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

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

‘Family Court Matters’ Issues Summary, At This Time: Right Sidebar ‘GO-TO | Current Posts’ Widget (Publ. Dec. 21, 2019 as 13th Sticky Post).

leave a comment »

Post Title: ‘Family Court Matters’ Issues Summary, At This Time: Right Sidebar ‘GO-TO | Current Posts’ Widget  (Publ. Dec. 21, 2019 as 13th Sticky Post). (short-link ends “-bUM,” about 4,300 words with 12/22 update; section (2) of (3) additions bring this to about 8,000 words as of 12/25/2019. (Detailing some footnoted organizations on the featured page… explained in context as it comes up). Though short, Section (3) was the main part — listing text boxes on Sidebar Widget for easier access.

This post further advertises the updated top right sidebar widget of my blog (by posting all its contents and marking the new post sticky) and features one of the pages which caught my attention during the update. The post was edited and/or copy-edited post-publication, adding mini-sections to the middle part, so while it no longer qualifies as “short” it still qualifies as I believe relevant.


For the straightforward list of Ten text boxes from the top right widget (titles and links) scroll or page-down to Section (3) of (3) announced by:

(3) (Lists Text Boxes;in diff’t background color):

However if your intention is to eventually read this blog, what comes before it –sections (1) and (2)  — shows what you’re in for and where I’m coming from.  Expect to be challenged and to exercise reason (plenty of reading), comparison, probably some basic vocabulary development (unless you’re an accountant or financial services advisor — and even then… the perspective differs) and to acquire non-partisan insight into how our country is run.

WYSIWYG: At this point, I don’t do consulting, conference circuits, presentations, webinars etc. so what you see here (and on my Twitter account) is what you get from me, except for any personal contact, which I generally keep to a minimum, in part because of what I have to say about the system and in part for how personal privacy relates to personal safety as it has for years…  If you want more or appreciate what’s here, please consider that DONATE button (suggested minimum: $10.00).

//LGH Dec. 25, 2019 update…  


(Filename: “LGH|FCM Go-To Widget Update (images 1,2) + ‘More Resources’ Widget (Img3, just to reference ‘Widget’ Definition) ~~3 SShots 2019Dec21 Sat..” 

This “GO-TO | Current Posts” widget provides handy links to other parts (Pages or Posts) of the blog in the form of ten custom-html (specially formatted by me) text boxes.  Each contains a link to another page or post with basic identifying detail (title, date published, shortlink, some, a bit more).  Because widget contents are not pre-set, I get to name the widget and add text boxes (with or without links — for this widget, I featured WITH links) to other parts of the blog.  Its updated label now reads:

“GO TO” Widget for: Current Posts (12 Sticky on top:–>incl. Tables Of Contents and Other Featured Posts marked ‘Sticky’) (This one “Widget” holds Ten Boxes=Doorways to other posts or pages). Last Updated 21 Dec. 2019.

See nearby image, with bright-yellow background, which only shows the above widget title, the first text box and just part of the second one, which together represent the two “Static” pages on this blog.  There used to be just one static page, around January, 2018, I restructured to separate the home page from the one were posts appear, requiring some basic navigation pointers, such as this Go-To widget.

Of this post: Sections (1) and (2) state why this post at this time; (2) describes a certain page (“For example, National Children’s Alliance…”) I felt appropriate to advertise again.  In this section, the longest on this post, I get on the soap-box, with megaphone, to re-state some principles that page illustrates and say why they matter so much to such things as “informed consent” in “government of, by, and for the People,” (USA).

[Adding a few paragraphs to characterize Section (2), Dec. 22]

Understanding even just a few basic principles [I address two:  “A Program is not a Person,” and “A Budget is not a Balance Sheet,” encourages fact-checking, which leads to understanding (seeing) where the most basic “understanding” has been systematically derailed to substitute the rhetoric of sales/propaganda for the basics of accountability and transparency.  Knowing to look for the “entity” in any claimed services (which will entail financing) alerts us to where the promotion of the same services attempts to distract from following the finances by concealing the name of the involved entities.

The page I featured (shown below in colorful text and an image) dealing with the basic topic of Child Abuse Prevention and Child Advocacy Organizations by name, including one with historic association with M.D. Eli Newberger who (years ago) became involved as an expert witness (if I recall it right) in protesting the confirmation of a Connecticut GAL as judge on the basis of extreme child abuse (sexual abuse of a minor by the father, with medical evidence); the mother had been put on supervised visitation specific to some shady people/groups, and was both traumatized and, understandably, broke.  The year was about 2011-2012, I posted it actively at the time, with others, and the venue (if I recall it right) was a certain court known as a “high-conflict” one (cases could be referred to it from anywhere in the state) with known AFCC officials.  I was not the only blogger or reporter involved in calling attention to this scenario .

You cannot get much more relevant to the issue of “Family Courts” than this situation … however my featured post doesn’t talk about that — it talks about two different nationally networked “child abuse prevention” nonprofits and their self-descriptions as opposed to their financials.  It also so happened that a known AFCC-member-originated nonprofit called “Kids’ Turn” which I’d been tracking had submerged itself under one of the nationally networked child abuse prevention nonprofits, “SF CAPC” which then suddenly changed its name again to “Safe & Sound” in 2017, and continued running the trademarked curriculum, featuring “parental alienation prevention.”  This topic is also referenced on my Front Page at some length. //LGH Dec. 22, 2019.

Below that, Section (3) just lists the ten text boxes in wider format.  It’s a straight copy except brief labels to each of those boxes, and here, enlarging the font size which on the sidebar I miniaturized to take up less space.  Section (3) has a certain border and background color:  Look for this, which marks the start of it (as well as a very large “(3)” heading):

(TEXT BOX 1 – CURRENT POSTS (Static “Posts Page” of this blog).


Sections (1), (2), and (3) begin here:


(1)  WHY THIS POST AT THIS TIME

This post addresses a technical difficulty I’ve noticed:  when accessing this blog through a cell-phone (at least the version I have), the right sidebar is hard to find.

The right sidebar provides basic navigation and featured post links and short-bursts of content for overviews of the materials I blog. I’d just been updating it, again with considerable effort detailing the format html (size, style, border, background color, etc.), adding another information box (post reference) for TOC 2017 which somehow had been bumped off the top 12 sticky posts, and in general, administrative house-keeping for clarity.  For the extra effort put in to things not cell-phone friendly (readily accessible or even visible only to people with laptops or computers) made no sense and a post to correct the situation did make sense.

(Image filename only): “LGH|FCM Go-To Widget Update (images 1,2) + ‘More Resources’ Widget (Img3, just to reference ‘Widget’ Definition) ~~3 SShots 2019Dec21 Sat PST @ {exact time, “NOYB”}.png”

Because this post adds a snapshot (version as of this date) of my top-right sidebar “GO-TO” widget, it complements two other July, 2019, posts shown within a different sidebar widget, which I named “More Resources.”**  Those two posts (as displayed within that widget) have similar functions, but off-ramped different parts of my sidebar.  The purpose of “More Resources” was to fully delete more text and link widgets; the overall purpose was shortening that sidebar, but the purpose here of posting contents of the “GO-TO” sidebar widget and all ten of its text-boxes (contents) isn’t off-ramping (those contents remains in place) but another way to publicize them and navigate the blog.

**Full widget title (See nearby image):  “More Resources (a.k.a. Former Sidebar Widgets (FULL of Show & Tell Texts, Links, Key Posts and a few “DONATE” Buttons too).”

Like those “More Resources” posts, this one also expands margins from sidebar widths. Being marked sticky, it’s now become topmost on the blog, as #1 of 13 sticky posts, to provide extra navigation help for people with viewing devices which may not be able display that sidebar so easily, including navigation to things fundamental to the blog purpose, feature a certain page, and restate a few basic principles as I just described above.

My updated label to the GO-TO widget makes it more specific, by mentioning that it contains (currently) TEN text-boxes, the term also echoed in the Section (3) list below by simply calling them “Text Box 1” etc. Otherwise one might think each text box was its own “widget.”

(2) Featuring a Certain Page’s Drill-Downs

Which page (with its two related posts) drilled-down certain child-abuse prevention nonprofit networks, emphasizing two basic realities (principles).

[Section (2) continued to grow after I published the post, mostly to cover claims I’d made or satisfy further my own curiosity on some of the quotes.  Some readers may be interested in the references to tobacco-tax revenues-based public/private enterprise which was referenced, in passing, on that featured page (California’s “First 5” promotion of MIECHV-funded (universal ideally) Home Visitation). Explained when I get to that part…]

While fine-tuning this particular “GO-TO: CURRENT POSTS” widget, I saw one of its text boxes referencing a certain page (“For example, National Children’s Alliance…”) published Jan. 2, 2018, nearly two years ago, was missing the standard “short-link ending” phrase.

Clicking through to grab those characters and add them to the text box, I skimmed the page again and realized and was personally reminded: <>it’s still a good example of drill-downs on connected, shapeshifting, shady-language-using websites; <>it connects to two other posts, which deal with national response to “Child Abuse” issues; and <>how these networks tend to operate vs. how they tend to speak of themselves on the websites.

While here, I’m also re-publicizing that Page (accessible/shown in “Text Box 8”) as it supplements two related posts (shown in “Text Boxes 9 and 10” of 10) which represents a major drill-down,  I also talk up current principles still important as applied to specific  named organizations still impacting the “Child Abuse Prevention” and ‘Child Advocacy” fields (and influencing dyanmics of the family court systems) something of deep concern to, I believe, most people.

Much of this represented years-earlier work I felt important enough in January 2018, to feature on that GO-TO widget, but supplemented for this post (as I recall).


Once published and marked “sticky” this post (“Family Court Matters’ Issues Summary, At This Time: Right Sidebar ‘GO-TO | Current Posts’ Widget  (Publ. Dec. 21, 2019 as 13th Sticky Post). (short-link ends “-bUM,”..),” not the following page I’m showing) becomes (by virtue of date created) the top post on the blog (the ‘Posts’ page), making any references to “12 Sticky posts” outdated as it becomes the 13th.

This is the particular text-box within this particular top-right sidebar widget that inspired this post.


This Page (shortlink ends “PsBXH-8iP”) holds detailed drill-downs and supplements the next two POSTS (‘Chasing Down Corp + Charitable Registratn’s’…Pt. 1, Pt. 2) shown next (below) on this text widget)


This Page: is still relevant, a good read; deals w/ AFCC-member- (Judge-Lawyer-Court Services Administrator-) founded Kids’Turn, (and) Internat’l Parental Kidnapping as regards the Hague Convention; and shows HOW specific non-profit coalitions organize to trademark programs + obtain federal grants, while using mis-leading language, (several) name-changing rapidly (SFCAPC became ‘ Safe+Sound,’ etc.) and more..)

Because I’m listing all ten text boxes on this widget, the above paragraphs show up in order (#s 1 through 10) below on this post…..

How that now looks on the sidebar (except the red rectangle, added to the image to show which page I’m referring to).  The two related pages also show below it (Text Boxes 8, 9 and 10 below):

TOPICS on this (again, recommended reading) page include showing, with exhibits, how although “A PROGRAM =/= A PERSON,” public/private enterprise often talks as though it were, both individually (at the nonprofit website, at the government website) and as mutually referring to each other.

I noticed among this  January 2, 2018 “For example, National Children’s Alliance, Alabama-based (legal domicile) and its network of CACs and Statewide CAC Coalitions…” page’s many drill-downs (annotated images of screenprints from entity websites and from the associated tax returns, including showing how a single year’s grants were distributed nationwide to similarly-named organizations) it explains and illustrates the deceitful “summary” practice many organizations use of referring to a PROGRAM being run**  “anthropomorphically,” that is, as if it were a live corporate (business, i.e., private-sector) PERSON, actor, or (in effect) business.

**The obvious selling point of the entity to the public are the programs, often technical-assistance and trainings, often trademarked too, but to the operators and owners, the selling point is the funding streams with roots in public funds, sold under a cause anyone would be hard put to protest aloud.

Try it on for size (state as your position, using the pronoun “I,”) without backing it up by a presentation of how funds are in fact being utilized: how socially acceptable or politically correct do these statements sound? Could you sign on to these statements?

I am opposed to child abuse prevention and efforts to help children who have been abused, or to determine — on behalf of those accused of abusing them — whether or not and how much they have been abused.

Try that with almost any other popular cause:

I’m opposed to government helping prevent violence against women… I’m opposed to government helping promote responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage as a public norm.

There seems to be a bit more support for:

I’m opposed to single-mother (or “female-headed”) households as a public danger. …. I’m opposed to permitting divorce… and believe the public (i.e., local governments nation wide) should invest heavily in preventing it through extra counseling.

Unfortunately, that’s also often where we should not just turn off the investigative or inquiry mode when it comes to specific organizations and programs entrusted with (basically) stopping bad things and promoting good things socially. We should remain aware that human temptation and corruption does, indeed, exist in a variety of places: “high” (in the power structures that exist) was well as low (in the same). If directly questioned on this, who’d deny that these things can exist?

But what about when it comes to challenging specifics of entities entrusted with, or flying the colors (flags, banners, etc.) of noble causes like those administered above?  Is challenging individual systems of networked public/private operations as the same as challenging the banners under which they fly, as ideas?

BASIC REALITIES ARE OFTEN LOST IN TRANSLATION. THIS BLOG IS A CONTINUE CALL TO ATTENTION OF THE PROCESS OF TRANSLATION, and HOW WE MIGHT TRANSLATE RHETORIC from SPECIFIC GROUPS (websites, organizations, professional advocates in certain fields handling these issues, etc.) INTO OBJECTIVE, MEASURABLE TERMS:  SPECIFICALLY CASH FLOW (Finances).  Accounting for Accountability.

PRINCIPLE: A PROGRAM is not a PERSON!  

In basic grammar, the PROGRAM is the thing acted upon, launched, or run by a PERSON or PERSONS.  

Its position would be direct object of a transitive verb; not the subject of a sentence with a transitive verb taking a direct object. 

The subject of a sentence with main verbs like “launch, initiated, started, run, founded (etc.) is NOT the direct object.  A PROGRAM being by definition in the category of things launched, initiated, started, run, or founded***, does not have a life of its own. Being by category in any description of its launch (etc.) is the object acted upon, some person, entity or other acting force (in the position of subject of a sentence) caused the program to run, even as no software program, however tooled to, in chain reactions or otherwise, continue replicating itself, IS the same as that program’s designer.##

Paragraph footnotes: (***as are corporate filings to form business entities which DO qualify as “persons”) (##Considerations of “Artificial Intelligence” not addressed in this discussion:  I’m talking about FINANCIAL transparency vis-a-vis the taxpayers here…and ways to throw them ((us)) off-track in seeking it, or even knowing where to look)

Think about it: A “program,” not having a life of its own as a “person” it cannot be held legally responsible.  Substituting one for the other (grammatically, in sentence usage, if not directly, calling a “program” seeks to avoid legal responsibility, and no other legitimate (ethical) purpose…).  What kind of mentality is behind conflating one with another while talking about nationwide altruistic and abuse-preventative (in this example) activities under the tax-exempt status?

When the program is described as running, starting, launching the program activities, in effect, the identity of the PERSON in that sentence is hid.  In a narrative context where usage flows from truthful to untruthful, extra effort to decipher is required IF any intent to follow the finances and economic energy keeping that program going.

The two terms [PROGRAM vs. PERSON] are mutually exclusive and using ONE as if it was the other, where no “dba” (registered trademark or “doing business as” indicator) exists without telling the viewers serves little other purpose than to derail look-ups of who’s behind that usage (dba, tradename, etc.).  In these subject matters, that “WHO” is likely to be either privately funded seeking to influence public resources, or public-funded (through grants or contracts) but operating privately as a nonprofit, which reduces accountability. If you read (all of) that post, you’ll see my explaining this on an annotated image from the website.


STAYING AWARE THAT “A PROGRAM =/= A PERSON” KEEPS ONE AWARE OF USAGE, WHICH AWARENESS IS VITAL FOR SEEKING ACCOUNTABILITY, CONNECTION OF CLAIMED EXPENDITURES TO CLAIMED RECEIPTS FOR THE SAME IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE.

Without understanding the basic reality that a “program” is not a (corporate) “person” unless registered separately under nearly the exact same name in the same legal domicile (in which case, that spoken of is in fact two different things — with the ENTITY being the most important one for fiscal transparency) we do not understand basic operations of government itself, especially government dealing with the private, non-profit sector.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 21, 2019 at 8:17 pm

Table of Contents 2019, FamilyCourtMatters.org’s Posts + Pages: January 1 – Dec. 16 (so far).

leave a comment »

(Post updated month by month since first posted Aug. 5.  Some updates include explanations or commentary..//LGH Dec. 19, 2019.


No single essay (post or page, even with the exhibits) can expose an entire network developed over the decades, expanding and evolving in its many roots, branches, tendrils above and below ground (direct public awareness ℅ storefront websites and periodic MSM feature stories). Understanding comes with exposure over time and seeing some of the basic operating principles in action, which I blog in a show and tell manner.  I’m just not focused on anecdotal narrative based on individual cases, not even my own. (See blog motto: “A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment”).

YOU ARE READING:

Table of Contents 2019, FamilyCourtMatters.org’s Posts + Pages: January 1 – Dec. 16 (so far).

(Shortlink ends “-ayV”. About 9,600 words (w/ monthly updates extending the table; word-count high in part because of the post “tags” added to the table as their own rows).  Last update Dec. 19, 2019, adds all Nov. posts and all Dec. posts so far (@12/19).


Post published August 5, and updated periodically as the blog grows.  The post shows on the table, chronologically under Aug. 5th, but being marked “Sticky”  remains in top position of “Current Posts.”   TOCs 2018 and 2019 are both recommended reading for my current research focus (browse titles) as is anything which made it onto my top right sidebar widget. Direct links to both this post and TOC 2018 show on my right sidebar, and both also are marked sticky, so TOC 2018 is also stationed among the top 12 posts. I’ll explain this again below with some images.

Within the table of contents, you’ll see this August 5 post easily from its white-on-black color scheme:

2019 FAMILYCOURTMATTERS.org
The Year in Posts  & Pages (so far, through Dec. 16)
(with approximate word counts for each and “tags” for some)
URL: short-link ends:
 (Normal color for a row containing a post title & link)
Aug. 5
STICKY, &
THIS POST
Table of Contents 2019, Family Court Matters’ Posts + Pages: January 1 – Dec. 16 (so far).
(“Sticky.”  About 6,000 words initial; the word count growing month-by-month with each update of course)
-ayV

 

Table of Contents Post PREVIEW

 

Table of Contents 2019 here, unlike TOCs for 2012-2014, 2016, 2017 incorporates any new pages by date published. Individual TOCs for late 2012 – 2017 can still be accessed within the top dozen sticky posts through the one for “2017” which internalizes links to the others: full title:  2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. See TOC for: (1) 2017 now thru March Sept. 21; (2) 2016 All; (3) Sept. 2012 – June 2014, Reverse Chrono, and (4) See Also More Info Below. Shortlink-ends 5qZ,first published Jan. 9, 2017.. 

  • The 2017 TOC (which holds links to earlier ones) is a formerly sticky post accessible I just realized, now through the widget  box “New To Blog?  Want My Position Summary or a Review?” publ. Jan. 27, 2018.
  • That access is a bit cumbersome, so I’ll add a more direct link to the sidebar (about the same placement) now, because TOC 2017 should be still easily accessible. This will alter and update the sidebar top right “Go To” Widget (which contains TOC 2019 and 2018 already; an image of it is lower on this post too). //LGH 2019.  In my latest post (Dec. 16, 2019) I had occasion to include small section reviewing TOC access points.

