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

NGA: National Governors’ Association.

PRWORA: Personal Right to Work and Opportunity Reconciliation Act (Welfare Reform, 1996).

Below, “ECS” is “Education Commission for the States” (a private entity with public officers, and an interesting background), which I discovered had been promoted by the NGA (then National Governors’ Conference?) 

ACT, Inc. and ACT Foundation, Inc. (The latter just dissolved FY2016, I found out), based in Iowa (and internationally) is a huge tax-exempt operations involves testing for college entrances and help with “work and life” preparation.  It’s got global operations.  

“NFI” in this context stands for “National Fatherhood Initiative” but I just moved a chunk of that section onto a new post May 20, 2020.  (link provided in context, below).  Through here is a Page Update 20 May, 2020.//LGH.

This PAGE is:

2017 April introduction to this 2016 Sept-drafted page is in this background-color.  What existed before (as of Sept. 2016) is white-background, different font (Georgia) and with maroon border. Being basically in two large parts, it totals about 14,000 words. I am tweaking it some January 22, 2020, without much change of content, just looking to post some excerpts to sociomedia rather than re-invent the wheel on my own “time and dime.” //LGH

This introduction was written fresh off a recent post,  Challenge Fund Circuitry (Anyone ELSE want to look up $52M worth of Challenge Grants from Annenberg Foundation Year 2001?),(<~that’s a link.  Publ. April 26, 2017, short-link ends “-6Dd”) which by referencing the Education Commission for the States (“ECS”) brought up again the topic of the National Governors’ Association.

Links to what I’m talking about may be found on that post and weren’t added in much detail for purposes of this preview.

The purpose of the Annenberg Challenge I’ve had on my radar recently, under the general theme of public/private partnerships aimed at reforming the (entire) public school system in the U.S.A., ends up on closer review of the ECS itself, as being remarkably close to its stated purpose, which you can see in some excerpted, annotated images on this intro section, below.

There is a light-blue-background extended section (pre-existing on this post) dealing with a Corporate Fellow [“ACT”] to the National Governor’s Association; I probably picked it out simply because it was a foundation, and it was very larger (over ½ billion assets).  You will see its tax returns and its related foundation showing over $25M total assets right next to it.

Also please scroll down to the very bottom and read again the list of the Corporate Fellows to the NGA for an overview (it is of course its own snapshot in time depending on when it was taken).

I admit this preview’s tone is somewhat dis-illusioned (not that I had many illusions going in) from recent, vicarious witnessing of what’s being done to the public school system and how, in addition to what was already done to the family court system with, in the case of the NGA, at least one significant player in common.

I don’t expect perfection, but I still have been shocked at the level of “in-your-face” financial discrepancies (not to mention financial information “M.I.A.” regarding million-dollar reported transactions for the public benefit).

Other than this blog and local people (and some on-line) I discuss these writings and subject matter with, I am also dis-illusioned about jumpstarting a serious conversation about this when it seems the population has been neatly divided and groomed to fight political parties – left OR right; or religion, or something OTHER than public accountability for public funds, and insisting on accountability for what level of influence is wielded by the “MIA” transactions which seem commonplace in the private, nonprofit sector contracting with, or getting grants from OR giving grants TO public systems.

It’s hard to have active, informed conversations on material which has been so censored over the years that discussing it sounds like a form of treason, and “threatens” (in my opinion, mis-placed) faith in most public institutions to self-correct, or to free themselves from private, UNdue influence on in which direction to correct when conflict surfaces. I’ve already witnessed over  about eight years what censorship in the family court advocacy realm has done, including TO three generations of my own family line, not to mention to the overall sense of safety and credibility for anyone approaching the courts.

This ALMOST 10,000 word page was completed, with its detail, in 9/2016 (probably moved from a TOC page at that…). Leaving most of it alone, but unpublished yet, I have in Q42016 and Q1 and now Q2 2017 been researching and blogging more extensively on Public School Reform networks — big ones, founded by billion-dollar or half-billion-dollar foundations (or some of both) — many of them I noticed also starting these networks in the 1980s and 1990s. Part of the LBO (Leveraged Buy Out) crowd figuring out it was time to invest in education, and the Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan combo (with “Harvard” representing primarily Harvard Business School) also figuring out that the new area for venture capital was consulting for and managing the investments (i.e., assets!) of public/private partnerships, spearheading change in public institutions etc.  (See recent posts for those terms).

I have been looking also at the role played by the publication/communications/high-tech corporations (and their spinoff foundations) in this whole picture. (“Freedom of the Press on the Auction Block” post) For example, in particular, the 1990s Annenberg Foundation $500M Challenge to Reform Public School Education, as modeled after certain networked nonprofits associated with not just Harvard (Graduate School of Education) as to some of the professionals, but especially Brown University.

