Today’s post:

CBMA and CFUF in #BlackLivesMatter: What’s Up Now, 2020, with (Famous-Foundations-sponsored-) Campaigns for Black MALE Achievement and (Still U.S. Gov’t-Sponsored-) Centers for Urban Families (fka “Fathers”)? [Started June 20, 2020, Publ. July_8].

In case the acronyms CBMA and CFUF, are unfamiliar, I’ve started with two images of search results for these nonprofits’ tax returns showing the full names for each, and that the latter has a second related entity (CFUF Fund) and (when live links to tax returns are provided separately) the former did not incorporate (in New York) until late 2014, first gaining speed under a major (California) community foundation which itself was created through merger, only 2006, and which I’ve blogged (red-flagged, as also has the media) several times before.

Technicalities and Hindrances looking up ANY tax returns on private databases:

Be aware, however, that the source for the images (The Foundation Center, Inc.’s Candid.org database) often gets the organization names wrong, which names should be always checked by clicking through to the tax returns themselves, and/or checked at the Secretary of State (for corporations) or, if it applies (and it does in NY), Attorney-General’s Office, or whatever department or division regulates charities and nonprofits at the state level, in the USA.

(Click on http://foundationcenter.org; you’ll be redirected to “candid.org,” but new website change doesn’t necessarily mean a business entity. It may or may not, and this time, FoundationCenter is acting as though it had, but withholding from the public paperwork proving that it did, while on its own pages, characterizing “Candid.org” as having the same EIN# as The Foundation Center.

This time, the Candid.org got both names basically right, but its own name (“Candid” is a dba) wrong.  I’m going to update available information on this, separately, but I raised the issue two years ago (June, 2018). Interesting when you consider a half year later, The Foundation Center and Guidestar announced their mergers they’d been talking about (says the NPQ, NonProfitQuarterly, which I found searching this out (I’m not a subscriber) this time round) since 2013.

Should I finish another post on this topic, it will be at this link under this or a similar name:

I mention it here because to look at an organization’s tax returns which refuses to post them, or even its own EIN#(s, if plural) on its website, leaves an open-ended question: Who’s most responsible for the delay, and why aren’t organizations filing timely or openly to start with?  That’s a “buyer-beware” situation throughout.  Meanwhile the private tax-exempt-corporation-run major databases which might provide information groups like CFUF (and the organizations some of its board of directors also run, such as the Warnock Family Foundation (posted without the word “Family” on the website and no EIN# or financials) won’t advertise openly, i.e., deliberately “forget” to post, are creating even more accountability problems: (i.e., TheFoundationCenter, rebranded as “Candid” after “transferring assets from Guidestar.org, and Guidestar.org itself) also don’t post their own timely or others’ timely (or accurately labelled), when the major source of said tax returns is supposedly the IRS, which collects revenues for the United States (federal) Government to apply as our Congress sees fit — including to promote marriage and fatherhood through diversions from welfare.

As such, while I can look at organization websites as they evolve, in analyzing, I don’t have for these two (CBMA and CFUF) (or, generally, for tax-exempt organizations involved dealing with them or their boards of directors either), any tax return for 2019, while websites are describing 2020 facts about their leadership and programming.  While I’m fine-printing it, the organizations meanwhile do their “BIG-Photos-Bright-Colors” gesturing to distract from just how inbred and overlapping are the business interests of those running it.  And in some cases, how crooked.

So, CBMA and CFUF in #BlackLivesMatter: What’s Up Now, 2020, with (Famous-Foundations-sponsored-) Campaigns for Black MALE Achievement and (Still U.S. Gov’t-Sponsored-) Centers for Urban Families (fka “Fathers”)? [Started June 20, 2020, Publ. July_8]. (short-link ends “-cvS”)

One is in New York (legal domicile Delaware) and the other in Baltimore, Maryland. After the two images of tax returns (the last three years for each), starting with the latest available tax returns, I have some “get-acquainted” quotes or profiles of the CFUF Chairman of the Board, CEO, and a self-descriptive quote or so from the latest available tax return.  Further down, (and closer to the starting point of this post), I reference CBMA’s original fiscal sponsor (Silicon Valley Community Foundation, I’d posted on it several times– exactly where, links provided below), some of the website’s displayed current CEO’s bio blurb (Shawn Dove), some of his “bio blurb” reference involved a former Secretary of State of New Jersey (<~Wiki), and reverend, who has perfected the multi-tax-exempt entity business model sold as helping communities become debt-free and under the umbrella of community development, obviously some religious responsibility… [it] recruits and trains churches, agencies and community organizations to use [its] unique and proven strategies for recruiting families to foster and adopt children.   Naturally, trademarks were involved.

A few paragraphs here — covered in more detail further down — added July 17, after publishing this post.  I believe the “charitable immunity act” (from torts, i.e., responsibility), new to me, important to notice. Perhaps this may explain why privatizing government functions specifically into non-profit “charities” (very broadly defined) is so popular.  This added section in fine print and a different-colored background mark its beginning and end…

Search results on this act brought up an interesting (though long) 2005 article published by Villanova University (Charles Widger School of Law). I have been reading; it puts a well-annotated timeline to the use of this immunity and the emergence (1980s) publicizing clergy abuse and subsequent lawsuits.  See in pdf format here:

‘Secrecy+Settlements: Is the New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act Justified in Light of Clergy Sexual Abuse Crisis?’ by Samantha Kluxen Barbera (a second click on blank  page icon may be needed to view).