Table of Contents 2018 (<~second version, published March 24, 2019; short-link ending “-9y7”) also includes pages. The “ARCHIVES” function does not. Here, I highlit pages bright-yellow because the short-link protocol for them differs (by just one capitalized letter) from that for posts.

While I have fewer pages overall, the ones I do have tend to be as important as key posts and often paired with them.  Some exist to give more in-depth detail on a topic a postmay have introduced.

 

IMPROMPTU COMMENTS FROM MY October 2 UPDATE, this color background, green border:


In September 2019, I worked extensively on (condensing) the massive Front Page to the blog, resulting in some off-ramped posts, connecting links, and updates

I’m not sure how much longer I can keep blogging and wanted this blog more accessible.

All my indicators are there’s still nothing like it out there: written by someone with experience of both the domestic violence protection and the family court system but despite that personal experience still focused on obtaining and featuring basic data (i.e., much from databases) available to common people (i.e., people without access to academic journals, insider information on the courts, or individual court cases) to show system organization, and that built-in conflicts of interest within that organization as a rationale and solid — as opposed to “assumptions unspoken/unchallenged, and when challenged, found lacking proof — base for (family court) system reform.**

(**See “Clarifications added Oct. 3,” next inset.  The statements from this paragraph continue below that inset and brief “footprint” from it).

Section “Clarifications added Oct. 3, 2019″ was moved to Bonus Content (Illustrations, More In-Depth Details) by Post, from Certain 2019 Posts, ‘Oct. 3 Clarifications’ and my FNAQs (Publ. Nov. 4, 2019). about 6,500 words)  Now that this has been published as a separate post, that post is also in the (updated) table below.  //LGH Dec. 19, 2019 (while adding Nov. published posts to this table).

Clarifications in part say:

(Footprint left from now off-ramped material):

. . . It seems that what you do (or fail to do) after you know matters the most.


**(Nonprofits who manage to get cited, and eager to file amicus briefs, testify before task forces, and to the extent their leadership has academic connections, publish in a law or other journal), some getting minor USDOJ/NIJ grants to start finally backing up the [ridiculous and barely supported] numeric claims about the family courts, others working more getting their names alongside the former in media articles about the problems in family courts).  See my June 29, 2014 post for a list as of about that time, but I’ve known before then.  Collectively, they make this blog necessary, and its basic work, harder.

In my “58 Essays” and “Acknowledgements” (now second and third sticky posts on this blog) —  Acknowledgements, Executive Summary (Current Projects | Rolling Blackouts) and What Makes This Blog “What You Need to Know” (July 31, 2019). (<~~Click to Access; shortlink ends “-auh”, also marked sticky). I gave these groups a backhanded credit for the existence (as a necessity) of this blog.

[Continuing from just above the Oct. 3 inset and this ‘footprint’ left here from it:]

The family court system has been but shouldn’t really be characterized as either politically progressive or politically conservative, as understood in the USA or elsewhere.  It is what it is, and developed over a timeline with specific agents, and actors already in place and in power.

In more than one country family courts continue to have damaging effects and outcomes (“roadkill”).

I see that both the actors[1] who helped originally set up the family courts and the (self-appointed/system-anointed) family court reform movements [2]  have professional “story-tellers” with revisionist, fictionalized, or just plain dumbed-down, illogical explanations bordering on mythical fairytales with religious superstition for those bad outcomes, including but not limited to headline-making “roadkill.”

[1] People, associations, and/or institutions such as universities, or parts of the federal government (USA); [2] protective parents, battered mothers, family rights, etc.

I chose early on to go look at who’s funding such myth-making; what an expedition it’s been!

By the way, more logical answers continue to be hard to argue against, as shown by collective refusal to engage, attempts to co-opt on-line discussions with a highly diluted version (I say this with specific websites in mind) and in general refusal to mention this blog by name while I know as blog administrator many of the same groups and their leaders (as well as, per “statcounter” certain universities, government entities, and followers from specific countries) have been following it.

{END, “IMPROMPTU COMMENTS  FROM MY October 2 UPDATE”}

Despite the uncomfortable content, we need more logical answers to counter the seemingly easier and strong collective urge to instead “play the fool,” and to continue to be exploited because it’s more comfortable socially to join existing movements than start one.  This reminds me of how, on the surface, it may seem easier to submit to abuse than confront it, something I know about experientially, before, during, and after. You’d better believe it’s a “gender” issue, but it’s also a freedom and economic issue.  Abuse is a form of slavery and exploitation. Those who profit the most from its perpetuation are going to, generally, be the most resistant and likely to try scapegoating just single (demographically labeled) groups rather than correct the system.

I would never dedicate, as I have, ten years of investigative blogging and (as possible at any time) social networking on this issue were it not so deeply dangerous to future generations, and I have been and am a mother, no matter who may or may not wish to acknowledge that socially, or in my own family line once I confronted in-home domestic violence and all kinds of “coercive control” i.e., “abuse” and (ever since) had to also deal up close and even from afar with their intent to stuff it back into the closet, at least as it pertained to my family line and our shared family line.

There is no excuse for the levels of abuse we have condoned through passive ignorance of our own governmental systems in flux  (USA and internationally).  At the heart of this is utilization of tax-exempt status in the private sector to stockpile influence and resources to drive the public sector, which is SUPPOSED to be “wealth-blind” when it comes to legal rights.

//LGH Oct. 2, 2019, tweaked some Nov. 3 during table update to add October’s posts.


The main, but not only important content, on this page is the table which looks like and begins:

2019 FAMILYCOURTMATTERS.org, The Year (So Far) in Posts,* 2019

(with approximate word counts for each and “tags” for some)

URL: short-link ends:
Jan.5, 2019 2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019]

Under 4,000 words, but see also, below, Table of Contents 2018 (<~second version, better format, published March 24, 2019; short-link ending “-9y7”)

-9p3
Feb. (no posts were published this month)
March 4

 

How 501©3 “The Next American City,” with help from at least Five BIG Foundations, lost its “American,” while Devastated Detroit’s DESIGN is Anointed by UNESCO (Written Sept. 2016, but Published Mar. 2019). (about 8,600 words)

“The post was fully written in 2016 as you see below (except this update in this background-color) but, through my oversight, was not published until now, 2019.”
-4iT

(The above was a sample of what the post looks like.  Scroll or page down for the full table…)

re: ‘TWO HELPFUL LINKS’ — Image from TopRightSidebar, ‘GO TO POSTS’ widget, shows TOC 2019 & 2018 + ‘Key Posts 2012-2017’ (LGH, @ Sept. 1, 2019) [Actual Widget shows current rev. date (through Dec. 16, 2019), though this earlier snapshot of the sidebar doesn’t.

FINDING THIS TABLE of CONTENTS 2019 IS EASY, several different ways exist:
~~>Best: If blog’s right sidebar easily viewable) click “Current Posts” page (it’s at the top for now, so that’d lead right to this post) OR a bit below it, a direct link widget labeled TOC 2019 (shown in nearby image, along with a similar widget linking to TOC 2018).
I realize on some cellphones (including my own) the right sidebar isn’t easily seen; if so, then:
~~>Second Best: Type FamilyCourtMatters.org (=”Front Page”) and click the link provided near the top to get to the “Current Posts”(“Posts page”) on this blog.  

~~>Serendipity: Occasionally reading some other posts, you may run across a tiny section with the image to left and some active links to TOC 2018 and 2019.


COLOR-CODING: For some posts in this table I added separate rows with tags, immediately beneath the row for each respective post, labeled “TAGS” in the left column and “n/a” in the right.  I labeled “Sticky” posts “STICKY” in the left column, no extra highlighting.  I called attention to any new pages because they are highlit yellow. (and marked “PAGES” in middle and right-hand column).  The addition of tags probably doubles the size of the post (and table) but I feel is helpful information to browse or notice.

My average post size is probably about 8-10,000 words, but several are longer.  Because of this, I’ve included approximate word-counts for each post on the table.
Read the rest of this entry »

58 More Essays (Pages) on Essentials** of the Family Court Arena. **IMHO, as expressed 2009-2019.

leave a comment »

You are reading: 58 More Essays (Pages) on Essentials** of the Family Court Arena. **IMHO, as expressed 2009-2019(WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ends -ar9. //LGH July 31, 2019.  About 8,000 words as updated Aug. 4, 2019)   This title will be repeated a few inches below (that time with a Footnote [1]).

ANY post may be further edited (as in, condensed, or expanded, or both) after publishing. Blogger’s privilege!


Speaking of which, I’m adding TWO HELPFUL LINKS here, Sept. 1, as you see here.  They are blog navigation (two years’ worth of tables of contents, only one of which (2018) is among these top “sticky” posts).  TOC for 2019 (“so far”) was published Aug. 5 and updated through August 31 (“so far”) as well as added separately to the blog sidebar widget, and (that’s new) TOC 2018 right underneath it.They are also inserted here to recommend browsing this blog’s titles (in table format) for a quick, informal, overview of subject matter and to better help understand where I’m coming from, taken as a whole.I may add this specific TWO HELPFUL LINKS  inset (with attached image) of information to about one post a month, moving forward, and have inserted it to some as far back as May, 2019.  //LGH September 1, 2019.

re: ‘TWO HELPFUL LINKS’ — Image from TopRightSidebar, ‘GO TO POSTS’ widget, shows TOC 2019 & 2018 + ‘Key Posts 2012-2017’ (LGH, @ Sept. 1, 2019)

TWO HELPFUL LINKS added Sept. 1, 2019 (for recent subject matter overview):

 Table of Contents 2019, Family Court Matters’ Posts + Pages: January 1 – August 31 (so far). (Shortlink ends “-ayV.”  About 6,300 words,posted August 5, updated Aug. 31) (You can also link to this TOC post any time from the top right sidebar, under”GO TO: All Posts, incl. Sticky, Tables of Contents..” widget, which holds several boxes for navigating to specific important places (posts or pages, incl. the home page), and, 

(Table of Contents 2018, Posts and Pages.. (publ. 24Mar2019, short-link ends ‘9y7’)


 

58 More Essays (Pages) on Essentials** of the Family Court Arena. **IMHO, as expressed 2009-2019(WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ends -ar9. //LGH July 31, 2019.  About 8,000 words as updated Aug. 4, 2019) [1].

I had fun writing these; hope you enjoy reading them.  Browse their titles, pick somewhere and dive in!

The “58 Essays” referenced in the title came from ‘PAGES’ (widget) from off right sidebar with all the links. The list of those titles with links directly to each one, also a 3X3 (nine total screenshots index) of all titles as seen formerly on the sidebar widget are the only illustrated (images involved) items on this post and are at the bottom. Look for images with some colorful lines and arrows, a bit of side-line commentary like these next two:

4

8

All material is my writing except where quoted, and all 58 pages were previously written across that ten-year time span. Now pinned to the top of the blog (designation “Sticky”), this post features them as basic content (and shortens the sidebar considerably). 

As ever, I voice my concerns about and continue to raise awareness of both current developing and longstanding situations whenever/ wherever I have opportunity, including while writing the introduction here. Having written too much while creating this administrative/index post, I then off-ramped extra introduction text to:

That post holds key content on current developments and actors seeking to change family court legislation “locally” (within certain United States) and, I see, the battle pro/con “parental alienation” continuing internationally, with some of the same players on the “opposed” side, regarding publication by WHO of another “ICD-11” nomenclature for diseases. … (July 10 2019, Collective Memo of Concern  to WHO … RE: Inclusion of “Parental Alienation[2]  

I just happened to write the material on my mind while setting up this post.  There are still some opening comments here, though; some navigation, some, just want I want to say: call it my opening spiel.  (That too may be condensed later)…

Cambridge English Dictionary, ‘spiel’ (Cambridge Univ Press)checked Aug 3, 2019.

(It’s a spiel to me because I’ve had to say it so often, was written impromptu and could be an “elevator speech,” depending on for how many floors we were in an elevator.  Not always used in positive sense.  The above link from Cambridge English Dictionary says it’s for “American English” then cites several examples from Wikipedia and “the Hansard archive” (“digitized (parliamentary) debates from 1803), which for some reason, I think is funny.) https://hansard.parliament.uk (see nearby image).


MY SPIEL.

My main concern as a United States citizen and as a human being is that those involved** seem to have little respect for basic concepts of representative government, although plenty of them are lawyers.  It is one thing to exchange ideas on an academic level among universities, or through private networked associations.  It’s another to seek to have those voices drown out and deluge the places where decisions are made as purported “intermediaries” or “the voice of the people” when they clearly aren’t.

**(including but not limited to those both pro AND con on the parental alienation issue (I call it #ArguingPAS), whether or not addressing the World Health Organization’s ICD-11, or whoever determines what does or doesn’t make it into each new version of the DSM  (The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual).[3])


PLACEMENT ON THE BLOG: This post now becomes the top-most post of ten “sticky” posts on my “Current Posts” home page of this blog near the top, on the right sidebar, also known as:

Once I split it, the count is now eleven “sticky” posts pinned to the top of this blog, below which the current posts will show, most recent on top.

This may not be the best first stop on the blog if you’re new to the it (or the fields it covers), but, hey, we all have our different approaches to taking in new information… so whatever works… and those pages hold solid, under-reported information. Over time, exposure and repetition of key concepts, I expect the main ideas will come through on most posts or pages, no matter where you start.  This is not a book or a weekly newsletter: it’s a blog, and an extemporaneous quality will always be present. I have done my best to keep studying and building scope, depth, adding subject matter relating to the main subject matter, and where possible, getting to the origins (creators) not just administrators of the family court systems.


Reviewing exactly what are those top (with this one) ten (soon to be eleven) “sticky” posts, I see that about half are indexes or tables of contents for specific years. I pin these all to the top partly because of their surrounding summary and still-relevant information, also a snapshot in time (of my understanding and/or current related events) [4].

(Footnotes [1-4] are several paragraphs below, not at the very bottom of this post.  My practice: If an explanatory comment is short enough, I’ll often just use “*” or “**” and include it at end of or right below a paragraph) I include cites in the text or with the quote.By contrast, footnotes are more often expansions or commentary, and sometimes become their own separate posts, individually, or as a group.  I have a few posts named “Footnotes to: _____”  I added two footnotes while revising this blog, to expand on a specific topic.

NEED A SHORTCUT?  SCROLL, SWIPE, OR PAGE-DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM UNTIL YOU SEE IMAGES:  (THE FIRST AND ONLY IMAGES THUMBNAIL SCREENSHOTS (3 rows of 3 each), A VISUAL INDEX OF THE PAGE TITLES.  THE PAGE LINKS AND FULL TITLES ARE BELOW THEM.  To break up the links even more, I put in dividing lines and the corresponding screenshot (from where they used to be on the sidebar) with some stars, arrows, and comments (on the images).


Any page or post can take comments.  I don’t do a lot of polls. I do not get a lot of feedback (comments);

JUDGING BLOG BY NUMBER OF VISITORS, FOLLOWERS, COMMENTS:  FAIR ENOUGH IF YOU’RE JUST LOOKING FOR AN EXISTING MOVEMENT TO JOIN, NOT TO BECOME A RESOURCE/LEADER, BUT, BE AWARE

I do notice**  are visiting and repeat visitors, or those with unknown business relationship (but a state geography) who stay on for an hour or sometimes several hours at a time   Over time, this shows the blog is being reguarly watched from certain countries outside the USA, and by a variety of universities or government entities from state level, state agencies, and/or private businesses, as well as some at the federal level (i.e., Dept. of Health and Human Services).  This is to be expected when I’ve been reporting on some of these.  Any university IP might be a student or a faculty or administrator; I’m not tracking which and probably couldn’t.  **(Through embedded “statcounter.com” html; it’s free.  “Statcounter” is based in Ireland) what types of entities — where browsers have proprietary labels identifying them, (unlike the retail or residential common carriers:  Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, etc.). I do notice when I post on something and then a flurry of visitors from that geography or agency suddenly show up on the “recent visitors” log.

Another issue I know I face as someone who has been stalked and had safety concerns about speaking too openly, we are mostly aware that submitting a comment to a blog will reveal an email address; while that’s not shown to the public usually (it isn’t here), it could be to any blog administrator. Having been there myself, I know it’s quite possible to read, even study contents of, this blog, without saying a word on a comments field, or tweeting about it.  What I find most interesting — few people are arguing (directly to me, on the blog, or that I’m aware of so far, directly against the key points I raise, elsewhere.  The usual practice seems to be, just ignore them, or try to take credit for a small percentage of them, while continuing “business as usual’ as advocates.

I read many websites (blogs, and at times Twitter feeds) without becoming a direct follower or always even commenting also; so do not take the sidebar “stats” as an absolute indicator of the importance of this blog.  Instead, decide whether I’m “full of it” or “onto something” then start asking sensible questions.  Decide whether it’s worth your time reading more.  That’s where I also started, regarding what I’ve been looking at these many years. If you NEVER review conflicting points of view outside those already “in your face,” then I suspect the issue is short-sightedness.  I try to stay aware of (and recently have begun to talk more about) media sponsorship and again, PAY CLOSER ATTENTION (TO FAMILY COURT EVENTS, ACTORS, MOVEMENTS, AND — MY KEY THEME — HISTORY, PRACTICES, OPERATIONS).   ASK GOOD QUESTIONS:  IT’S a MINDSET AND COULD BE MADE A HABIT.  IT’S ALSO AN ACQUIRED TASTE.


If you are NOT from the USA, I hope you will understand that with our (it seems) radically different tax system, i.e., the IRS (vs. the VAT system, which I don’t pretend to understand, although I understand it seems more incremental, built-in than the income tax on all taxable profits, whether of a corporation or of an individual), USA-domiciled charities must produce — with some types of exceptions — not only audited annual financial statements (depending on their size) but also tax returns and cough ’em up for the public.  People and private businesses must too, but those are not expected to be coughed up for the public.  The tax returns of tax-exempt organizations are — however certain major categories are still exempt, as in the religious.  So at no time is a total financial picture really available.

But those tax returns are full of clues and indicators for any organization and for organizations functioning in a coordinated fashion — which the response to domestic violence, child abuse, preventing them both, not to mention divorce, custody/visitation (whatever it’s called), CRIME (however categorized) and payment of child support, works.

By “charities” we are talking: their exempt-purpose revenues are federal income-tax-exempt, and if they continue to meet standards, a greatly reduced tax on NON-exempt-purpose revenues (from all those assets held, where it applies) is the incentive to form more and more of them, especially the wealthier one is.  I gather the general idea is that by working side-by-side with government to cover services it doesn’t naturally cover, but people need, a tax perk is granted.  Actually producing those services in a neutral and legal manner is another thing.

With this situation it IS possible to look up and look for those tax returns, corporate filings, and to a degree (though convoluted) perceive the flow of money THROUGH some TO another, also TO and FROM government in the forms of grants TO and FROM government entities.

