751	TELLER COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT	Effective	DPC	10/27/2000 12:00 AM
6	20001209752	20001209752	EL PASO COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT	Effective	DPC	10/27/2000 12:00 AM
7	20011022445	20011022445	PSI INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND JUSTICE CENTER	Effective	DPC	01/31/2001 12:00 AM
8	20011022446	20011022446	PSI HEALTH	Effective	DPC	01/31/2001 12:00 AM
9	20021117260	20021117260	CHILD HEALTH ADVOCATES	Effective	DPC	05/03/2002 12:00 AM
10	20021159702	20021159702	PSI ARISTA	Effective	DPC	06/12/2002 12:00 AM

and the last two:

Found 12 matching record(s). Viewing page 2 of 2.
#	ID Number	Document Number	Name	Status	Form	Effective Date	Comment
11	20021223054	20021223054	BOULDER COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP)	Effective	DPC	08/13/2002 12:00 AM
12	20021223055	20021223055	EL PASO COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP)	Effective	DPC	08/13/2002 12:00 AM

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

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

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

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

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

Jefferson County Child Support Enforcement Home Page!

Fatherhood Program

Learning to be the best dads we can be!

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

Through a case planning process, a dad’s strengths will be identified, opportunities evaluated and discussed, and a simple written plan formulated. The plan will identify the responsiblity of the dad and the responsibility theFatherhood Case Manager in implementing the plan.

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

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

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

WEBSITES

www.coloradodads.org
www.familiesfirstcolorado.org

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

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

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

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

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

About Circle of Parents: Fatherhood

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

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

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

Circle of Parents® EIN 800106957

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

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

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

Revenue (that year):

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{{An acquaintance of mine forwarded the article (which I knew about), and said she’d submitted a comment, responding to a petition on this matter, that funding be found to allow the Women and Children of the state of Kansas to leave the state, for their own safety.}}

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

Local Governments Slash Funding for Domestic Violence Survivors (Gender Issues,Law)

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

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

Bryce Covert

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

PARTNERS FOR KIDS: GETTING FATHER-READY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“What is Smart Start?

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

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

CIRCLE OF PARENTS(tr)

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

Total Dollars:$3,900,000
Transactions:1 – 4 of 4

However, if one takes the DUNS# above and looks, it’s clear that the source of some of this is definitely TANF funding, i.e., welfare.

The office (reported on USASPENDING.gov) being “500 North Michigan, Chicago, IL” right downtown Chicago, on “The Magnificent Mile,” I’m going to look this up further, right now. (That address also contains a virtual office, including some consulates, etc.)

ILLINOIS says, it’s in good standing, and incorporated, as a nonprofit, on April 20 2004.

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

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

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

How is FRIENDS National Resource Center for CBCAP funded?

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

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

What is CBCAP?

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

What legislation supports CBCAP?

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

Why were CBCAP programs created?

CBCAP programs were established by Title II of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act Amendments of 1996 and most recently reauthorized in December of 2010.

** For “expert” read “heat shield.” I linked to her LinkedIn — Ms. Starsonek hails from North Carolina and lists herself as working on this Circle of Parents(tr) “Fatherhood Initiative,” and formerly as a consultant for the NC Administrative Office of the Courts, although it’s clear her public policy experience has focused on “domestic violence/ intimate partner abuse.” The business is “nonprofit organization management” not “domestic violence advocate.” A 107 page article on-line here comments on how judges feel about “judicial sensitivity taining” re: domestic violence, i.e., it insults their intelligence to sit through propaganda.

A very good summary of her approach in a 2004 article from “Philanthropy Journal,” called “A Voice for Victims,” recommends the usual “integrated approach” and helping agencies get along with each other, gives her personal philosophy and background, and seems a typical system approach: It does not mention the existence of the AFCC, and attributes failure to protect women & children from getting murdered around custody disputes, plus the suicides apparently to lack of understanding and coordination — rather than any corruption or undue influence within the system. As such, the solutions are going to be more training and more interagency cooperation.

Based in part on recommendations made by a task force coordinated by Starsoneck, a select committee of the N.C. House this year passed what she characterizes as “landmark” domestic-violence legislation. With nearly two-dozen provisions, the law addresses a broad range of topics. It expands legal services for victims of domestic violence, provides for treatment for offenders, addresses the role of schools, and directs the state Department of Health and Human Services to recommend a plan for dealing with victims of domestic violence who have substance-abuse or mental-health problems. The law also bars discrimination by employers against victims of domestic violence who are seeking relief from the courts, ensures safer and more consistent handling of child custody and visitation in domestic violence cases (I’d like to see that!)

Note: North Carolina DHS has a “Fatherhood Project” — I don’t suppose any discussion of this comes up in public policy matters affecting child visitation and custody around domestic violence, does it? For example, informing victims that the field of “Fatherhood” exists?

WHILE these reports, task forces, and discussions are ongoing, North Carolina — like very other state — continues to have its Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood projects going on (affecting the safety of women & children attempting to leave abuse) and their Access/Visitation Programs as well — run from the Department of Human Resources — (affecting the safety of women & children attempting to leave abuse, and sometimes fathers with children attempting to leave domestic violence (Referring to the physical abuse in particular) as well). The access/visitation grants ARE the answer to women & children attempting to leave domestic violence, which sometimes casts them upon welfare. And historically the DV groups rarely report on this, either. SOMETIMES they do, but never to the point of protesting the expansion of those two policies, which would be like cutting off the hand that feeds the same groups!

I found 43 grants under two (there are more, but I only searched two) fatherhood-centric grants systems, in NC (all years). Obviously, from the chart below, the OCSE is administering the Access Visitation (“SAVP”) grants. (OCSE comes under HHS). OBVIOUSLY, marriage/fatherhood is being pushed — or at least “promoted” — through: Welfare Office, University Level, Community Action Organizations. I am curious why a “Voice for the Victims” may not be mentioning this consistently throughout a professional development resulting in 127 contacts (in this case). Without meaning to minimize Ms. Starosek’s career concern about DV issues, she has a educational background of psychology and social science, plus government involvement (contracting and consulting). She has been active also (per article) in Massachusetts, where AFCC is even listed right on the family court site — twice. Somehow, this has not caught her attention, and I suspect this is probably because of the associations more with policy-makers and government councils, that people going through the custody-child-removal system enabled by the grants, and the policies behind them. It is simply an entirely different point of view, and results in an entirely different voice.