//LGH

As always, I learned a lot doing these drill-downs, plural.

“What’s Up Now, 2020” only applies to the websites, as the latest financials or anything close to them, for either organization, just aren’t showing up. Some of the delay may be IRS filing deadlines leniency during COVID19 pandemic, but very late-filing while turnover of leadership, websites, and even entity legal business names, isn’t a new thing.

In both cases, the closest year I could find was 2017 (“FYE,” fiscal year ending, December), meaning both entities and CFUF’s related entity) are two-and-a-half years behind as of now, July, 2020.

I included tables with live links to the full tax returns  (the same search results, but copied directly into the post, (rather than screen-shots later uploaded as an image, to the blog and inserted into the post) much lower on this post.  Look for the similar color scheme, same organization names and EIN#s, but “clickable.” There are many such tables, once other involved personnel’s private foundations, or a larger sponsoring foundation (example:  The Abell Foundation, wealth created or at least assets greatly increased when a philanthropist Henry Black sold the publisher of The Baltimore Sun).

Some chairmen and -women or directors of CFUF have been in (or run for) public office, resulting in yet other connections to foundations associated with public-interest projects, i.e., taking government money.

This brought up the 501©3 — 501©4 combo, “Greater Baltimore Committee” (and its Foundation) and “The Waterfront Partnership of Baltimore, Inc.”

One chairman’s background (LinkedIn) I looked at included six years volunteering at Baltimore Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) Programs, which relates to the National CASA (“National Court Appointed Special Advocate/Guardian ad Litem (CASA/GAL) Association”) which, oddly, chose a major media company for its latest (well, FY2018 shown) campaign based in Las Vegas, Nevada, state where illegal prostitution (far larger business than the legalized version, says Wikipedia) is high — and child-trafficking.  The head of that media company (an LLC, not a tax-exempt organization) has been characterized (I’ll quote it) in 2004 (and since) as “huckster, dealmaker, and fixer extraordinaire,” “the most powerful unelected man in Nevada,” and with clear implications of mob connections.

The volunteering at a local CASA doesn’t make a person a fixer, dealmaker, or equal (per se) having mob connections, or being a crook.  But, it DOES make one in that company when the National CASA is considered, it’s the company one has been keeping.

ALSO (by and large) MOST of the tax-exempt organization’s websites do not offer or provide tax returns, audited financials, or EIN#s, ALL of which are needed to understand their operations.

One CFUF board member for several years, not a household name for me so I simply looked it up (Catherine E. Pugh), was a State Legislator, then briefly Mayor of Baltimore until scandals showed that she was a crook, and how so.  (See Catherine Pugh Wiki, Balletopedia, and this US DOJ announcement (next long quote) from last November, 2019.

Given the variety of people and entities involved, understand how a post on either one (let alone referencing both) entities above will be either very long, or very incomplete. The linear blog form with many links isn’t the ideal format, however, when it is read, and links followed (and read), it’s the understanding (your own comprehension) which can better process how what is being portrayed as simple, often isn’t.  Without looking at the various networks, you don’t comprehend the entities or their behaviors well enough to assess how genuine is the stated purpose.

The real question is, operations.  This next section on Catherine Pugh was added last (not first, where it’s showing up) as I did the drill-downs. I’ve labored on this post long enough and am about to publish.//LGH

You can now access the various documents (unsealed last Nov., posted at Maryland District Courts website Feb. 4, 2020), including indictment, plea agreement, stipulation of facts, and Government’s, then Defendant’s Sentencing Memorandum.  Stipulation of Facts:= in USA v. Catherine E. Pugh:

Pugh did not maintain a personal bank account, choosing instead to comingle her personal and business finances in her business accounts.  [Pugh] filed a U.S. Individual Income Tax Form 1040 for 2015 and 2016, which included Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Form Schedule C for Profit or Loss from a Business (Sole Proprietorship)…

Compare the dates the wire fraud (etc) took place — notice it involved public institutions (Baltimore Public City Schools, “BCPS,” a local charity (Associated Black Charities, Inc. (ABC-MD.org),** had political and self-gain (including tax-evasion) purposes, and involved — as often has to happen when fraud occurs — another civil servant / city employee) with when she was also a volunteer director (1.0 or so a week, with others: there’s only one paid officer, Joseph T. Jones, per the tax returns) with the well-known Center for Urban Families.

**(Looked up after I published this post):  The ABC-MD charity’s main revenue, throughout, is federal grants under the Ryan White (HIV/AIDs) grants.  Its ONLY financial posted on “Financials” page is for audit of FYE2017 and 2018 — not one Form 990, and nothing for any other years.

Yet, according to the signed (by Pugh and her attorney) Stipulation of Facts, the same charity played a major role in facilitating (knowingly or not; seems to me better fact-checking earlier was in order) Pugh & Brown’s varieties of fraud which show little regard for the poor and vulnerable — or the privilege of being in public office as a civil servant.  It’s unbelievable how many other companies and types of companies were involved in donating to the above charity, resulting in the fraud:  a healthcare insurance, auto insurance, Kaiser (a California, primarily, healthcare big player with a presence in Maryland), even a Chicago investment firm. But seems to have started (Count 1 of the Stipulation of Facts) describes with UMMS (University of Maryland Medical System) purchasing books intended for the Boston City Public Schools, and involving this Charity.  One was played off against another, backstopping as about to be caught, lying to their accountants, use of cash, straw donors, etc.   (Upcoming links and quote summarize).