Because of this expectation that some accounts we can read should and by law must be made available, where they’ve been late, missing, absent, or simply not credible, that reflects on any filing entity’s design.  over time it becomes clear that neither the private nor the public sector (i.e., granting and financial-statement-reporting to the public) has a consistent intent, held to and followed through on, of giving the public a legitimate account of its activities, operations, and their costs — as opposed to sales pitches for the same, forever.  {{I am not a certified public accountant (CPA) nor a lawyer and that was not tax or legal advice..It’s an individual thinking about a common situation and expressing an opinion on it!}}



Having spent some (I’m too old now to spend “enough!”) time on various other countries’ databases, while struggling with SLOW internet personally and NOT interconnected reporting databases, in the era of internationally connected HIGH-speed networks for: governments, educational institutions, research institutions, and I gather the military and probably health / medical institutions, I realize also that there may be major differences in the requirement to produce audited financial statements of government entity balances (assets & liabilities | revenues & expenses) and both naming and posting the actual account numbers associated with all legislated use of tax receipts for public benefit.

I believe that if we are living in a country and supporting it with our life energies through productive work, OR supporting/justifying its expenditures for in ANY way needing some help or protection from that country (or, state) we deserve to see the financial trail and be given an account.  I see that the current setup makes that nearly impossible — but the concept still exists.  That it’s nearly impossible works to the advantageous of the criminally minded, and against those seeking to operate legally within the constraints of any government’s laws.

Americans, it seems to me (speaking of those I’ve been around, deal with, or hear of through, for example, major media reporting, work, social networking, school (when I was in it), etc., have been groomed to NOT look for those financials or talk about them, NOT notice which non-profit entity is referenced (to the point of looking it up, identifying: age, size, location, leadership, and filing habits, including frequent name changes, or movement of assets from one to another, disrupting the traceable path).  We ought to be looking at these things and able to talk about them, but have been coached, distracted, discouraged, and — for those who attempt to look — often obstructed from finding out TIMELY things we ought to know.

That’s my spiel.  Now here’s the post:

 The nine-image thumbnail index gallery, and names and links to the 58 Essays (Pages).

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

July 31, 2019 at 6:21 pm

Acknowledgements, Executive Summary (Current Projects | Rolling Blackouts) and What Makes This Blog “What You Need to Know” (July 31, 2019).

leave a comment »

ANY post may be further edited (as in, condensed, or expanded, or both) after publishing.  Blogger’s privilege!

You are reading: Acknowledgements, Executive Summary (Current Projects | Rolling Blackouts) and What Makes This Blog “What You Need to Know” (July 31, 2019). (Shortlink ends “-auh”, marked sticky, this is currently 9,900 words.  That includes two lengthy footnotes, one of which I expect to remove to its own post.)

Most of this post’s content has been moved from: 58 More Essays (Pages) on Essentials** of the Family Court Arena. **IMHO, as expressed 2009-2019. (Published July 31, 2019; Short-link ends “-ar9”) after both posts were published “sticky.” Because of that, there’s an element of “patchwork” in the post; but each part I hope communicates.


This post describes current projects in process, re-iterates my rationale for the blog and gives some key examples, “clues,” with links to where more may be found and that such clues have been around for a VERY long time.

My blog in general alerts people (it cannot fully cover, solo) the existence of a major information gap in reporting on family court-related matters which it seems has been maintained by those wishing for global restructuring of family law (nation by nation and apparently under also the UN / WHO standards) to go a certain way without addressing what, in fact, happened in the United States of America, and how we now have an allegedly secular (or at least no-national-religion) government but somehow want to maintain official fatherhood policy — moderated by “family violence services.”

BOTH the “Pro” and the “Con” sides on any issue seem to be profiting from it.  With this type of prolonged conflict an obvious question is, who stands to gain what from refusing to resolve it according to law, or common sense?  How genuine are the causes being put forth as put forth?


I see this as more than just a power struggle for the role and place of women regarding men.  It’s also a power struggle for control of future generations of workers, i.e., population regulation, and it’s a power struggle for economic dominance through infrastructures that continue to supersede and undermine from within (any jurisdiction, including country), the rule of law specific to that country.   So, I’m going to continue testifying in this media, if not allowed another, to what I have not only experienced, but also witnessed and have been documenting for ten years now (and taking historical look-backs by government agency, nonprofit organizations, where available, and also reporting changes “in action” as they occur).


Just two post sections reflected in post title:  

  • Acknowledgements
    • A significant part of the landscape, i.e. “The Problem” is a  “Rolling Blackouts” situation // a sarcastic thank you to those generating a need for this blog. it’s also in part a statement of the problem; could’ve gone under “Executive Summary” where I see the title has it.
  • Executive Summary
    • “Current Projects” just names a few themes (geographies of interest) I’m working on now, of enough significance they got onto this top-ranked (pinned) post.
    • Executive Summary contains quick summaries directed at people who may not “get” the role of the U.S. Congress in the current family court problems, and some exhibits (images).
    • While I might expect that from people who don’t live or work in the USA, it’s a sad testimony that it continues being under-estimated or ignored by so many who do. (See “Rolling Blackouts” reference).
  • Any footnotes to the same (or, they may be integrated into main text, if it flows right).  Right now I have one referring to the State of Pennsylvania only.

These categories were added after I wrote the material. They provide a handy title, not hard and fast rules.

This post despite its beginnings as a placeholder is I feel appropriately still near the top of the blog (right now, in Position #2) because it references currently developing events in different states (USA) and countries, some of which demand urgent attention from people who may not be aware of them, or of what seems like a coordinated strategy across different countries and in different states, frequently involving people and organizations I’ve had to report on, and at times personally deal with regarding those strategic cover-ups.


I have been reaching out (through social media) to specific people, some associated with specific organizations, others may be protesting them, especially in the United Kingdom, to communicate in layperson’s terms about similarities and differences between our systems, as well as an “alternate” report from street level about favored organizations and individuals based here, but oh-so-fascinated with developing (and having already developed) personal ties, connections, and even legislative influence in our respective countries.

I hope some understandings may be reached, despite us often not knowing each other professionally or personally. I believe that looking at other systems often provides a mirror — contrasts and similarities are taken into account, not just ignored — on one’s own and help understand it better.  This is especially true for who or what is the “family law” system, and it has occurred to me recently that one roadblock to international understanding (with people more focused on issues such as womens rights, domestic violence as handled in the family courts in the UK) may just not understand the accountability expected with the US tax system, particularly regarding the IRS, the Internal Revenue Code, and requirements to produce tax returns a public can read.

Our whole government is organized, in fact, around giant economic forces, much of which is organized tax-exempt across several categories — and they are constantly interacting with each other.  I know this to be true also in the UK (Nuffield Foundation,[1] Joseph Rowntree, Leverhulme Trust, come to mind) but what I do NOT know is the level of reporting required.

[1] https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/revisions-uk-government-expenditure-plans [2] Nuffield Family Justice Observatory pilot study 2019-2023 (Just saw / footnoted below); [3]  May 18, 2019 article being published in an August, 2019 Oxford University Press | in “International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family (Oxford Academic) (Introducing Social Science Evidence in Family Court Decision-making and Adjudication: Evidence from England and Wales: (also just found; the Abstract shows it was based on a Nuffield-funded scoping study) (etc.).  I see this journal, while editorial board is from the UK (Universities of Oxford and Cambridge), the “Overseas Editorial Board” lists three from the USA (with no affiliation or from which state (or university, if applicable) mentioned — names only, and one each from German, Spain and France).

I’m familiar with companieshouse, some charitable registration places — but nothing the equivalent of what, here, we have, for example, ℅ databases (as imperfect as they may be) such as “FoundationCenter.org/find-funding/990-finder” which link to tax returns.  Or other sources of Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports by the UK governments (the GFOA standards are tied to Canada and the USA, not the UK, Mexico, France, etc).  An obvious geographic size applies, not to mention government organization and financing policies. (I reference this on the other top post also).


For example, more specific to these fields:  In 2015, the UK  passed a control criminalizing “Coercive Control” (and seems to already be running into issues with enforcement).  That term comes from a book by that name, and a Rutgers Professor Evan Stark, who I understand has had British ties early in his career (1980s?) through a Fullbright(?) fellowship (excerpts on my massive home page — just type “FamilyCourtMatters.org” to get there).

Like most of the “family” or “domestic” violence prevention movement in the USA, which our federal government basically controls (economically) and has regionalized into specific, higher-paid “resource centers” tying into the state-wide coalitions, there are major things this book — which I have and have begun highlighting, but the introduction, table of contents, and index already confirm, just does not divulge, while people like myself are left scrambling to publicize (not having connections to Oxford University Press (used by many), SAGE (with its social science focus and interesting history/co-founders), Wiley (used by AFCC) or TandFOnline.com (“Taylor & Francis, an Informa plc company”) (a number of different journals in this field), i.e., special societies promoting our cause to the point of publishing journals),  the more realistic/comprehensive account of the field from the street level and cross-sector, USA.

This “street” level has to include the input from our major federal agencies as developed in the last fifty years. Screwing up policies through withholding of key evidence in the USA, then running over to the UK, Canada Australia even more intensely after the word starts to get out here, is not responsible, or ethical behavior.  It’s utter arrogance, and callous indifference, and that’s what we, here, continue to deal with, nationwide.  The closer I look at this, at the earliest phases, the fewer people seem to have been collaborating in key organizations which have been accepted to run several different fields.  Variance from key themes taken for granted is NOT tolerated; these themes have been now embedded into policy such that to address that is to take on all those who’ve made a living in the field(s). (SEE “A QUICK SUMMARY” section near bottom of this post for more explanation).

There seems so little interest in hearing from us except as we** serve to legitimize the collective agenda (behavioral modification, “prevention treatment and services” emphasis) and can be used for PR due to the drama, tragedies, or headline-making destructions we’ve  endured by way of the family courts.

(**”protective parents,” a phrase coined to start a movement possibly; individuals harmed by the family court fiascoes after or while also trying to protect our physical persons, property, lives, and often also minor children, from both the former (or current) abusers/batterers AND the abusive systems in which we found ourselves simply trying to get free).

The level of betrayal of trust, in my opinion, is far greater by those promising help, but withholding information which might lead to understanding those help SYSTEMS, than it ever was to men, or in some cases women, who simply behaved like animals in their home domains — and observers were either cowed into, or already groomed into “it’s someone else’s problem” non-reporting assent.  Another level of betrayal of trust, for women in particular, is to live here, and see so-called feminist leadership, or seeming to be “feminist” simply roll-over… or summons/invite in, open season… any and all male leadership to run the field of “stopping violence against women.”   They may do this in a very nice, verbally civil, friendly “we support women” voice — but it’s still attempting to dominate the field and frame it to protect vested interests.

One of my particular “beefs” complaints is why “batterers’ intervention services” must be integrated into a “coordinated community response.”  Along with supervised visitation services, I think these two created professions have done much harm — while supporting the conferencing and publishing careers of some.  Probing deeper, many (not all) have a religious basis originally, which concerns me as having experienced the battering while married in a Christian-rationalized context. Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

July 31, 2019 at 6:12 pm

“The Family Court Franchise System” (Blogspot.com, 2012 only, 40 posts and 7 Pages) Is Now Grafted into FamilyCourtMatters.org here (WordPress.com) as of April 7, 2019 [Updated (shortened) July 2-5, 2019].

leave a comment »

THIS POST IS: “The Family Court Franchise System” (Blogspot.com, 2012 only, 40 posts and 7 Pages) Is Now Grafted into FamilyCourtMatters.org here (WordPress.com) as of April 7, 2019.

Published April 19, 2019, last updated July 2-5, 2019.** Approx. 10,000 words including the index (table of contents) to the blog merger. (Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-9Aj.”).  Check back here periodically for which of those 47 indexed reports (post & pages) have been re-published on this blog (some with updates or reiterations of relevance to current context). (**Major deletion of prose, bringing index close to the top).  See also SOME HELPFUL FOOTNOTES below the Index.

I’m placing the abbreviating (“Read-More”) link high on this post because it may not be the best one to jump in on for a general blog overview. It’s actually an overview of a blog I merged into this one in 2019, having written it several years earlier, while the material is still relevant because the practices (and organizations pushing them, such as the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts or similar entities) are still pushing similar programming, and the same federal agencies (U.S.) continue also to fund programs, and have expanded scope and quantity, it seems affecting family court (and “human development”) outcomes.

A historic look from a different perspective (which mine still is!) is always helpful. If the concepts are new, the index below is still shows post titles as a kind of overview, but I have not written this post for the purpose of re-summarizing everything (or this blog).  I wrote it, as the title says, to merge two blogs and retain the record of post titles separately from my normal tables of contents.

This post is sticky because it serves a specific purpose for which I didn’t want it buried among all posts, however it’s only on the top (if it still is when you’re reading this) because it was published last.  If you need less complicated visuals, or more plain text and fewer section titles, I recommend start at the top right sidebar, or just continue scrolling further down on this page to browse tables of contents, or current post titles.  In mid-2019 I’ve been working on re-organizing and some streamlining of the blog, while continuing to write, and still many people just do not speak ‘economic’ when it comes to this subject matter, or in general, so explaining it gets a bit cumbersome….
Read the rest of this entry »

2018 Blog Posts and New Pages (Full List with Titles) in Standard TOC Format [provided March 24, 2019]

with 5 comments

Title of this post: 2018 Blog Posts and New Pages (Full List with Titles) in Standard TOC Format [provided March 24, 2019] (Shortlink ends “-9y7”;…)…

 


Sept. 2019 update: Do not let this preliminary “TWO HELPFUL LINKS” insert confuse you.  The Post title above is accurate — you are looking at what it says, and the post is marked “Sticky” and remains near the top of this blog (within about a dozen similarly pinned posts).

Because we had enough ‘sticky posts,’ when compiling a Table of Contents for 2019 (“so far”) in August, 2019, I didn’t mark it sticky — but did stick it on the blog sidebar as its own widget.  Then added (right below it) the link to this post.  Then I took that information and patched it onto a few existing posts (from 2019) as a quick link to a general overview of the last two years of my writing.   As shown here:**

re: ‘TWO HELPFUL LINKS’ — Image from TopRightSidebar, ‘GO TO POSTS’ widget, shows TOC 2019 & 2018 + ‘Key Posts 2012-2017’ (LGH, @ Sept. 1, 2019)

TWO HELPFUL LINKS added Sept. 1, 2019 (for recent subject matter overview):

 Table of Contents 2019, Family Court Matters’ Posts + Pages: January 1 – August 31 (so far). (Shortlink ends “-ayV.”  About 6,300 words,posted August 5, updated Aug. 31) (You can also link to this TOC post any time from the top right sidebar, under”GO TO: All Posts, incl. Sticky, Tables of Contents..” widget, which holds several boxes for navigating to specific important places (posts or pages, incl. the home page), and, 

(Table of Contents 2018, Posts and Pages.. (publ. 24Mar2019, short-link ends ‘9y7’)


(** other versions you may see have same content but the light-green background.  I made this one light-pink for contrast with existing post). Thanks for understanding.  //LGH Sept. 1, 2019 update.


Title of this post: 2018 Blog Posts and New Pages (Full List with Titles) in Standard TOC Format [provided March 24, 2019] (Shortlink ends “-9y7”; about 4,000 words. Also marked “sticky” until incorporated into the earlier version. It may appear either before it (which would be awkward), or below about seven other sticky posts.  WordPress makes the call on which it is.)

NOTE: This post updates a previously published Table of Contents called 2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019] (Short-link ends “-9p3”), which is currently the top post on the “Current Posts” page of this blog, through the magic technique called labeling it “sticky.”  I am not sure how publishing another post also labeled sticky will affect which one is in the top position, but will find out in a few minutes when I hit “Publish!” //LGH 3-24-2019.

Why Update (Re format) Needed:  In the earlier post, under time constraints, I chose two different formats** which provided links, and titles, but in such a way that the titles weren’t searchable on that Table of Contents page. They also weren’t that easy to read.  It’s time to produce a proper list with: Dates, Full Titles (searchable by name because they’re not in the form of images), and the links, too.  As I did for earlier years.

  • ** (1) Dates & links only (Quick-&-Dirty, Neat-&-Incomplete, Version 1), followed by
  • ** (2) Dates & links as captions to images blog admin. dashboard which at least showed the post titles (Not Quite So Quick: More Complete but Visually Messy, or Quick-&-Dirty, Version 2).

Bonus Extras Here (“Neat-&-Complete, Version 3“): This is still a Posts (not Pages) Table of Contents, however this version  includes any new pages added during 2018, entered chronologically as they were published. The blog has a total of only 56 published pages since its start, but nearly 800 posts.

Those extra pages are hard to miss (rows highlit in yellow, labeled “Page”) but here’s a sample of one page, February 22, with table header row.   Clicking on any post or page title in the full table of contents below will bring you right to that post or page.

One benefit of having the pages included is actually seeing they exist.  They would not be found by scrolling down on main part of blog; while listed on the right sidebar, they are listed in a narrow column of ALL published pages since the beginning of the blog. Not so easy to browse, and separated from their immediate contexts, which would be, generally, a nearby post.

FAMILYCOURTMATTERS.org, The Year in Posts,* 2018

(*All posts, interspersed with any new pages when published, highlit yellow)

short-link ends:
Page

Feb. 2, 2018

Consolidated Control of DV Advocacy by Feminist Leadership Refusing to Identify, by Name and Financing, The Opposition Entities. Subtitle: Personal Relevance to a Post-DV-Intervention, Unprosecuted, Child-Stealing Event by Ex-Batterer case in the SF Bay Area:

(Post announcing this page published Feb. 4, short-link ends “-8yW”, next row)

New Page

-8rg

I will publish this post (improved Table of Contents) separately and incorporate its more standard-format table into the sticky post also, currently at the very top of this blog’s “Current Posts” home page.  The second project will be completed later than the first.I copied the earlier Version 1 Quick and Dirty (Dates only) here in the process of building the table, and left it here as a quick-list (Archives function, while similar, only lets you view one month at a time; I thought it might still be useful).

I also provided some introduction from my perspective one year later, but below that is indeed a very functional and more traditional-looking table of contents for the whole year.  In 2018, that was only 37 posts, and a few new pages to go with them.

Having reviewed post titles and some of the contents in the process of manually creating the table, I’m still proud of the blog and convinced of the timeliness and relevance of its message.
Read the rest of this entry »

2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019].

leave a comment »

2018: A Year On This Blog | Table of Contents (Posts) | This One is “Sticky” [@ Jan. 5, 2019] (Short-link ends “-9p3.” This post is under 4,000 words).

This post lists, links to, and thereby publicizes, one year’s worth of posts.  It’s an informal TOC.

It does this in two different layouts.  Both Layouts follow short Introductions I and  II only because this ended up being the top “sticky” post on the blog.

Layout by Date Only {{Short Form, no titles: Links by date only (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)}} precedes Layout by captioned images displaying full post titles & published dates {{The image captions show only dates published; click on the date wanted to read the associated post}}. 

Read the rest of this entry »

In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform, or Make Kids Safe WITHIN Family Courts STILL (Abusively, Territorially, and Intentionally) Limit Possible Answers by Censoring Terms Admitting Other Historic Evidence — About The Courts (not “Batterers!”) AND Government Itself — while Coaching (even Certifying) Others to Imitate. (Published May 2, 2018)

leave a comment »

Welcome to my blog.

You are on nearly the top** post of the page which displays all posts. 

**Several posts are permanently (until I change my mind…) like this one, categorized “Sticky” = “Stuck to the Top.” WordPress decides order, but it appears that if I add one, that goes on top.  THIS one, however was intended as a main gateway to understanding the blog, so I’ve made several ways to get here directly.  From the Home Page or from the Sidebar “GoTo” widget near the top.

As of this update (June 30, 2019) There are NINE sticky posts (several are tables of contents) and this one is now FOURTH.  The order only matters if you get there by scrolling down from the top.  