FYI — we can speak. Victims, unless their larynxes have been injured in an assault — CAN speak. most I’ve met are articulate (discounting some for the PTSD), and don’t need ongoing interpretation. They are often adults, and are eyewitnesses of their own experience, and often networked well enough to know others’ common experience. They are often the best voice of what they have consistently experienced, and this voice has been lost. Federal Policymakers are not INTERESTED in the roadkill to their rhetoric as applied at the state level. They are interested in maintaining political viability by continuing to get grants for their associates, knowing FULL WELL that there is no adequate oversight, and no real document results in the objectives under which these programs were (improperly) sold to Congress to start with (Welfare Reform 1996).

(NORTH CAROLINA: Years, All CFDAs 93597 (A/V) and 93086 (HM/RF) series). Circle of Parents, in taking on this DV expert made sure NOt to hear “the voice of the victims” of family court coverup of DV.. . … ….. , meanwhile complying with federal regulation 45 CFR 303.109 (as to these grants), or at least its sentiment, in taking on a token DV person to lend legitimacy . . . .

Program Office	Grantee Name	Grantee Type	Award Number	Award Title	Action Issue Date	CFDA Program Name	Award Activity Type	Principal Investigator	Sum of Actions
ACF	CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC	Community Action Organization	90FR0001	FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK	09/21/2007	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	SALLIE P SURFACE	$ 245,296
ACF	CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC	Community Action Organization	90FR0001	FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK	09/14/2008	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	SALLIE P SURFACE	$ 245,296
ACF	CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc.	Welfare Department	90FE0059	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/17/2007	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	CYNTHIA J HARRIS	$ 550,000
ACF	CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc.	Welfare Department	90FE0059	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/14/2008	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	CYNTHIA J HARRIS	$ 550,000
ACF	EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY	Junior College, College & University	90FE0017	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/20/2007	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL	$ 405,528
ACF	EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY	Junior College, College & University	90FE0017	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/26/2008	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL	$ 525,161
ACF	UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL	Junior College, College & University	90FE0094	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7	09/20/2007	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ANNE JONES	$ 490,465
ACF	UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL	Junior College, College & University	90FE0094	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7	06/06/2008	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ANNE JONES	$ 0
ACF	UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL	Junior College, College & University	90FE0094	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7	09/22/2008	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ANNE JONES	$ 530,482
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0001NCSAVP	SAVP 2000	08/22/2000	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 207,273
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0101NCSAVP	SAVP 2001	08/23/2001	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 207,273
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0201NCSAVP	2002 SAVP	08/06/2002	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 248,098
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0201NCSAVP	2002 SAVP	09/14/2009	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$- 23,880
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0301NCSAVP	2003 SAVP	09/11/2003	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 248,098
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0301NCSAVP	2003 SAVP	09/14/2009	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$- 30,070
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0401NCSAVP	2004 SAVP	09/15/2004	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 272,566
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0501NCSAVP	2005 SAVP	09/14/2005	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 272,566
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0601NCSAVP	2006 SAVP	09/19/2006	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 268,587
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0701NCSAVP	2007 SAVP	07/20/2007	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 278,157
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0801NCSAVP	2008 SAVP	01/30/2008	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 271,792
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	0901NCSAVP	FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION	12/23/2008	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 272,258
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	1001NCSAVP	FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION	11/25/2009	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 279,933
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	1101NCSAVP	FY 2011 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION	10/08/2010	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 286,100
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9701NCSAVP	SAVP 1997	05/31/1998	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 233,772
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9701NCSAVP	SAVP 1997	12/02/1999	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$- 216,494
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9701NCSAVP	SAVP 1997	01/04/2000	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 205
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9801NCSAVP		09/01/1998	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 233,772
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9801NCSAVP		02/24/2003	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$- 233,772
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9901NCSAVP		08/16/1999	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$ 207,273
OCSE	NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES	Welfare Department	9901NCSAVP		02/25/2003	Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs	SOCIAL SERVICES		$- 132,019
OFA	CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC	Community Action Organization	90FR0001	FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK	09/22/2006	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	SALLIE P SURFACE	$ 245,296
OFA	CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC	Community Action Organization	90FR0001	FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK	08/24/2009	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	SALLIE P SURFACE	$ 245,296
OFA	CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC	Community Action Organization	90FR0001	FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK	09/24/2010	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	SALLIE SURFACE	$ 245,296
OFA	CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc.	Welfare Department	90FE0059	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/25/2006	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	CYNTHIA J HARRIS	$ 550,000
OFA	CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc.	Welfare Department	90FE0059	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/18/2009	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	CYNTHIA J HARRIS	$ 550,000
OFA	CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc.	Welfare Department	90FE0059	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/24/2010	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	CYNTHIA HARRIS	$ 550,000
OFA	EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY	Junior College, College & University	90FE0017	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/22/2006	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	DR LINDA ROBINSON	$ 514,308
OFA	EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY	Junior College, College & University	90FE0017	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/18/2009	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL	$ 519,625
OFA	EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY	Junior College, College & University	90FE0017	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8	09/24/2010	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ELIZABETH CARROLL	$ 548,181
OFA	Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc.	Other Social Services Organization	90FM0009	COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES.	09/27/2011	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	KIMBERLY M KIMBERLY	$ 725,000
OFA	UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL	Junior College, College & University	90FE0094	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7	09/22/2006	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ANNE JONES	$ 375,685
OFA	UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL	Junior College, College & University	90FE0094	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7	09/16/2009	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ANNE JONES	$ 538,524
OFA	UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL	Junior College, College & University	90FE0094	HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7	09/24/2010	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	ANNE JONES	$ 550,000

Results 1 to 43 of 43 matches.

(THAT was just for effect, and you could find a similar chart in any other state).

“PARENT TRUST FOR WASHINGTON CHILDREN” logo alerts me to, probably another grant behind this one: There are only so many icons available showing human figures looped together by a heart, or heart-type logo! . . Besides, the leading page is “BUILDING STRONG, HEALTHY FAMILIES” which is a government theme. When it comes to REAL families, somone is a father, someone a mother, someone gives birth (possibly more than once, creating siblings) and the term is “RAISING” my/our children, not BUILDING them! An entirely different mindset is involved in “BUILDING a family.” Builders are not the house, they are outside the house! The house is made out of material they manipulate, according to some master plan, or at least SOME plan. However, life comeso after childbirth, and from the perspective of the individuals, people GROW, and hopefully good values are instilled, safe places,future hopes, associations — and real, living connections. The life force from within is the verb “GROW” and the artificial, social-science-focused (i.e., focusing on the theory, policy, or others involved) results in terms like “BUILDING FAMILIES,” (Plural). Particularly as many of these policies are resulting in partially dead, or wholly dead families (i.e., murder/suicides), wasted years, wasted tax dollars, and time taken out of building their own futures, according to their OWN plans which just may happen to fit their own reality better than an “almost one size fits all” policy from above . . . . . . (well, you can tell what kind of mood I”m in today on all this mess!) (it’s reall organized, but in practice, it’s messing with other, important realities, like due process in the courts, and the ability to make independent choices, by MOTHERS!)(and, many FATHERS, too!).