It’s good to be alert to the “how” of such operations involving public institutions and private charities, because it can and no doubt does occur in plenty of places.  Notice:  several companies out of a home address, the types of interrelated businesses they were in, and targeting the nonprofit field and public offices (State Senator, Mayor) (using, no doubt prior involvement IN the public offices as a credibility boost) This quote is only about half (or less) of the Department of Justice press release:

Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh Pleads Guilty to Federal Conspiracy and Tax Charges

Department of Justice

U.S. Attorney’s Office

District of Maryland

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Thursday, November 21, 2019

---

. . .According to her plea agreement, from approximately 2007 through 2016 Pugh served in the Maryland State Senate, where she served on various legislative committees, including the Senate Health Committee.  In 2011, Pugh ran an unsuccessful campaign to be mayor of Baltimore.  In September 2015, Pugh again ran for mayor of Baltimore, and won, becoming Mayor on December 6, 2016.  Pugh owned Healthy Holly, LLC, a company formed in Maryland on January 14, 2011, and used to publish and sell children’s books she had written.  Pugh also owned Catherine E. Pugh and Company, Inc., a marketing and public relations consulting company organized in Maryland in 1997.  The principal address for both companies was Pugh’s residence in Baltimore.  Pugh was also the sole signatory on the Healthy Holly and Pugh Company bank accounts.  Pugh did not maintain a personal bank account, using her business bank accounts for personal and business finances.

Between June 2011 and August 2017, four Healthy Holly books were published, with each book listing “Catherine Pugh” as author.  The vast majority of books published by Healthy Holly were marketed and sold directly to non-profit organizations and foundations, many of whom did business or attempted to do business with the Maryland and Baltimore City governments.

From approximately 2011 until December 2016, Gary Brown, Jr. worked as a legislative aide to Pugh.

. . .Wire Fraud

Pugh admitted that from November 2011 until March 2019, she conspired with Gary Brown to defraud purchasers of Healthy Holly books in order to enrich themselves, promote Pugh’s political career, and fund her campaign for mayor.  Pugh and Brown admitted that they employed several methods to defraud, including: not delivering books after accepting payments for the books; accepting payments for books to be delivered to a third party on behalf of a purchaser, then converting some or all of the purchased books to their own use without the purchaser’s or third party’s knowledge; and by double-selling books without either purchaser’s knowledge or consent.  Pugh stored quantities of fraudulently obtained Healthy Holly books at various locations, including Pugh’s residence, her state legislative offices, her mayoral office, the War Memorial building in Baltimore City, and a public storage locker used by Pugh’s mayoral campaign.

Specifically, Pugh admitted that she sold approximately 20,000 each of Healthy Holly books one, two, and three to the University of Maryland Medical System (UMMS) for $100,000 each.  UMMS agreed to the purchase on the condition that it be on behalf of, and for distribution to, school children in the Baltimore City Public School system (BCPS), in part, to further the mission of UMMS’s community outreach program.  As part of the agreement Pugh was to deliver the donated books to BCPS.

As detailed in her plea agreement, Pugh did not deliver the full 20,000 Healthy Holly books one, two, and three that UMMS purchased to BCPS, instead keeping some of the books for herself.  In addition, Pugh sold to unwitting purchasers copies of Healthy Holly books one, two, and three that had already been sold to UMMS and donated to BCPS.  Pugh used Associated Black Charities, a Baltimore-based public charity, to facilitate the resale and distribution of the books to new purchasers.  Neither the charity nor the new purchasers knew that Pugh was double-selling the books.  Pugh also accepted payment for books that were never delivered to the purchaser.

Conspiracy to Defraud the United States/Tax Evasion

Pugh further admitted that she used the proceeds of the sale of fraudulently obtained Healthy Holly books for her own purposes, including: to fund straw donations to Pugh’s mayoral election campaign; and to fund the purchase and renovation of a house in Baltimore City.

Specifically, Pugh issued Healthy Holly checks payable to Brown, for the purpose of funding straw donations to the Committee to Elect Catherine Pugh. …

! ! ! (From the Maryland District Courts link above, with the various pleadings, I started reading the “Stipulation of Facts” (quoted briefly above) and on page 2 see that, in approaching the BCPS (public schools) to get agreement to take her books, they first had to copyedit (Book One) for grammar and copyediting mistakes (!!) — this was a State Senator and mayoral contender in 2011!!)

You have the links and can check back through the years, when former Mayor Pugh was board of directors on CFUF…including up in 2017.

The websites (per tax returns) are BlackMaleAchievement.org for the Campaign (“CBMA”), CFUF.org for the Center, and “N/A” for the second “CFUF Fund” entity.  I guess viewers of the website aren’t meant to know about the second entity and viewers of CFUFFund’s tax return who somehow manage to locate it probably did so through the other tax return.

I’ve been aware of these organizations for years (one search shows, of CBMA before it incorporated, on a post I did January 2011), and of CFUF when its business name (last initial) stood for “Fathers” not “Families.”  Change of label hasn’t really become a change of focus, it becomes clear quickly.

CFUF is the earlier of the two by over a decade, but historically seems to get more government grants.