The primary early source of Annenberg Foundation wealth was in the publishing field (particularly the sale of “Triangle Publications”).  Many are still unaware of just how dominated this field is, and what directions it’s been moving in this century — away from anything less than major-media-owned outlets.  This can be explored by following some of the companies and some of the public television stations also.

On April 26, 2017, (that is, yesterday!) I published a 20,000-word “Challenge Fund Circuitry”* post on some of the recipients of the grants (donors, intermediary organizations formed for the purpose or pre-existing) and made a mental note on the “Education Commission for the States“ (<==history page; click links on it to read further details) as a key spokesperson or influence chosen by Walter H. Annenberg (then in his mid-80s) and appointed friends, such as Vartan Gregorian (who was also Dean at Brown University for a while).  *Post title:  Challenge Fund Circuitry (Anyone ELSE want to look up $52M worth of Challenge Grants from Annenberg Foundation Year 2001?)

What I’m getting to here is that the ECS (Education Commission for the States) was formed in 1967, by a COMPACT and to, as a nonprofit (but, chaired each year by a Governor), implement the “Compact,” as originally heavily promoted by James Conant Bryant at, guess where — Harvard. (At this time, I don’t think Harvard had yet even admitted women)… from ECS “History” page (main link):

In the mid-1960s James Bryant Conant, an educator, scientist and diplomat who served as the president of Harvard University from 1933 to 1953, put forth the idea of an interstate compact on education policy. His 1964 book Shaping Education Policy was written when the GI Bill, the National Defense Education Act, Great Society legislation and other initiatives had greatly enlarged the federal role in education. In the book Conant called for a kind of counterbalance — a mechanism for improving and strengthening education policy and policymaking at the state level. Such a mechanism, he said, would:

• Give voice to the diverse interests, needs, and traditions of states.
• Enable them to cooperate and communicate with one another.
• Promote their working together to focus national attention on the pressing education issues of the day.

In early 1965, John W. Gardner, president of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, teamed up with Terry Sanford, who had recently left the governorship of North Carolina, to transform Conant’s idea into reality. Over the next two years, under Sanford’s leadership, the Compact for Education was drafted, endorsed by representatives of all 50 states and approved by Congress.

The operating arm of the compact — the Education Commission of the States — opened its headquarters in Denver in 1967, with former Cincinnati school superintendent Wendell H. Pierce serving as its first executive director.

**I made all my comments (annotated) below BEFORE, deciding to look for a link to this famous personality, running across a 1964 review (by a woman) in the Harvard Crimson of his 1964 book referenced above, “Shaping Education Policy” [or, as saved to pdf in case the issue gets archived] which admits a “grave moral defect” he omitted in his earlier (1957) book “The American High School.”  Notice one of the first civil rights acts in the country occurred in 1957; Dr. Conant, despite having run HARVARD for 20 years prior to this, hadn’t weighed in on segregated schools yet, but somewhere between 1957 and 1964 (see yet another civil rights act… a Presidential assassination, and prominent civil rights leaders emerging) he has a sudden awakening as to the problems of segregation in the nation’s public schools.

Unbelievable, at least in hindsight.

She also (in my opinion) “nails it” that he is wistfully wishing we could get around that pesky Constitution and organize ourselves more like the great English or French (i.e., European) countries — more centralized and streamlined.  Speaking from a position of privilege, he’s recommending an antidote to the privileged elite in the public school systems across the country??  Yep, apparently! NY and California were supposedly great models (read the whole book review).

…In fact, I see that starting in 1955, Conant was (per “history.state.gov”) stretching back to John Quincy Adams of Ministers, Envoys or (for this man, May 14, 1955–February 19, 1957) “Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary” — to Germany! (Conant lived 1893-1978..)

HarvardCrimsn 1964 Bk Review of Conant’s Shaping Educatl Policy’ admits he forgot the segregatn issue in his 1957 book (!) SShot 2017-04-28 at 2.41PM (<–click to read annotated image)

This is “classic” private university/big-bucks philanthropy (Carnegie  Corporation) /current and/or former highly-placed public officials (a former governor, a former public school district superintendent) agreeing to form a privately controlled nonprofit in association with a sort of treaty (compaq) they’ve made with each other — not with U.S. Citizens. It’s yet another public/private “partnership.” The Compact describes specific purpose to respond to recently increased federal funds for education by professionalizing, connecting to political leadership at the state level with the purpose of transmitting good ideas across state lines, regionally and nationwide.  [link: http://www.ecs.org/ec-content/uploads/Compact-for-Education-Dec1965.pdf for a “clean copy” and the rest of it].