This one, apparently, is marketing “Professional Trainings” especially “Conscious Fathering”(tr). Contact your local affiliate to buy it:

“

“Conscious Fathering’s Creating Parental Balance Trainings:”

with “DONATE” “WEB STORE” “CONTACT US” (in that order)

(It took a while to locate, but it’s a project of the Seattle Foundation, self-described as the largest funder in King’s County) or at least helped by them):

Parent Trust for Washington Children

9/10/2010

$15,000.00

support general operating expenses.

EIN# 911036940, I’ll check TAGGS (yes, they have been filing, at least): recorded here under a different name (and no DUNS#)…

Recipient Name	City	State	ZIP Code	County	DUNS Number	Sum of Awards
PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE	SEATTLE	WA	98101	KING		$ 50,000

(“Mutual Support” programs? How about put some of that to tracking down that “undistributable child support collections” held at the state level, no doubt in Washington, like other states!)

FY	Award Number	Award Title	Budget Year of Support	Award Code	Agency	Action Issue Date	DUNS Number	Amount This Action
1998	90CA1648	DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS	1	0	ACF	09-14-1998		$ 50,000

There are thousands of “90CA” awards. To narrow it, I picked 1998, and only WA, D.C. & CA (most projects get tested in CA, why not?) — narrowing it down to 18 awards. Parents Anonymous apparently got started in California anyhow, and the washington group eventually changed its name: Here we go, from TAGGS:

Fiscal Year	Program Office	Grantee Name	State	Award Number	Award Title	Budget Year	CFDA Number	CFDA Program Name	Award Action Type	Principal Investigator	Sum of Actions
1998	CB	CAL ST LA UNIV AUXILIARY SERVICES, INC	CA	90CA1589	PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – FIELD INITIATED RESEARCH ON CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	MITCHELL EISEN, PH.D.	$ 9,750
1998	CB	CENTER FOR CHILD PROTECTION & FAMILY SUPPORT	DC	90CA1614	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	JOYCE N THOMAS	$ 100,000
1998	CB	D.C. CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND	DC	90CA1645	DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	CAROLYN S ABDULLAH	$ 50,000
1998	CB	EDGEWOOD THE SF PROTESTANT ORPHANAGE	CA	90CA1599	PRIORITY AREA 1.03 – INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO KINSHIP CARE OF CHILDREN IN WELFARE SYSTEM	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	LILLIAN JOHNSON	$ 199,464
1998	CB	FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO, INC	CA	90CA1608	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	ASCENCION HERNANDEZ	$ 100,000
1998	CB	FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES OF THE BAY AREA	CA	90CA1587	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	PATRICIA CHAMBERS, PH.D	$ 150,000
1998	CB	KITSAP BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS	WA	90CA1609	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	ELIZABETH S BOSCH	$ 100,000
1998	CB	LOS ANGELES COUNTY, DEPT OF CHILDREN’S SRVS	CA	90CA1594	PRIORITY AREA 1.03 – INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO KINSHIP CARE OF CHILDREN IN WELFAR	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	SHARYN L LOGAN	$ 200,000
1998	CB	MARY’S CENTER OF MATERNAL & CHILD CARE	DC	90CA1586	PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – HEALTHY FAMILIES DC	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	JOAN YENGO	$ 150,000
1998	CB	PARENTS ANONYMOUS	CA	90CA1592	PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – NATIONAL NETWORK OF MUTUAL SUPPORT/SELF HELP PROGRAMS	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	TERESA RAFAEL	$ 350,000
1998	CB	PARENTS ANONYMOUS	CA	90CA1646	DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	LISA PION-BERLIN	$ 50,000
1998	CB	PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE	WA	90CA1648	DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	SYLVIA MEYER	$ 50,000
1998	CB	SAN DIEGO COUNTY YMCA	CA	90CA1630	PRIORITY AREA 1.04 – SCHOOL-BASED CHILD MALTREATMENT PREVENTION	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	TANYA PHAM	$ 100,000
1998	CB	SAN DIEGO COUNTY YMCA	CA	90CA1630	PRIORITY AREA 1.04 – SCHOOL-BASED CHILD MALTREATMENT PREVENTION	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	TANYA PHAM	$ 100,000
1998	CB	SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, FOUNDATION	CA	90CA1566	PRIORITY AREA 1.02R – CONSOR- TIUM FOR LONGITUDINAL STUDIES OF CHILD MALTREATMENT PROJECTS	4	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	ALAN LITROWNIK	$ 250,000
1998	CB	STANISLAUS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION	CA	90CA1601	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	HAROLD R DEARMOND	$ 54,725
1998	CB	WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE	WA	90CA1590	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	1	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NEW	SHERRY C BRUMMEL	$ 197,471
1998	CB	WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE	WA	90CA1590	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS	2	93670	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	SHERRY C BRUMMEL	$ 195,092

I just looked up “Parents Anonymous” and behold — only CA & AZ show any DUNS#s . . . . the umbrella organizations? Are they ALL running “Conscious Fathering(tr)” professional training classes, and if so, for how much? Notice, CA gets the biggest grants…

Recipient Name	City	State	ZIP Code	County	DUNS Number	Sum of Awards
PARENTS ANONYMOUS (earliest grant shown 1995, Budget Year, 2)	CLAREMONT	CA	91711	LOS ANGELES	090749326	$ 2,828,196
PARENTS ANONYMOUS (THIS GRANT IS 2010….)	PHOENIX	AZ	85014	MARICOPA	119833135	$ 792,550
PARENTS ANONYMOUS (THIS GRANT, 1999)	PHOENIX	AZ	85014	MARICOPA		$ 50,000
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF BUFFALO & ERIE COUNTY	BUFFALO	NY	14206	ERIE		$ 750,000
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF NEW JERSEY, INC.	PRINCETON	NJ	08540	MERCER		$ 50,000
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF PENNSYLVANIA	HARRISBURG	PA	17102	DAUPHIN		$ 50,000
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC.	CHARLESTON	SC	29416	CHARLESTON		$ 50,000
PARENTS ANONYMOUS ORG. OF MASS., INC.	BOSTON	MA	02116	SUFFOLK		$ 50,000
PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE	SEATTLE	WA	98101	KING		$ 50,000