CBMA didn’t need them, with the powerful organizations which came together to start it, complete with a NY address (when incorporated) but a fiscal agent from California, at first. CFUF as you can see below has two tax-exempt related entities and some complex involvement of board members with other corporations dealing with CFUF)

Read the rest of this entry »

This post,

Think About It: Will Any of These EVER Admit to AFCC’s Influence AND US-based Fatherhood | Access Visitation agenda for the (AFCC-promoted, specialized) Family Courts? (My Sentiments + Evidence May 29, 2020, Updated and Published June 26). (short-link ends “-crl”{<~last character “l” as in “lovely”), as drafted about 5,000 words, as published probably MUCH longer)(almost 21,000 words!).

started as my indignant reflection on another one interrupted an update to the previous one published May 20.  That previous post featured updated National Fatherhood Initiative, Inc.’s tax returns; I wanted to remind people of this entity and more like it, and that their programs with collective impact still exist, and who/what the NFI is as a nonprofit.

That post was called:

For Political Clout, Big Isn’t Always Best, as the National Fatherhood Initiative, Inc. (1993ff, EIN# 23-2745763) and its Disproportionate Influence for its Small Size and Financially Fuzzy IRS Tax Returns Show (Started Jan. 20, 2020, Published May 20). (Case-sensitive, generated short-link ends “-c80,” <~~final character is a “zero” not capital “O”) (about 5,200 words).

Both posts are timely and appropriate now, just after June 21, “Fathers’ Day” in the USA:

WHY:

AFCC is still being its usual self,** (it’s a cult), and the leadership of the violence-prevention (supposedly feminist) field and the barely-disguised anti-feminist, “women and children as property” fatherhood field are still talking about anything BUT their respective business entities and how the U.S. government funds both fields (unequally, it seems),

URL: BWJP.org Updates News from the Nat’l Child Custody Project’ Filename: “BWJP’s 2016 Nat’l Child Custody Project admits collab w AFCC and NCJFCJ (& it’s a DVRN entity)~~Viewed 2020June25 ThuPST @ 1.14.04 PM”

URL: BWJP.org Updates News from the Nat’l Child Custody Project’
Filename: “BWJP’s 2016 Nat’l Child Custody Project admits collab w AFCC and NCJFCJ (& it’s a DVRN entity)~~Viewed 2020June25 ThuPST @ 1.12.55 PM” (Bottom of page)

…or that the name of the game is how long you can go (in either field) cutting deals left and right with the “other” side, all the while portraying (where mentioned) if not the AFCC at least the NCJFCJ (which has collaborated with AFCC this century, some in the last, and which shares some judicial membership, sometimes runs joint conferences (see two nearby “BWJP.org” images) as somehow “the good guys” trying to solve the challenging dilemma of how to recognize an abuser when one shows up on the radar (typically in a family law proceeding) and what to do after you have.

re: AFCC being its usual self, (a cult)<~’lexico.com’ definition:**

**Recruiting, grooming professionals just getting their PsyD’s or J.D.’s (specific institutions are known — at least I’ve noticed — to be historic strongholds of AFCC activist members running Centers or Institutes in them), giving them special preference in association with older, established judges, law professors and psych professors.

When some judge gets in trouble (appropriately) for seriously questionable rulings and there’s some job blowback, the group moves in to offer a position. (Google Hon. Christina L. Harms, Ret’d. (<~Balletopedia for time and place judicial basics) in Massachusets).

Just like moving, instead of confronting, abusive priests after discovery of molestations.

[[This BEGINS my post-publication expansion, an example of cultic behavior section

on the CHRISTINA L. HARMS, ROBIN DEUTSCH, Wm. James College’s CECFL, CAFES (etc.) situation

showing AFCC members’ behavior, not to mention close-knit personal relationships with local courts]]. I’ll also mark the ending.

(A two-person, Dec. 2016 Ethics Workshop for Clinicians/Clinical Administrators at the Moore Center, Inc.  in New Hampshire (serves people with disabilities in the region; see its “About”
and “History” pages) says she was then directing Wm. James College’s “CAFES” [Child and Family Evaluation Services,# under its “CECFL” [Center for Excellence in Children, Families and the Law], formerly directed by Robin Deutsch, Ph.D., but CAFES website doesn’t currently list her, at least obviously.  The other person at the Moore Center’s 2016 Ethics Workshop is now shown directing the CECFL.)

#”William James College is proud to present the Child and Family Evaluation Service (CAFES). A forensic service that provides forensic psychological evaluations that are prepared by psychologists and/or post-doctoral psychology fellows under close supervision of highly qualified and experienced doctoral-level professionals.” [undated]

I told you AFCC is a cult (<~etymonline) From Latin ‘colere,’ to till, cultivate.  (related words: colony…). It’s what they do; the USA is their current main colony and, its people, it seems, main source of revenues for members, but their (collective groupthink) heart is elsewhere…

(Context: AFCC group loyalty doesn’t always reveal group members when featuring each other.)

AFCC in MOTION ~~ Link: WmJamesCollege website description of its “CECFL” and components, @ June 1, 2014. Hon Christina L. Harms ret’d in 2012 just six days before one of her controversial rulings in 2011 (which also cost her a job offer from Boston University) was appealed. The ruling appointed a Parenting Coordinator [Deutsch, pictured] and attempted (illegally) to delegate the judicial function to her, over the timely-filed objections of the mother. Amicus Briefs were filed. {Bower v. Bournay-Bower} Another (or perhaps the most) controversial ruling involved forced-abortion AND sterilization of a 31-yr-old pregnant, bipolar woman, against her will and despite her protestations of being Catholic. Grandparents were involved. Both are searchable on-line.//LGH 2020June26. NOTE: I gave links and searchable terms because my summary here is by recall from recent reading.