1 of 3 annotated images (Click IMAGE read “ECS The Compact for Educatn Dec 1965 (intro, top) “

2 of 3, Click IMAGE to read “ECS The Compact for Educatn Dec 1965 (intro, bottom, signed Terry Sanford,@DukeU, Dec 1965)”

3 of 3, click IMAGE to read “ECS 1965 Compact (history link) The Idea (James B Conant)” (a comment which wouldn’t fit on the page also in main text, nearby)

[My comment for 3rd of 3 annotated images here re: Dr. James B. Conant’s great Idea and protest of the “jumbled mess” and tangled mess he’s proposing to straighten up — consider the turmoil of the times, and the challenge to the public schools as a mechanism for continued racism and sexism within the system, which conceivably might ALSO have led people to continue considering why there is one public system and a separate but unequal private system nationwide, not only for their children (K-12) but ALSO for their young adults in the private vs. public college university systems also, of which you can guess which sector Harvard (in the 1960s) represented!]

Consider the times (1960s, Civil Rights movement AND Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964, assassination of JFK (and more to come) and — of all things! — women continuing to seek admission to elite, east-coast (primarily) universities from which the nation’s leaders were clearly to be drawn, with parallel private women’s college such that future generations might have good breeding (i.e., “well-bred”) stock for their young men, with wealth marrying wealth, while the nation’s WORKERS would be educated through the public, compulsory school systems which made sure NOT to reproduce the (British) style of mentoring and forming lifelong business associations, etc.

While sold as representing the states vs. an overbearing federal government, ECS has ended up insteaad nationalizing the schools, and a point of reference for subsequent school reformers (as the Annenberg Challenge selection of the ECS as a primary advisor or leader — see my post which describes and provides links — who want system reform to also be national, but this time selling it under “community” representation at the local (school district) level. Hardly surprising that a key Annenberg Challenge (to the Public Schools) person also involved previously with high-profile private universities (Brown, Univ. of Pennsylvania) Vartan Gregorian, went from Dean of Brown to Chair of the Carnegie Corporation.

It caught my attention that a prime distribution and promotion for this concept of the ECS was through the National Governors’ Association (NGA). So, “Fatherhood Initiatives” aren’t all they’ve been promoting over the years.  From the ECS website, link to a narration (sort of intro) to “The Compact”:

…In May, 1965, Governor Sanford called a meeting of representatives of all organizations and associations related to education plus representatives of the National Governors’ Conference to seek their advice “on the best method and organizational structure for bringing together the political and educational leadership of the several states for the purpose of studying, planning, suggesting and promoting sounder objectives and goals for the improvement of education in America.” 5 They met in Washington and the consensus was that the ideas should be developed.

As a result of the Washington meeting, a Special Planning Committee met in the spring and summer of 1965 to develop tentative proposals for forming the Compact. It consisted of representatives of the Governors’ Conference Committee on Human Resources; the American Council on Education; the Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges; the Council of Chief State School Officers; the National School Boards Association; the National Association of State Boards of Education; the American Association of School Administrators; and a few advisors, such as John Ivey of the Michigan State University Department of Education, Mitchell Wendell of the Council of State Governments and Alan Pifer of the Carnegie Corporation as well as Governor Sanford and his staff.

The more I look at the school reform networks, particularly as facilitated by the Annenberg Foundation and coordinated nationwide across multiple similar–but-not identically-named nonprofits, some set up regionally to cover the whole country, and especially as I read

(a) as close to original sources (tax returns I mean) and (b) some of the trail of scandals involved (for example, a Chicago Public Schools CEO being actually convicted of a felony (entered a plea-agreement with federal authorities to 1 after being indicted for 20) involving a $20M no-bid contract for (principal or superintendant) training by SUPES academy, in which the successor organization to “Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Inc.) (which successor organization is “Chicago Public Education Fund” or CPEF (still active) had also invested,

…the more loopholes and lack of internal AND external balances and controls surface.  For example, in a single $6.68M grant alleged to have been donated in a certain year to Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Inc. (that year was FY2001 for the Annenberg Foundation, and could’ve been either last half of FY2000 or first of FY2001 for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge) — the donee organization’s books are NOT showing receipt of at least $6.1M funds.

Continuing on to the successor organization (“CPEF” for short) for the same, the same basic year (year 2000) a Schedule B of “Excess Contributions” TO the CPEF seems to be missing 5 out of 6 pages OF Excess contributions. BUT, if one totals the amounts shown on just p.5 (the only page out of 6 referenced on the header for Schedule B), that amount is over $200K higher than acknowledged by CPEF that year.  What’s more, a weird address for the $995K alleged to have been received FROM the Annenberg Foundation BY the CPEF (Chicago Public Education Fund, started only in 1999 and designated successor of Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which dissolved itself by 2002) of a street address in Evanston, IL (rich suburb of Chicago proper and home to Northwestern University) now is shown at Community Learning Partnership, which, it doesn’t take too long to figure out, is as interested in basic progressive agenda around community organization as in reading and writing and math, or even decent public schools in Chicago.   [See my post for the details!]