You probably got here indirectly from the Main Page “FamilyCourtMatters.org” Sidebar “Current Posts”

or having been given the case-sensitive short-link “https://wp.me/psBXH8Ly” from social media (or me).

Let’s talk.

Labeling/Linking protocol:

I typically begin posts now with Title (with active link), identify in three characters the end of its short-link (here, “-8Ly” as you see right above), date published and/or updated (if major updates or revision), and approximate wordcount.  Remember the first part (wp.me/psBXH- for posts and wp.me/PsBXH- for pages) and you can copy (hint: tweet, share, etc.) any post without that long title.  Just pick a few words from it and get the link right).  For this post, then, it’s:

In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform, or Make Kids Safe WITHIN Family Courts STILL (Abusively, Territorially, and Intentionally) Limit Possible Answers by Censoring Terms Admitting Other Historic Evidence — About The Courts (not “Batterers!”) AND Government Itself — while Coaching (even Certifying) Others to Imitate. (Published May 2, 2018) (case-sensitive short-link ending -8Ly,” about 10,700 words).

Again, Let’s Talk!


FamilyCourt Matters.org, this WordPress blog, has been available on-line now over nine years and as of today (Dec. 8, 2018) has 785 published posts and 45 pages. By posts, you’ll see quickly, I do not mean a few thousand words and quoting an expert, referencing a problem, and maybe including a link or two.  These posts have (I feel confident to say) as much detail and background links as the average mainstream media journalism reporting on even one aspect of similar issues. The overall purpose of the blog differs from the purpose of mainstream media or even many blogs focused on similar topics.  

I am calling out to concerned people to educate themselves— as I had to — on the structure and operations of the family courts which ties directly into other major topics — the structure and and operation of governments (plural) + the structure and operation of private corporations, especially in the nonprofit (tax-exempt) charitable, advocacy or “philanthropic” sector which has become the extra arm of government, not the altruistic, neutral mediator between government and citizens as it is commonly being characterized.

I keep blogging to name names and report developments (in this field) from an “outsider/consumer” point of view, while continuing to assert there are other places to look for more productive grounds from which to argue for or against specific agenda within and around the family courts

Read the rest of this entry »

Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, from ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018)

leave a comment »

Full Post Title:  Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, From ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018) [Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-8X8” and this post ends after about 11,000 words]

**Explained more below in this post, and in a typical post. No apologies for failing to sugar-coat the news. Or for long sentences in the next few indented paragraphs, summarizing my understanding and explaining that comment. With additional “show-and-tell” relating to the rest of this post (and blog).

Read the rest of this entry »

Seven Posts from December, 2017 (Informal TOC Update @ March 14, 2018) [Short-link ends ‘-8MD’].

with 3 comments

You are reading:Seven Posts from DECEMBER, 2017 (Informal TOC Update@ March 14, 2018)(with case-sensitive, WordPress-generated short-link ending “-8MD”).

This post is about 7,000 words and will remain, being a Table of Contents (for a single month in 2017 only), near the top of this blog.  I’m repeating the olive-background section reminding new readers where to start the blog or to find Tables of Contents covering a larger time span — and in more condensed (titles-only) form — near the top of each Q4 2017 (Oct., Nov. and this one, Dec. 2017) sticky post listing that month’s published titles (with some intro text to each).

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 14, 2018 at 4:57 pm

Eight Posts from November, 2017 (Informal TOC Update@ March 9, 2018) [Short-link ends ‘-8KE’].

leave a comment »

You are reading:  Eight Posts from November, 2017 (Informal TOC Update@ March 9, 2018) (with case-sensitive, WordPress-generated short-link ending “-8KE”). This post is about 10,000 words and will remain, being a Table of Contents for a single month only, near the top of this blog.  (June 29, 2019 update: The best place to start the blog now is at the top:  (FamilyCourtMatters.org) or as shown on the right sidebar, near the top “For Current Posts Most Recent on Top.”  This post is still helpful, so I’ve kept it “Sticky” still.  Thanks for understanding.//LGH)

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 9, 2018 at 1:22 pm

Eight Posts Published in October, 2017 (Informal TOC Update @ March 6, 2018). [Short-link ends ‘-8Kh’]

leave a comment »

Title: Eight Posts Published in October, 2017 (Informal TOC Update) @ March 6, 2018. (short-link ends “-8Kh”). This post is only about 3,150 words.

Two similar posts for November and December,* 2017  were published later this month and because they too were marked “sticky,” they now display above this one on “Current Posts, Most Recent on Top”. (*holds access to another new page with more extended “abstracts” (post excerpts, summaries) for December 2017 only)  ~~~ Together with the main Table of Contents “2017 [TOC] continues themes from 2016” post, link shown immediately below, that makes four several separate ones held in the top position on the blog.  [Strikeout added June 30, 2019.  Even I’ve lost count.. WYSIWYG! //LGH].

I’m adding this preview (ivory background, blue borders) section just today (June 30, 2019):

Click image (this time) to access full newsltr., 16pp

To clarify, the NCJFCJ gets paid to do this newsletter, by the public (HHS Grant# shown)

Value-added on most Tables of Contents:  even short ones like this often have extra material, mostly because I can’t keep my mouth shut about whatever I am investigating and writing up at the time.  These two images are a sneak preview.

Also a new page announced below is still useful:

“…I finally published a related PAGE, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov  (Page started 8/29/2017, published Mon 9/18 evening. With case-sensitive shortlink ending “-7w9″)”

I also want to call attention to the post on anti-smoking (Tobacco Litigation) revenues which are still influential in subject matter areas overlapping with the family courts, and the one on “Chatham House Rule” (<~~a good concept to understand).

Tobacco litigation (master settlement agreement — billions over the years) and added-tax revenues are indeed also being used nationwide to continue promoting increased father-engagement (because of the focus on Zero to 5, The First Five Years, and/or Early Childhood Development).  They are well known about, I imagine through most state-level social services systems, so we might as well learn about it too and they are combined at the program level with existing HHS-sponsored incentives. I read tax returns EVERY day, and I’m telling you, there are (from what I’ve seen so far) MILLIONS of dollars slipping through the cracks, let alone used for dubious-based programs to be forced on parents when what they may need instead is food, clothing or transportation — not preaching and attitude adjustments!) in combination with chameleon corporations as service providers.  But that’s more current writing, so enough on that now…//LGH.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 6, 2018 at 4:02 pm

2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. See TOC for: (1) 2017 now thru Sept. 21; (2) 2016 All; and (3) Sept. 2012 – June 2014, Reverse Chrono, and (4) See Also More Info Below. [Published Jan. 9 2017, last updated July 1, 2019] [Shortlink ends ‘-5qZ’]

with one comment

This post presents three different ways to view three different time spans’s tables of contents.  I had previously posted for two of those time spans, but never in page-sized (8X11) format for viewing or printing.  This post pulls it all together and put the links in one place to older tables of contents direct from here (in 8X11) or directly on their original posts (links to those posts).

POST TITLE: 2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. See TOC for: (1) 2017 now thru Sept. 21; (2) 2016 All; and (3) Sept. 2012 – June 2014, Reverse Chrono, and (4) See Also More Info Below. [Published Jan. 9 2017, last updated July 1, 2019]. (case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink-ends 5qZ, first published Jan. 9, 2017, second half of post title and substantial updates added in late September, 2017).  About 9,000 words.

Terrible title.  But, here you have:

Tables of Contents for:

  • 2017 (most) 
  • 2016 (all)
  • 2015 none (I published not one post that year for personal reasons).
  • 2012-2014 (some),** and
  • significant “Value-Added” content, the  (4) See Also More Info Below referenced in the title.***

**I got as far back as about Sept. 21, 2012, and after June 29, 2014, I stopped blogging, again, for personal reasons, basic limitations on one person’s waking hours.

For posts before about Sept 21 or 24, 2012 (i.e., March 2009 – 2010-2011 & almost ¾ of 2012), you must use Archives function by month or search individually if you’re aware of a post title or keywords…Earlier posts are in rougher format (I am a self-taught blogger and there is a technical, not just subject matter, learning curve!) but I believe the basic principles repoprted that far back still apply.


**Now that its mid-2019, I’m still blogging, and have even integrated links to another blog’s contents, starting with an index to their before-and-after (as I publish them gradually on this one), I am removing from here most of that “more info below” content to separate pdfs or (newly published) posts, leaving some links and some footprint text instead. The extra info just takes up too much vertical web page real estate, so I evicted it.

On review, I see that most of the (4) More Info Below is my drill-down and write-up of an important organization called “CENIC” for which I’m sure every United States state (and probably the territories) has a corresponding arrangement.  They have to, because it deals with provision of high-speed internet access for governments and universities.   My writeup represents a lot of time and effort but it’s got to go.  I’ll describe it briefly, move to a new post, leaving a footprint here (a link or two and one image) as footnote on where I was as a blogger at the time.  Good information, good demonstration of a drill-down and why to do them, but it still should’ve begun as its own post. Its presence complicated the already complicated layout here.

There’s also some more info on top, though.  Let me summarize:

[Some Must-know Cold, Hard, Facts about Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports aka CAFRs.]

Because this was the leading edge of my whole blog, in one subsequent update I included a reference to another of my blogs economicbrain.wordpress.com, blog name “Cold,Hard.Fact$.featuring a large image of the tall buildings towering over a city landscape (and a long caption go with it) right below the “Read-More” link.

They are government buildings in downtown Oakland, California; that blog features government accounts as a window into its purposes. It shows where I began working through the government comprehensive annual financial statements (CAFRs) which I began featuring also here in 2012, as soon as I saw and from seeing, understood their significance.

This significance is now integrated into the substance of FamilyCourtMatters.  If and when we are doing “drill-downs” on any entity, understanding that “substrata” is close to solid ground.  It’s a bottom line, foundation-level indicator of what is being built on top throughout all government and commercial activities. I look at the US, but other countries also produce financials:  their purpose is to better facilitate international trade and measurements. Basically, without seeing these, no one can in effect understand government(s) or interpret statements from governments on their current condition.

The parallel for corporate or business activities (including all advocacy groups registered as nonprofit or other businesses) would be audited financial statements for any entity — or sometimes these are presented as “consolidated.” Both the audited financial statements AND tax returns matter and are needed (but, financial statements are only required to be made available to the public, as I understand it, for nonprofits — and with plenty of exclusions, such as some types of religious institutions.  They MUST be made available to the public for government entities).

Up until that point I was tracking mostly federal U.S. Dept of HHS grants which affect family court and domestic violence, welfare reform issues and as I recall (of the years 2009-2012!) a lot of tax returns, as well as reporting on the issues themselves.

Pls. click here ~>my 2012 blog “Cold,Hard.Fact$“ and why I still refer to it on FamilyCourtMatters (for post 2017 TOC, -5qZ)..2019July01 Mon ~>for a short statement  which I just added/uploaded as pdf. This is not a link to the blog, but a statement about it. Thanks.

Moving on …

This three different (by time span) tables of contents in printable or just conveniently viewable 8X11 format are great for an overview of my work up through those dates. If you want to just view them directly on a blog, this post also provides links to do that also.**

Because the format is new, I’ve also posted images of how those 8X11 formats will look.

This post as sort of a “parent” contains both content for 2017** and links to content for the other years, as the full post title laboriously summarizes. I kept just this one “sticky” making it a visible access to the others. It’s basically a front-door way to scan dozens, if not hundreds, of post titles for an overview of what I’ve been writing about. **(For 2017 no more clicks needed, just scroll down) 

Read the rest of this entry »

Pay For Success Social Impact Funding (SIF) = Same Old Public/Private Pipelines, Faster Flow: Why Do We Submit? [Too bad was NOT published Jan 21, 2016, but is Now: Jan. 21, 2020].

leave a comment »

Post title: Pay For Success Social Impact Funding (SIF) = Same Old Public/Private Pipelines, Faster Flow: Why Do We Submit? [Too bad was NOT published Jan 21, 2016, but is Now: Jan. 21, 2020] (“-2Sr,” published Jan 21, 2016, at about 5,500 words).

[As I started this post in 2016]

Some of us are wondering where “justice” went as expressed in terms of due process and representative government, and what to do about it. Well, continuing to read, write, and research (regardless of whether I’ve been still posting to this blog — as you can see, I haven’t put out a new post since summer, 2014), I’m starting to wonder why we even still ask the question expecting it to show up, miraculously, in the traditional places — like courtrooms. 

UPDATE: About  the Title’s “2016 / 2020” (NOT Published/Published) Dates:

Yesterday, I was looking for this post as a reference to that (SIF) concept under “Published Posts” but finally found it under “Drafts.”

Since it happened to have NOT been published almost exactly (to the day) four years ago, is still relevant to what I’m communicating, and has information on both the AFCC and (related) NCCD), I’m publishing it now.  I’m also publishing it now because the post I’d hoped to get out yesterday, 1/20/2020 — such a unique date — just couldn’t be wrangled into shape or down to size: it happens!

The “public/private” issue it addresses remains important and has specific applications in the USA.  Other than the above title adjustment and these few words, and one re-run of a Form 990s table for the “NCCD,” the post is unchanged from as written in 2016.  Personally, in late January, 2016, I’d JUST been improperly forced out of a long-term rental (kept uninhabitable, but I was (circuitously) prevented from exercising tenants rights which did exist in the area) the previous month which may also be reflected in the opening sentiment. I was in a fight for housing and economic survival, for which “justice” would’ve come in handy...

I also just realized, though it wasn’t published at the time, January 2016 was when I finally broke that year and a half pause in posting on this blog with a different post, as I recall, in disgust at what was taking place with the David and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki family court case up in Minnesota and despite  key domestic violence organizations being located from the early 1980s right in that state. As usual, there had been AFCC personnel involved in the judicial AND custody evaluator decision-making in the case.

As is except for minor formatting checks (and while doing that, a few copyediting comments added within italicized “{{…}}”s where I thought it might help. I also on viewing this, changed the level of some Headers to make them larger.  I also added tags, and because I wanted to mention “Sir Ronald Cohen” (who I was originally looking for when discovered this post had been left in draft), added these two although the post doesn’t really deal with those topics:

  • “Big Society Capital (BSC) Oct 2016 SAID Bus School Case Study on SITF + Sir Ronald Cohen’s Leadership in the same in the UK”
  • “HBR-Bridgespan’s “Insight Center on Scaling Social Impact” + Sir Ronald Cohen”

By clicking on either of those tags, more information may be connected to this post. “HBR: in the second one stands for “Harvard Business Review”…

Another change I’ve made is to add a screenprint of the NCCD/AFCC section (from this post) near the top as a visual.

INCIDENTALLY: The NCCD (National Council on Crime and Delinquency) is an odd organization I’ve featured in other posts — odd because of how many other governments are recorded as granting to its projects, while it’s operating tax-exempt with the word NATIONAL (not “INTERnational”) in the USA and (so it seems) seeking to digitize the handling of people in almost any public institution within the USA.  A Children’s Rights group (founded by an ACLU lawyer) in New York was using NCCD as a subcontractor with an Oakland, California address which is what first brought it to my attention.

A distressed mother from Georgia’s comment on this blog referring to (another) NY-based nonprofit subcontracting with the NCCD brought my attention to that Children’s Rights group, in case you were wondering whether comments on this blog are noticed and their contents considered… They are…

Overall, this posts’ material blends well with the current post(s) I”m trying to wrangle into some acceptable shape soon…

//LGH “Early 2020”

AGAIN,…

Some of us are wondering where “justice” went as expressed in terms of due process and representative government, and what to do about it.  Well, continuing to read, write, and research (regardless of whether I’ve been still posting to this blog — as you can see, I haven’t put out a new post since summer, 2014), I’m starting to wonder why we even still ask the question expecting it to show up, miraculously, in the traditional places — like courtrooms.

To “govern” is to control.

Right now, it seems Public/Private Partnerships are actually in control and in a very tangible, identifiable way, the form of government (defined again, as control backed up by force:  particularly the ability to tax, and to incarcerate) — and not traditional government entities alone.

Over the past six years, as I tracked  or did “drill-downs” on one “national” nonprofit association or another associated with some primary function of government in the USA — and most of them also operating internationally, just like any other corporation might — I see there really is a network of organizations which, taken together, really do “shadow” and influence government itself.

In mainstream media, including on TV, major national print and on-line publications, etc., it’s not uncommon to report in the influence of corporations (implying for-profit businesses) as an improper influence on government, but I have yet to see a significant, ongoing discussion of the nonprofit sector itself (ALL of it) as an improper influence on government.

I’ve talked about some of them before on this post, and currently, have been looking at and will be posting still on one called the National Council of Family and Juvenile Court Judges.  HOWEVER, today, I’m talking more about the National Council on Crime and Delinquency as part of Social Impact Funding.

It’s time to talk about who’s in control when the unified, coordinated language coming from:

(1) sources such as Forbes magazine, representing of course, corporate wealth,

(2) philanthropy, as coordinated with other philanthropy and

(3) federal agencies such as the CNCS (Corporation for National and Community Service) and the White House [both representing of course the Executive Branch of Government, to the extent we have separate branches of government in the USA any more…]

uses such terms as “Social Impact Funding” and “Pay for Success” to represent  deals cut privately with a federal agency by those with wealth to invest, with “intermediary organizations” scattered across the states, and networked into “subgrantees” (all nonprofits it seems) to do the work that the public is already taxed in order for government to do as a great thing.

The power of common words, undefined, to “spin” what’s actually happening is nothing new. But the acceleration of this spin made possible in recent (decades) HAS to be noticed, and ought to be protested, differently.

Read the rest of this entry »

Arizona! (Career AFCC Academics’ Self-Disclosure Habits, Home Habitats/Economic Niches, cont’d.) [Started Nov. 13, 2019, Publ. only Jan. 3, 2020].

leave a comment »

This is: Arizona! (Career AFCC Academics’ Self-Disclosure Habits, Home Habitats/Economic Niches, cont’d.) [Started Nov. 13, 2019, Publ. only Jan. 3, 2020].. (short-link ends “-bAu,” under 5,000 words, with Extended Footnote Just a Few PRWORA-Explaining Posts from my Blog,” about 6,700 words, and an added comment near the top, around 7,000. I found some incomplete sentences and so am copyediting it post-publication Jan. 6).

[At some point, an obvious typo at the end of the title made its way onto the post:  Year “2010” for “2020,” and a different, odd ending for the title as copied into the post just above. Both places now corrected as I just noticed it//LGH Jan 21, 2020]


As 2019 entered its last two days, I wanted to post any remaining “In the Pipeline, Arizona” posts promised in November, although my head was into different subject matter by then as relating to my blogging, USA and global current-events, and personal life perspective (long-term goals haven’t changed; short-term options have).  Out of many drafts, this one just under 5,000 words and speaking plainly seemed viable..//LGH


THIS POST IS FOLLOW-UP with PRACTICAL ADVICE:  LOOK IT UP FIRST.  UNDERSTAND WHO YOU’RE DEALING WITH OR SEEING QUOTED MAY TALK EMPATHETIC/SINCERE (ABOUT HARM TO WOMEN AND CHILDREN FROM “DOMESTIC[1] VIOLENCE [2]. etc. [3])**

** [1,2,3] Added to here to highlight the variety of terms.  Terms vary by country, proprietary terms, and type of government funding sources, AND  they also evolve with the speed of collective dissemination as they have been for decades.  That “evolution” is also its own roadmap...for those who read the signposts and notice who’s erecting [publishing] them… to who’s co-opted the public-square conversations** and are (plural) in no mood to relinquish those strongholds. (**Basically, through access to funding for media propagation and sponsored chairs and/or research at universities; in various professional journals named by subject matter, etc.)