That one of the names in this case** was in fact AFCC’s Robin Deutsch of Wm. James College, shown here describing how to groom post-doctoral students in the correct way to evaluate and run court-ordered “high-conflict” classes, etc.) does not show on the link in caption above, but on a subsidiary link. (**for example, identifying that probate judge and parent coordinator (see photo caption above and image/next paragraphs below).   My blogging context wasn’t this controversy, however:  I look up this judge not because of these cases, but having seen a mentoring relationship through an AFCC website which, at the moment, I do not remember,*** probably related to its (AFCC’s) most recent (June 2020) Special Webinars series on child-parent contact issues.  The situation seemed so typical in its cronyism and disregard for due process en route to a desired (mutual) goal.

***Found it:  Stephanie Tabashneck, Psy.D., J.D. (<~see resume & image below for just how recently and from where the two graduate degrees).  Tabashneck’s long, informative January 26, 2017 interview with Hon. Christina Harms, starting with description of Harm’s work at CAFES, how (influenced by Alan Dershowitz) she went for family law after first trying criminal (i.e., criminal defense), and how the idea for the High-Conflict course was in fact Robin Deutsch’s, but came from Maine, and what’s she hopes is coming up next:  Notice the  URL platform/designed for law students: https://abaforlawstudents.com/2017/01/26/qa-shaping-the-future-of-family-law/.

From Harms interview, after referencing Alan Dershowitz as her inspiration at law school (Harms attended Wellesley, then Harvard), then discovering she hated doing criminal law as he did (see Wiki: defense teams for Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein 2006; at 28, youngest law professor at Harvard):

Most big firms don’t do family law and so I left and my family law background allowed me to get a great job as the General Counsel for Massachusetts Department of Social Services, which was all about children and families. That was a wonderful job. I loved every minute of it and the only job I wanted even more was to be a family court judge, which is ultimately what I was lucky enough to be able to do.

From Tabashneck’s resume, “Employment.” Her Psy.D. was also from Wm. James College, first employment item also references presentations for the ABA and AFCC:

Center of Excellence for Children, Families and the Law, Boston, MA 2013 – 2014 Postdoctoral Fellow
Completed high-conflict custody evaluations with deposition and court testimony. Supervised and trained by Robin Deutsch, Ph.D., and the Hon. Christina Harms (ret.), who provided feedback on all court-ordered evaluations, depositions, and court testimony. Coordinated Boston-area pilot program for homeless children and parents.

PRESENTATIONS
Carey, P. & Tabashneck, S. (2019, January). Trauma and substance use disorders: Implications for family court. Presentation at the Massachusetts Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Worcester, MA.

(image filename only): StephanieTabashneck.com CV (PsyD Wm James College came before JD @ NewEnglandSchool of Law) Screen Shot 2020-06-26..

That’s what I mean by AFCC-led grooming; Deutsch’s position at Wm. James enabled this for generations of psych students; nearby NorthEastern School of Law which also features at least one well-known adjunct professor, Wendy Murphy (<~her site), (Wikipedia: “a lawyer specialized on child abuse and interpersonal violence,1983: Boston College (private, Jesuit), 1987: New England Law School), certainly knows about the existence of AFCC and, probably, that nearby William James College’s CECFL has been run for about two decades by a leading and activist member, Dr. Deutsch. Is it likely that many of the law school’s professors don’t know either?)

Yet how few professionals in their debates complaining about decisionmaking or seeking to tweak standards and guidelines even reference the AFCC group-loyalty factor, or emphasize that the membership includes family court judges?  In what worldview is that not relevant?

Due Process and improper delegation of authority problems in Bower v. Bournay-Bower divorce, parent-coordinator violations noted by higher court (Norfolk County, MA, Hon Christina Harms (Probate judge who appointed the PC) the PC in question (other filings show) was AFCC’s Robin Deutsch,historically directing a Center at Wm. James College (formerly, in fact about 2012, name-changed from Mass. School of Professional Psychology)

Each time I think about whether to quit blogging and writing on these topics, I run across situations that say, “Never give up” on these exposes so at least one other voice and witness exists on-line.

In the Bower v. Bournay-Bower divorce case I referenced in the caption to above picture showing Harms & Deutsch at William James College (both in red suit jackets), a successor Judge (Jennifer Ulwick) inherited the case, then attempted to appoint, despite all this controversy, Robin Deutsch, who was then Parent Coordinator, as GAL for the child, but Deutsch (properly) declined. Read the case summary in image to left. Realize that the probate judge in question was Hon. Christina L. Harms (by then ret’d.).  Next, though retired, amid some scandal, she was in 2014 until (time, unknown — perhaps still but not on the college website’s record?) working with Deutsch who she’d just passed some work to (2011) and tried to delegate her authority to, at “CECFL” in William James.

In June 1, 2014 the retired-amid-scandal-2012 Probate and Family Judge Christina Harms is shown with Robin Deutsch as then director of the CECFL in a description of the CECFL, its “Certificate in Child and Family Forensics — “which is also a requirement for four post-doctoral clinical fellows who work at the Center and help to lead the Center’s High Conflict Divorce groups that help couples ordered by the courts to resolve their differences to become better co-parents,” High-Conflict Workshop, and CAFES. This link, (AFCC in MOTION ~~ Link: WmJamesCollege website description of its “CECFL” and components, @ June 1, 2014, ) See image above (showing both in red suits at a desk), from which I’m also quoting here:

In addition, the four postdoctoral fellows conduct court-ordered evaluations of children and families who are involved in the legal system by virtue of divorce custody disputes and allegations of abuse, neglect, or domestic violence. Deutsch, who led the MGH [[MassGeneral Hospital]] custody evaluation program for 20 years, sees the Center as one of a kind in the US and attributes an aspect of its uniqueness to the co-director of this Child and Family Evaluation Service (CAFES), retired probate judge Christina Harms, who also directs the High Conflict Divorce program. “We are very lucky to have this thoughtful, experienced leader and guide for a very delicate and important project,” says Deutsch.