This is starting to look far more like a deliberate facilitation of easy money-laundering, racketeering, and system to enable politically-connected bribery & kickbacks to and by public officials. In other words, in plain English, almost no matter where one looks, it looks C.O.R.R.U.P.T. …. if this were NY, I’d say it looks like “the Mob” is back, but as a good part of it is Chicago, perhaps I should say “The Machine.”

It’s not all 100% progressive at the “Annenberg Challenge,” though — if it were, it couldn’t be promoted as bipartisan or even a pretense.  Accommodation has been made for (politically “under the influence”) Republicans too, which also shows up in that post, and related pages I’m about to publish to go with it, as relates to the State of Tennessee and involvement Senator Lamar’s attempt (while governor) to entirely privatize the prison system with non other than Corrections Corporation of America, of dubious reputation for many reasons, then and since, including inmate deaths, assaults, escapes, neglect, and in general, conflict of interest.

When it comes to the education part, as now-Senator Lamar was under G.W. Bush (i.e., President Bush, senior) administration, early 1990s, the U.S. Secretary of Education, a chosen model for public education reform (by Walter Annenberg and I gather his advisors), David T. Kearns, of New American Schools (“NAS”) which later merged into the (also huge) AIR for Behavioral Research (of which it was also characterized as a supporting organization).  I detail a good part of this on the recent post “Challenge Fund Circuitry,” and posted multiple screenprints of earlier versions of “New American Schools (and related entity) activity at the very bottom.

David Kearns had served as (assistant?) Deputy Secretary of Education at the same time under now (since 2003) Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, whose recent accomplishment as a Senate committee chair, per one source (quoted is ensuring the confirmation of very Republican Besty DeVos as Secretary of Education this past season, 2017.

It’s in general bad news, and it’s becoming an alternate and NON-representative form of government, at this point, I have to say intentionally.  IF you understand this, WHAT would you do about it?

In passing by this page (which should’ve been published earlier, but wasn’t), I’m leaving it as is except on reviewing a fine-print section, giving ONE example of a “NGA” Corporate fellow, “Act, Inc.” and Act Foundation“ which are — large organizations — I reviewed those two entities again and have decided to add several (about 15 or so) screenprints from the tax returns showing just how HUGE and how GLOBAL these are.

I question why such entities should be allowed to operate tax-exempt, given how when they get enough that might disqualify them from tax-exempt status, they tend (this one certainly did) to simply take, this example, ¼ million dollars (that’s $25,000,000) and set up a separate related entity (which is how ACT, Inc. got started in 2010), continue paying vast salaries to their chief officers, and re/distribute revenues, assets, liabilities, expenses across the board. ACT, Inc. also has a host of related entities in other countries (see its Schedule R) and as of FY2013 only shows assets of $530M.

Update from the tables shown below:

Along those lines of how to reduce excess taxation even on revenues held by nonprofit institutions or tax-exempt foundations, …..

In 2002, tax returns show, the Annenberg Foundation leadership accepted/took control of $100M EACH funds for the benefit of schools of communication (named “Annenberg”) at two private universities, one in Pennsylvania (U Pennsylvania is a private university, among its 12 schools is Wharton School of Business — and Annenberg School of Communications // Public Policy Center) and USC (Univ. of Southern California). The Annenbergs (via their foundations) had poured money into the schools earlier, but now their investment managers (also for other foundations, it looks like) reap the benefits of controlling the assets, while returning (under terms of the trust) trust income to the respective universities.
I posted on this earlier in April.

At what point ($550M assets? $1 billion? $2 billion) does the word “NON-PROFIT” become meaningless? What is the real profit to the public not operating in or working for this sector (the tax-exempt foundations and their friends in and out of high-level public service, that is to say, government, jobs)? It means “reduced taxes” especially (for Form 990PF filers) on “non-charitable use assets.”

As I speak, a new and as we know, controversial US President, President Donald J. Trump, is getting ready his (?) Administration’s “tax” programs. Check your mainstream media (or even alternate media — they’re pretty mainlined by now anyhow) headlines or discussions, whether print or internet or TV. ARE THEY seriously discussing the impact on household incomes of a vast, unmonitored and essentially out of control set of tax-exempt foundations working together WITH government to screw the public while investing in major promotions to proclaim its the opposite?