[1] Domestic, Family, Intimate Partner.  [2] Violence, Abuse, “Maltreatment”; increasingly specialized terms such as [3] Coercive Control, Justifiable Estrangement (vs. parental alienation),  or DV by Proxy.

When you follow the entities (and maintain some awareness of which specific “professionals” (whether in practice, public office, or academia) belong to which ones) which have built wonderful venues (financial/access to real estate infrastructure and administrative/operational resources) for private-value propagation at public expense, it’s easier to see changes in motion.

Understanding that the family courts themselves and the programs run through them represent a built infrastructure, in individual counties, states (US) provinces (Canada, Australia) and in some places, countries. The “Public/Private Enterprise” is key to success:  Private individual resistance to “harmful practices within it” isn’t enough to breach those built walls.  The public leverage — at least in the USA — comes from governments’ dependence on all our tax receipts to fund the ongoing debt, leaving other resources already available (collectively through government operations at all levels) to, as they have been, self-fund.**

**Those last two sentences referring to realities that only reading the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (“CAFRs”) can really drive home, but those CAFRs give fantastic overview — at any level, understanding all levels interact with other levels of government — of the relationship of individuals to our (respective) country/countries (if dual citizenship) effective “coercive control” of our lives.//LGH Jan. 6, 2020.

This post also contains preliminary info on the Flinn Foundation which later posts may handle in more detail, as a supporter (with another private foundation in Arizona) of the “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior at the University of Arizona.”

Why I was looking at Arizona psychologists and people talking, “Brain and Behavior” — I suggest, take a look at the post this came from:Blurring Boundaries Between: Nations, Sacred and Secular, Public and Private; Continually Infusing More Social Science into (=Diluting) Law. For example ℅ Nuffield Fndt’n, or Oxford Univ. Press’s ‘International Journal of Family Law, Policy and Social Science’ (Nov. 8, 2019).” (short-link ending ‘-bxq’).

Right after publishing a post (Blurring Boundaries…, short-link ending “-bxq“,) I found myself looking for “just one more” fine-print reference associated with Robert Dingwall’s reference to divorce mediation, which find inspired this post.  I hope writing this follow-up on that “find” will be a quick task, but still it’s going to entail providing (or describing) a number of screen prints showing word-counts on just two LONG documents to make its point.  [<==Just quoting this post, further down as first drafted//LGH Dec. 30, 2019]

I will repeat this paragraph and link (with shortened title) near bottom of this post. “Blurred Boundaries” takes a larger view but ties it to current people, organizations, trusts, and a specific academic journal, with USA advisors from Arizona.  I’ll bet many readers were unaware of some of the (global) connections involved so deeply embedded with those fighting for ‘family values’ in the ‘family courts’… You’ll see if you read that post…(one contains the word “Pontifical”)…Food for thought…

Another quick quote from this post, below:

Personally, I found it amusing, but not so funny as to miss the opportunity to make my point:  UNLESS YOU CHECK, You’ll NEVER KNOW how often authors who are constantly quoting other AFCC authors are themselves AFCC.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 3, 2020 at 7:25 pm

Three Tax-exempt Cummings Entities (Inc. 1994 and 2004 (co-located) in Reno, NV, and 2014 in Phoenix, AZ) and Their Family-Controlled Personal Agenda: Taking Former Arizona State U’s ‘DBH’ Accreditation International, Con’td. (#2 in a Pipeline, Publ. Dec. 16, 2019).

leave a comment »

CGI-BHS (or “CummingsInstitute.com” ‘History’ page, shows Husband, Wife, Daughter; this is Nicholas A. Cummings only.  More below on this post… (SShot 2019-12-16)

While  the three Cummings Foundations (or “tax-exempt Cummings entities”) do not connect directly to AzBio roadmap I’ve been blogging recently, they are, generally, in the same business of which healthcare is a large part, and one of them, as it happens for this post series, also active in Arizona.  Two are in Nevada: See map of western United States.

Also, family court concerned parents and domestic violence  survivors, protective parents and others concerned about child abuse (including sexual abuse of children, treatment for which comes up here), keep in mind that the influential NCJFCJ* is located at the University of Nebraska-Reno, a longstanding chapter of AFCC** (providing more work for psychologists etc. via family court systems) is in Arizona. (New Here? If so, know that: *stands for “National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Inc.”  a key nonprofit in the family court biosphere…**stands for” Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.“).

I had to flee California a year ago (had been trying to leave for years) and in doing so, one fine, Sunday, late-summer evening, I drove first to (and after a quick overnight, through) Reno, which is just a very few hours (if that) away from the San Francisco Bay Area, also a known location for AFCC influence.  Dr. Cummings, above, seems to have practiced in the SF Area for many years also.

The AFCC and the field’s (and family court systems’) tendency is to view and discuss criminal behavior as the perpetrator’s treatable, manageable, maybe even preventable psychological or psychotherapeutic issues.  This approach also involves treatment of (and gaining access to) victims of the same perpetrators– in fact, the more treatment all round for everyone, the better, it seems.  So much of public policy deals with this kind of population management and behavioral health/modification interests… an enduring line of work supported by public resources.

Co-locating/integrating mental healthcare (referrals and interventions) at the medical level likely works great as a career curve for those providing the mental/behavioral health interventions, as professionals in specific “psych-related” fields.  I’m not so sure how it works well for the funding public, or patients funneled through the various centralized, coordinated, systems of care, either as effectively reducing crime and violence, OR economically.

Again, look at your maps for California, Arizona, and Nevada

The AFCC-collaborating NCJFCJ has been located for decades at the University of Nevada-Reno which, despite being in a different state, is still near the UK CAFCASS-collaborating AFCC strongholds in San Francisco (although origins and strong connections still exist in Los Angeles),  and as I’ve been saying recently, the attempts to regionalize and market Arizona internationally as a great pharmaceutical and behavioral health entrepreneurial hub, even down to upgrading the airports.  [“CAFCASS”  Children and Family Court Advisory Support and Services, est. about 2000]  That’s one reason examining the filing habits of the financial backers is so important.(While it’s still there..) see my Twitter account profile (home page) for a long, pinned Tweet (thread) showing this, both in descriptions with links and some of the attached media, naming also how domestic violence specialists with the health (vs. criminality) focused professionals such as Jeffrey L. Edleson (with strong ties to both University of Minnesota and the University of California-Berkeley (both, Schools of Social Work), and is now working separately on Hague-related international (parental abduction) issues in the same field.  {{Paras. edited to correct a misplaced phrase and give definition of the acronym CAFCASS and directions to why I connect the three bodies (CAFCASS is not a private organization; AFCC and NCJFCJ are, but membership features (espec. the latter) judges and other civil servants)Different “rules of engagement” apply for government entities vs. private corporations, nonprofit or otherwise, which is the point, and those private corporations’ leverage when they overlap in membership with civil (gov’t) employees in positions of high authority.  This leverage being exercised through private memberships can also be operated, where it suits the groups’ purposes, privately — away from the prying eyes of the (paying) public.  //LGH Dec. 19, 2019 edit.


Other major themes are regionalization, nationalization, and internationalization, of course (as ever) coordination of services to integrate cross-sector while maintaining close access to U.S. federal grants to states from HHS and its many parts.

What Cummings (the family line) may lack in billionaire wealth like some others in the USA, they seem to (primarily he seems to, his (sic) women’s voices and another male Cummings (son? former son-in-law? “Andrew” rarely seen on-line in their own words) more than make up for in aggressive self-promotion, branding, storytelling (rarely matches the withheld financials), spin, and marketing.

Historically he is also well aware of the power of degree-granting independent nonprofits, having started up, it says, some of the earlier independent professional schools of psychology in California in the late 1960s, at a time when the field was just “coming into its own…”

Overall, this drill-down is long overdue.

Post Title: Three Tax-exempt Cummings Entities (Inc. 1994 and 2004 (co-located) in Reno, NV, and 2014 in Phoenix, AZ) and Their Family-Controlled Personal Agenda: Taking Former Arizona State U’s ‘DBH’ Accreditation International, Con’td. (#2 in a Pipeline, Publ. Dec. 16, 2019). (Short-link ending “-bLg,” about 12,000 15,000 words, some overlap with prior post. Last update/tags added and I discussed (multi-screenprints posted) also on Twitter, Dec. 18, concerned about subcontractor “Benevity” and related chameleon-like corporate filings in California, Florida, and run it seems from Canada).


This post adds drill-downs on these entities and looks at the organizations’ self-descriptions in contrast with tax and state-level filings). It also profiles two other involved people (besides quoting the self-profiling of namesake Nicholas A. Cummings in the process of quoting websites).  For further follow-up, I’d recommend (someone else!) further follow-up, among other things (such as “Sun Corridor, Inc. entities and developments), on the Columbus, Ohio’s American Endowment Foundation’s free-wheeling “DAF” model and the Tobin Family behind them. Tags coming soon. Post may be partitioned after publication; it certainly needs it, but for now, I want it published…It’s possible or probable that a Cummings may be handling one of the donor-advised funds there (in Ohio) as it shows as a major contributor to one of the entities in Nevada… //LGH

This post exists to supplement my #2 post in the Arizona Pipeline, now published, accessible at:

Wm. O’Donohue, UN-Reno PsychProfessor 20yrs or so (or Wm. T. O’Donohue) (from faculty page, viewed Dec 16, 2019)

Wm. O’Donohue (from Sage Publications author website, viewed Dec. 16, 2019

In the process, besides the family named, I also ran across and briefly profiled an early CEO of one of the entities (which showed up on its tax return), when his name also came up as frequent co-author on an earlier (2008) find (two nearby images): William O’Donohue, sometimes “William T. O’Donohue,” a professor of psychology at University of Nevada-Reno.

He directs a “Victims of Crime & Integrated Healthcare Research Lab” there, and part of his vita (only current to Jan. 2010 available at university faculty page) shows one professorship sponsored by or named after Cummings (image top left on this post), with whom he has also authored several (papers, books chapters, etc.).

(Chair of California’s First-5 Commission since 2013; see under CCFC.ca.gov (California Children & Families Commission is also called “First-5” and has a statewide as well as (58?) county commissions; parallel to this there are similarly named and connected private non-profits. Together, they push certain types of programming using Tobacco Tax Revenues obtained through a (passed 1998?) Prop. 10 Californians voted through. I’ve blogged it and how it intersects with “family court matters” under posts with the title “Tobacco.” (Health Systems Flush with Cash, etc.)

Later, mostly because Nicholas Cummings continually references his own background at Kaiser Permanente as either “Chief Psychologist” or “Head of Mental Health” (1959-1979), and Kaiser is so closely associated with promotion of universal healthcare in the USA (“Obamacare,” etc.) — while Cummings’ main business model (“BioDyne”) is pushing to locate psychologists alongside doctors as beneficiaries of that funding stream  — I also looked at the former head of Kaiser Permanente in California, George Halvorson, who since 2013 has been appointed Chair of California’s First 5 Commission, and whose bio blurb there cites to a strange nonprofit which bears his name legally, but not as divulged on the website — anywhere — while it’s clearly promoting NINE of his books (and no one else’s books)…


Below, I’ve linked to and summarized foundation data for CFBH and its related or main contributing businesses: another, earlier Cummings Foundation (“N&DCF,” as mentioned on the website) in Reno, Nevada, and somewhere between those two, taking contributions from at least three businesses (an LP, an LLC, and an “Inc.”) all labeled NDC, and (largest amounts at least in one year I viewed) a two-plus-billion-dollar-assets entity, American Endowment Foundation (“AEF”) based in Ohio, as mentioned in at least the first version of post title. Partway through this post I also ran across the “CGI-BHS” which accounts for the post title’s listed years: about one every ten years it seems…

Pardon the long sentence in the next paragraph.  The subject is the longest part.  The predicate is the main point:  Why have we as a nation tolerated putting tax-exempt foundations, private and/or so-called “Community,” effectively on steroids, incentivizing development of bad accounting practices within the sector; that is, we have, being ourselves taxed almost every time we “twitch,” justified as supporting government services for our own welfare and paying off long-term (forward-projected) pension liabilities across-the-board, continued to tolerate (by ignoring, or failing to report as they exist: comprising an identifiable sector) private interests spreading roots (fiscally) and continuing to develop business relationships involving public institutions underground in such a way that most of the public, who reside mostly above-ground fiscally as employees (through tax-withholding, fees-based public services such as access to the courts, or receiving food to eat when work is not available) just cannot, realistically, see each new round of the same types of entrapment coming?

That was a very long sentence too, introducing this one:

Having just a few foundations, backed by wealth from prior corporate profits in the pharma-medical-mental-healthcare, transportation, and internet/info/communications infrastructures (themselves all closely connected) plotting together to control the economy of an entire state as a regional hub — marketing THEIR private roadmap internationally through additional multi-partner entities (like Arizona’s “Sun Corridor, Inc.”), often with overlapping leadership, and at least one of them (sector: USA’s burgeoning Mental Health Archipelago) taking major funding from an out-of-state, out-of-region, tax-exempt foundation featuring Donor Advised Funds (“DAF”) administrative services — specializing as a “concierge service” to financial advisors themselves managing clients’ donor advised funds) seems like putting the inherent obfuscation of the DAF (let alone tax-exempt) sector on steroids.

SUN CORRIDOR searched at Arizona Corporation Commission, came up with several entities; one Sun Corridor, Inc. (reg. 2008 for-profit, line of work “business consulting”) was administratively dissolved for non-filing as of 2014. Somehow (I still don’t see “how..”) a pre-existing (2005ff) identically named — but NOT for profit “Sun Corridor, Inc.” formed in 2005 (in a different county) is still active.  Sun Corridor Subsidiary, Inc. (also non-profit) still exists active; Sun Corridor Metropolitan Planning Organization, Inc., NONProfit, still exists.  And lastly, applied for in July 2015 only, the trade name “Sun Corridor” was applied for by Sun Corridor, Inc. — hopefully the legitimate (nonprofit) not the administratively dissolved one.  I’ve pasted here as active links and in table format; links may or may not remain active.  If not, repeat the search at the link given below under mini-section FOUR HELPFUL LINKS to VALIDATE OR FACT-CHECK THIS POST

SEARCH RESULTS (no column for “founding date” which sure would be nice! I’ve typed them in after “Entity Name,” row by row, in these results)
Entity ID Entity Name Entity Type Entity County Agent Name Agent Type Entity Status
S627242 SUN CORRIDOR               {appl. July 2015} Trade Name Active
18813950 SUN CORRIDOR METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION    {8/20/2014} Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Pinal IRENE HIGGS Statutory Agent Active
20109206 SUN CORRIDOR SUBSIDIARY, INC.  {6/8/2015|Bus. Type: Business League} Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Pima ROCKWELL AGENCY LLC Statutory Agent Active
11804156 SUN CORRIDOR, INC.                         {2005} Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Pima LAWRENCE M HECKER Statutory Agent Active
14963961 SUN CORRIDOR, INC.          {2008/Adm Dissolved for non-filing by 2014} Domestic For-Profit (Business) Corporation Maricopa KEVIN PASCHKE Statutory Agent Inactive

Statutory Agent Rockwell Agency LLC (L19182049) was formed only April, 2014, its agent Lawrence M. Hecker and some other principals including one added 2015, T. William Pew, entity address in Tucson).  (See the link provided or repeat the search if needed).


It really is JUST A FEW FOUNDATIONS, but COORDINATING ACTIVITIES

WHILE FAILING TO “TELL-ALL” ON WEBSITES

& WITHHOLDING SUFFICIENT AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FAIR ANALYSIS.

 


Total results: (here, just 1)Search Again.  (American Endowmt Fndtn, EIN# 341747398, YEDec, FY2017 Only)

(The last three years’ returns shown in a table much further down on this post).

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
American Endowment Foundation OH 2017 990 2085 $2,001,944,686 34-1747398

Started only in 1993, this Columbus, Ohio-based “AEF” says it’s now approaching $3 billion assets.  Its latest tax return gives just a whiff of the size (but not rate of expansion; a three years-worth table is further down in this post). Also involved in this same AzBio roadmap is another Ohio-based, well-known entity, ‘Battelle Memorial.”

Like the Cummings Foundations, my background reading on the AEF (only discovered within the past month) shows many family relationships among the own board; a key indicator of purpose may be found in the background of Thomas J. Tobin (briefly touched on here in context of the tax returns).

Other than I was personally busy and writing on other urgent topics, I am now wondering how it is I failed to look up the EINs of the Nicholas and Dorothy Cummings Foundation (est. 1994 in Nevada) and  Cummings Foundation for Behavioral Health (est. 2004 in Nevada) and keep monitoring them year by year after I first noticed the founder(s)’ stated goals and behaviors OVER SEVEN YEARS ago (in 2012). Early 2012 puts awareness of this connection to the ‘Battered Mothers Custody Conference’ regular and vocal presenters (at least one in psychology, another in law) early on in the course of this blog.

Debts and liabilities relating to some real estate among the Cummings-controlled entities, which  are housed or held in at least three other entities which aren’t labeled non-profit  (shown below).  


FOUR HELPFUL LINKS to VALIDATE OR FACT-CHECK THIS POST:

1), 2) These two links may prove handy in follow-up or following (fact-checking) this post.  Nevada Business Entity Search: https://esos.nv.gov/EntitySearch/OnlineEntitySearch, branded “Silver Flume,” and the Arizona Corporation Commission’s version of a similar but (as ever) not identical search interface, at: https://ecorp.azcc.gov/EntitySearch/Index.

3) Other than specific organizations’ own websites, I also, as usual, did many searches at Candid.org (new branding of Foundation Center after purchasing “Guidestar.org”), exact url: https://candid.org/research-and-verify-nonprofits/990-finder.  You’ll find this often in my posts when showing tax return tables with this phrase, which Candid.org generates:  “Total Results: [number]  Search Again.

4) Another website I use often to locate an EIN# where organizations are being especially vague, coy, or otherwise secretive about their own — and sometimes to locate a tax return more current than what Candid.org can (or does) produce, which returns are (as I understand it) obtained from the IRS anyway: http://apps.irs.gov/app/eos

Post-specific: Later on in the post I looked for Psychology Licensing Boards in both Nevada and Arizona.  Nevada’s seems functional; Arizona’s does not.


The general theme of my current posts is Arizona, specifically “AzBIO” and behavioral health ecosystem build-ups (this century, and the last decade of the 1900s).

I already showed an AFCC connection to a University of Arizona’s “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior” (through Connie J.A. Beck expounding upon mandatory mediation with IPV (Intimate Partner Violence) involvement), and previewed other major foundations behind turning at least Southern Arizona into a regional BioScience economic hub.

There’s open admission that this has been coordinated in large part by the Flinn Foundation in association with Battelle Memorial  out of Columbus, Ohio.


Flinn Foundation has no problem publicizing its roadmaps, and progress towards the private collective goals targeting an entire state ecosystem, whether by state, by year and quarter, or part of Arizona (Southern, Northern), or by metropolitan area.

What it does, obviously, have a problem with is posting any of its own financials ANYwhere on the website https://flinn.org/bioscience/

Having seen this BioScience / Behavioral Health (related) sponsored drive for the State of Arizona, I then felt it necessary to include and remind us of the role of the Cummingses (elder:  Nicholas A. and Dorothy) and dedicated daughter (Janet L.), (and (relationship?) an Andrew Cummings in Greenwich, CT, not usually mentioned on the websites but showing in the tax returns).