In 2017-2018 “Postdoctoral fellowships in Child and Forensic Psychology” (under supervision of CECFL and CAFES directors) were announced by the Massachusetts Psychological Association as providing full-time stipend of $42K for each of three positions, submit letters and curriculum vitae to Christina L. Harms at WilliamJames.edu.

In Feb. 22, 2012, AboveTheLaw gave Harms’ “Quote of the Day” (*) for her comment on the need for judicial independence:  “This is not American idol…” (included here for its internal links to the story, Link just updated to go straight to the article, not just an AboveTheLaw “tag” to the Judge)).

As I said, AFCC members till their ground, recruit and groom professionals to work in the family courts with a certain worldview and fluent in AFCC jargon.  The college clearly had and probably still has a close relationship with the probate court.

[[END, post-publication expansion section, example of AFCC’s cult behavior

on the CHRISTINA L. HARMS, ROBIN DEUTSCH, Wm. James College’s CECFL, CAFES (etc.)

showing AFCC members’ behavior, not to mention close-knit personal relationships with local courts]]

The questions among such aligned professionals seem to be:

How can we KEEP ongoing contact between known abusers and their minor children — which ‘everyone knows’ is for the benefit of all — and anyone who disagrees, often mothers who left such abusers, fathers of their children — is (her)self, obviously abusive.

Those poor family court judges (supposedly) need adequate counsel and ongoing training to differentiate false allegations of abuse from real ones in time to save lives.  Also, since ongoing exposure to traumatizing lifestyles is now mandatory, for the most part, all systems need to be “trauma-informed.”   “Such a challenge” for AFCC and friends…

Where this routine is getting old in the USA, “not to fear, the overseas [and North of the Border, i.e., Canada] connections are still here and flourishing.”

Subtitle to this post, and a blog theme by now:

What the male domestic violence experts, consultants, trainers and technical assistance-provider/authors — and their female colleagues — haven’t told, won’t tell, and why should they?  Life’s been pretty good to most of them….

Among “these” are: Evan Stark, Lundy Bancroft, Barry Goldstein, David Mandel and Jeffrey Edleson.  

Essentially, I’m going to provide links to prior discussions (on this blog) on these men, in that order.  I also referenced and quoted some prior posts on others, such as Peter Jaffe, Ph.D., and as Ed Gondolf with whom domestic violence organization early leader, Barbara J. Hart, Esq. collaborated. All of the above men seem interested in and some emerged from the “court-mandated batterers intervention services” field. I comment before, during, and after on the situation.

What kind of guidance and practice standards the field should have, is an acceptable topic of academic debate.  Whether the field should exist, despite ongoing acknowledgement (like the family courts) it’s not working, or stopping battering behavior it seems is not.  The more public discourse there is declaring (pro/con) a heartfelt desire to “to the right thing” in this field (typically aligned pro/con “the Duluth Model”), the better it is for the field, for people working in it —  “All PR is good PR” — and the less likelihood of it being universally shut down as bad science, bad practice, or high-lethality risk.

On this post, amid the information, basically organized by individuals’ names, I also reference some updates to organizations representing “that which they won’t/don’t divulge” about USA’s “Fatherhood.gov” pre-occupation and funding streams.**  By showing the contrast in a single post, I show that, while it’s among the “unmentionables” in the policy-making circles dominating the field of “domestic violence prevention” and “family violence interventions” (etc.) — dominating because tapped into the public grants and contracts funding streams — this situation certainly exists. It’s comprehensive, entrenched, and funded; it has been year after year accepted by the U.S. Congress and at state and county levels, while being (mostly) ignored by the US public, including those mentally and sociomedia-wise focused on following the “DVRN” organizations in US and some with many shared values and standards in the UK, EU, Canada, and Australia.

It is a weighty situation that we need to acknowledge and deal with.

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s time to declutter my home profile on another media platform; time to unpin (without losing content) that fine-print, multi-post thread which has been pinned to the top of my Twitter account for over a year now.  Hence this post:

One Thread, Many Images, (My) Basic Drill-Down Messages Re: NFJCFJ, AFCC, CAFCASS, “Alienation,” “Domestic Abuse Trainings” (AFCC does, too..), “Arguing PAS, etc.” [Feb. 20, 2020] [short-link ends “-ccQ”]

A “bitly link” to some of this (Oct. 2019 thread, http://bit.ly/2LW3JxV)(<~~corrected link) is now on my Twitter profile, however the part below starting Sept. 2018 had much more content which I want to move, not lose, including I see a section on The Greenbook Initiative and involvement of Jeffrey L. Edleson in the mix of Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment, which the above (bitly link to Oct. 2019) thread doesn’t seem to include.

…These take time to assemble, still hold vital points of reference, and (as a whole) I believe also features my value of following organizations as organizations (funded corporations, and/or government entities taking and dispensing public resources — in media campaigns of various sorts (“Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood” funding streams for ad agencies and technical support multinational companies like ICF, Incorporated, anyone?)