Patience in reviewing this material will be rewarded by better understanding, and is recommended.  Thanks for those who have what it takes to consider this information and its significance to the United States of America and liberties which may have been taken for granted during parts of the 1900s, but should not be, now.

BELOW HERE (except my added images for Corporate NGA Fellow “Act, Inc.” and its foundation) is the earlier writing on the NGA.

This page sprang from a reference on an updated Table of Contents (2016) post.The main difference between a blog PAGE and a blog POST is that (unless “stuck” to the top of home page — which that Table of Contents and the longer one, along with 9 other key posts, are — posts march by in chrono order, disappearing into the dusty distance or “Archives” whereas Pages only show up when I say so.  I have many pages, but not ALL published pages, showing on blog’s right sidebar).

I wanted to make a few points, but not in an overly long introduction to the Table of Contents.  No easy task!  Those points are are summarized in the long title.

Do you Know Your NGA?  Post-PRWORA, 1998 Stealth, Coordinated Expansion/ Diversion of Welfare Funds based on Sociological, Quasi-Religious Ideology on the Ideal Family Structure (the offspring of The 1965 Moynihan Report), Facilitated by (A) At least 39 of the Nation’s Governors and (B) as Coached by Wade Horn ℅ The National Fatherhood Initiative (Page Added 9/2016) [<==with a shortlink, courtesy “tinyurl.com” http://tinyurl.com/j697l85 (<~~ the character in red is lower-case “L”) 

[or use the shortlink format from this blog: <==with a case-sensitive shortlink ending “-4qs” ]

This Page is about 9,400 words.  On seeing a certain 1998 document detailing nationwide fatherhood initiatives the NGA was soliciting our governors to push at that time, I looked up one program referenced for California.  The search result led, surprisingly, to a Governor’s “State of the State” (cf. a President’s State of the Union) address.

A continuation Post on this topic shows that, from my personal perspective, I couldn’t have chosen a worse time to leave an abusive, violent, husband, having minor children in the household (making me an immediate single mother) than right after welfare reform. {{That said, staying wasn’t a safe option, either..}} {{In hindsight, I see}} I had taken some women’s rights from the 1970s too much for granted and had moved to California during a conservative Republican Governor’s tenure.

• The Year was 1998, and California Gov. Pete Wilson’s State-of-the-State Address Reveals his Connex to the NGA Post-PRWORA Pro-Fatherhood  Agenda + via Eloise Anderson to Fathers’ Rights Group “Children’s Rights Council” (CRCKids.org)

The continuation post title and link are provided again below in context of California.

Then again, once the at-home assault and battery, and other forms of isolation, economic control and coercion and other forms of coercive, occasionally terroristic intimidation begins, there is rarely a good time for anything; you do what is required to survive daily and work towards establishing a way to survive longer-term than daily in which to live a life, and raise children.  I continued seeking help until I found some,  there was no significant “intervention” found (certainly not in religious circles, but nowhere else that I’d found either) until I filed that emergency restraining order with kickout.

Private Connections WITHIN Government via the Corporate (esp. Nonprofit) Sector Increases Speed of Legislative and other Administratively Effective Change, whether good or bad.

In contrast with how long, surprisingly, it took me to connect with someone, or some agency who could connect me to my own legal rights to stop the battering and other forms of abuse, and exercising them, reading some of this material, in hindsight, I’m amazed at the acceleration throughout the 1990s of the “healthy marriage/responsible father” and “single mothers | independent women are bad” (underlying message) as it affected social service programs, particularly anything involving child support, family court, domestic violence orders, custody, divorce, and the type of pro-bono or low-cost legal help available in the civil spheres.  As one individual, it took me years to get the information to get free.  Meanwhile, thanks to national nonprofits formed by civil servants such as state governors, and inter-related centers at universities, the opposition to this was getting bred into the infrastructure, from the Gubernatorial, the federal agency, and (read my FIRST TWO posts of this blog — March 9, 2009 was the first, see “Archives”) Presidential level in the mid-1990s.

Excerpt (will be repeated below),  and where this page began, before the introductions, explanations, and expansions:

While this is a long title, I’m putting the page up quickly, and it’s a short post with primarily just one link to discuss — and not in depth either. But it does point to the function played by an organization I brought up on my verbose “Table of Contents” page.

This page serves to post a pdf I ran across years ago, and which showed me the level of betrayal of open government, representative government, and the public interest of US Citizens, through a private association of state-level executive-branch officials called GOVERNORS.

August 1998 + 18 years = 2016. 

One generation born then just now attained “majority” and became adults. Perhaps we should inform them, and their mothers, and all others, about the NGA and the NGA’s own privately controlled nonprofit activities “back when..”

A National Governors’ Association Center for Best Practices “Stateline” communication (August 3, 1998), called

“Promoting Responsible Fatherhood:  An Update“

One Generation Later seems a good time to remind us of what the NGA was doing, privately, without public fanfare, within two years of 1996s PRWORA and only four years of founding the National Fatherhood Initiative, an HHS grantee started and run in part by former HHS, high-ranking employees (the one cited in this link is Wade Horn), which would naturally give them an insiders’ understanding of what was coming down the road with welfare reform, about those $150 million/year responsible fatherhood/healthy marriage grants, and about the already in place access and visitation grants (which after 1996 were legislated to $10 million/year) designed to increase noncustodial parent contact, which being targeted with the other funding stream against “mother-headed families” would in practice mean, decreasing mother/child contact and parenting time where Daddy was not already resident or in control.

I have written before on the NGA as a type of standardizing, coordinating influence on public policy.  (July 19, 2013, “The List — Where was it Found?”)

This page is less about the NGA (National Governors’ Association) and the NFI (National Fatherhood Initiative) than about one of the causes they coordinated together to push, as referenced in a short publication in 1998 (and, FYI, previously in 1994), with “PRWORA” (welfare reform = government budget major restructuring of the Social Services Act, called the largest change since it was enacted in 1934…) approved by Congress in between, in 1996.

This single theme of “responsible fatherhood” spawned many kinds of programming and (of course) generated ongoing public revenues and multiple programs (with associated nonprofit organizations as well as functions within existing government agencies) ever since, and to this day.

However in this page, I still do talk about both organizations below.  Every citizen should know about this type of organization through which legislation and suggestions for what the Executive Branch Leadership of any state (i.e., Governors, with their cabinets, chief staff members including agency heads which they appoint, and through the power of governmental executive orders at times)  can be forcefully enacted without bothering to run it by the state legislatures.

NGA logo (low-resolution, from Wikipedia site, which explains that it believes this is fair copyright use)

However the NGA is one of the oldest of such entities of this type (far older than, for example, the “National Council of Family and Juvenile Court Judges”) at, per website, 1908 origins.

Mission/About page

…Who We Are

Founded in 1908, the National Governors Association (NGA) is the collective voice of the nation’s governors and one of Washington, D.C.’s most respected public policy organizations. Its members are the governors of the 55 states, territories and commonwealths. NGA provides governors and their senior staff members with services that range from representing states on Capitol Hill and before the Administration on key federal issues to developing and implementing innovative solutions to public policy challenges through the NGA Center for Best Practices. NGA also provides management and technical assistance to both new and incumbent governors.

Notice, please, that telling the public (website viewers on the main or “About” pages) what a group does, or giving it a metaphorical description — such as “the collective voice” — or using the vague word “organization” does not reveal its true essence.  This section of most “about” pages is normally public relations, and promotional, no matter for whom.  What we, the public (and taxpayers) OUGHT to be told whenever civil servants, or government entities — or for that matter, government funding — is involved, is exactly what type of entity the website represents:  Government or Private Nonstock Corporation (the main two options), or is the website actually representing some type of center, initiative. or project of one or more public (government) — or private (which includes the 501©3s and other nonprofits) “entity.”

So, the “NGA Center for Best Practices” can be identified — it has an EIN#, a start-date, and it files tax returns (shown below).  It is an “Inc.”

Wikipedia article explains that the NGA (as opposed to its “Center for Best Practices”) developed from the 1907 “Inland Waterways Commission” set up by President Roosevelt during the Progressive area, and in part because of transportation: the railroads weren’t moving product fast enough, but also for management purposes.

So, if you live in a single state, is that governor going to listen to organized citizen ideas, or considerations — or will their ears be tuned to those in other states — and from their Corporate Fellows Program? (Established 80 years later, that is, in 1988).  I have a post about “the List” some years old, and have copied the current list of “Corporate Fellows” in this “public/private partnership” (see also that link) at the bottom of this page.  Many are pharmaceutical, or oil, or computer/electronic related.

However, for just one example of  an NGA “Corporate Fellow,…”

ACT policy platforms

ACT has articulated policy recommendations in the form of policy platforms in three areas: K–12 education, postsecondary education, and workforce development. The platforms are an essential part of the ACT mission to help people achieve education and workplace success.

ACT recommendations are informed by its data and research, which reinforce the importance of individuals meeting appropriate achievement benchmarks at every point along the continuum from kindergarten through career. Each of these policy platforms focuses on specific goals, but they are also interrelated components of a unified approach to improving an individual’s success along the continuum.

The supporting foundation above dates to 2010 ($30M), and the other, to 1960 ($530M).  This one doesn’t even take grants — it has program revenues so high, plus it also raised $12M from selling around $300M of its own securities.  Its 3 hours/week Part VIIA (Key personnel) are earning a middle-class income (Between $30 & $60K), the CEO over $800M, and 8 more key personnel somewhere between $300K and $450K (approximate) plus benefits.  The organization is worldwide and obviously quantity is a big source of its revenues, testing both in the education and workforce assessment fields.  ACT, Inc. gave about $3.9M grants out, I saw, but of this $3M was to its own supporting organization (a kind of “reverse-relationship” I guess).  It’s holding at year end over $300 million in public traded securities (Part X Line 11), and $30M in “program-related investments” — which turns out to be in its own supporting organization, above.

They have 129, it says, independent subcontractors, with the largest one having been paid $37M.  The size is simply ridiculous, and all of this PRIVATE, and under the control of a board of (independently voting), only 14 individuals.

ACT, Inc. has “a network of state organizations” and has the country regionalized — into five districts.  I would print the map of the US with its Northwest, Southwest, SouthEast, Midwest, and Northeast sectors — but web technology (its site and my device) doesn’t facilitate this.  I don’t believe they may wish to advertise the plan. Scroll down to see that inset map of the USA.  Reminds me of the existing HHS administrative regions also, formerly the “Federal Security Agency” divisions.

And going this as tax-exempt organization, both of them.

2017 Update — Screenprints from ACT Inc and one or two from ACT Foundation.  I just want to show size, scope and in general, activities.  Most are from a single year’s tax return, link is above. I’m not annotating them, so if the images are too small to read, go locate that section on the related tax return! I hope that the impact will be self-explanatory.  

I may (or may not) come back and print pdfs for individual clearer viewing, but having made these screenprints for my own reference, thought they might be of interest to others also.

(In general this part of the filename identifies the images: “(EIN#420841485 Inc 1960, FY2013 YE Aug31) 530M assets Iowa Corp w Global SchedRs (Educ+Wkforce) SShot 2017Apr27”) See light-blue background section above.  Along the right side of these images, the page narrative continues as if they weren’t there, and doesn’t refer to them:

The Corporate Fellows list of the NGA, or even the NGA, isn’t the main point of this page, but I do want us to be aware of the organizational setup, and how long it’s been in existence.

For a point of reference, here are two tables with links to recent  tax returns for the two organizations mentioned in the Page title (The NGA and NFI) with SOME (not much) discussion below each table:

Search Again

Definitely recommend becoming aware of this organization and its purposes, and sources of revenue, given that all 50 governors of the states and five US territories, are members, and currently Governors John Hickenlooper, Mike Pence, Pat McCrory and John Kitzhaber, currently Board of Directors.   Also interesting is how they manage to have “0” employees (Part I Summary, and Part VIIA:  Directors Officers Trustees, Key and Highest Paid Employees) Column “D” Is blank — and the pay is from “Related Organizations) and totals $2.2M + benefits) in those other columns.  Yet, On Part I under “Expenses” they record over half their contributions ($15M this year), that is, over $8M was spent on “Salaries.”  Without employees, one has no “salaries.”

The “Related Organization” Paying those salaries and sharing facilities is not the “Center for Best Practices” but FYI the NGA itself, with a different EIN#.  (See Schedule R, on the above returns), shown as:

However, as a private nonprofit (governed by the government instrumentality of this NGA), I see that the latest tax return showed $15M of “contributions.”  Of these, Part VIII shows that it’s approximately ⅓ “government grants” (over $5,3M) and two-thirds [private, i.e., non-government], that is, over $9.9M.  Look at Line 1, Part VIII.   Meanwhile, on Schedule R, Part V (transactions with related organizations), I see about $3M total being exchanged under categories m,n, and o.  Unfortunately, which direction the funds were going isn’t clear (to me, that is):

• m Performance of services or membership or fundraising solicitations by related organization(s)
• n Sharing of facilities, equipment, mailing lists, or other assets with related organization(s)
• o Sharing of paid employees with related organization(s)

Aetna
Altria Client Services, Inc.
Alkermes
Amazon.com
Amgen
Amplify
AmeriHealth Caritas 
American Electric Power
American Water 
Anthem
Apple
Apollo Education Group
Astellas Pharma
AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals
Archer Daniels Midland 
AT&T
Atria Senior Living
Bank of America
Barrick Gold of North America, Inc.
Best Buy Co., Inc.
Blue Cross Blue Shield
CenturyLink
Cerner Corporation
Cisco Systems
The Coca-Cola Company
Cognizant Technology Solutions
The College Board
Comcast Corporation
Covanta Energy
CCA
CSRA
CVS Health
Daiichi Sankyo
Darden Restaurants
Deloitte
Dominion
The Dow Chemical Company
DTE Energy
Duke Energy
Edgenuity
Educational Testing Service
ESRI
ExxonMobil Corporation
Ford Motor Company
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles
General Dynamics Information Technology 
General Electric Company
General Motors
Gilead Sciences, Inc. 
GlaxoSmithKline
Golden Living
Google
Hallmark Cards, Inc.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Hospital Corporation of America
HP Inc.
Humana
IBM Corporation
IGT
Intel
International Paper 
Intuit
Johnson & Johnson
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
K12
Kaiser Permanente
Lundbeck
Marathon Oil
Mars
MAXIMUS
McKinsey & Company
Merck & Co., Inc.
Microsoft Corporation
Molina Healthcare, Inc.
Morgan Stanley
Motorola Solutions
Mylan Inc.
Nestle Waters North America
NIC, Inc.
Nike
Norfolk Southern
Northrop Grumman
Novartis Pharmaceuticals USA
Novo Nordisk Inc.
Oracle USA Inc.
Pearson Education
Philips
Purdue Pharma
Pfizer
Prime Therapeutics
The Procter & Gamble Company
Prudential Financial
ResCare
Sanofi
Samsung
SAS Institute Inc.
SCAN Health Plan
Scholastic
SEADG
Southern Company
State Farm Insurance
Target
TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA
TIAA
Time Warner Cable
Toyota Motor North America 
TransCanada
Truven Health Analytics 
Unilever United States
UnitedHealth Group
Union Pacific Railroad
Verizon Communications
Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Walgreen Co.
Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

• American Institutes for Research
• American Psychiatric Foundation
• American University
• The Annie E. Casey Foundation
• The Atlantic Philanthropies
• The California Endowment
• Casey Family Programs
• Conrad N. Hilton Foundation 
• Cuyahoga County (OH) Community Health Board
• Drexel University, Office of Mental Health Systems and Substance Abuse
• The Eli Lilly and Company Foundation
• Ford Foundation
• Interact for Health (formerly known as Health Foundation of Greater Cincinnatti)
• Human Services Administration Organizations, Inc. 
• Human Services Research Institute 
• The Jacob & Valeria Langeloth Foundation
• JEHT Foundation
• John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
• The Joyce Foundation
• KRA Corporation
• Laura and John Arnold Foundation
• Local Initiatives Support Corporation <==<==<==
• Melville Charitable Trust
• Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission
• National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
• The New York Community Trust
• NoVo Foundation
• Open Society Institute
• Open Society Policy Center
• Patrick and Aimee Butler Family Foundation
• The Pew Charitable Trusts
• Policy Research Associates
• Public Welfare Foundation
• The Rhode Island Foundation
• The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
• Rockit Foundation
• Rosenberg Foundation

• State of Florida, Orange County
• State of Indiana, Indianapolis, Department of Public Safety
• State of Michigan
• State of New Hampshire, Department of Justice
• State of New York, Division of Criminal Justice Services
• State of New York, New York City, Department of Health and Human Hygiene
• State of New York, New York City, Department of Probation
• State of North Carolina, Department of Correction
• State of Ohio, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
• State of Pennsylvania, Commission on Crime and Delinquency
• State of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare
• State of Pennsylvania, Office of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services
• State of Texas, Bexar County, Adult Probation Department
• State of Texas, Department of Criminal Justice
• State of Texas, Fort Bend County
• State of Texas, Harris County, Community Supervision and Corrections Department
• State of Texas, Harris County, Public Defender’s Office
• State of Texas, Office of Court Administration, Texas Indigent Defense Commission
• State of Texas, Tarrant County
• State of Texas, Travis County, Adult Probation Department
• State of Texas, Travis County, Criminal Courts Administration
• State of Texas, Williamson County
• State of Vermont, Department of Corrections
• State of Wisconsin, Department of Correction
• Staunton Farm Foundation 
• Texas A&M University

About “ACT”:

About Us (this link is fine print, bottom right, a little hard to find on their page):

Most people know us for the ACT test, but that’s just one aspect of our work.

It’s a fact that more than 1.8 million graduates have taken the ACT® each year—making us the leading US college admissions testing company. We also serve millions of job seekers, businesses, government agencies, and policymakers around the world.

[Different link] ACT State Organizations (!!) Be a Voice, Make a Difference

Our vision is to eliminate the skills gap by connecting the outcomes of K-12 and postsecondary to career opportunities. Join thousands of education and workforce professionals in all 50 states, plus the District of Columbia, on this quest.

ACT Research and Policy: Including Measures of Student Behavioral Skills in Accountability Systems