Nicholas A., throughout seems well aware of (and typically found citing to) his prior leverage as former President of the APA (American Psychological Association) and for twenty years (1959-1979) Kaiser Permanente  HMO (“Health Maintenance Organization”) or its predecessor, as Chief of Mental Health, following the famous LSD-dispensing Timothy Leary.

For example in one of the three featured Cummings-named non-profits on this post (more details below), despite how small, recent, and specifically tailored to his own business model it is, the “history” page casually calls it a “university” and cites its inspiration from a meeting of Silicon Valley Tech entrepreneurs who dropped out of college — because they knew more than their teachers — and “revolutionized society.”  The text then goes on, citing his own credits, to state his plan to revolutionize the healthcare sector…. Talk about “grandiose” — while casually deficient in basic state-level compliances, sloppy in providing specifics on the descriptive websites, and tax returns in poor format, once a person can locate them (off-site):

Our History (url: https://cummingsinstitute.com/history/)**

Founded in 2015, the Cummings Graduate Institute for Behavioral Health Studies is one of a handful of universities worldwide that grant the distinguished Doctor of Behavioral Health (DBH) degree,*** and is the only university that exclusively focuses on the growing field of integrated healthcare. CGI credits its origins to the work of Nicholas Cummings, Ph.D, Sc.D (1924 — ), an American psychologist, author, and former president of the American Psychology Association (1979)….

[all emphases mine, quote continued below]

**The word “graduate” not included in web domain name; it could’ve been — why not? the word “institute” without further definition is just about meaningless).

***This’d be a great place to list or link to ANY others in the handful to support such a statement, but it seems the sentiment was why bother?  It just keeps on talking…. and assumes the reader is content to be a passive consumer of the storytelling.  Where’s any respect for the intended readers?

Grouping this degree-granting nonprofit set up only a few years ago the designation “university” seems to be grasping at importance:  Typically university websites at least in the USA as we commonly understand them carry the suffix “_____.edu” whether public or private, and the term “university” hasn’t yet been fully degraded to “anyone who can pull a nonprofit together and get accreditation for granting a few degrees…”

Who and What this nonprofit (and family line) is may be better viewed by looking closer at the various financial (tax) and corporate filings it doesn’t care to post in between the news on its achievements.

Actually — see nearby image or its website — having just in June and September 2019 obtained certain kinds of accreditation, it announces the launch of a “CGI.EDU” website in January 2020.  (The full legal name is CGI in Behavioral Health Studies” which’d be a more honest representation of what it’s doing; retaining the reference to “Cummings” and losing the references (BHS) to what it’s actually promoting).

CGI-BHS announces ‘CGI.edu’ is ‘Coming soon’ (Jan 2020) ~~Screen Shot 2019-12-16

The text then launches a recitation of his brilliant innovation, and eventually only in passing and never separately from HIS accomplishments mentions his own daughter,  Dr. Janet L. Cummings.

Janet L.’s voice is not expressed here as in any way distinct from his, nor anything she did separately from him, although it’s likely she’ll be outliving both him and his wife Dorothy M. Cummings, not mentioned either, here, as actually DOING anything. Janet L. will be with other leadership (few outside Cummings on the various entities show up — you’ll see, below) “carrying the torch” on this enterprise.  It doesn’t specifically mention a father/daughter relationship and I don’t know whether Dr. & Mrs. Dorothy Cummings is Janet’s (or Andrew’s) biological mother, stepmother, or not.  It could be found out, I just do not know presently.  Judging by the photo, she resembles Nick Cummings and looks a whole lot younger. Was that a graduation photo?

(Nevada Board of Psychologist Licensure look-ups:  Janet L. (“..rID1064”) has a 1992 Psy.D.  from Wright State University, but is not active in Nevada because “Registration status:  Closed.  Incomplete Application.”  Psychboard.Az.Gov searches Behavioral Analysts and Psychologists separately. I couldn’t get the search to load currently, but before doing so, a pop-up message warns it directs away from a government site to a non-government site.  Therefore, the process of looking to a government site (and the licensing board at Arizona) seems to simply direct away from it; disclaimers beyond that warning are not mentioned in the pop-up.

Our History (url: https://cummingsinstitute.com/history/), cont’d.

… In the early days of the technical revolution, Dr. Nick Cummings was invited as the CEO of American Biodyne to attend a luncheon*** where he would meet innovators and entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley, including Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Dr. Cummings was inspired by the brilliance of these entrepreneurs, and was struck by a similarity he noticed among the group: a particularly high college dropout rate. The tech giants of Silicon Valley had either enrolled in college and quickly dropped out after learning they knew far more than any of the faculty, or never enrolled at all; choosing instead to spend all of their time inventing the new technologies that would absolutely revolutionize our lives. Dr. Cummings realized that what healthcare needed was a similar revolution, and he saw an opportunity to teach behavioral health providers to disrupt the ineffective, fragmented healthcare system from within. There was only one problem: no university existed that was out-of-the-box enough to create both the curriculum and the environment that would stimulate the kind of innovation that healthcare needed. The choice was clear.

In some world views, anything “fragmented” is bad or regrettable, although the purpose here is to “fragment” (disrupt) from within to shift the paradigm for the “entrepreneurial” among the behavioral health practitioners (and psychologists)…  [I noticed the State of Arizona has separate licensing links and presumably requirements for behavioral health analysts and psychologists.]]

In 2014, Dr. Cummings along with his daughter, Janet L. Cummings, Psy.D, created## the Cummings Graduate Institute for Behavioral Health Studies  to fill the educational gaps for innovative and entrepreneurial healthcare professionals wishing to disrupt healthcare from within or for those looking to launch new ventures. Drs. Cummings designed the DBH program at CGI to address three critical needs behavioral health providers would need to be successful in this aim: medical literacy, efficient and effective delivery of behavioral health interventions in medical settings, and entrepreneurship and innovation in the healthcare marketplace.

[all emphases mine, end of this quote]

## “CREATED…”: The word “created” is generic, however, the links I gave above to Nevada and Arizona business entity search sites lead to documentation of who actually ‘created’ as in ‘incorporated,’ and Nick C’s name isn’t on the filing paperwork.  As I recall from recent lookups (but, you have the links)…hers and one non-family member’s, Brett Sabatini, is.

*** “A LUNCHEON…”: Conveniently vague and no context given:  approximate year (even decade), geography (which state), ANY name of “luncheon” other than “a luncheon” and how many other innovators were involved, or special invitees.  Was this within a conference, at a pay-per-plate fundraiser, or what?  We all know luncheons can be “tete-a-tete” (intimate, small) or parts of any hotel- or resort-based conference with up to a thousand or so attendees.  With no other info, the statement is basically just boasting.

The carelessness of the text so few internal links or footnotes to validate any claim, and such vague language as to make fact-checking most claims tricky, assumes a storytelling, “take our story on faith” approach.  Though no Ph.D., I never put out posts with so few links and so little supporting evidence.  Even children listening to stories — which readers shouldn’t be treated as — should get to ask questions.  Yet the dynamic here is, DON’T ask questions, and avoid direct connectings to anything which might show the fiscal, corporate, or anything more than the most basic summary of who they (the Cummings entities mentioned) are and what they are doing.

From another part of the site, a sense of how many degrees granted so far:  As of Sept. 2019, only TEN:

As of September 2019, CGI has graduated ten Doctors of Behavioral Health who are located across the United States practicing in a variety of capacities including healthcare leadership, private practice, and university education.

cummingsinstitute.com/contact-us/ (Viewed Dec 6, 2019. History page says the CGI was started in 2015, a spinoff from a DBH program (but privately controlled) at Arizona State Univ.; Nicholas Cummings (bottom left) was born 1924 so would be about 95 yrs old now…

When and by whom were its various accreditations granted? (Stated on-site HERE)

AZ-SARA (State Authority Reciprocity Agreements with other states, which then apparently lets it be a member of the National Council (“NC”)-SARA:  Sept., 2019.

DEAC ( a Washington, D.C., nonprofit referring to post-secondary education) — only June, 2019.

A large banner announces that its “CGI.EDU” website will launch in January 2020 despite having only granted ten graduate degrees so far, total. (It seems that an undated (and no-names) photo I show again below, may show the first three, or possibly four.  They may be staff, but they’re wearing robes, and three of the (standing) four, caps…

TWO EXISTING BLOG MEDIA LIBRARY PDFs (2013, 2008) LEAD TO MORE VITAL INFO: 

The next two pdf links come from this blog’s existing “Media Library” and were not created from scratch during my current investigations (look-ups) for this post.

I include the first (May, 2013), because it reflects Cummings stating his own qualifications for legal expert witness-type purposes in a specific civil case; I include the second, (2008 and a J Contemporary Psychotherapy article), a short piece ‘…Our Inadvertent Vow of Poverty..‘ because it reflects intention to build the financial resources for the field. It’s well-written.  Of course it also ignores entires fields of basics on the family court system and how the Dept. of Health and Human Services runs specific legislated funding streams to impact outcomes in family courts, although those courts are under state, not federal jurisdiction.  The desired impact includes increased “noncustodial” (primarily fathers’) time and settling differences out of court, i.e., steering litigants away from normal civil or criminal courts where specific rights and procedures exist, or that overall,** this family court system is having a “field day” providing revenues for those in the fields of psychology, psychotherapy, etc.  It also shows two co-authors (daughter Janet and William O’Donohue).  [[**Sentence in this color added post-publication 12/17.]]

On researching tax returns for this post, I’d noticed that William O’Donohue also shows up as a CEO on one of the Cummings foundations. Presumably he is or was a colleague and/or business partner of like mind on the enterprise/s, the footnote shows he was (and seemingly still is) a professor in the University of Nevada-Reno Psychology Department with a specialty interest in treating children adults who have been sexually abused, and has been supported (per a vita with footer stating only “January, 2010” posted on his U-Nevada Reno, faculty page now, Dec., 2019, and that he’d had significant, ongoing grants supports from the NIJ, since degrees obtained (up through PhD) in psychology in the 1980s, and one, in “Philosophy of Science” in mid-1990s.

(The link’s label is mine; it’s a short read, makes 30 statements in as many numbered paragraphs, and the case –in Hudson County, NJ, with defendants in California — possibly deals with the issue of characterization of sexual re-orientation therapy as legitimate (vs. “de facto” unethical) where those engaging in it are fully-informed.  My main interest here, however, are his stated credentials.  Why, as late as 2013, no supporting links or footnotes are included to his claims (such as might be find in any article in, for example, a law review) I do not know.  It was a random internet find.   But, Please read!)

Looking for who was on (as it claimed to have been on) President Kennedy’s Mental Health Task Force (no year mentioned on the Certificate above), I found this page at the JFKLibrary.org which, being a brief summary, doesn’t name those on the Taskforce, but does describe how many (27) when they met with him at the White House (Oct. 18, 1961) and the context of constituting it (as supported by his sister Eunice Shriver Kennedy and in light of “Mental Retardation” (now, “intellectual disabilities,”) being an issue directly affecting the Kennedy family — his own sister, Rosemary, less than two years younger than himself).  This links to CarterCenter.org (associated with Emory University in Atlanta), “Mental Health TaskForce“, but reflects a 501©3 and doesn’t readily lead to identification of who was on the Carter Task Force while he was in Office.

References from this (I took some screenprints of a word-search) show lots of Cummings quoting Cummings over a period ranging from 1968 – the 2000s.  Just one sample (References are of course alpha by last name).  I encourage you to read this pdf (it’s not that long either).

 

ALSO AT THE UNIVERSITY of NEVADA-RENO is, with similar fields of concern, the National Council of Family and Juvenile Court Justices.

Re-reading this five years later (my pdf is dated 2014) I see that Wm. O’Donohue is listed there (and still) as a Professor of Psychology a University of Nevada-Reno, with an interesting specialty focus (integrated healthcare isn’t primary) and directing a ‘Victims of Crime & Integrated Care Research Lab” with, apparently (by pronoun usage, not all photos are clear and photos are not definitive anyway) four female assistants (who hold 3 M.A.’s and a single B.S. — in Psychology from Portland State University, last name “Cummings” — and a lone male, with a B.A. — or is it ” B.S.”?  (Label says one thing, contents the other, on the brief description available on this lab’s website), from University of Utah.


(Link in nearby text, my post short-link ending “-bLg” publ. Dec. 15, 2019) Caroline S. Cummings, B.S. of Victims of Crime & Integrated Healthcare Lab at University of Nevada-Reno, directed by Nicholas A. & Janet L. Cummings frequent co-author (and psychologist/professor, William O’Donohue. I have no idea whether or not she is related, but did notice.

O’Donohue’s vita is presented in doc, not pdf format; hard to open at first. Wm T. O’Donohue, WTO VITA ‘updated Jan 2010’ (Accessed from UNR website 2019Dec14, context post -bLg, Cummings associate) (39pp printed Doc to pdf, ca 4.5pp of this Educatn thru NIJ Grants, the rest, publicatns)

No products (publications proceeding from the lab, i.e., what does it do? are even listed.  Some of individual participants’ publications are, but not as associated with the lab.  He has a Wikipedia, all websites I’ve seen so far show the same headshot only photograph (with blank (solid-color, no context) and I found a single post (at least pertaining to him), seems inactive, called “http://williamodonohuephd.com“), one of just three external links on the Wiki page.


SEPARATELY, his LinkedIn (#8606726),judging by education profile, it’s the same person) shows a Nevada LLC active since 2011, “OneCare Health Solutions, LLC”  Judging by the “Silver Plume” Nevada registration this was NV20101695484, Formed 9/10/2010 and “Annual Report Due” 9/30/2015; apparently not provided as it remains (despite the LinkedIn’s characterization) “status revoked.”  The only other manager listed was an “Ed Edghill” in West Chester, Pennsylvania. I’m not a private investigator and chose not to go further looking to validate who is or isn’t this Ed Edghill (there are several by this last name listed in Sanger, California: may be entirely unrelated, or not, I DNK).


O’Donohue At Sage Publications:  (link to “author’s Website” from SAGE is, however, broken):

William T. O’Donohue is a licensed clinical psychologist, professor of psychology and adjunct professor in the Department of Philosophy at University of Nevada, Reno, and a faculty member of the National Judicial College. He is widely recognized in the field for his proposed innovations in mental health service delivery, in treatment design and evaluation, and in knowledge of empirically supported cognitive behavioral therapies. He is a member of the Association for the Advancement for Behavior Therapy and served on the Board of Directors of this organization. Dr. O’Donohue has published over 50 books and 150 articles in scholarly journals and book chapters. For the past 14 years, he has been director of a free clinic that treats children who have been sexually abused and adults who have been sexually assaulted.

(FURTHER LOOKUPS on my CELL PHONE SHOW BOOKS PUBLISHED BY SAGE and SAGE PUBLICATION’s AUTHOR SUMMARY.  For Further Exploration).


Nicholas Cummings’ background is in both: psychology and psychoanalysis. His enthusiasm for psychology seems directly related to awareness that most people can’t afford psychoanalysis, so they’re not reaching enough of the total human population who might become clients or, his preferred term, “patients.”  Key to reaching more is getting the profession (of psychology) mainstreamed directly with primary healthcare, a.k.a., that which public funds will back on the premise that more prevention (“Brief Intermittent Psychotherapy throughout a lifetime”) earlier saves costs later.

“Incidentally” this also helps preserve his chosen profession. Kaiser Permanente HMO and its (many) associated nonprofits, including foundations, especially in California but not limited to it, have also been closely engaged this century in pushing for universal healthcare (“Affordable Care Act” 2010, aka informally as “Obamacare.”).

 

 

 

http://www.ccfc.ca.gov/about/organization.html#members, he chairs First5 California, appointed in 2013. Click on name to read bio blurb, which references his prior background (and maintains connections still) to Minnesota.  This is the full quote:

George Halvorson was appointed by Governor Jerry Brown to chair the First 5 California Children and Families Commission in May 2013. He also is the chair and chief executive officer (CEO) of the Institute for InterGroup Understanding.*** In this role, Halvorson is focused on putting processes, teaching materials, and learning programs and approaches in place to help people deal with issues of racism, discrimination, intergroup anger, and intergroup conflict. He currently is authoring three new books that will serve as the core teaching curriculum for the Institute.

Prior to taking on his new roles focusing on children and intergroup conflict, Halvorson served for more than 11 years as the chair and CEO of Kaiser Permanente, retiring from that position at the end of 2013. Prior to his tenure at Kaiser, he was the president and CEO for Health Partners in Minnesota, serving in that position for 17 years.

Earlier in his career, Halvorson started health plans in Uganda and Jamaica, and helped start health plans in Chile, Spain, and Nigeria – most of which continue to operate. He has advised governments in Great Britain, Ireland, Germany, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Russia on health care issues and has been featured as an educator for national health ministries at the European Union Health Summit in Brussels.

“Peace Thoughts, Truth and Honesty,” of course… except in business dealings, judging by quick fact-checks on this entity….See footnote below. (Posted Dec. 16, 2019, short-link ending “-bLg”)

***This sounds like the name of a nonprofit of uncertain legal domicile (not shown here; we’re supposed to just “know” — or be impressed?). I looked for it years ago, DNR results…

<~~There is a website; it is in Sausalito, CA (a quaint niche/tourist? town known for its harbor and many houseboats, just north of San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge) and seems to be well-geared to sell Halvorson’s (nine, pictured) books and push First 5, Conflict Resolution, and how to “trigger” a sense of group, that is, an “us” versus a “them” mentality, etc.  …  Nice bold graphics (black on white), just no financials: www.intergroupinstitute.org/about.  Very “California”…Look at the “books” page and a few of the blog titles….  I have a KAISER | FIRST5 | George Halvorson Footnote; more FnAQs* on this Intergroup Understanding Institute on that footnote. *FrequentlyNOT-AskedQuestions,  like “what’s your EIN# and why haven’t you been filing appropriately according to state laws, year after year?”


I’d be interested to know his academic background and how he got into all this before working to promote and administer “universal healthcare” in the US in (at least) two different states, prior to now working to (so says the CCFC website) regionalize pre-school and early care, including for reimbursement rates, to better socialize (reduce inequities based on household income) the care and rearing of VERY young kids, starting at (if not before) birth…

Halvorson has authored eight health care-related books, including Strong Medicine; Epidemic of Care; Building Health Co-ops in Uganda; and Ending Racial, Ethnic, and Cultural Disparities in Health Care. He has also written four books on instinctive intergroup behavior and one book, Three Key Years, that deals with brain development and emotional needs for very young children. Additionally, he has served on more than 30 boards and commissions, and has chaired more than a dozen – including the American Association of Health Plans; the International Federation of Health Plans; the Partners for Quality Care Board; the Health Governors for the World Economic Forum in Davros, Switzerland; and the Health Plans Committee for the Board of the American Diabetes Association.

He and his wife, Lorie, have five sons, two daughters-in-law, and five grandchildren. While they reside in the San Francisco area, they continue to have strong ties in Minnesota

More at Footnote: Universal Healthcare | Kaiser Permanente | First 5 California and George Halvorson 


The next two images, from either my Table of Contents 2012-2016, or from one of the posts shown on it, voice just some of my prior concerns I already raised about this particular family’s role which also intersects with my “Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson” post which got me looking at the history of psychology (professionalized or otherwise) and psychoanalysis (a.k.a. “Freud et al.”) more closely than awareness of AFCC’s typical membership categories already had.