(“Oh yes, and a nod towards our concern about Violence Against Women and preventing Child Abuse.”)(The latter best done, so it’s being messaged abroad, by ensuring ongoing father-contact, for the most part, no matter what…)

“All of the above will be provided, mostly, tax-exempt for people whose income remains low, in part, because they must live NOT tax-exempt living in the jungle of “service provision” privatized government concerned with where to hide, excuse me, allocate their millions for “Building Healthy (or Purpose-Built) Communities” …

So, this is my formerly pinned, now unpinned, Tweet thread, started Sept. 2018.  It’s far from perfect, but contains man y points of reference and images to illustrate them.  I.e., for example, AFCC collaborates and even trains (example from 2007) with NCJFCJ.  Both AFCC and NCJFCJ are tax-exempt organizations based in the USA.

For example, for those #ArguingPAS not promoting the public-interest values of “Reading Forms 990” and Doing the Drilldowns — Looking It Up (connecting dots, or showing where they just do NOT connect, on the various available databases, thus also revealing the completeness, functionality and currency (how long does it take any group to post its returns, beyond the legal deadlines, that is)…. of those databases, whether showing up on a *.gov website or a *.org or *.com one, …. if they were so concerned about the propagation of said Unsound Psychological Theory, they’d have long ago outed the AFCC that promotes it.

But they aren’t, won’t, and don’t do so.  This in itself tells you another operational value is in place for those individuals, and their associated platforms.

Without a question, not outing “AFCC” is core — essential — critical! — to the perpetuation of the domestic violence prevention initiatives across the USA.  With that geographic disclaimer, I can also say (because rather than join in arguing PAS, I actually do my drill-down/look-it-up homework, to the best of my (volunteer) ability, and have een for years — I can say (that is, I’ve seen) plenty of UK-based DV people (i.e., working or featured in various organizations titled after helping women, or preventing violence against women publicizing the problems with “domestic abuse” (as it tends to be called, rather than “Domestic Violence” in the UK) actually came from the USA, both male and female. Particularly what may seem on the surface like wonderfully sensitive, empathetic, and concerned men (authors, consultants. and or program administrators) are loathe to out AFCC or point out how from the start (1980s?) the anti-violence programming was centrally organized and by mutual agreement (for the most part, without majority decisionmakers being abused women) determined that a BUILD-IN of “Batterers’ Intervention Programming” was essential component.

Where that component (father-outreach to perps) wasn’t showing up enough, entrepreneurs like David Mandel (“Safe & Together Institute,” home base, Connecticut, etc.) made strong connections to women-led and women-focused organizations (and apparently were also welcomed into or in front of them) to retrain providers such that it was.

A click on “Media” icon may be necessary to display the full thread.  I’m still a bit new at embedding such things.

#EveryCourtEveryChild is unfair to half those children’s parents – the female half! #NCJFCJ is a PRIVATE Nevada org. & does not represent the people’s will, but the collaborating judges’ It’s partnered & has some common membrs w/misogynistic & Brit/Commonwealth-obsessed #AFCC. pic.twitter.com/C8H72qM2pL

— LetsGetHonest | Understand: #CAFCASS_AFCC_NCJFCJ (@LetUsGetHonest) September 15, 2018

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

These should display many messages, and some replies within them. If not, please let me know with a comment. A quick post here, hope it’s helpful…  I’ll be putting a link to this post back on my Twitter account somewhere; on the profile if possible, or perhaps a new leaner/cleaner pinned tweet with a single graphic.   //LGH.

Post title and shortlink:

‘‘Divorce Mediation & Domestic Violence’** (per a 1997 NIJ-funded report by Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. of CPR, (and now, FRPN.org) raises the questions: Does the DV Industry USA know about AFCC? (Yes!) Since When? (I DNK). Are These Orgs. Acknowledging This? (Generally, No!). So…? (Know Your Organizations!) [This Nov. 19, 2019, off-ramp from Post ‘Oh Arizona!,’ Publ. Jan. 25, 2020′]. (short-link ends “-bE7”)

**As published, I didn’t copy the study’s title right.  I’m fixing it in body of post, and, belatedly, the title, which recurs a few times in the post contents below.  The links are provided my posts anyhow; working on other aspects, I didn’t catch the error until today, Feb. 2, 2020.  Next inset discusses perhaps why.

The earlier (1997) study and Award#:

Divorce Mediation & Domestic Violence, (<~~link to the pdf) Found at NCJRS, Doc’t. 164658:

USDOJ / NIJ Award# 93-NIJ-CX-0036.  (Lead author Jessica Pearson).

(Four images from the front matter of this 235-pager! added only Feb 1, 2020):

The later (2011) study and Award#:

Intimate Partner Abuse in Divorce Mediation:  Outcomes from a Long-Term Multi-cultural Study (multi-author, most from Arizona State University, first listed, Connie J.A. Beck).  The one I previously blogged, last November.

US DOJ Award#  2007-WG-BX-0028 (see nearby image from NCJRS.gov; image caption holds link to the pdf)

‘IntimatePartnerAbuse in DivMed’tn|Outcomes frm a Long-Term Multi-cultural Study’ (NCJRS.gov doct’ 236868 Dec 2011) USDOJ-NIJ Grant 2007WG-BX-0028 Beck,ConnieJA+4 (SrchResults ‘Dingwall’)~~ SShot 2019Nov08 FRI PST @3.55.33 PM

Jan. 25, 2020, Pre-Publication (Impromptu) Preview,  for a post in Draft since Nov. 2019

..