Showing: 1 – 9 of 9

TAKING the DUNS# “090749326” to USASPENDING.gov, we see they have “only” missed over $2 million of grants here:

Total Dollars:$697,225

Transactions:1 – 2 of 2

One grant was “discretionary” — and is the National Child Abuse HelpLine (call your local Parenting Anonymous(tr) group leader???) – 2010

and the 2007 one was actually even named after this group:

Recipient: PARENTS ANONYMOUS
675 W FOOTHILL BLVD STAT 220 , CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA

Reason for Modification:

Program Source: 75-1536:Children and Families Services Programs

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Administration for Children and Families

CFDA Program : 93.670 : Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities

Description:
NATIONAL PARENT HELPLINE

Date Signed:
August 22 , 2010Obligation Amount:
$500,000

and

Transaction Number # 2

Federal Award ID: U81CE001039: 000 (Grants)

Recipient: PARENTS ANONYMOUS
675 W FOOTHILL BLVD STAT 220 , CLAREMONT

Reason for Modification:

Program Source:

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CFDA Program : 93.136 : Injury Prevention and Control Research and State and Community Based Programs

Description:
ENHANCING CHILD MALTREATMENT PREV INITIATIVES THROUGH PARENTS ANONYMOUSA INC.

Date Signed:
July 02 , 2007

Obligation Amount:
$197,225

“parents anonymousa inc.”?? This is supposedly an extension of an earlier grant we don’t see there:

R
Obligation / Action Date	07/02/2007
Starting Date	09/30/2006
Ending Date	09/29/2008

BUT, when I omit the DUNS# and just search on the name (in quotes, Prime Award search) I see this — and have to say, just go look yourself:

Total Dollars:$18,936,970
Transactions:1 – 25 of 25

This includes more from the Arizona group, and Buffalo and Erie County (NY, PA, I guess). There are grants or contracts from the Justice Department, and under the term “DRUG-FREE”, as well as (now we know where the term “Strengthening Families” comes from:

Transaction Number # 1

Federal Award ID: 98JSFX0001: 03 (Grants)

Recipient:	PARENTS ANONYMOUS CLAREMONT
Reason for Modification:
Program Source:
Agency:	Department of Justice : Office of Justice Programs
CFDA Program :	16.541 : Part E – Developing Testing and Demonstrating Promising New Programs
Description:	STRENGTHENING AT-RISK FAMILIES ALL ACROSS AMERICA

Date Signed:
August 17 , 2000Obligation Amount:
$3,000,000

Transaction Number # 2

Federal Award ID: 98JSFX000104 (Grants)

Recipient:	PARENT ANONYMOUS CLAREMONT
Reason for Modification:
Program Source:
Agency:	Department of Justice : Office of Justice Programs
CFDA Program :	16.541 : Part E – Developing Testing and Demonstrating Promising New Programs
Description:	STRENGTHENING AT-RISK FAMILIES ALL ACROSS AMERICA

Date Signed:
September 30 , 2001Obligation Amount:
$2,993,400

They are basically THROWING money at this group, and the Arizona branch (again, looking at transaction details, DUNS# is often missing).

In 2002 (this is from “USASPending.gov”), same program: they got $2.7 million

cfda 16;541 comes under ”

CFDA Program Title	JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION_SPECIAL EMPHASIS AND T/A

(OK, I finally looked up the project title). The DOJ awarded a $16 million grant to Parents Anonymous — to try out and assess its own programs! This is the AUdit Report saying their evaluation was “adequate”!!

Here they are seeking donations: Be a Circle of Friends ($500), Patron ($1,000), Hero ($1,500), Champion ($5,000 and get to speak at national conference), or Benefactor ($10,000). They havent figured out privileges for $10,000 and above yet . . . .. Contact “Meryl Levine.” I have a feeling it MAY be this Meryl Levine (from NJ, actually, but look at the details and compare to what Parents ANonymous is doing). The pay for Parents Anonymous VP was over $100K/year.)

DO THESE CONNECTIONS have anything to do with getting THOSE grants?

CALSWEC Standing Committee

Let’s take a look at who “CALSWEC” is, with HQ at UCBerkeley:

Created in 1990, the California Social Work Education Center (CalSWEC) is a consortium of the state’s 21 accredited social work graduate schools, the 58 county departments of social service and mental health, the California Departments of Social Services (CDSS) and Mental Health (CDMH), the California Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, professional associations, and foundations.

CalSWEC is the nation’s largest coalition of its kind working to provide professional education, student financial aid, in-service training, and workforce research–all directed toward developing effective, culturally competent public service delivery to the people of California.CalSWEC’s main office is at the University of California, Berkeley.Download a copy of the CalSWEC Fact Sheet (October 2011).

Ms. Levine is on the “CHILD WELFARE STANDING COMMITTEE” (representing PARENTS ANONYMOUS(tr):

Child Welfare CommitteeThe Child Welfare Committee is responsible for leading and overseeing curriculum, stipend, and other issues of social work education pertaining to public child welfare. It includes members of the Board and community volunteers interested in child welfare social work. Committee members are listed below.

Committee Chair
Charlene Reid, Director
Division of Social Services
Tehama County Department of Social ServicesStaff
Barrett Johnson, Director, Child Welfare In-Service Training Project, CalSWEC

Meryl Levine, Vice President of Development
Parents Anonymous Inc.Viola W. Lindsey
Department of Social Work and Social Ecology
Loma Linda UniversityKristina Lavato-Hermann
School of Social Welfare
San Francisco StateÂ UniversityChristine Mattos
F&EÂ Steering Committee
CaliforniaÂ Department of Social ServicesDavid Meyers, Sr. Attorney
Center for Families, Children & the Courts
Administrative Office of the Courts/Judicial Council of CaliforniaMark Miller, Training Director
Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family ServicesKate Mortimer, Project Coordinator, Title IV-E Program
Department of Social Work
California State University, Northridge

SEEMS LIKE THEY ARE ASSOCIATING WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE TO GET CHOSEN FOR MAJOR GRANTS . . . .