These just two images are fine-print/colorful (annotated or background) and intended to supplement, not replace, the information on this post, best after reading the rest of it:

Find FamilyCourtMatters.org prior, related posts: two-image gallery.  Find by dates or from within sticky post “Table of Contents 2017” either as pdfs (with active title links: best) or from that page linking to direct displays of those TOC’s as separate posts.  Next quote (from my “Table of Contents 2017 continues themes from 2016…” contains a link to a pdf containing the images shown just below, but explains that’s a 37-pager.  (Second click on blank page icon probably required to open).

PDF #3: Table of Contents, June 29, 2014 reverse chrono to Sept. 24, 2012 (37 pages, about 140 posts), … (pdf format, showing in 8X11 page installments).  This being so much longer, has different sections. . . The table of contents (therein) is on pp. 4-20. FYI. The front and end matter contain narrative (blog) substance, not just “navigation” instructions.  …

[No posts published from June 29, 2014 – January 22, 2016.] {{i.e., last half of 2014 throughout all 2015,  I did publish before Sept. 24, 2012, but have no manually created “Table of Contents” for them; see “Archives.”}}

The post containing the same (long: 140 posts) list of TOC, June 29, 2014…to Sept. 24, 2012 (all titles with active links, shortlink ends “-2rW”)  is here, but I recommend viewing it as pdf with 8-11 display from the above link.   A post containing links (pdf & post) to this, and to TOC 2016 and 2017 is here (short-link ends ‘5qZ’).  That post is complicated, so the next mini-section in this background-color (inside black bordered box) summarizes….

There are hundreds of posts (my admin dashboard shows 839 posts as of mid-December 2019). They are also points of reference for key topics within this field from a consumer’s AND investigator’s (tracking the nonprofits and how they hook up with federal grants, as by now you know) and domestic violence/family court survivor (mother)’s point of view, trying to keep it objective but not ‘dispassionate’ where there are such huge accountability loopholes throughout.

QUICK REVIEW:  HOW TO ACCESS FAMILYCOURTMATTERS TOC POSTS.

This MINI-Section, except label and last three links, covers access to MOST of this blog’s titles one way or another! I took the time to review because the titles themselves are like a table of contents to under-reported topics within this field which shed major light on the ones typically being publicized in MSM or by specialty (niche) advocacy groups.

It contains descriptive text, title with link from the top of my Comprehensive (Sept. 2014 – Sep. 21, 2017) TOC post.

Below, in this background-color, I added links to three posts finishing the list  for 2017 (Oct, Nov & Dec).  For 2018 and 2019, see other Sticky Posts near the top of the blog or (probably quickest route) links provided on blog right sidebar widget.

SIX separate (all “sticky”) posts provide lists of all post titles through Oct. 31, 2019:  1 (next, below) + 3 (to complete Fall 2017) + 2 (two versions of 2018) + 1 (2019).  PAGES: ’58 Essays’ lists all Pages (vs. Posts) through that date; itself a top sticky post.

This (next) post** presents three different ways to view three different time spans’s tables of contents…. This post pulls it all together and puts links in one place to older tables of contents direct from here (in 8X11) or directly on their original posts…


It’s actually current through Oct. 8, 2017.  The pdfs take so long to make, I hadn’t updated them… Therefore posts for Oct, Nov, and Dec. 2017 are presented in separate posts, all marked “Sticky” within the top dozen links, so easy to find, and I’m posting them also right below here:

(In grabbing those titles to paste in here, I added the short-links to the actual post titles for all three for future, easier reference//LGH Dec. 15, 2019).

The “Giant post ending “-2ug” (June 29, 2014, first TOC image above, left) I’m thinking about how to re-write with graphics, cutting it down to flow-chart size with a basic “legend.”  Don’t hold your breath, but it’s on my “to-do” list being such a key point for this blog. It was also my last post before taking a (basically, forced) one-and-a-half year break posting here, to protect my own housing options from specific family-oriented obstacles to the same (forum:  probate court, topic: trusts).  Most of the organizations listed on it haven’t gone away yet, or changed behaviors.  It’s still basic information


Compared to Flinn.org:

When it comes to the various Cummings Foundations, ALL their Board of Directors  or Foundation Managers represent far fewer individuals (at least one of them in his mid-90s by now), which makes me wonder how old is the one daughter involved (Dr. Janet L. Cummings), and probably (even taken as  a whole with other related for-profit entities, i.e., some holding real estate) far fewer resources.  All three websites are even less interested than “Flinn.org” in revealing their EIN#s or financials, while posting glowing descriptions of their own disruptive innovations (links below, see for yourself).  So I decided to take a closer look.

Having now taken that closer look, I can see why they might not want people to get a closer examination* of the books! (*..of even tax returns up through Dec. 2017: I don’t have; websites do not volunteer any audited financial statements so far…)


My prior attempted titles for this post reflect its complexity as I progressively uncovered one red flag connection or omission after another.  Included here for extra preview:

4th attempt, variation on the 3rd: Three Tax-exempt Cummings Entities (Inc. 1994 and 2004 (co-located) in Reno, NV, and 2014 in Phoenix, AZ) and Their Family-Controlled Personal Agenda: Taking Former Arizona State U’s ‘DBH’ Accreditation International, Con’td. (Publ. soon after Dec. 9, 2019). (short-link ends “-bLg”)

3rd title attempt:  Why I Still Notice the Cummings Family and Their Respective Operations in Reno, Nevada and Phoenix, Arizona (establ.1994, 2004 and 2014), some funded in good part from a $2 to $3B Foundation set up 1993 in Ohio

2nd Title attempt: Who??  are the Cummings: (Nicholas&Dorothy + Daughter Janet L. in Reno, Andrew in Greenwich,CT) and Why?? Their Three Nonprofit Entities (N&DC 1994 in NV: 990PFs; CBFH 2004 in NV: 990PFs; CGI-BHS 2014 in AZ: Files 990s and Grants Doctoral Degrees 100% On-Line) (Publ. Dec. 7?, 2019)

First title attempt/this Post is (however titled, it’ll be available when published at this link)Cummings Fndtn for Behavioral Health (EIN# 300163951, NV), Major Contributor American Endowmt Fndtn (OH) and a few others co-located with CBFH, per its 990PF Roadmaps (Publ. Dec. 5?, 2019) (shortlink ends “-bLg” started Dec. 4, 2019)

THIS POST exists to link to for further drill-down (supporting information) linked to my #2 post in the Arizona Pipeline, now published and accessible at:

There seems to be sharing of debts and liabilities relating to some real estate among the Cummings-controlled entities.  

Viewing only the total Form 990-reported assets (once each EIN#s has been looked up and verified) and the (Cummings-controlled) entities’ websites’ brief summaries give only a fraction of the picture and as such are mis-leading.  

The 1993-founded AEF (in Columbus, Ohio) being the major contributor a certain year, I looked it up and found what looks like a new species of “community foundation” retaining some of the (in my opinion) worst characteristics of Donor-Advised-Fund tax-exempt foundations while losing even a pretense of the “local” part expressing concern for the region in which it’s geographically or legally domiciled.  In fact it advertises how its donor-advised funds can be used to contribute to individuals favorite community foundations, with their donor-advised funds, too. Its stated tax-exempt purpose, in all caps, is, in just seven words:

To Expand the Capacity of American Philanthropy.”

(FY2017 (YE Dec) Form 990, Pg. 1, Part I, Summary, Line 1)

Part VIIB (sole independent contractor paid anything over $100K) was a Gift Admin/Software provider from Canada — which was paid $2.4M for its services.  2017 (Part VIII Line 1 Revenues were about $684M) and its Investment Income about $41M).  The software provider was called Benevity, Inc., 1812 4th St. SW, # 300, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.   I could say a lot more here (after looking it up), “I get it,” but this post is already too long!

After about 20 minutes of lookups, quick summary:  This part on “BENEVITY” qualifies as an “aside” but is included because the 1993ff “AEF” here chose to use it for a subcontractor in 2017, which gives at least some idea where its (AEF’s) “head” is at…

Benevity, Inc. (that $2.4M paid FY2017 subcontractor helping AEF, above) has a “contact us” page showing three offices in Canada (not at the address shown in the FY2017 return above, which address was interesting in its own right (building owned by W. Chan Investments, Ltd., at least in 2018 and with 11 spaces still for lease) in Calgary, Victoria, and Toronto + one in the UK (Cirencester/Gloucestershire), and two in the USA: one in San Mateo, California, and one in Clearwater, Florida.  They focus on employer giving, contributions managed in 17 languages, one of the first “Certified B” corporations in Canada.

The address in San Mateo, California (get this:  a “Burt Cummings” was involved) is a $1.8M home sold (recently); the “Benevity” in California existed for less than a month in 2018, apparently for the purpose of merging into Versaic, Inc., a California Corporation of which two versions exist, one with multiple strange filings (several “Restatements,” an agent Resigned in 2006, name change from “SponsorWise” (Up til then) to “Versaic, Inc.” a California Stock Corporation in 2011 (what happened during those 5 years, then?), and within one month (actually a half-month) after Benevity Mergersub, Inc. (existed for a only few weeks in March, 2018 as a California Stock Corporation) it merged into Versaic, Inc. (Calif. Corporation), Versaic, Inc. (California) then merged into Versaic, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, address, ℅ Benevity International, Inc. in Calgary–and that’s just looking into ONE of the two USA addresses of Benevity, Inc. in Calgary, Canada.


See “Footnote: Benevity, I mean Versaic, Inc., I mean American Online Giving Foundation,** in Canada, The UK, California — I mean, Delaware, and Florida — (from the State of Georgia), I mean… (ad infinitum)…” for my brief follow-up for this insanity, a.k.a. “business model” (which reminds me of the “JustGive” going “JustGiving” I blogged in much detail several years ago — same general idea.  Start in the USA, featuring on-line transactions, move out of the country… I’ll add a Footer, but I need to talk to someone else (who, not sure yet!) about this… Oh yes — and the Florida Address AOGF shows legal domicile Georgia.  Get the general idea? ! ! !

**I’m not saying AOGF is “Benevity,” although tax returns show it’s paying Benevity as a Part VIIB Subcontractor for administrative services, and although Bryan de Lottinville is President of AOGF##  and leader of Benevity… In fact AOGF in 2015 showed only 3 board of directors and ZERO employees (it being “online giving” while claiming $127M of contributions most of which it gave away — but provides no Schedule I listing of.  Now, I wouldn’t like to be responsible to itemize over $100M of micro-donations (or large ones) on a Form 990 Schedule I, but that IS the IRS requirement (unless “micro” somehow avoids compliance).  This money could easily also be going to “domestic” (USA) governments as happens under AEF, above, which chose Benevity.

((AOGF is EIN#810739440; FY2016 viewed; table of last three Form 990s is in the footnote) (AOGF legal domicile FL, has had two addresses in Florida already, the second of which shows up as one of just two “USA” offices of Benevity — same street address) and files in many different states within the USA)

[Dec. 17, 2019 added comments]:

This should be blogged.  I’m just spreading some breadcrumbs here and in the footnote below after another day (Dec. 17) looking at this, I have a better understanding of “standard operating procedures…”  There are many accountability problems.  I’d also like to point out that, while registered in Georgia (why Georgia), the word “American” could refer to all of North America, not just the USA — and again, Benevity.com IS a Canadian, not US, organization.  Market niche is “world’s largest employers…” and they’re moving that money FAST while failing to provide full, and visually readable, records of it for the public, esp. in the USA…

For AEF to be mixed up (utilizing) AOGF and promoting the Cummings (as just one of millions of dollars of donations in a certain year, but still the bulk of the Cummings’ entity’s contributions for that year) reflects negatively on AEF.  I also note that one of the Cummings entities below seems to be adopting the similar model — citing $40M of assets in the form of “pledges.”  The whole situation needs a real “plumbline” of accountability which I don’t see it’s likely to get anytime soon.



For FY2018, AEF also turned out to have MAJOR “Schedule B” contributors, contributing millions of dollars, EACH and OVERALL, of noncash (i.e., public-traded securities, it seems), which the entity then can sell at a loss, as often happens on tax-exempt community or other large foundations.  Sometimes they seem to be in effect dumping grounds for non-producing assets while contributors (donors) get nice federal income and/or excise (state-)** tax-reduction, the entity continues to function (often by taking more grants) (**I’m not a tax professional… for the finer points, ask one!)

Add the six amounts shown on images 1 & 2 above to show about $279.4 Million (out of total contributions that year shown on page 1, over $1 billion) were “Schedule B,” i.e., larger. One wonders who the owners were.  Because AEF describes itself as “concierge donor-advised funds-service, targets services especially towards other financial advisors, I’m wondering who would have that kind of money to donate in a single year to this Ohio nonprofit, and why one of them decided that $90 of US Treasury Bonds should be donated.   Interesting situation …


Grant-making, as I’ve reiterated recently and even copied screenshots of my recent post to Twitter to say it again, is not necessarily the primary purpose here. 

I also give both Cummings Foundations a failing grade for [A] seeking to exploit and target access to public healthcare funds (a massive enterprise field) while, [B] disrespectfully to the public who’ll pay for this, failing to even divulge their own EIN#s, let alone financials for any year.  

The respective foundation assets as of FY2017 are shown:  $40.9M (CFBH, files 990PF so founding year NS on face page), $27.2K (N&DCF CFBH, files 990PF so founding year NS on face page)) (co-located), and $2.0B (AEF in Ohio). (AEF’s website now claims $3 billion).

and nonprofit “CGI-BHS” (My acronym for  Cummings Graduate Institute for Behavioral Health Studies” (granting DBH’s on-line), which files Forms 990, starting only in FY2015.  Total Gross Assets (2017) $306K.  This one’s not self-supporting, or even close to it

Read the rest of this entry »

Look Who’s Been Building Arizona’s BioScience/Behavioral Science ECONOMIC, ACADEMIC & COMMUNICATIONS Ecosystem | ‘School of Mind Brain and Behavior’ at Univ. of Arizona, (cited in an NIJ Report by AFCC-Loyal Associate Prof. Connie J.A. Beck, Ph.D. (Psych.) (Started Nov. 13, Publ. Dec. 11, 2019).

leave a comment »

My prior post,most of it with this dark yellow background,

basically listed upcoming ones, with today’s post,

as #2 in the pipeline.  Today’s post generated another one (“Three Tax-Exempt Cummings Entities,” link provided at the bottom of this one) which isn’t on that list, as I took a closer look.

Today’s post gives more details, like EIN#s and links to more information, on a certain Flinn Foundation and the Thomas R. Brown Foundations’ (plural) plans for Southern Arizona — commenting on how that seems organized — and checks back in on the “Nicholas A. Cummings” connection to Arizona Behavioral Health “stuff” as well as to fixing (sic) our (sic) family court systems, adding key details to what I’d blogged (about seven) years ago.

Today’s post also contains some reminders on the necessity for high-speed internet infrastructure, who’s been investing in this, and an example from California (“CENIC”) of how wealthy individuals or entrepreneurs (there, a medical doctor) can and sometimes do take control of an infrastructure, set up multiple nonprofits to which their own profits are donated, and seek to construct regional hubs, planned development, for their personal priorities and projects, involving universities, foundations, federal funding, of course high-capacity, high-speed communications (internet and other).

ANY post (or page) may be further edited (as in, condensed, or expanded, or both) after publishing. Blogger’s privilege! This one will have (soon) some tags, and a few more images referenced in the text, but not included yet.  That said, I do provide links throughout.

//LGH Dec 11, 2019

 For the Southern Arizona region, I found one long-term CEO of a major community foundation (J. Clinton Mabie) ALSO on a separate entity, “Sun Corridor, Inc.” [About, Investors-Partners page] (I’ve seen but not yet researched) which its websites say are also working on an airport [see “TUS Blueprint” link] to access the region.  From what I can tell on the entity’s website, this is functioning as a type of “business roundtable” for regional planning, where the top infrastructure owners meet among themselves, claiming to represent “the people” when it comes to development. The total planning of course involves many nonprofits, energy companies, and healthcare providers… This then brings up (to me) the concept — if these leaders are representing all those (85,000 was the number claimed here) employees and the government funds associated with them and infrastructures they use — then who do the state legislators and county supervisors, municipal leaders (mayors, boards, etc.) represent — really?

While I’m not covering it in this post, I am flagging it here for future reference  and FYI.

TheECONOMIC, ACADEMIC & HIGH-SPEED INTERNET” phrase in my post’s of its long, winding title, signals more specifics of this “AzBio” ecosystem and source of some of the sponsoring wealth involved here.  Along with the “health/pharmaceutical/bio-science” parts (intersecting with medical or other doctorate-level scientists — PhDs and MDs– working at universities or corporations) such an ecosystem is going to involve major communications infrastructure and computer databases to hold and crunch the data, especially when this gets into the fields of genomics, epigenetics, and personalized medicine based on that.  This post provides points of reference for that infrastructure, in body text and more details as a footnote.

Separately, this phrase in my post’s title “(..|cf.  ‘School of Mind Brain and Behavior’ at Univ. of Arizona,** (see 2011 NIJ-Grant-Funded Report by AFCC-Loyal Assoc. Prof. Connie J.A. Beck, Ph.D. (Psych.)refers to a mixture of career psychologists** whose collective attempts seek to affiliate with anything “neuro-” or some better respect for their work derived from the innate respect granted scientists and doctors, AND to provide some scientific basis for their accessing the primary healthcare infrastructure with its mainly medical/ surgical/ pharmaceutical basis. It’s about perception and co-location for professional (business) reasons.

I’ve covered the Arizona/AFCC/psychologist-behavioral health connections at length in recent posts, but this post also brings in, specific to the state of Arizona, a set of family-controlled foundations (most, but not all located in nearby Nevada) with (lifelong, it seems) specialization in mental health/behavioral health fields and promoting opportunities for professionals in that field, in addition to belated (2012ff) involvement in the family court systems also, including with supposed advocates for battered mothers…

Generally, the mixture of career psychologists’** collective attempts seek to affiliate with anything “neuro-” or anything producing by association better respect for their work can be seen in choice of “lingo” jargon, or specific vocabulary to reference their own work, as exhibited often by AFCC members in academia or outside it:  clinical, forensic, etc. and sporting extra certifications and accreditations as post-degree acronyms.***  For the latter, proliferating sub-specialties and associations to promote each of them (i.e., publishing, conferencing) seems essential to the professions; producing more “cites” for members.

**(Including many who will be AFCC loyal and interested in the family court systems & abuse prevention — but also able to get federal grants by virtue of their stated research, testing, or evaluation interests).


***(Itself a whole tax-exempt-association, cross-country professional sector within the field, promoted in part, I found again, by the APA (American Psychological Association) itself).  cf. “ABPP” and the “specialty of “CFP” (Couple & Family Psychology), one among many, I found.  With any specialty, there’s often an associated training or licensing organization, which I gather is where AACFP (“The American Academy of CFP”) comes in…

A doctorate level achievement is one thing; but extra certification by private membership organizations set up to promote and elevate specific specialities within psychology takes group self-promotion to a whole new level.

Among those promoting the practice (of adding doctorates, adding specialties within psychology) originally and (I see, now again, separately — based on his own model) is Nicholas A. Cummings (b. 1924). He describes being conscious of helping (his colleagues) getting the doctorate level degrees (back in the late 1960s forward) through independent schools of professional psychology set up to do just that, as well as some of the certifying associations.  See images in this section, and I have more at the bottom of this post.   (Cummings Foundations are addressed in this post, and in the updates (there’ve been new ones since) I found it necessary to add a spin-off post on what wouldn’t fit onto this one.