Post Title: ”Divorce Mediation & Domestic Violence’ (per a 1997 NIJ-funded report by Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. of CPR, (and now, FRPN.org) raises the question: Do the DV Industry USA Orgs. know about AFCC? (Yes!) Since When (I DNK: 1980s?). Are They Acknowledging AFCC? (Generally, No!). So? (Know Your Organizations!) [This Nov. 19, 2019, off-ramp from Post ‘Oh Arizona!,’ Publ. Jan. 25, 2020′]. (Short-link ending “-bE7”, about 1,700 words as moved; not now of course… Full title and link repeated below):

I started this post after publishing (on this blog) last November (“Oh Arizona!”… (The Career AFCC Academic’s Dilemma…“, short-link ending “-bzx”) on a 2011 NIJ-funded study about mediation in domestic violence settings within the family courts.  While writing that, I found an earlier one on the same topic:   ‘Divorce Mediation & Domestic Violence’, Found at NCJRS, Doc’t. 164658).  NIJ Award# 93-NIJ-CX-0036

The earlier one’s year was 1997 which IF you follow this blog, by now you know is right after Welfare Reform (1996).  This 1997 one unlike the 2011 one, does not  even pretend, that AFCC was not a key player.

POST TITLE ACRONYMS:  My post title uses several acronyms which will be briefly identified here in case they are unfamiliar but described for their significance a bit further below. By now in this field parents and advocates who consider themselves “informed” on the family courts should be familiar with them, but I realize it’s no accident that, generally, they are not. The public awareness gap (basically, blind spots) facilitate more private maneuvering of the situation out of view, while we are coached, encouraged, and conditioned when on-line to focus on other and argue about other things.

The acronyms are, in post title order: NIJ (the National Institute of Justice<~”An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice,” with the motto: “Strengthen Science, Advance Justice”), CPR (Center for Policy Research, Inc., a Denver, Colorado 501©3 formed in 1981), AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc.), and FRPN (Fatherhood Research and Practice Network, which is a website, not an Inc. stating it’s a joint project with CPR and  Temple University). I’ll also be talking about the CRC (Children’s Rights Council, Inc., mid-1980s, in Maryland), mostly because Dr. Pearson was also involved with it, since its founding.

WHO IS THE NIJ?  My Quick Pre/view from its website)***

As you can see the title includes my phrase “NIJ-funded.”  I only mention it because it funded the study I’m interested in impacting domestic violence and mediation as handled in the family courts. However, looking at NIJ’s mission and mandate, we might ask why, given NIJ’s focus having so little to do with the family court system, it was funding organizations and evaluations whose focus is the family court systems as far back as 1997 (if not further).

***Separately, I’m aware that Law Professor Joan Meier of George Washington University (known for her long-term association with “DV LEAP,” a small nonprofit, created in 2003(?) housed at the university) has received, or DV LEAP under her leadership has, funding from the NIJ, but I know less about the NIJ’s (and the USDOJ’s under which it was formed) structure and operations than about HHS, which comes up constantly in the context of: family courts (especially but NOT only in the USA), healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood promotions and infrastructure maintenance (i.e., all those websites with downloadable information, including but not limited to “fatherhood.gov,” and welfare reform I’d like to pursue understanding of it further at some point.

NIJ’s “About” page also says it was started (under the USDOJ presumably) in 1969.

Its list of past directors includes no women (although a few “Acting Directors”) until 2001, Sarah V. Holt.  I notice many of the appointments were pretty short: a year, or two or three mostly, until 1995.

The NIJ is the research, development, and evaluation agency of the [U.S.] Department of Justice

We are dedicated to improving knowledge and understanding of crime and justice issues through science. We provide objective and independent knowledge and tools to inform the decision-making of the criminal and juvenile justice communities to reduce crime and advance justice, particularly at the state and local levels.  [[About NIJ, https://nij.ojp.gov/about-nij, June 17, 2019]]

Notice it makes no reference to the family court, or even civil courts.  The juvenile justice communities overlap subject matter, some, with criminal issues when juveniles commit crimes; other parts of the “juvenile justice communities” involve “status offences”  behaviors like truancy (or underage drinking/driving) which would not be a crime for an adult, so it’s understandable why “juvenile justice” might be there in the larger context of “crime and justice.”

The family courts as set up, by design/intentionally also now overlap significantly with handling real criminal issues (such as assault and battery, kidnapping, causing serious injury, murder, child abandonment, terroristic threats, or child abuse, etc.) and what are notably NOT really criminal issues, such as divorcing, seeking perhaps in the process child support, or functioning as a parent separately from another parent.  

Family Courts and Family Court Divisions of Superior Courts) are by far a more recent development. For the record a “Court” is not synonymous with the word “proceeding.”  Obviously people did divorce many decades ago, but the family courts we have now (USA, and some other countries I’m learning) are a more recent phenomenon, or rather “development,” because they were developed; they didn’t just mysteriously spring forth like ghosts from the previously existing courts.

Under “How NIJ is Organized” (Page:  July, 2019) I see it has An Office of the Director, two science and three support sections, the latter including “Grants Management.” The two “science” sections (in this overview) reference these types of science:

Each of the science offices is composed of scientists from specific groups of scientific disciplines — social and behavioral scientists, forensic scientists, and physical scientists and engineers. While our science offices are organized into specific focus areas for administrative purposes, they operate in a multidisciplinary and collaborative way.

However the mini-descriptions of the two science offices, both here, and if you click through, talk about forensic science, do not repeat any reference to “social and behavioral scientists” and continue to emphasize the criminal justice system, not civil: family courts aren’t even mentioned.

Read the rest of this entry »