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General Seal and Site Header

http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/g9004013.htm

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Strengthening At-Risk Families All Across America Grant Awarded to the Parents Anonymous Incorporated, Grant Number 1998-JS-FX-0001, Claremont, California

Report No. GR-90-04-013
August 2004
Office of the Inspector General

Executive Summary

The Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division, has completed an audit of a Strengthening At-Risk Families All Across America Grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to Parents Anonymous located in Claremont, California. The purpose of this grant was to build and support strong, safe families in partnership with local communities by utilizing the Parents Anonymous model that helps break the cycle of abuse and delinquency. As of August 20, 2003, Parents Anonymous was awarded a total of $16,673,900 to assess strengths and needs of Parents Anonymous programs. The grant supported national training, technical assistance, outreach, referrals, and program materials and publications. In addition, the grant funded Parents Anonymous’ efforts to design a children’s program model, and a national database system for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information about Parents Anonymous.Our audit revealed that controls over the accounting process and records related to the grant were adequate. We found Parents Anonymous to be in compliance with OJP’s grant requirements. We reviewed Parents Anonymous’ compliance with essential grant conditions and found no weaknesses in the accounting records.These items are discussed in detail in the Findings and Recommendations section of the report. Our audit objectives, scope, and methodology appear in Appendix I.

(WELL, here are two of those reports from the OIG):

Sort by date/ Sort by relevance

DOJ/OIG OJP External Audit Reports
… At-Risk Families All Across America Grant Awarded to the Parents Anonymous
Incorporated, Audit Report GR–90–04–013, August 2004. …
http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/_ojp.htm-69k- Cached

Audit Report
… Claremont, California. Report No. GR–90–04–013 August 2004 Office of
the Inspector General Executive Summary. The Office …
http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/g9004013.htm-3k- Cached

Guess I’ll have to write for it:Prior to 2010, only the Audit Executive Summaries have been posted. All the Executive Summaries have been cleared and are arranged within the appropriate state directory for convenience. States not represented in this distribution do not have Executive Summaries available for inclusion at this time.

AS WITH THE HEALTHY MARRIAGES CURRICULA — it seems the JUSTICE DEPT. is helping a specific organization disseminate its own, specialty, program material. There is ONE little minor detail with this grant going to this organization: . . .. and that’s called CONFLICT OF INTEREST. (whether it’s above, or below, I looked at the founding documents and find that a long-time L.A. County Judge (haven’t checked out whether other mental health professionals in the employee of the County, or working FOR the Justice Department) (or, as to HHS, in the family court system or around it) – – – were, at the time the grant was awarded.

Note: California board had an L.A. County Judge (eventually became a judge ) on the group since 1973, and it might be worthwhile to see who else those board members represent. Meanwhile, I want to know about this Justice Program “strengthening families all across america” program. It’s probably a bunch a hooey, based on how frequent there are these family-court-related massacres, one state or another.

In the year 2002, the DOJ gave away $52 million (grants) in “Developing, Testing, and Demonstrating Promising New Programs.” The top Ten Recipients included: #1, Parents Anonymous (the City of Los Angeles itself being #7)”

Top 10 Assistance Recipients FY 2002

1. PARENT ANONYMOUS$2,700,000

2. DARE AMERICA$2,475,000

3. CALIBER ASSOCIATES$1,999,480

4. WYOMING COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ASSOC$1,851,050

5. GIRL SCOUTS OF USA$1,800,000

6. WAYNE CNTY DEPT OF COMMUNITY JUSTIC$1,800,000

7. LOS ANGELES CITY OF$1,800,000

8. SAFE AND SOUND$1,496,700

9. PUBLIC / PRIVATE VENTURES$1,375,000

10. AN ACHIEVABLE DREAM$1,350,000

Do their state registrations show?

AZ as charity,- yes:

ID	NAME	DBA
12810	*PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ARIZONA, INC

(at the same street address, as a “dba” also)

ID	NAME	DBA
24105	CPLC SOUTHWEST, INC.	PARENTING ARIZONA

in 2003 (* 2008) it also picked up the trade name: “PARENTING ARIZONA: SAFE CHILDREN, STRONG FAMILIES” (Search will probably expire, but file ID 300792 may help on the corporations search website).

Pennsylvania (per corporate website) has plenty of these by county.

CALIFORNIA HAS ITS USUAL ASSEMBLY OF: Formed, dissolved, suspended, with one survivor:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1239568	02/22/1984	DISSOLVED	PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF MARIN COUNTY	CARRIE PUGH
C0896252	08/30/1978	SUSPENDED	PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ORANGE COUNTY
C1023786	04/13/1981	SUSPENDED	PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SACRAMENTO, INC.	PETER A BUCK
C1259155	10/18/1984	SUSPENDED	PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SHASTA COUNTY, INC.	BARBARA RAYNARD
C0606551	09/03/1970	ACTIVE	PARENTS ANONYMOUS, INC.	LISA PION BERLIN
C0816640	05/27/1977	DISSOLVED	PARENTS ANONYMOUS, PACIFIC-SOUTHWEST	SHELLY TAYLOR

Lisa Pion Berlin, Ph.D. apparently influenced the CAPTA legislation, and here is the main site, Los Angeles area: Every other term is trademarkeed…

http://www.parentsanonymous.org/pahtml/pressExpert.html

Dr. Pion-Berlin is a renowned expert in the prevention of child abuse and neglect. She has authored legislation to strengthen the prevention focus of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and is frequently called upon by national and state policymakers along with the media to share unique solutions for implementing effective community-based child abuse prevention programs, achieving meaningful Parent Leadership and Shared Leadership, and creating child welfare system reform to ensure safe and strong families. Dr. Pion-Berlin also speaks on a variety of parenting topics such as: (see site).

Her son? husband? relative? (It’s an unusual last name) is a filmmaker; this one is about hazing

The ” National Child Abuse Prevention Advisory Council, helps promote Parents Anonymous(r) Inc.

With a unique blend of highly respected public figures and experts in the child abuse field, the National Child Abuse Prevention Advisory Council focuses on increasing public awareness about Parents Anonymous^® Inc. and its effectiveness in strengthening families and preventing abuse and neglect.

(in fact, I can only see one person, maybe two, on the list that is not some celebrity from a TV show….)

(Heavy emphasis on trademarked classes and training parents to teach them, as a means to prevent child abuse. In other words,parenting classes. Guess where I am gong next…..) The theme is having Parents (not just social staff employees) involved. This (next) says that in 1994, they got funding to form the NPLT (tr) concept:

Parent Leadership and Parent Leaders

Parents who are committed to helping to create change in their homes and their communities are called Parent Leaders. They may be parents, grandparents, kinship care providers, foster parents or anyone in a parenting role who speaks from his/her own perspective – – and not in a staff role for an organization. Those who are most effective, however, are Parent Leaders who have personal experience in the systems they are working to change.

In other words, we’d rather you be an insider, but speak as a parent.

Parents Anonymous® Inc. took Parent Leadership to a new level in 1994 when it received funding to create the first National Parent Leadership Team® (NPLT), thereby ensuring Shared Leadership on a national scale. The creation, development and study of this first NPLT, initiated the Parents Anonymous® Inc. Parent Leadership research agenda. We brought 12 members from across the country on board. Over the years the Team has continued to grow and members work in partnership with Parents Anonymous® Inc. in all matters related to programs and policies.

OK, this is probably the Grants we just saw above (Taggs) for the California group — the time frame matches, as well as the name of teh grant. TIHS is probably why the fatherhood emphasis gets in there — because of the HHS funding… The above quote was from a newsletter put out by a Childrens Center associated with Harvard? or at least with a harvard.edu address: ©2011 Judge Baker Children’s Center

I don’t know how common this last name is, but here is a David S. Pion-Berlin teaching at Univ. of California/Riverside, showing a Ph.D. from International Studies in 1984, Univ. of Denver

Yes, Dr. (in what?) Lisa Pion-Berlin takes credit for her husband, David S. (Political Science, Latin Americanist) and having been raised by her wonderful father (Nazi Refuge) — no mention whatsoever is made of any mother. IN context, I can understand why, but again — this site is emphasizing Dads, on father’s day.

Value The Importance Of Your Fathers Daily

Celebrating Father’s Day this Sunday is essential to focusing on their critical role in our children’s lives. We all need to make sure we embrace fathers daily and value their importance! I have experienced first hand two extraordinary Fathers: my own dad, Kurt Berlin and my husband, David Pion-Berlin.

I was raised by an extraordinary Dad who has challenged me to be a caring, responsible and contributing member of our society. He still practices law in DC at 85 years old and provides me with valuable input and support (even when I don’t ask) in my role as Mom and as President and CEO of Parents Anonymous® Inc.

(OBVIOUSLY this is a very website-oriented, and heavily trademarked group, with frequent new programs and initiatives, every single one (that I’ve seen) with a slick website. I noticed heavy First 5 (California) group, which is a red flag to me; there were questions regarding their funding in the news, including conflicts of interest between someone on its board directing moneys to another charity he was on).

“The Shared Leadership” plan would seem to be incorporating parent-input, and thus good. But (see my notes), the type of parent input preferred is someone IN the system, and the influence could readily go both way. Again, I simply found this group (at all) by pegging (yet another) fatherhood training certification affecting Jefferson County CO, from Washington State, and as it happens, originated in Southern California. http://www.nationalparenthelpline.org/what-we-do/mission-history.

As a domestic violence survivor become a custodial mother become a custody-challenged custodial mother (fatherhood funding influence is clear, in hindsight), become a NONcustodial mother and from there increasingly impoverished (i.e., repeatedly losing work), I know FIRSThand the feeling of a fantastic website full of empathetic terms and hotlines, including the National Domestic Violence Hotline (1-800-799-SAFE or something), which refers people to local agencies that (in the situation I just described) do not help anyhow. They can be good listeners, however — just not provide actual help. The same goes for other similarly high-web-profile groups like NCADV, DVLEAP, etc. — they are on the policy side, and not on the actual help side. Those who don’t have personal referrals to real sources of help will be sorry on calling the official numbers and hoping for real, tangible, in-time, valid resources — as opposed to the appearance of resources.

Here is the “Charitable Trusts” record of the Parents Anonymous satellite groups. Only the main one survives, as we can see:

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF MARIN COUNTY	056591	Charity	Dissolved	SAN RAFAEL	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ORANGE COUNTY		Charity	Not Registered	MISSION VIEJO	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SACRAMENTO, INC.		Charity	Not Registered	SACRAMENTO	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SHASTA COUNTY, INC.	057939	Charity	Inactive	REDDING	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
PARENTS ANONYMOUS, INC.	015477	Charity	Current	CLAREMONT	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
PARENTS ANONYMOUS, PACIFIC-SOUTHWEST		Charity	Not Registered	CULVER CITY	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
As1

AS early as 2001, we can see their revenues and assets are JUST FINE; even in these hard times, they are not suffering too bad: EIN# 23-7278097, and the founding articles filing is 47pp long on-line here

Fiscal Begin:
Fiscal End:	30-SEP-01
Total Assets:	$502,908.00
Gross Annual Revenue:	$4,312,507.00
RRF Received:	21-FEB-02
Returned Date:
990 Attached:
Status:	Accepted

2009:

Fiscal Begin:	01-OCT-09
Fiscal End:	30-SEP-10
Total Assets:	$1,775,724.00
Gross Annual Revenue:	$1,584,661.00
RRF Received:	12-AUG-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached:	Y
Status:	Accepted

As I said, they are selling classes and have copyrighted material (plus their websites have the “Donate” buttons, legal as they are a charity). Unlike many of the fatherhood group organzations, this SMART bunch (original board, or early board, included a woman who later became a judge) have (to this date) a lot of grants and a lot of program service revenue, the proportion is closer to half. (2009: $

667,716 contributions/grants — $902,923 program service revenue (what they are DOING as a nonprofit is actually bringing in revenue). Plus about $1K investment, and $8K “Other” revenue.” (which their tax form will explain). The nonprofit purpose has become technical assistance to spread the gospel about their (copyrighted) concept, and presumably write off expenses, like $940K salaries, etc. (in other words, they more than wrote off the program service income earnings).

“Parents, children and youth transform their attitudes, learn new behaviors, build on their strengths, and create long-term positive changes in their lives through proven effective, quality Parents Anonymous Programs implemented by our accredited network organizations”

Got this business model yet? . .. by our accredited network organizations. What do they do?

Parents Anonymous Inc provides training and technical assistance,develops publications and conducts research on meaningful Parent and Shared Leadership, systems reform and effective community-based strategies to strengthen families. Expenses $1,302,041

This work – promoting one’s own work and business model — earns Dr. Pion-Berlin $195K per year, VP Meryl Levine $111K, and another VP Sandra Williams $122K, for 40 hour weeks.

Other earnings (revenue) 660K Government GRANTS, plus $863K Government CONTRACTS, and like I mention, $39,194 (or about a good secretary’s annual salary), accreditation fees. No royalties show up ….

And, of the original 10 (1972) members of the Board, including one just labeled “Betty L., Los Angeles” (no address — guess that was one of the anonymous parents), the top 4 (except Secretary) are two J.D.s, an M.D., and what looks like a social worker, an ACSW and an MD/MPMH (mental health practitioner):

Pres Jean Matusinka, J.D. 3401 Club Drive Los Angeles, CA. 90064
VP Roland Summit, M.D. 1000 W. Carson Street D-5 Torrance, CA. 90509
Sec Margot Fritz 7373W. 83rd Street Los Angeles, CA. 90045
Treas. Gerald Tarlow, J.D. 3812 Sepulveda Blvd. Torrance, CA. 90505
Helen Boardman, ACSW 2115 Fargo Los Angeles, CA. 90039
Leigh Colitre 8035 S. Vermont Los Angeles, CA. 90047
Garold Faber M.D.,M.P.H. 13543 S. Hawthorne Boulevard Hawthorne, CA.
Norman Fleishman 6063 Hargis Street Los Angeles CA. 90034
Betty L. Los Angeles, CA.
Ed. Welz 13106 Glenfield Detroit, Michigan 48201

In 1996, Amendment stated that any remaining assets would be distributed by the Superior Court where the principal office is (which just so happens, I believe, to be Los Angeles…)

If this corporation holds any assets on trust, such assets shall be disposed of in such manner as may be directed by decree of the Superior Court of the County in which the corporation’s principal office is located, upon petition therefor by the Attorney General or by any person concerned in the liquidation.

Hopefully, none of those on the board will have any inappropriate relationships with said Superior Court, or, if a judge is involved in said distribution (which looks like a sizeable amount), he/she will have been REAL honest on the “conflicts of interest” filling.

THEN AGAIN, common sense tells us, this is Los ANGELES COUNTY (see Richard Fine, etc.) and that is a little much to expect.

Some of the incorporators: Jean Matusinka, J.D. became (or was) a judge and a prosecutor of sex and DV crimes; this is her 2006 Obit (LA times), she died at 66, from lung cancer, unfortunately:

Judge Jean Matusinka, 66; Professor, Former Sex Crimes Prosecutor

Obituaries | PASSINGS

April 02, 2006|From Times Staff and Wire Reports

Judge Jean E. Matusinka, 66, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge and former deputy district attorney, died Monday of lung cancer at Torrance Memorial Hospital. Since 1990, she had been handling a civil calendar at the Torrance courthouse and was hearing cases until a week before her death.

Born in New York City, Matusinka graduated from Hunter College with a degree in history and earned her law degree at Brooklyn Law School in 1966. Admitted to the State Bar of California in 1970, she joined the district attorney’s office in L.A. as a deputy district attorney. She specialized in sex crimes, child abuse and domestic violence cases. She was instrumental in forming the child abuse and domestic violence section and the sexual crimes program of the central trials division. Matusinka was one of the prosecutors in the early days of the McMartin Pre-School molestation case in the mid-1980s.

{{tis case keeps cropping up in association with judges, or nonprofits (incl. one in Brooklyn), and deals with hysteria, ruined the preschool operators, and etc. “The longest and most expensive criminal trial in United States history had a modest beginning. On May 12, 1983, 40-year-old Judy Johnson dropped her two-and-one-half-year-old son off at the front of the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, California without notice and drove away. The school’s teachers cared for the unknown “pre-verbal” boy in the hopes that his mother would return for him at the day’s end. ” The link I gave details Matusinka’sinvolvement.}}

She was appointed to the Los Angeles Superior Court by then-Gov. George Deukmejian in 1985. One of her first jobs was presiding over the calendar in the downtown criminal courts building. As a judge handling criminal and civil cases, she gained a reputation for toughness, fairness and decisiveness. She was also a clinical professor at the USC Keck School of Medicine’s Institute of Psychiatry, Law and Behavioral Science.

THIS USED TO BE “MOTHERS ANONYMOUS, INC.” and @ SEPT. 1970, had the stated purpose of: “

The specific and primary purposes are to perpetuate .an organized program for mothers who fear they might or are actively engaged in any form of physical or emotional abuse towards a ch1ld.
To help and rehab1l1tate mothers who do engage in physical or emotional abuse towards a child
• To have and to exercise all the rights and powers that are now or mayay thereafter be granted by law.

By 1971, the name had been changed to “Parents Anonymous.”

(Back to Jefferson County Colorado’s Fatherhood Program’s “Famlies First” link to “Circle of Parents” where, naturally, one is going to find a fatherhood program paid for by yours truly, the US HHS.)

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

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

For additional information, on this program choose an option below.

However, my question was — is what appears to be the EL PASO

Parent Opportunity Program

In an attempt to nurture and grow the relationships between non-custodial parents and their children, El Paso County Child Support Services has developed the El Paso County Parent Opportunity Program (POP). Through individualized case management, POP works with non-custodial parents to achieve personal family and career-oriented goals. By achieving these goals, parents can both bond with their children and learn to become better providers for their families.

(the ‘evolving nature of child support,” you’re in it…..)

POP also offers various legal and community services to eligible parents. POP case managers are able to find legal help and mental health counseling for parents in need of them. POP provides services through a community partnership comprised of El Paso County Department of Human Services, Center on Fathering, Goodwill Industries, and Child Support Services of Colorado.

To be eligible to receive POP services, applicants must be non-custodial parents who are residents of El Paso or Teller Counties and have an income of not more than 185% of the federal poverty level.

Obviously, they are targeting IV-D cases, and will be able to get some funding for them from the government.

(An aside, but looking up “El Paso County” we find that in Oct. 2011, it discovered that the state had shorted it $1.3 million from sales tax collected, but not sent back to the county. An additional $830,000 is apparently still under discussion:

El Paso County Recoups $1.3 Million from State

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) – Colorado has shortchanged El Paso County in the amount of sales tax revenue collected by the state but not sent back to the county. . . . The discrepancy follows a years-long investigation into the money that’s collected by Colorado and remitted back to the county monthly . . .Such discrepancies may not be unique to El Paso County. Douglas County officials say the state’s been off about $200,000 a year since a 1 percent capital improvement tax was passed there in 1996…

Colorado officials sent letters to the county’s 14,000 vendors, advising them of potential reporting errors.

Part-time employees researched the discrepancy and found errors in which collections were posted to other entities, vendors provided wrong information and data was incorrectly keyed in.

That resulted in the $1.3 million going back to the county from the state. Twenty-seven additional audits totaling $830,000 are pending with the state.

“We’re happy to hear it’s working out well for the county. We think this is a good partnership for everyone,” said Mark Couch, spokesman for the Colorado Department of Revnue. The state has upgraded its computer system and has converted paper files and manual data entry to a new electronic system, Couch said.

ANYHOW, MY POINT BEING — remember to research trademark names and registrants. In this case, Policy Studies, Inc. IS “El Paso County Parenting Opportunity Project” which is described (below) as a unit within the child support department. Knowing, as you do now, that CPR and PSI (dba in this case El Paso County POP) have personnel in common, at least did have Jane Venohr, Ph.D. in common (and they pubish together), being the nonprofit and for-profit prongs of evaluation — here is a 2007 “Colorado Parenting Time Project”

The evaluation is, this time, conducted by 3 CPR people — but NOT Jane Venohr; instead, by Pearson Thoennes and instead of Venohr, “Lanae Davis.”

They speak of the El Paso POP as though objectively and not associated with it, in this report:

Cover page: (formatting appears differently in the original)

Submitted to: Colorado Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement 1575 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80218*

Submitted by: Center for POLICY RESEARCH 1570 Emerson Street Denver, Colorado 80218 303.837.1555 http://www.centerforpolicyresearch.org

(the offices are 0.5 miles, or a 3 minute drive, away from each other)….PSI (or, El PasoPOP) as of 2002 was 1 mile, or a 6 min drive away)

September 2007

[Authors} Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. ~ Lanae Davis, M.A. ~ Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D.

CPR has three Ph.D.’s — Venohr is the 3rd — but only used two for this report.

Prepared under grant number 90FD0096 from the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) to the State of Colorado Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement (DHS).

Points of view expressed in the document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of OCSE or DHS.

Here is the HHS grant that paid for it (the study):

This $125,000 award was made in 2004 (El Paso POP having become a trade name shortly before, in 2002).

Program Office

Grantee Name

Archive for the ‘Mandatory Mediation’ Category

Warning:

Warning: This article contains language that some will find offensive, but that others will find refreshingly honest.*

INSPIRATION FOR THIS POST:

First, the public face — clearly this is a hot shot, and professionally alert group:

Welcome, from the Association of Certified Family Law Specialists in California, an independent association of California attorneys who specialize in family law.

Domestic Violence Sites on the Worldwide Web

Access to Visitation Grant (which redirects to the AOC courtsite, and a persistent person might be able to locate the information on this program).

A.P.A.R.T. The website reads “parentalabductions.org” the Banner reads “Wives’ Tales’ and it’s simply about single-parenting tips.

Family Law Trial Court Proceedings

Consensual Dispute Resolution

OK, now that the very active ACFLS cannot ? show its origination, as claimed, in 1980 as a legitimate California corporation, but rather it was incorporated in 1995 (at least the one with “, Inc.” after its name is the only one I could find on SOS site) here’s the Charitable Registration:

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN

+ + + + + + +

I have a question. In fact, several questions:

Dr. Stephen Doyne Has Been Involved In 3,000 To 4,000 San Diego Custody Cases

Speaking of “Going Abroad”. . . .literally and allegorically

Healthcare Districts, Associations of Healthcare Districts and their Watchdogs:

How to Use a Squat Toilet (Frank Burres in Worldhum, 9/25/06)

“Warning: This article contains language that some will find offensive, but that others will find refreshingly honest”

Mt. Diablo Health Care District lawyer billed beyond board limit

The STOP Program: Understanding & Treating Domestic Violence 40-HOUR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TREATMENT PROVIDER CERTIFICATION COURSE

NRFCBI

GOFBCI

NCJFCJ

or 5-letter ones such as I’m going to profile today

ACFLS (“Inc.”)

Let’s try:

FBI searches Lackawanna County (Pennsylvania) court administrator’s office

SHARE THIS POST on...

Like this:

NOPE. It is different. So I hope you will call or tune in next Tuesday at 9pm EST (til further notice):

Rodney Erickson: Clean House!

NOW —

ABOUT ME (& the Let’s Get Honest BLOG)

READ MORE www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org

FBI searches court administrator’s office

– – – – – Or (just one last one!):

WHAT IS A “CONCILIATION COURT” (ever heard the term?)

Conciliation Courts

FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS (California Code 1800ff (part, below:)

OK, Let’s review this: COUNTY (financial) vs. STATE (pays judges) responsibilities and associations:

Does that explain why your life as a disputed custody parent (if that’s you) are now filled with these social science, behavioral modification, psychopathology & psychology of families & psychotherapist personnel?

“CONCILIATION COUNSELING: THE COURT’S EFFECTIVE MECHANISM FOR RESOLVING VISITATION AND CUSTODY DISPUTES“

Abstract

WHAT I WAS NOT TOLD — EVER — BY ANY COURTHOUSE I ENTERED< ANYWHERE< OR ANY MEDIATOR:

WERE YOU? WHOSE CHILDREN ARE THEY?

WHO HAS JURISDICTION IF YOU HAVE A CUSTODY DISPUTE?

L.A. Divorce Blog (Nov. 24, 2009)

While this is talking specifically about someone wishing to stop the divorce via a “petition of conciliation,” the existence of this code – has affected all “custody disputes” and also how domestic violence is adjudicated. Cindy Ross (also of California, and who writes better) described:

(notice — this is an older post, 2/19/2003) and talks more about the impact.

She hasn’t reported on a few others factors, but at least this explains why, when coming in for a divorce, the court seems more interested in assigning you a few (dozen) experts. As also explained (again, long ago) on

To which I’d add — and related federal programs, as they may be available.

SO, ABOUT THIS BLOG:

Montgomery Street Barracks

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN

Salaries in 2009 — not that running a large non-profit shouldn’t be well-rewarded. They have offices (it says) in Boston, Washington, D.C. & San Francisco.

Assenblymember Ammiano Names Esta Soler as ‘Woman of the Year‘

MINNESOTA-STYLE DV ORGANIZATIONS

Brownback program promotes marriage

Focus on the Family

Yes they are! Of course, here’s how they describe themselves:

2009-02-2

2006 Budget

Historical funding

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

The STOP Program: Understanding & Treating Domestic Violence
40-HOUR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TREATMENT PROVIDER CERTIFICATION COURSE

Council on Foreign Relations
Family Research Council Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment
Federalist Society
Freemasonry (!!!)
The Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow
(etc.)