So overall, we have here a mixture of major need for money, smart people, capital, ongoing access to public resources, and of course super-power internets and computers.  THAT’s why I put the words “internet” in there, and because one of the [actually, all the TRB] foundations (Thomas R. Brown) providing some of the private capital here got its wealth from the field of transistors and semiconductors in the first place and has tag-teamed with the Flinn Foundation (basis of wealth, medical/cardiologist) to work through the community foundation (CFSAz.org) and the University of Arizona, to turn “Arizona” into a thriving “bioscience”  economic infrastructure.

Economic (in the post title) is of course, public/private and while the public is tax-exempt as government, the private sector major wealth often seeks tax-exempt or tax-accountability-avoiding places to stow its money. In our age, we know also that much of this wealth comes specifically with the engineers of the current age of internet and communications infrastructure in the first place:  those who own the assets get to charge and determine how much to restrict access for them. A footnote here gives more specific context.

As I said above, then Today’s post gives more details, like EIN#s and links to more information, on a certain Flinn Foundation and the Thomas R. Brown Foundations’ (plural) plans for Southern Arizona — commenting on how that seems organized — and checks back in on the “Nicholas A. Cummings” connection to Arizona Behavioral Health “stuff” as well as to fixing (sic) our (sic) family court systems. It adds follow-up from when I blogged it many (about seven) years ago.

WHY CUMMINGS? Nicholas A. Cummings is in his 90s now and probably no billionaire like other involved famous private foundations or community foundations nationwide.

The “Cummings connection,” besides linking to Arizona generally also links specifically to the family court systems which, overall, are intent on integrating behavioral modification ecosystem and getting the public to fund it also.  The Cummings Foundation also connects historically since at least as far back as spring 2012 to the still-active coalition of “Fix the Flawed Practices / Handle Domestic Violence IN the (Broken, Unsafe, etc.) Family Courts” self-selecting professionals and their ragtag (for the most part — if you look and list ’em all in a row) nonprofits which provide media sound-bytes to make them sound more important.  So yes, this topic is a “Family Court Matter.”

As a whole, this Ecosystem, like air and water quality, should be monitored and noticed, not just inhaled and drunk indiscriminately. HOW individuals setting it up choose to reveal or conceal their own financials is a key to the character and intents of the same.  Altruistic?  Hardly.  Transparent? Not at all.  Accountable to the public? How could they be, in this manner?

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 11, 2019 at 2:30 pm

Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is No Accident | Noticing/Naming The Foundations..(Next Posts in This Pipeline) (Nov. 15, 2019, Publ. Dec. 1).

leave a comment »

You’re reading:  Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is No Accident | Noticing/Naming The Foundations..(Next Posts in This Pipeline) (started Nov. 15, 2019, Publ. Dec. 1).  (Case-sensitive short-link ends “-bCC”, about 2,500 words only).


This post exists only to identify and provide post titles (with links active when each is published only), specific points of reference (names of centers, tax-exempt foundations involved, etc.) and brief descriptions/abstracts of what they already hold in their draft status.  You don’t need to wait for me to publish to look anything referenced up; but I already know most people don’t get quickly (by digging for where not shown voluntarily on the websites) to the financials of such situation, where character and structure (and age of existence) tend to show up.  But if you want to get a head start on this in the public interest…

More Posts In This Subject Matter Pipeline:

(Subject Matter: Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is no accident.)

Or, Behavioral Health Strongholds, Conflict-of-Interest Investors & their reporting behaviors in Arizona, (my) Recent Finds correlate to Earlier Ones)

“In the Pipeline” in my world means, in draft status as posts.  They are more than “in the works” or wouldn’t be listed, but they have not yet (as of this date) been published.

Specifically, my prior post, publ. Nov. 25, updated (tags added, footnote and sections added Nov. 26), seems to have opened some of my “Let’s explore-and-examine on these foundations’ coordinated influence” floodgates.  I began devouring available information and it quickly started falling into categories of operations.  Link and mini-description of my Nov. 25 post, which was just a start (and more focused on the AFCC participation aspects):

My Prior Post: Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019(short-link ends “-bzx”) (#1 one in a pipeline with, so far, 3 and probably there will be 4 more posts). Tags  added later.  This is a long post and there are some internal section/explanation overlaps.  Read with patience (last update Nov.26, total 12,400 words includes a few extended footnotes)!

It could’ve been easily subtitled: “TO SHOW or NOT TO SHOWSHOULD AFCC’s INFLUENCE be SUBMERGED or FEATURED?” 


I remember having gotten back to Arizona through reading about a co-editor (in chief) of an international journal based in England; that journal already had an Overseas Editor from Arizona (Ira Mark Ellman), but the co-editor (in chief) Robert Dingwall also had been writing on mandatory mediation as it intersects with domestic violence, which brought up the USA (NIJ)-grant-funded project involving an AFCC-connected psychologist  (as recent posts detailed).

I drafted this “what’s in the pipeline” post (Arizona’s Behavioral Science Biosphere is No Accident, short-link ends “-bCC”, the one you are now reading) because of the background information I kept discovering* on who’s been backing the “Behavioral Science Biosphere” in Arizona, and how this was being engineered and coordinated.

Obviously that biosphere will involve a heavy dose of career psychologists and/or psychotherapists, some ensconced within universities and (as it happened here) chances are, some of those will have strong, career-long connections to the AFCC (“Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.”) which tends to promote the same fields and obtains court-connected and court-ordered funding for their professionals and networked nonprofits.

Chances are, and I’ve also identified within this post pipeline, a heavy dose of USA’s responsible fatherhood promotion via Social Security Act funding (i.e., “welfare reform”) has also been alive and well in the State of Arizona  since at least the early 1990s, and beyond Arizona due to the nature of the multi-society behaviors of behavioral science professionals (in their mutual field- and career-building interests), to international privately organized interests, journals, and/or associations. These two conditions seem to be mutually favorable to expansion of the field of behavioral health and justifying of existing power structure which happens in this country to identify as patriarchal, i.e., “father-focused.”

*I kept discovering because and as I kept looking.  Like finding the definition of a word one hasn’t seen before, it began just looking up one reference in the (2011) document I wished to blog where one of the author’s references was to a  “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior” at the University of Arizona-Tucson. The follow-up came from looking at when this School of Mind, Brain and Behavior was first established (it seems, only about 2009) and by whom (which led to the Flinn and Thomas R. Brown Foundations, articles talking about it).

For length and better flow, I’ve moved the material to a number of different posts by main subject matter.  With “Oh Arizona…” as (#1), they are:

Read the rest of this entry »

Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019

leave a comment »

This post is:

Post Title: Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019 (short-link ends “-bzx”) (#1 one in a pipeline with, so far, 3 and probably there will be 4 more posts). Tags  added later.  This is a long post and there are some internal section/explanation overlaps.  Read with patience (last update Nov.26, total 12,400 words includes a few extended footnotes)! (and Jan. 14, 2020, just to move this title to the top of the post; I’m getting ready to publish a sequel on earlier, related study to one featured here..//LGH.

TO SHOW or NOT TO SHOW?



RESEARCHING AND REPORTING ON BRAINS, MINDS, BEHAVIORS and HOW TO MODIFY (IMPROVE) HUMAN BEHAVIOR WHILE LEARNING WHAT MAKES US TICK IS BEYOND FASHIONABLE NOW: IT SEEMS TO BE MAINSTREAM PUBLIC POLICY.


My Ten Most Recent Posts, include one on the National Science Foundation (“NSF”) which is actually part of the US government (not a private entity) funding a “Brain Initiative” as well as at least a few recommending, for a starting place, screen for AFCC among authors, references, cites and BOTH sides of any pro/con debate involving the usual topics in the family courts — including domestic violence issues.

[Correcting an image annotation error: My inserted yellow comment on #5 actually belongs with the 10th most recent (not imaged) post. The sidebar widget “More Resources” also links to it, that link is 1. Really Want Systems Change?, |2. ‘LGH. There’s STILL No Excuse. But…,’ |3. ‘To Support and Visually Upgrade,’ and, |4. ‘The “Technical Training and Assistance Excuse” ‘[Started Oct. 3, Publ. Oct. 4, 2019] ( “-bcv”).  Images take a while to make and upload, so I’m correcting it here instead. BMTP/Wellesley narrative and links are on the above Oct. 4, not the Oct. 27, post.  CLICK ON EITHER IMAGE TO ENLARGE AS NEEDED).//LGH]


Speaking of “MINDS, BRAINS and BEHAVIORS”… what about the behaviors of those involved in promoting this field and working for decades in it? Specifically, what about the level of transparency and honesty in disclosing any conflicts of interest while reporting from within the field?

Why such consistent withholding of basic, key affiliations among authors at times taking public funds to write reports and who have resumes also showing public (NIH, NIMH, or NIJ, etc.) grants?

This systemic withholding of disclosing probable conflicts of interest is unlikely to change anytime soon, but it should be noted when reading or consuming the constant information output aimed at policymaking…

This withholding is also predictable in certain fields and when dealing with certain topics.

In ARGUING PAS: For example,  what I call “Arguing PAS” is one of those topics where AFCC affiliations are often unacknowledged by proponents on either side of the argument.

 

In Parenting Coordination: The presence anywhere** of “Parenting Coordination is another easy “tell” (sign, or should I say “symptom”?) of AFCC affiliation among those promoting it and/or those mentoring those promoting it, often professionals already working in the family court system in any of a few different countries.

** Parent Coordination Instances may include (& I’ve seen throughout the USA, several different states, and for many years):  In judicial administrative policy, as legislated in or out of existence, on websites of nonprofits, and especially where referenced in academic (journals, etc.), and of course in individual divorce, custody, or family court cases involving court-mandated parent coordinators … in these situations, probe the surface; AFCC involvement or leadership in setting it up, administering funds to support it, or running the programs (and training/certifying others to get on on it too) will not be far away or even distant history.

A few images to illustrate more recent PC-promotion here (mini-section with images and explanations).

Notice that three fields covered within these inter-relationships include Reunification Programs or Camps [1], Parent Coordination [2], and Mediation [3] (not only services, but also “training and consulting” in at least the last two).  The “reunification” provider here [not the main topic of this post] was the clearest link to AFCC — if you follow its professionals’ over-arching agenda as reflected in these (and some other) fields…

[1] Families Moving Forward [2] (FLiP), Ltd. [3] Riverdale Mediation (there are other businesses listed in association with its leadership (Riverdale Mediation image caption [below] shows one of the principals(?) also references “Mediate Dispute Resolutions” and “Mediate393.com“) (1) and (3) are in Canada, (2) in the UK.  I have not found (1) or (3) listed as business entities in Canada, but am not really adept at the various places to look there yet. It’d be interesting to know whether they are business names or registered trade names and if the latter, for whom.  As I recall from writing an earlier post on this (but don’t claim perfectly!) Mediate393.com had an arrangement with the family courts for referrals.).

‘UK Parenting Coord (PC) Roadshow’ image (see also pdf) by Jared Norton (AFCC-Ontario Bd Direc?) but @ Riverdale Mediation | Screen Shot 2019-11-25.. (=Image filename: Screenshot taken from pdf already on this blog & previously posted).

I recently publicized how a Canadian-based young man (Jared Norton, AFCC-mentored) took up with two UK-based women (Gillian Bishop, Felicity Shedden) first in Canada, then for a “Parent Coordination Roadshow” to the UK to promote the practice there.  Look for “FLiP” (Family Law in Partnership, Ltd., British) and/or Riverdale Mediation (Canadian) on this blog [Labeled “#3” in image of my Last Ten Posts at the top of this post; published Oct. 31 as “Part 2″…] or my social media.

(AFCC helped sponsor and expand the field and push for legislation to allow judges to order it).  The larger context was probably Board of Directors of AFCC-Ontario; I didn’t recognize the young(er) man so looked him up and found descriptions on both sides of the Atlantic on the trainings and shared purposes. UK Parenting Coordination (PC) Roadshows | Riverdale Mediation (June 19, 2017) this pdf 2019Oct28

“Riverdale Family Mediation Services” (Hilary Linton (Pres), Eliz Hyde (Medius Dispute Resolutions, Mediate393), Clifford S Nelson, Ret’d Judge) Screen Shot 2019-10-27



In Mandatory Mediation with IPV: Another such field and favorite pro/con/what-if topic for public and academic debate for decades! has been on mandatory mediation within divorce where domestic (or intimate partner) violence (or abuse) is alleged and may have occurred. Have you any idea how often those arguing for extra stipulations or trainings within mediation, i.e., showing awareness of the associated problems —  might be or are loyal followers or members AFCC whose careers and resumes have been bolstered by citing to it, but somehow by agreement do NOT typically reference it much in the debates?

Here’s another “case in point” of withholding (though shown in other contexts) an author’s AFCC affiliation I ran across on that sub-specialty within the family courts.

Post Title: Oh, Arizona: Mind Your Behavior! (The Career AFCC Academics’ Dilemma: “To Admit, or Not to Admit?”) Nov. 25, 2019 (short-link ends “-bzx”) (#1 one in a pipeline with, so far, 3 and probably there will be 4 more posts). Tags  added later.  This is a long post and there are some internal section/explanation overlaps.  Read with patience (last update Nov.26, total 12,400 words includes a few extended footnotes)!

TO SHOW or NOT TO SHOW?
SHOULD AFCC’s INFLUENCE be SUBMERGED or FEATURED?

Maybe a public task force should be appointed to convened a private roundtable on behalf of conflicted (bipolar?) AFCC-loyal — and AFCC-conference/trainings-sustained — career PhD’d psychologists (or lawyers, but the example here features a psychologist working at a public university) to establish model practice guidelines for in what context it’s “OK” (safe for the future of the field) to acknowledge one’s close affiliation with and dependency (for citations) on AFCC.

I’m thinking based on more evidence I discovered recently here, among the membership it must be either a tacit group dynamic just absorbed through association or perhaps the result of previous explicit group tactics. Did some roundtable already meet? Were private guidelines circulated to warn AFCC-affiliated academics: “When writing for even potential public consumption, don’t disclose AFCC — it might lead to questioning your neutrality, of possible conflicts of interest and it would alert more non-professionals to our existence?”

“Especially if that writing involves any federal funding…”

Not being a member, I don’t know, I just know what I’m seeing of the pattern of withholding in some contexts, and featuring openly in others, something I’ve observed for years now.


Let’s compare an NIJ-funded report on a certain topic with the lead co-author’s own faculty page and resume to see whether the AFCC influence is submerged (visible only if key authors or verbiage is already known to readers as “AFCC” standard) or featured as a credit to the individual’s career curve and expert status.  I’ve provided both links and images so you can.

In doing this I also show how and why I ran across this information through basic follow-up practices which illuminate family court function/dysfunctions and the behaviors of academics and/or professionals writing constantly about them.

These professionals are often focused on researching and developing practices to modify it seems everyone else’s behaviors when it comes to handling criminal behavior (acts)** which the family courts continue to handle and which family court-focused professionals continue for decades to research and to report on conditions under which it might continue be handled, allegedly appropriately in that forum (jurisdiction, venue, etc.) — with better trainings, screenings, and modifications to accommodate them. (** reference is below the next image; look for the blue font).


The NIJ report admits (claims) that mediation was mandated in one jurisdiction specifically so they’d have some data to study its impact on domestic violence when there was no grassroots or voluntary demand for it

“Why is mediation often legally mandatory?”

In other words, in order to test a theory, if subjects wouldn’t volunteer for the study, they should instead just be forced to participate, facilitating the study (!!).  (Nearby annotated image from the NIJ report; this image is also posted below in context).

Is that not a high-risk, potentially lethal situation to socially engineer? For the sake of more reports like these to fund, build resumes, and speculate on “what works better IN the family courts” when lives are at risk?

Is it possibly relevant that those helping run the courts are part of a membership association (<~link) which, from the 1970s and 1980s focused heavily on promoting mediation, and that in California by 1981 mediation became basically mandatory for modifying (not just “establishing”) any child custody /access or visitation order, and that by 1984 the U.S. Congress had enacted into legislation the “access and visitation” concept, to then be funded starting 1988, and substantially increased in 1996 with authorization of “welfare reform” PRWORA, to ten million dollars a year nationwide, an amount continued to this day, i.e., for a full generation (about 23 years now).  

And that by definition grants go to a specified single agency at the state or territory level within each state’s or territory’s government — never directly to any private nonprofit? (However, once there said agencies can certainly subcontract to private organizations). 

How might exposing the presence of this association (and the lead (first listed) author’s long-term involvement in the same association) in a report offering answers on why mediation legally mandatory (and how to adjust for the related criminal behaviors which somehow continue to be involved) shed a different light on those explanations offered?


**Specifically the criminal behavior labeled “IPV” or “IPA” “DV” or “DA” where “IP” means “intimate partner,” “D” means “Domestic” (with no reference to partner, spouse, relative, or the other parent), “V” means “violence” and “A” in the context, “Abuse.” In other words, usage and terminology varies.


In looking at this situation, and from the cover page of this report, another topic comes up: the behaviors of major foundations and leading personalities which chose and are still choosing to sponsor (in a collaborative, coordinated, regionally-planned manner where tracking the private interests becomes a major maze) such things as “Schools of Mind, Brain and Behavior” in — for this example — Arizona. I say this up front because without a network and backing, a single faculty member (or four Ph.D.s and an M.S.) would not have that much influence. I’ve done some drill-down and have two (or three) posts in the pipeline on those funders within Arizona.


The NIJ-Funded Report on IPA in Divorce Mediation:

Intimate Partner Abuse in Divorce Mediation: Outcomes from a Long-Term Multi-Cultural Study (<~link to this doc’t. “236868”) found at NCJRS, described as NIJ-funded, Grant 2007-WG-BX-0028; Report is 2011)  

This small-ish grant was awarded to the Regents of the University of Arizona (& Cal State Fullerton?). Four of the five authors occupied at the time different two places within the University of Arizona and a fifth was from California State University, Fullerton. All those with PhDs at the time (four out of five) seem to be psychologists.

From what I can see, one only is most closely citing AFCC on c.v. and faculty page, however, that person was the lead author.  In addition (on the faculty page) her sole “community” contact person listed was the daughter of another well-known AFCC individual (Philip Stahl’s daughter Rebecca Stahl). What struck me most was the absence of references to AFCC in the long report, and the presence in the (also long — but not THAT long!) c.v., both linked to below.

This seems to be just a belated 2018 description of the 2011 study; the page (several paragraphs long) contains no other links. As the older study shows, they’ve been debating this topic since the 1980s (!!)..”Are we done yet?”

About seven years later a single, short (about 2-page) review of this long (238pp) study shows up at the NIJ.

See Footnote: “Incredible How Gullible” (Why is there no functional public-access & publicized to us USDOJ Database of Grants Awarded?)

Apparently two other shorter (17pp, 19pp) reports were written off the same NIJ 2007-WG-BX-0028 grant award for about $319K.  One is only available through SAGE now (expensive!) and for the other one, I found no actual link on the part of page labeled “Download paper”), which leaves us with a few abstracts, the long one, and the short summary seven years later….

The lead author’s cv shows another NIJ grant, similar theme, over twice is large (over $700K), has been awarded since.

WHICH AUTHORS HERE? (BACKGROUNDS).

From three authors [Image, FN1] at the “School of Mind, Brain and Behavior…” under the Department of Psychology, one [image, FN2] at a (named after sponsor or other respected figure) “Institute for Children, Youth and Families” at a (named after sponsor or other respected figure) School of Family and Consumer Sciences all at the University of Arizona, and one author [Image, FN3] at simply “Department of Psychology”, California State University (“CSU-Fullerton”)…

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: