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)
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 9,600 11,000 words, sections of which may be moved elsewhere to shorten it!] [The “Read-More” link will also, in time, be moved closer to the top, making for a shorter lead-in section.]
**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).
In my experience, (far) too many people, as for generations most of us have been conditioned, whether or not holding any number of white-collar professional jobs, whether or not possessing sufficient understanding of running a business to handle themselves, whether employee or self-employed, not only lack the functional vocabulary — financial literacy — to even acquire an understanding of the intersection of public and private finances, or on government and taxation itself — but also are so emotionally and financially invested in what works — at least tolerably — for themselves — they do not really want to (will not to the point of continually “cannot”) understand something different, that is, a different assessment. Indicators and symptoms that something odd, that an ongoing, major economic “black hole of non-accountability” exists are thus sidelined, dismissed, and/or ignored, as are people who may broach the topic and point to it. These fainter, less “in your face” indicators in some ways could be called “the canaries in the coal mines.” i.e., ignore at your own risk.
I have of course stood in the “too many people” category above until shocked out of it (in the context of family court), but unlike some, that shock didn’t eradicate all my curiosity, or my healthy respect for the value of ongoing observation and assessment of current surroundings as survival traits (which I also know are best utilized BEFORE in “fight-or-flight” mode).
The literacy and information (including functional vocabulary and its use) on certain economic matters and the operations of government as it is versus as it is portrayed to the public is where “first come + mutually organized = first served” and the rest of the population will be allocated to useful, functional positions within society* as organized by those more aware of just what public resources actually exist [1], and how to access them for private profit [2]. *That these positions may not look exactly like what they did centuries ago doesn’t mean they’re still not symbolically “Hewers of water and drawers of wood.”
[1] Key to understanding this is whether the public has been told the truth regarding the bottom line of (particularly) the federal government, and based on that, the legitimacy of all systems of taxation portrayed as beneficial and necessary for example, to balance that budget. Bottom lines whether of both government and private sectors are expressed not just in terms of annual or bi-annual budgets — but of financial statements. AUDITED ones. Looking at a single entity or just a few entities within a field (OR at public only or private only) is inadequate because public and private constantly interact with each other. Both sectors frequently change names, consolidate, spin off or (for government departments) set up new offices within existing departments, etc.
[2] There’s far less competition in fields mutually controlled by those who pioneered them.
(Example: See blog search phrase: Harvard/Bain/Bridgspan (as a business model) and click on the “Why Bother to Unravel” post [2.1] (its concluding paras) on that search result (2nd search result after this post).’ I concocted that phrase during a drill-down involving all three. I had discovered “Bridgespan” as a subcontractor on another foundation’s tax returns. My fabricated phrase refers generally to commandeering the profits in NONprofit consulting, and as a NONprofit, which takes collaboration with others also so inclined. Notice “Bain” is associated with well-known public figure from Massachusetts (who also ran for President not too long ago).[3, with two associated images] Notice that an elite, private university (in that aspect, HBS — Harvard Business School) is integral part of the phrase, as it is of that model. Better yet, spell “Bridgespan” correctly in the search and read (scroll down towards the bottom for that section) what I published last year (March 30, 2017): Omidyar Entities: The Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan Consulting Model (Transform and Help Run — or own — Distressed Assets, LIKE U.S. PUBLIC SCHOOLS), Rebranded, on Steroids, and Gone Global).
[2.1] Full title and image from top of “Why Bother to Unravel” post (publ. June 16, 2018):
“Why Bother to Unravel…“Link provided nearby or see blog “Archives” for 6/16/2018. Bottom section of this post also summarizes key concerns in a few paragraphs, regarding social service delivery in the private sector, and the tax-exempt sector in general (from an accountability standpoint — not from a “service-delivery” standpoint).
[3] Bain Execs Spent Nearly $5M on Romney’s White House Run, Records Show (Anne Faris-Rosen in Center for Public Integrity, 2/7/2012 (let’s call this “about six years ago.) Mitt Romney and John Kerry both referenced, in the article, but the image (excerpt shown here) mentions Bain Capital LLC and Bain & Co., the latter being a consulting company. Note the timeframes and that Bain & Co. formed in 1984, a decade which is ON my radar below as to LBOs and major Tax Reform, and within the following decade (1986-1996) and with (Tax Reform Act of 1986) organizing personnel and nonprofits in common, welfare reform, which brings up right up to “the elephant in the room” when discussing why family courts are so conflict-ridden and economically, socially and psychologically devastating for so many. Romney, it says below, had continuing passive income after the fourteen years he spent at Bain & Co. Note Bain & Co. LLC also did those leveraged buyouts which (for some of the bought-out companies’ employees) resulted in job loss through the heavy (i.e., “leveraged” with debt) burden the resulting setup provided.
Image #2 of 2, excerpted from Bain Execs Spend Nearly $5M on Romney White House Runs (2/7/2012 in Center for Public Integrity)”Click image to enlarge
Image #1 of 2, excerpted from Bain Execs Spend Nearly $5M on Romney White House Runs (2/7/2012 in Center for Public Integrity)”Click image to enlarge
Along the way (and on most posts on this blog), you’ll see that I continue to name and profile (economically) many organizations directly associated with and set up to affect custody proceedings, child support decision-making, and of course, defining what is and (especially) is not “domestic violence” or “child abuse” and is better described instead as, “high-conflict.” Most of these address how to problem-solve any assessed condition — typically through more trainings (some qualified under CEU or for lawyers CLE credits), certifications, and guidelines for those in the (existing and as we speak, more being created) professions involved. MOST of which will be supported, up front, or once in operation long-term, by public funds.
This time (not most times) the image is the link to article. Click to access. It’s a short read — Please Do! (from Atlanta Business Chronicle originally).
McKinsey & Company copies Bain (2014)
This section/illustration may be moved (or may not) later! I added to it where McKinsey, already a global consulting company (for decades) connects also to the US-based National Governors’ Association., and the significance of the NGA among other similar associations in setting policies which obviously will affect US citizens due to size, scope and major corporations involved. //LGH.
While I’m on “Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan (The Bridgespan Group)” — it’s no secret that Bridgespan was a spinoff of Bain and involves consulting for nonprofits with positive spin on the social impact (benefits of course are featured) of doing so. On basic Google search again, among plenty of results on the first page, one is Nonprofit Quarterly reporting that the big consulting firm (multi-national) McKinsey & Co. (which I featured as a “Corporate Fellow” to “National Governors Association Center for Best Practices,” a pay-to-play status), reported in March 2015 that it has copied the model and spun off its own nonprofit. Click nearby image to read more (see esp. para.3), however this next quote from it specifically acknowledges the “Bain’s Bridgespan” model being circulated — obviously among powerful corporations whose profits, otherwise, would be taxed — considerably — if they weren’t moving revenues from nonprofit to nonprofit for better “social impact” and to help economic mobility of retail-level entry workers (!), and if you explore this example further, that’s exactly what they’re talking about. Someone has to work for all the corporations who have so many profits they have to pour excess into tax-exempt foundations. If you read further (on this post) for example, on the background of people like Grover Norquist (active in pushing for Tax Reform Act of 1986, and after that, “Contract with America” which so dramatically (but in the “background operating systems”) impacted judicial decision-making in America’s (meaning here, the USA’s) family courts.
McKinsey & Co. Starts its own version of Bain’s Bridgespan Rick Cohen, March 27, 2015 in Nonprofit Quarterly.
…Some portion of McKinsey’s thinking on nonprofits is contained in the McKinsey on Society website, where there are essays and research summaries addressing topics such as how poor school systems can become good school systems and, not surprisingly, extolling the potential of social impact bonds. In other words, as a global management consulting firm, McKinsey has had a nonprofit practice carried out by some of its 19,000 staff in over 100 offices in 61 countries.
This looks a little like Bain & Company’s creation of the Bridgespan Group in 1999. Bridgespan started out strongly with a $1 million grant from Bain plus several loaned staff. Like McKinsey, Bain & Company is a wealthy parent for its nonprofit consulting spinoff, with sales of around $2.1 billion.
The Chronicle of Philanthropy suggests that the McKinsey Social Initiative will start life with a $70 million capital infusion from McKinsey & Company plus access to 25 of its consultants to work on MSI projects and advice from 10 McKinsey partners …
Well, I just looked up the Form 990s and found it’s already (since 2014 origins) changed its name AND its website, and the one linked to on the 2015 report (which is neither) isn’t what the 2016 tax return shows (latest year shown on a separate database — NONE are shown on the website) (EIN# is 471073442).
Just a sampler: Shows change of name w/in 2 yrs of startup, two concurrent websites with different names, and a very small board addressing “solutions to pressing global problems.”
Note: Flipping the handling of a basic tax return — while changing website AND entity names, which do not correlate, and often while withholding either half the financial documents (i.e., if there are both tax returns and financial statements) or the most recently filed ones, and the like, appears to be common practice in the sector, no less so from the larger tax-exempt foundations than from smaller ones.. For what is now called not “McKinsey Social Initiative” but “Generation: You, Employed” — if I even started to explain what I’ve seen in just 15 minutes looking for key information about the organization/s being represented through only two websites and three yrs of tax returns, I believe readers would go no further on this post for the craziness — missing information, inconsistent information, and especially if unfamiliar with basic Forms 990, what I’m noticing on those black-&-white (until I annotated them) tax returns. So it’s been sidelined (for now). However (hint) there seems to be more than on 501©3 involved; because one is described in fine print as “private operating foundation” (which produces 990PFs) and the one I just looked at is public (which has as link above shows, a plain Form 990.). However know that the former “McKinseySocialInitiative.org” doesn’t redirect to “Generationinitiative.org” but to “McKinsey.org” which, eventually (not at the top) mentions a “Generation.org” (not “GenerationINITIATIVE.org”), hoping perhaps, that readers won’t get down to the very, very bottom of “McKinsey.org” website and notice, as I (from habit) did.
McKinsey.org is an incubator for new solutions to social issues. It works by applying McKinsey’s capabilities and by partnering with leaders from the private-, public- and social-sectors.
McKinsey.org is a 501(c)(3) private operating foundation.
-
- Squint hard, the bottom of “McKinsey.org”
-
- Registered in NY, variously,1956, 1966, 1995, 2011?, 2013, & 2017 (not in order shown)
-
- McKinsey.COM (the for-profit global consulting firm) timeline gives it credit for founding “Generation” with emphasis on global reach.
-
- McKinsey.com, 1990s
-
- McKinsey.com 1980s, note >half partners from OUTside the U.S.
“McKinsey.org” is a private operating foundation WHERE? (see five-image gallery above; click on any image to enlarge, navigate using the arrows directly to the others) In which country? IF in the USA, in which state (or territory, or is it D.C.)?
(annotated excerpt from 10/1/2012 Big 7 Pension Guidelines (a 2pp release)
(I see from the image url that I posted this around July 3, 2017)
Notice the last image, bottom states that since “two years after the early 1980s” (thanks for a specific year), the majority of partners are from outside the U.S. What does that mean when it’s a major contributor as consultant, among other corporations with U.S. toeholds, to USA-focused “instrumentalities of government” such as the National Governors’ Association (searchable on this blog; I’ve posted on it) and its accompanying nonprofit the NGC “Center for Best Practices” and that (as I recall, but should be fact-checked) a coalition of similar organizations (to NGA) call themselves “the Big Seven” as to pursuing their interests before U.S. Congress?
-
NGA Corp. Fellows (vs. “Partners”) program accessed 4-20-2018 says it started 30 yrs earlier in 1988
NGA Corporate Fellows described under link to “Corporate Partners” (accessed 4/20/2018) (what $20,000 a year can buy in terms of access). Shows that this program started in 1988….
- DEFINITELY not advertised at first, second, or even third level but there is a list of “partners.” Since I first blogged it, the list has been separated, I supposed on a sliding scale: Platinum, Gold, Silver and Bronze. The Silver list is long, but McKinsey & Co. is still on it. Samples in next image gallery
I’m ON “McKinsey.org” and there are no links to financials at least accessible clearly from top margin or bottom margin of the website, so casual readers might not bother to look up either tax return, or even recognize that at least two different nonprofits (judging by the one I found so far, EIN#471073442, Generation: You Employed, Inc., which at least in 2016 was not a “private operating foundation” or called “McKinsey.org”) which both must file separate returns (being nonprofit and not religious or otherwise exempt from doing so as would be: a church, a mosque, a synagogue, or (for more, see IRS.gov and figure it out!) and if large enough or so required, audited financial statements, too. I look forward to posting on the dilemma presented, when I can… Meanwhile website “McKinsey.COM” is careful to take credit for “Generation” which it allegedly founded in 2014 (and probably did, but not under that name, and obviously “Generation” is not the same as a US nonprofit named “Generation: You, Employed, Inc.” and it’s clear that both “Generation” and McKinsey & Company are, and have been for many decades, globally oriented. )
End of “McKinsey & Company copies Bain 2014” section.
(Representing one part of this post title “WE are Here, Collectively” subject matter).
In an ideal world, which no blog-only platform attempting to present information like this can be, the next section would be near the top. The balance between informations spread too thinly between many posts, and spread too thick on single posts I see from many website is met in typically two different ways — oversimplify and withhold most critical information, and/or show what is displayed in bill-board, or on-line news style (i.e., present the reader with a grid of photos and catchy titles, typically “news” on the organization, and let them click somewhere on the grid, which through narrative story-telling should keep readers properly distracted from going after the financials, corporate identification, any available tax returns, and ownership, not to mention when tax returns are available, note which related organizations indicate further size of the current organization’s empire, reach, or scope of activities (referring especially to any “Schedule R” (Forms 990 after 2008) showing related entities by type. Before 2008, they are reported, but less obviously on tax returns. THOSE should be identified first.
As I’ve made clear above, McKinsey & Company AND the website “McKinsey.org” (claiming private operating foundation status) AND the website “Generation.org” make that near-impossible. I did check the IRS exempt organizations select check list for anything “McKinsey” and found only two results, as well as CharitiesNYS.com and on the latter came up empty — which doesn’t meant it’s not somewhere else in the US, a needle in a 50-plus(50-state) haystack — or possibly not in that haystack.
This post and two nearby related ones took over a month to write, revise, reconsider, and allocate sections of information between them, as designed to: (a) provide an informal Table of Contents updated through Q1 posts which would last beyond their listings on “Last Few [10] Posts menu on right sidebar, and a few navigation and blog viewing issues, and, more importantly (b) prioritize and decide what/how much to report on current investigations (newer organizations on my radar, newer insights on organizations historically on it), and finally (c ) come up with an appropriate title.
Although the extensive “You Are Here” part (a) comes first for visual consistency with other TOC posts, the guts, the main substance of this post (b) in different sections — such as , comes after it. I’ve excerpted the start of that second part here. When you see this text in this format, you are in that section:
~|~|~|~|~|~
Increasingly the most common denominator of population demographic (and a specialty niche, too!) is, predictably under this system “Low-Income.” (Images from San Francisco-based nonprofit) $358M Gross Assets “Low Income Investment (formerly “Housing”) Fund.” Fifteen years ago (2001) it had only $78M assets but now it has $358M, with barely a “blip” in either assets or revenues during the 2008 [real estate, mortgage-default, foreclosure-producing with global consequences] bust.
“You Are Here” On This Blog
You are now looking at a fifth “sticky” post supplementing three informal Table of Contents update ones already published in March and a much more formal and comprehensive one published in January 2017, called “2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes from 2016” — all of which are pinned as posts to the top of the blog before one can browse actual current posts… as {described in the olive-colored background sections and accompanying images of previous posts (on any color background) below}.
With this post and the 2017 TOC one imaged nearby that makes five (and a sixth is in process mid-April, 2018) “sticky” posts which will remain at the top of “Current Posts (Most Recent on Top)” page.
These are here not only for Table of Contents updates, but also to emphasize key themes, using currently evolving (rapidly!) community development and other “replicable” projects affecting the national bottom line and the status of anything approaching justice and representative government, in the USA and elsewhere.
Understanding the public/private collaborations both separately and as acting collectively: how they operate, what the uniform control tactics and agenda are and have been; how, often, financial statements or (as it applies) IRS tax returns viewable by the public are obscured, not posted accurately, completely or sometimes at all when legally required; the size and complexity of private nonprofit networks influencing public institutions (that is, government!) has never been more critical. This will continue being critical unless some counterbalances surface — and the public starts resisting conditioned indoctrination to pick only ONE side of any pre-framed cause, and then argue it using ONLY limited vocabulary (rhetoric) instead of teaching ourselves the same language of “control of assets and dispersal of accountability for them” being used upon us.
2018 is not time to continue consuming, following and believing false statements (implicit or explicit) or a prepared menu of who to believe, based on historic population demographic, geographic (Urban/suburban/rural) religious, racial, gender or political divides.
This, as I anticipate publishing it mid-April, 2018, might be the top or next-to-top post on my “Current Posts: Most Recent On Top” Page. (To clarify, “top” here refers to position on the blog main page, as stacked atop ongoing posts, most of them arranged by date published, not to popularity). If so, know that I published it after about a month on the “back burner.” The next few images represent writing between then, in fact between January 1, 2018, and now. This page is my promised “extra” to three “Informal TOC” posts, one per month for Q4 2017 but each one published in March 2018, as shown in the nearby (annotated) image. Access them easily on “Current Posts: Most Recent on Top” (=First link under the Go-To Widget), below this post. All posts have a “Read-more” abbreviation link to segregate a post lead-in text, for better browsing if a person chooses to browse by scrolling, swiping, or paging-down that static “Current Posts” page.
(Post March 19, 2018: The long title refers to Robin Hood Foundation.)
Shows posts March 30, 2018 (just announces a New Page — see nearby image for details) and April 7, 2018 (one I’d thought was published two yrs ago. Discovering the oversight on attempting to reference it on Twitter I quickly posted it.
Three posts from late Feb. – early March, 2018
Opening text from 3/28/2018 new page.Click Image & Read!
After these posts, and as images copied today (April 11, 2018) from my blog sidebar under “Last Few [10] LGH Posts” where they still show (but won’t for much longer if I keep posting), you can see more recent posts. Some moved into publication recently had been held “pending” over the winter holidays. They deal with ongoing organizations which typify themes I’m exploring.
.
.
.
Are you a first time visitor? Then realize that “2017 continues themes from 2016…Tables of Contents” may be a better place to start: full post 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. (case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink-ends 5qZ
Click to enlarge. Excerpt from Jan. 9, 2017 post explaining TOC navigation. If you don’t want to mess with uploaded pdfs or anything complex, find this part of the [“2017 continues themes from 2016…“] post and browse at least the last three posts of 2016 and all of 2017‘s posts. Other years (and links to them) are also discussed [on that “2017 continues themes from 2016…” post].
FamilyCourtMatters’ Jan. 2018 four published posts. Image’d be titles-only but I added colorful comments on the subject matter of each post.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Seven Posts from December, 2017 (Informal TOC Update @ March 14, 2018)
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). If you’ve read one of them you can skip past the next post’s section in that color; December’s here is two paragraphs (olive-background segments) longer than the other two.
Click to enlarge. Excerpt from Jan. 9, 2017 post explaining TOC navigation. If you don’t want to mess with uploaded pdfs or anything complex, find this part of the [“2017 continues themes from 2016…“] post and browse at least the last three posts of 2016 and all of 2017‘s posts. Other years (and links to them) are also discussed [on that “2017 continues themes from 2016…” post].
2017 Dates shown in this post:December 3, 14, 15, 17, 21, 23, and 24.
This post provides access in full post titles with links in, in this format,
Image (links shown not active, of “7 Dec 2017 Post titles by LGH@FamilyCourtMatters (see Pg+Post~>2018Mar14)
and access to a page with the list in that format and with descriptive texts (quasi-“abstracts” actually just copied from the post intro, or other summary parts within a post — hence its’ an INformal TOC update) and, for this month I also posted screenprints (4 images) from my blog dashboard which simply lists them –but being images, they are not interactive (clickable to get to the post).
Again, the extended abstracts to accompany these post titles (informal TOC) are published on a new page, which I’ve been working on separately from this one. It is far longer. Its full title and link:7 Posts from December 2017 (Intro, Links, + Extended Post ‘Abstracts’ + Images @March 14, 2018) This page has a short-link with case-sensitive ending “-8NJ” and is published at 22.5K words long. New pages also display automatically on the menu “Vital Info/Chrono-Alpha Links” on the right blog sidebar. Unless I move them to the top, they show at the bottom of that menu (list of links).
Look for a block of bright yellow highlit titles (with dates in red) below on this post or the above related page. It’s found in that format, i.e., with active links, in both places.
Note “Community Quarterback” element of Purpose Built Communities model.. (click image to enlarge; repeated in slideshow gallery below, on my 3/14/2018 “Seven Posts from Dec. 2017” post)
#1 of 2, East Bay Times June 23 2017, Grand jury calls for audit of popular youth violence prevention nonprofit
Keeping the longer abstracts separate, length here permits me to retain my preliminary section on “Purpose Built Communities” (imported from Georgia to California, and occasioning a civil grand jury to be assembled when the “usually a newly created nonprofit,” “community quarterback” (a key element to selling Purpose Built Model locally anywhere — see nearby two images, also slideshow-style image gallery further below — which as applied to a certain census tract (“Castlemont” neighborhood) in Oakland, California, turned out to be functioning as a fiscal agent of another, fund misappropriation and co-mingling was discovered, along with unpaid debts (from mis-use of public funds) to the California? Department of Education over an immediately failing charter school, part of the formula for neighborhood transformation which local leadership had swallowed, whole, apparently (see second image with building photo & East Bay Times logo).
What the local press didn’t report on, really, was how deeply this model connects to influential nonprofits and coordinated public/private “partnerships” (I use quotes because the relationship may not always meet the legal definition of a “partnership” although there’s no doubt about the coordination, which is being featured as the positive good in the model) — whether Public Health Institute (of Oakland), PolicyLink (also of Oakland), through common board leadership, and of the nonprofit leadership, typically (found both here, and I eventually discovered more of it in Atlanta also), i.e., someone formerly a local civil servant or leading a major agency (such as the Atlanta Housing Authority) then heads off to a community transformation nonprofit — which will call upon funding streams from the government entity.
Similar to how HHS personnel then began working for nonprofits which called down HHS funding for marriage/fatherhood promotion in the late 1990s, early 2000s, which this blog originally documented (for years) in major detail.
As with HHS, the same practice could apply in HUD, with a difference that now “place-based philanthropy” wishes people to be in public supported housing (under private ownership), receiving public health and human services (under private ownership through nonprofits) AND attending public-funded (based on per-student $$, typically “charter”) schools (under private ownership through nonprofit. With (trackable in both Georgia and this California example) board membership of the several nonprofits in common. Thus while the general intent is to root and ground residents in public institution-funded: housing, social services, and schools (and private/nonprofit after-school, pre-school etc.) and local wage-based income, the controlling factors are corporations NOT based on wages, but primarily on contributions, and involving complex menu of related entities.
While the people working and living in such communities MUST reside there for it to work (for capitalized debt to be repaid, I suppose) those intent on replicating the model seem to have no problem flying around the country for conferences to spread the community transformation/”holistic model” gospel. A better word, from what can see (business/financial profiling) might be “WHOLEistic” — the intent to gain WHOLE control of a community AND its residents, call it locally representative, while withholding from the observing public (and probably many of those involved) both the financial records, and the down-sides to this model, long-term and short-term. But, as blighted communities (in Atlanta, involving a deterioriated public housing project and crime-ridden area called “Little Vietnam”) were the “base-line” any improvement would seem to be just terrific, whatever the long-term cost and option for any other form of personal freedoms or survival is sacrificed in the process.
Drew Charter School (EIN# 582528098), part of East Lake neighborhood, Atlanta, Georgia, and on which the Purpose Built Communities (and “Schools”) model is based. Form 990, FY2008, Pt. VIIB, Independent Contractors paid over a certain amount. Janitorial more recently has been outsourced to an Alabama corporation. Edison Learning to over $1M and managed the school that year.
Drew Charter School, EIN# 582528098, Form 990 FY2008, Pt. VIII Revenues (Lines 1-4 only) showing primary source is government grants ($9.5M out of $10M).
Edison Learning (™) screenshot under the heading shown. See also their “Turnaround Schools, Charters” section which features the East Lake (“Drew”) charter school FIRST. Not referenced on the brief description (with no links to more info on it on the site) is how very many other forces, foundations (plural) and LLCs were involved, as well as public housing funds, and personal control (through board directorship) maintained by project developers maintained throughout.
Drew Charter School in Atlanta (for example) FY2008 tax return <== shows $9.5M of government grants out of a $10M total revenues (per Page 1, Pt. I) with (that year) just two primary subcontractors, one of them paid over $1.1M and it’s a for-profit? software-based Edison Learning, Inc. in New York for “Management of School.”
There’s an Edison Learning Center, Inc. (formed only in 2005) and “Academy, LLC” (formed only in 2017) in New Jersey (a Corporate Division website with notably opaque — unless you pay for more information — public records), and none through basic search for “All” (vs. “Active” only) at New York Corporate and Business Entity Database. However, notice its disclaimer (click through or hover cursor over link to see) that this database does NOT include assumed names by businesses, corporations, or other entities which might file at the county level instead.
Meanwhile the Edison Learning(™) website reference (with a NJ address) also shows a UK division, and references partnerships across the US, the UK, and Africa in order to “shape a world” and enable students to “impact a global society.” Naturally, a high focus on using software, and on training professionals in the ‘whole-school’ model.
How “community” and “local” is that, then?
In other words, portraying the Oakland example as a “rogue operation” of a great model, is mis-leading. Another interpretation and presentation is in order. That’s why I took the time to look and to incorporate this example (representing more current research) into a post intended to be near or at the very top of this blog. Expect major transferable skills from viewing and coming to an understanding of the backdrop of this model, and if it’s new territory, of the nature of nonprofits, from the perspective of having a closer look at the books, that is, those available for free (except your time) on-line. [The above few paragraphs is a 3/16/2018 update//LGH]
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Eight Posts from November, 2017 (Informal TOC Update@ March 9, 2018)
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), near the top of this blog.
Click to enlarge. Excerpt from Jan. 9, 2017 post explaining TOC navigation. If you don’t want to mess with uploaded pdfs or anything complex, find this part of the [“2017 continues themes from 2016…“] post and browse at least the last three posts of 2016 and all of 2017‘s posts. Other years (and links to them) are also discussed [on that “2017 continues themes from 2016…” post].
2017 Dates shown in this post: November 5, 18 (with links to a new page Nov. 11), 21, 22, 23, 24, 28 and 29.
Formats follows what’s seen in the first listing below — Dates are in red, followed by post titles (with links to them) highlit in bright yellow, followed by opening or summary texts (copied & pasted, not re-written, these are not formal “abstracts”) in light-green backgrounds inside dark green lines. Some of the opening text sections contain images and subsections to give a flavor of each post.
Here’s a list of titles only. Below, a list of titles (in the same format) with the surrounding (summary) texts inbetween. This added to conform better to the December, 2017 post and for reader convenience. Also, in doing this I noticed that in the main post (titles + “surrounding texts” section) the title for Nov. 28 had omitted; its surrounding (summary) text mistakenly had been credited to November 24. This has now been corrected adding it here, and switching the 11/24 duplicate with the 11/28 title applicable to its surrounding abstract.
That title references some significant “fatherhood” organizations in Baltimore and in South Carolina (and NY) and is a relevant read focused on an original main topic of this blog. 4/12/2018…//LGH.
NOVEMBER 5, 2017: Before WHO’s HiAP there was UN’s Agenda 21; As Usual, Internationally-Networked Nonprofits such as ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA, Inc.** ~ (1991ff, MA legal domicile; first HQ in Boston, then Berkeley, then Oakland, and lately Denver) ~ Help Spread the Latest Version of the Global Gospel. (with case-sensitive short-link ending “-7N2,” post started 10/14/2017 as one of two spin-off posts from my “HiAP” one; being published Nov. 5)
NOVEMBER 18 (referencing also a Nov. 11 new page): About MRFP, Inc. (NAAG/NASCO’s “Single Portal Initiative” for MultiState Registration and Filing by Charities — except, apparently, for MRFP, Inc, NAAG, and NASCO). Also See my New Page (publ. 11/11/17) on SimpleCharityRegistration.com [This post Publ. 11/18/2017](shortlink here ends “-7X8”).
NOVEMBER 21: Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline, Pre-Thanksgiving 2017 (looking back, looking forward…), Yet I See I’d Outlined Nearly the Same Basics One Year Ago (Nov. 2016) [Published 11/21/2017]. (short-link ends “-7ZH”).
NOVEMBER 22: Post Footnotes for “Before WHO’s HiAP… A Closer Look at ICLEI-Local Gov’ts for Sustainability…” post, starting with “NYT Activists Fight Green Projects” (short-link ending “-7T1” started Nov. 2, 2017, published Nov. 22.)
NOVEMBER 23: Happening NOW: Locally and within the USA, Matching Nonprofits to Legal Entities and Tracking Them Remains at Best (for Most) a Messy, Expensive and Unreliable Process, but Internationally — More Streamlined, Monitored, and Standardized for Faster, Easier, and More Profitable Trade. See FSF, FSB (G20-formed, 2009), LEI Legal Entity Identifier [global database + system], GLEIF (Swiss Foundation), LOUs (who issue LEIs) and ‘KYC’ (Know Your Customer) [Publ. Nov. 23, 2017]. (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7To”; moved here Nov. 3, 2017, publ. Thanksgiving Day). (About 8,000 words with some post-publication revisions).
NOVEMBER 24: Changing (the) World, Changing (the) Words: Sovereignty, Circumscribing Sovereignty versus Global ‘Citizenship’ (the Unmentionable: then who is the Global ‘Sovereign’?). (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7MB” started Oct. 14, 2017, published Nov. 24),
NOVEMBER 28: Why are Famous PRIVATE Foundations (Ford, Mott, Public Welfare and others) and On-line Mass Solicitation, DAF-collecting Companies (like JustGive.org) so Fond of Funky, “Failed-to-File” 501©3s — like Wisconsin’s barely-still-there CFFPP (Center for Families and Public Policy) and Its Board of 1hr/week Unpaid Father-Focused Networks (some entities, some not) Speakers, Conference-circuit Experts?. (shortlink ends “-7So” and length is about 10,000 words). Started Oct. 29, published Nov. 28
NOVEMBER 29: The Dark Sides (Bottom Lines) of Web-based Donor-Advised Funding: Donor Disclaimers, Buyouts, Emigration (JustGive [US]–>JustGiving [UK]). And Interesting Related Ops (IronPlanet: ZOPB Highway ByPass J.V.) and Bank Bailouts. [A July 26, 2016 section repost]. (shortlink ends “-83s” and length is just under 7,000 words).
Surrounding texts aren’t abstracts, but summarize content, and usually from the very top of a post. Click any title to access it. Titles are obviously in bold font and highlight bright yellow..).
~ ~ | | THIS BEGINS THE EIGHT POSTS & THEIR OPENING TEXT || ~ ~
NOVEMBER 5, 2017: Before WHO’s HiAP there was UN’s Agenda 21; As Usual, Internationally-Networked Nonprofits such as ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA, Inc.** ~ (1991ff, MA legal domicile; first HQ in Boston, then Berkeley, then Oakland, and lately Denver) ~ Help Spread the Latest Version of the Global Gospel. (with case-sensitive short-link ending “-7N2,” post started 10/14/2017 as one of two spin-off posts from my “HiAP” one; being published Nov. 5)
Post abstract/opening shown in this background-color, marked inside green lines (box): Other post abstracts for November 2017 informal Table of Contents update here follow the same color scheme, to distinguish them from post titles. … Some of these “abstracts” are long enough to include sub-sections, which might be in different color schemes. On-location (actual posts) rarely will follow the same color schemes; this [light-green inside dark green lines] color scheme is just an added visual marker for purposes of this post. Look for the yellow-highlit post titles.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Eight Posts Published in October, 2017 (Informal TOC Update @ March 6, 2018).
First published March 6, updated March 16, 2018 with this intro from insight (“hindsight”) gained while producing subsequent, similar posts:
The format on the “Table of Contents” page is cumbersome to produce and explain; this is a “quick-and-dirty, copy-and-paste” compilation. Well, not exactly quick to produce… but being at least restricted to a single month here, quicker than updating the complex inter-relationships between list, post image, underlying post page printed to pdf for viewing (etc.) as shown on the “2017 Table of Contents” (which incorporates other, earlier tables in multiple forms, with different viewing options).
Life, common sense (and blogging, not to mention years of producing documents in variety of business settings each with its different software and corresponding limits or character traits, including certain flaws) also tells me that any set-up so complicated is probably not the best one, especially for a lone blogger without administrative staff, paid or volunteer. It’s inefficient and any error at one level could be reproduced at others. A blog, and specifically a WordPress blog here, is no different. It’s great for certain purposes; for others, not so much.
Realizing this, I hadn’t worked on the Table of Contents for some months while continuing to work hard on writing posts and pages on current content, some of it directly responsive to current headlines and developing, ongoing social and economic policy situations I felt should be flagged in the public interest.
Title: Eight Posts Published in October, 2017 (Informal TOC Update) @ March 6, 2018. (shortlink ends “-8Kh”). This post is only about 3,150 words.
Two similar posts, like this one also marked “sticky” for November and December,* 2017 (*holds access to another new page with more extended “abstracts” (post excerpts, summaries) for December 2017 only) were published subsequently this month and now display above this one on the main content area (“Current Posts, Most Recent on Top”).
Together with the main Table of Contents “2017 [TOC] continues themes from 2016” post, link shown immediately below, that makes four separate ones held in the top position on the blog
Scrolling continuously downwards below them, one gets to the otherwise continuous display of new writing (posts) below — like those written in 2018 and I assume (if one scrolls enough) far earlier in 2017, if you’re into scrolling rather than reading tables of contents… Meanwhile, on the sidebar, a “most recent posts” widget is a shortcut to exactly what its title implies: only the most recent, limited by number. To reach any beyond that limited number (so far) for 2018, continue scrolling downward on the main content area (or, take your chances but minus any titles: just pick a date on the calendar (Archives) widget at top right of blog).
Explained in next section with an unusual (for this blog) olive-background, white-font color scheme. If you’ve read this on posts November 2017, December 2017, it’s the same: verbatim, an exact copy (December’s intro as THE top post is a bit longer).
Click to enlarge. Excerpt from Jan. 9, 2017 post explaining TOC navigation. If you don’t want to mess with uploaded pdfs or anything complex, find this part of the [“2017 continues themes from 2016…“] post and browse at least the last three posts of 2016 and all of 2017‘s posts. Other years (and links to them) are also discussed [on that “2017 continues themes from 2016…” post].
OCTOBER, 2017: I PUBLISHED EIGHT POSTS — On Oct. 3, 7, 9, 20, 22, 24 and 26
ALL OCT. 2017 POSTS ARE LISTED WITHIN THIS MAROON-BORDERED BOX (on this post), EACH WITH SOME DESCRIPTIVE TEXT COPIED ALONG WITH THE TITLE …(AND IN REVERSE CHRONO ORDER, SO DON’T LOOK FOR A COHERENT NARRATIVE BETWEEN ALL OF THEM).
Look for the MONTH + DATE HEADINGS, followed by post titles highlit in bright yellow. Post titles highlit in yellow are active links: click any one to go to that post. I’ve placed a “Read More” separator after the first listing for October 26, 2017. The others are easily found on the post — just look for that yellow!
Many of these posts also have extensive tags as well identifying their their themes, which also might help show related posts in a “tags” search, or entering the same search string in the plain “Search” function would accomplish the same thing. I write long titles deliberately so browsing them may expose continuing and basic themes on the blog, over time.
OCTOBER 26: “Health as an Asset” “Thought Leadership” and the Chatham House Rule:** A Section Unearthed from My “Smoking Control/Tobacco Litigation” Post and Reposted Here, in light of Current Congressional Events, and in light of Senator Flake’s (2014) Commentary Before the CFR citing to 9/11 and the Iraq War Commended (?) for Unifying the United States. [case-sensitive short-link ending “-7QH.” Re-posted (bottom half) and written (top half) Oct. 25-26, 2017].[Published Oct. 26, 2017]
**Terms taken from 2010-2011 Conferences Among ABIS* (the Academy of Business In Society), RUTGERS (“The State University of New Jersey”), and the Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust.
“Minor details” The only home (USA) base in that list (despite Johnson & Johnson HQ being in NJ, its “Corporate Citizenship” trust formed in 2007 isn’t a U.S. entity and in fact is focused on the “EMEA” region: Europe, the Middle East and Africa)## would then be Rutgers, the public-supported “State University of New Jersey.”[The Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust isn’t a U.S. charity].
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
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. [First published Jan. 9 2017, last updated 9/30/2017]
(Rev. 09/24/2017 (format/appearance changes, adding TOC entries since March 2017) ~ | ~ (FYI, on Jan. 27, 2018, I just “unstuck” ALL other posts except this one. This post is also readily available through a New Home Page which lists the Top Ten Posts (this being one of them because it’s a Table of Contents. The “unsticking” process is to move current posts closer to the top of the blog. Let me know (comments field) if this works better for you. Thanks,//LGH).
FYI — at the bottom of this post is also some information on the $89M Assets (FY2014) nonprofit called “CENIC” (Corporation Network for Education Initiatives in California). (Here’s Tax Return for FY2015). I talk about it here also as a bit of “show and tell” for some processes I use repeatedly in the blog, whether on family-court-connected corporations, federal grants, or lookups of tax returns.
Blog Preview (Some comments added March 2018 — seven numbered paragraphs — but I may take them out later. I’m feeling conversational today….) After that, a section (in this background-color) on my state’s (California) provider of high-speed, multi-function internet for those fortunate enough to be involved in certain types of universities or institutions within the state (and for which we all pay, indirectly through those funded institutions, increasing “membership fees/assessments”). The times we live in….
1. This blog is not typical journalism, anecdotal reporting with references to the standard “expert,” the standard “injured parties” for a story line and some promotion of whatever advocacy group or foundation might be associated with fixing the problem. I believe the situations we face run much deeper (and higher up the decision-making ladder), and I believe that the journalism reporting symptoms, while important, is a major distraction from comprehending and observing over time (in transition) reporting systems — and developing a functional vocabulary (as opposed to the one in standard use for “PR” reasons).
2. Beyond “system failures” (or successes!) of varying types, I found it necessary to start looking more at the macro level of how government and the philanthropic (nonprofit) sectors interact, and report themselves, as contrasted (often) with what their economic footprints tell over time. In the USA, there’s a public sector, and a private sector. The word “public” by implication means a government entity and as such, its revenues are NOT taxed, although as an employer it will pay taxes for its employees. The word “private” means that which is NOT a government entity, for which different reporting rules apply.
3. When within the private sector there is the major tax-exempt portion, and the blending of leadership (for example, on boards of directors) or revolving doors (government service // nonprofits in sequence –or simultaneously) that action itself, given only government — not private corporations — can tax people, the power bloc is consolidated. As typically consolidated, what next to do but talk about how to help “low-income” families or people — while taking advantage of the same through tax-exemption and — some of these foundations or nonprofits — unbelievably high salaries for some of the leadership, and major profits for the subcontractors.
4. A major difference between them is where any rights exist, and alternatives when those rights are violated. I’ve looked at thousands of websites and organizations (and tax returns) over the years, and it doesn’t take too long to start recognizing which websites advertise big, and report small (fail to show their financials), or which may look like they’ve been around forever — but it turns out, they were incubated elsewhere, flew (sometimes “under the radar”) as far as reporting their existence through normal means, then are suddenly “spun off” as their own entities (with great graphics and colorful logos, complex websites sometimes). Patterns emerge.
5. I told you in the blog motto, this is “Uncommon Analysis,” but it’s not “unnecessary” analysis!
6. Over the years, I would’ve appreciated more personal conversations along these lines — there have been some — but when faced whether to hang out with people who prefer anecdotal reporting with a sprinkling of “financial facts,” and those willing to look seriously evaluate where financial facts are to be found — and where they are NOT being found but should be — I’ll choose the latter, who also appear to be fewer.
7. This process is also subject to personal limits and the necessity periodically to deal with events stemming from the original matters surrounding (speaking personally) the reporting of domestic violence and seeking legal intervention to stop it. As I recall, I originally started blogging when it seemed that endless comments on others blogs buried information, delivering it in short burst only, across multiple threads. When I found many people just re-posting others’ work which was being fed to them –and among advocacy groups for any cause, that can be risky (or, just plain distracting)….. The other thing I remember as starting it was watching websites — and my hard-worked, researched, linked, and “public-interest” comments — go down suddenly. The blog serves to preserve at least much of the information.
This tan-background section on “CENIC” added during post review early March, 2018. Below it, I show the Tables of Contents and explain how to access them (a variety of ways).
I discovered CENIC as an organization when it showed up as a visitor to this blog. Its existence highlights who funds the increased capacity for high-speed internet and institutional connectivity between universities, school systems (in this case), and a few other places — connectivity that we benefit from indirectly, but in general cannot personally access as citizens so much as can the faculty and enrolled students or researchers at the various institutions. (List of “BIIG” Associates and steps to full connection, where “BIIG” stands for “Broadband Infrastructure Improvement Grant” (from California Dept. of Education) for access to a certain kind of network. The main concern behind this seems to have been the ability to provide “computer-based assessments” everywhere. CENIC.org website also has a “Connection Tracker,” by categories. Here are those categories:
See also BIIG.k12HSN.org (BIIG 2.0) for more description of the network. The improvement was targeted to both schools and districts.; reference is to 2015-2016
It was organized in 1997 (says the tax return) and its main revenues are not from government contributions, but from “program service revenues” — however these are labeled “membership fees/dues” which would in essence be contributions — and generally coming from educational (public) institutions, which (say the tax return, and CENIC’s schedule of revenues and assets over time) they only increase year after year. Looking at the details of the tax returns helps show where the weight of expenses and revenues is, and related entities, whether taxable or not. Here, one of the largest expenses for CENIC is “Circuit Leases” ($20M/year one year), while its two kinds of activities, one made a significant profit (nearly $12M — roughly) and the other, a loss. The profit comes from the membership dues.
This next “…@Sep28,2017, 3pp)…” link is to a printout (for CENIC, taken in 2017 Sept) from the California Department of Justice, Office of Attorney General “Registry of Charitable Trusts” — a resource I use a lot (along with a few other main sites to look up tax returns, or double-check tax-exempt status with the IRS) on this blog. I’m placing it here for familiarity, in general what such a “Details” printout would look like, and some things it reveals about any organization. The printout also contains active links to “Related Documents.” By looking here at its “Founding Documents” one can see that certain universities and research institutions were original “Charter members” but considered affiliates — not “members.” (The Corporation has no “members” it says).
Charitable registries at the state level should become familiar. So should Secretaries of State (or as appropriate, other places) “Business Entities Search” sites at the state level. Each state is different, but so much can be learned there- – including the state of those databases in the first place and how they are organized. “Business entities” have to have a legal domicile — which should be located. If nonprofit and required to file, their files should be looked up (i.e., search for the EIN# then go to a database such as “990finder” and look it up). For government entities — look under the filing entity’s “Comptroller” or “Financial Reports” somewhere and, as much as possible, locate and start reading their “CAFRs”* to discover what, really, are the collective holdings of any such entity — as opposed to the budgets only.
(*A searchable term on this blog will tell much about CAFRs and link to plenty of others who lay it out well too).
Please take a look! To get there, you may need to click once on the link, and a second time, on the “page icon” which displays there under my blog title and the image title:
CENIC (Corp for Educ Netwk Initiatives in Calif) Calif DOJ-OAG-RCT Details (@Sep28 2017, 3pp) CalEntity# C2031925, EIN#943289022, first funded only in 1997? <==OAG DETAILS page differs from these images from a single-year Form 990. Shows entity growth over the years, and some of its filing habits (in “Related Documents” section) Check it out!
Click Image to Enlarge — this is CENIC’s explanation for its Gov’t funding (not in compliance with requirements of the simple one-page form). They did send in the FYE 2016 report, but “forgot” the $300 fee, says a letter at the California OAG’s website. (image repeated below with a better caption. Anything not in black and white is my commentary…)
CENIC website CalREN coverage + Backbone maps SShots, Overview (Calif) courtesy “Intermapper” (Image 3 of #3) here.
I believe there are parallel types of organizations in many other states. Stated purpose: “To Establish an Advanced Network Infrastructure for the Expanding Needs of Education and Research, for University Faculty and Students.” It operates “CalREN2.”
After looking at its tax returns, charitable filings at the State level, and realizing how (a) late and (b) evasive it was on certain information required to be reported (i.e., specific contact names where there’s government grants) — “back then,” despite appreciating (not that I ahve access to!) the need for “multi-functional network” of the highest speed and calibre for educational (K-20) and certain research institutions, I expressed my, well, disgust, in the annotations to a part of its RRF. (Also shown at the bottom of this post).
For 2017 Link to this post for this year: 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. (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 9,800 words.
The Table for 2017 (with the last three of 2016 for continuity of a certain theme) is near the bottom of this page. It is current through September, October 8, 2017. You will see the header to 2016 with 3 rows, the header for 2017 and 53 54 rows followed by some more blanks. That’s one of several ways to access posts for 2017. It looks like this (notice the last entry pictured represents the post you’re looking at, “Row 3” for 2017):
Click to enlarge. Excerpt from Jan. 9, 2017 post explaining TOC navigation. If you don’t want to mess with uploaded pdfs or anything complex, find this part of the post and browse at least last three posts of 2016 and all of 2017’s posts. Other years (and links to them) are also discussed below.
Meanwhile, the “10 most recent posts” section on right sidebar is helpful for 2017, or if you’re handy with scroll or page-down functions (but not recommended on cell phone) go to the top of this blog (just: “FamilyCourtMatters.org“), scroll down below this lone “sticky” post with its abbreviated lead-in (i.e., text preceding the “Read More….” link), realizing that lower down = earlier posts.
As the title indicates, the Tables (plural) of Contents (“TOC”) are in three sections: <> 2017 through March, <> 2016 (all of it), and <>Sept., 2012 – June, 2014. Post title also signals that besides the tables of contents, this post has <> more info below.
The next three links pull up those three TOC for better browsing in a form whereby any post displayed on that table can be reached by clicking on its name after clicking on the link to bring up the pdf. The next inset box is just in case a little vocabulary might further help navigate what follows.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
The National Domestic Violence Hotline: 1-800-799-SAFE, looks like Move-the-Money Shell Games around $57M HHS grants (1995-2016).
Post Title: The National Domestic Violence Hotline: 1-800-799-SAFE, looks like Move-the-Money Shell Games around $57M HHS grants (1995-2016), with case-sensitive short-link ending “-3fW.” Being published April 6, 2018 “as is” except adding this information, a border, and establishing a certain font, after years buried on my blog as a draft. This post is under 2,000 words.
Post was originally drafted — sometime AFTER the HHS Grants database underwent a facelift removing the ability to search by EIN# — possibly 2016, possibly 2014, definitely after 2013. Being published now because I had occasion to refer to it, remembered writing it, and (as sometimes happens on this blog) thought I’d already published it! Blog search on the 1-800-799-SAFE telephone number above pulled up results from 2012, 2011, 2016. When I first revisited it today (April 6, 2018) and hit “save draft” the prior year simply did not show. On hitting “save draft” a second time, a prior revision date of April 2, 2016 shows, which in context makes sense as original drafted date.
[[April 2018 Notes: url to the now-expired logo inside red borders above MIGHT be found via Internet Archive Search: and is “http://www.thehotline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hotline-logo4.png” if readers want to search for an earlier version. Nowadays I use more screen shots (with or without captions) to avoid this problem…The next-door image which hasn’t expired yet has upload date “2013/09”]]
(www.hotline.org; this is out of Austin, Texas)** (**see next quote)
“This website was supported by Grant Number 90EV0426 from the Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. Its contents are solely the responsibility of The Hotline and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.
“This Web site is funded in part through a grant from the Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any or its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this Web site (including, without limitations, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided).
“Exempted from federal income tax under the provisions of Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Since we were just given the specific award number* — here’s the TAGGS.hhs.GOV reporting of it (I searched by Award#). Notice in column headings that the Award name and the Recipient name are same, which they normally aren’t’. Click HERE [=”https://tinyurl.com/TAGGS-HHSgov-90EV0426″%5D to see it on HHS site (Link saves search specifications, not search results). *That is, for the HHS component, not the Dept. of Justice component. If giving one award#, why not give the grant award# from the Office for Victims of Crime also? //LGH Apr 2018
(Export Options: )
|
Data FY
|
CFDA Num
|
CFDA Program Title
|
Award Number
|
Award Title
|
Action Date
|
Recipient Name
|
ZIP Code
|
Award Amount
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 93592 | Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants | 90EV0426 | National Domestic Violence Hotline | 7/14/2015 | National Domestic Violence Hotline | 78716 | $4,100,000 |
If you click on the “Recipient Name” it should read (“Other, Special Interest Org.”) same as the tax return, which I’m showing below:
National Domestic Violence Hotline PO Box 161810 AUSTIN, TX 78716
As re-run 4/6/2018; see next image:
TAGGS basic (not “Advanced”) search, re-run of Specific HHS grant 90EV0426 shows one more result in 2016, but not for 2017, though one existed. Click image to enlarge.||Note: Running “ADVANCED” entity (not specific grant#) search again in 2018 pulls up a 2017 grant, awarded Aug. 2017, same Award # (90EV0426) amount >$7.7M — but this was NOT included in a 2018 BASIC run specifying that award# the same day (See captioned image nearby). Something is “off” or heavily delayed data entry at the TAGGS level for a Summer 2017 award not to show over a half year later, by Spring 2018. This shows a discrepancy between Basic & Advanced search results, something I’ve noticed happens — a lot — on this database!)
Now please click on my “Advanced Search” of the same organization name, I picked several columns and did not select any years (which defaults to “All Years” — since 1995). This table has 3 pages of results (3rd page, small) and at top, as you can see, reports $57 MILLION of grants, and 53 distinct awards. Other things you may see is that this named organization is getting BOTH the SVDC grants (much smaller) and the hotline grants, which while they started fairly small in 1995 or so, they are now up to $4 million a pop.
You also, I hope may notice under the “DUNS#” column (not shown above), which is an identifier, that up until perhaps 2008, there were two different ones in use, but afterwards, only one.
Illustrates discrepancies in TAGGS database and (w/ rest of post contents publ 4/6/2018) obstacles connecting entity name to specific, continuing EIN# (I.e., 3 EIN#s and changing entity names are involved, but on TAGGS now EIN# can no longer be searched, just DUNS# or (unreliable substitutes) entity name. Obviously affects quality control, ability to compare with IRS filings. Also, Advanced Srch shows more results (image top row) than basic search, even on same grant# (here, 90EV0426) ¾ yr later!
I know something very unusual about this hotline, as to Tax Returns. I discovered an “anomaly” between the group that HHS was funding (millions of dollars over time) and the actual recipient organization by that name in Texas. As I recall it, I discovered this (some years earlier) by plugging in the EIN# to TAGGS.hhs.gov. However, TAGGS.hhs.gov user interface, where viewers can search the grants, as I just discovered (and of course reported immediately to any readers) has recently gotten a facelift and “Search Recipient by EIN#” seems to be “off” the menu of options.
Nevertheless, I see an organization at a PO Box in Austin Texas, by this exact same name (National Domestic Violence Hotline) which for SEVERAL years in a row, starting with Fiscal Year (begins Sept. 1, ends Aug. 31 the next calendar year) 2007 reflected contributions & grants of exactly 0.00, i.e. ‘nothing.’ At the above link (and below, I provided six FY2007 Form 990 EZ annotated images during post 2018 update), on top left, you can see “Initial Return” checked. Each subsequent year (and I just checked them) still reads “$0” funds received — until the last year shown in the next table, they filed a ‘Schedule N” Dissolution. They said there were no assets to distribute. This organization filed several years in a row as a completely empty “drawer” at that PO Box. People are not always consistent labeling even their own organizations on tax returns, but I did notice that in (I believe it was) Year 2009, it picked up the name “foundation” — but without checking “name change” on the heading.
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Domestic Violence Hotline | TX | 2014 | 990EZ | 13 | $0.00 | 74-2848462 |
| National Domestic Violence Hotline | TX | 2013 | 990EZ | 10 | $0.00 | 74-2848462 |
| National Domestic Violence Hotline | TX | 2012 | 990EZ | 10 | $0.00 | 74-2848462 |
- Question: WHY would anyone form and file tax returns for a blank 501© for several years, then after it received no funds, close it down?
SHARE THIS POST on...
My New Page 3/28/2018…
You can be sure the title of this post announcing the new page will be changed soon, and this post announcing it is likely to be fleshed out some.
Meanwhile, here’s the link to the page in question:
Title now encapsulates (although in a large “capsule”) the main points of this page:
PAGE TITLE: Corporations (usually starting with tax-exempt ones) Coordinate Campaigns named after a Cause, but We (the Public) should Coordinate to Get and STAY Cognizant of the Corporate(and Gov’t Entity) Contexts. [Page added March 28 2018] Published at about 14,000 words, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8R5.” I worked four days on it: WYS now Is WYG. (What You See=What You Get)
My suggestion is to just read and enjoy, especially if you have major involvement in family court fiascos, custody battles, or advocacy, or as a professional. There is more than one point of view on the whole mess, and this one definitely diverges with mainstream pro / con on most of the identifiable causes. Or “campaigns.”
SHARE THIS POST on...
Robin Hood Foundation (“RHF” 1989ff); Its Disregarded Entities incl. Robin Hood Holdings LLC (2001ff) The FBI & FINRA-prosecuted (2015, 2016 news) $1.4M Ponzi Scheme/ Securities Fraud involving a NC Broker Charles Fackrell — and several “Robin Hood” entities; RHF’s $11.6M 2008 grant to Single Stop USA (2007ff w/ board members in common)(of which claimed only $8.3M Total Contributions for 2008, “do the math”), not to mention ImpactMatters (2015ff in CT, although fka EvidenceAuditLLC). All this to help the poor, slash poverty and make the world a better place?
Placeholder for a missing thumbnail, RHF leadership page
. . . .Take a breath for another LONG post title….
Robin Hood Foundation (“RHF” 1989ff); Its Disregarded Entities incl. Robin Hood Holdings LLC (2001ff) The FBI & FINRA-prosecuted (2015, 2016 news) $1.4M Ponzi Scheme/ Securities Fraud involving a NC Broker Charles Fackrell — and several “Robin Hood” entities; RHF’s $11.6M 2008 grant to Single Stop USA (2007ff w/ board members in common) (which claimed only $8.3M Total for 2008, “do the math”), not to mention ImpactMatters (2015ff in CT, although fka EvidenceAuditLLC). All this to help the poor, slash poverty and make the world a better place? Shortlink ends: “-7Ym” moved here 11/16/2017 after a day or two of incredulous look-ups…finally published (mostly as-was) March 23, 2018, at only 4,444 words.
At this point, I do not even remember which was the most recent parent post. I remember making an off-hand reference to the “take from the rich to help the poor” (i.e. the fabled “Robin Hood” reference), already knew this was a significant progressive foundation involved with other foundations, and started looking at it and its tax returns.
~ ~ | | INTRO & 3/23/18 UPDATE STARTS HERE || ~ ~
After a month-long hold, a closely related post was published March 18, 2018. Its intro explains the long pause and includes this commentary:
Two related posts … were on hold for some months in Q1 2018 while I restructured blog home page, added some tables of content posts (for Q4, 2017, actually) and posted on more current events, and how “Community Development” as “expanded Real Estate Development” was expanding government costs and concentration, while placing many assets directly in the hands of private investors who needed low-income populations to test their behavioral modification and social science theories upon, globally. …
Post Title: NYC’s largest anti-poverty organization (so it says) appropriates for its name a well-known 15th century British legend about a 12th century outlaw of noble character, a name preserved by Hollywood and a parade of famous actors for about a century– a name like many iconic “handles” often translated into business models (incl. “Anti-Poverty” ones) — hoping to absorb some of the glamour, reputed compassion for commoners, and in general, virtue. of this well-known hero. Such names are taken for the PR connotations and ALWAYS deserve A Closer Look, especially in this 21stC. I have been…. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8NN.” Moved here Dec. 8, 2017, being published March 18, 2018(!), still under 8,000 words)
And, “oh boy!” do these posts elucidate just how globally such demonstrations are, some programs (and software applications) originating (which by now should not be surprising) out of Harvard, MIT, and a new center at Rutgers University, typically with a variety of creatively named and name-changing nonprofits reflecting the global intents, and justification for continued control of major assets under multiple corporate names by anyone BUT the people whose wages help create them, while those subcontracting or otherwise collaborating as employees with those who have great, innovative ideas (for example, getting MORE people on as many public benefits as fast as possible, digitally) participate in the “fees for friends” and “trickle-down” business of consolidating federal funding across all the various agency “silos.”
Except this intro, post is mostly intact as written. I’ll add tags soon….//LGH March 18, 2018.
Tags were added March 24…
I did add tags and images of a board of directors for “ImpactMatters” (viewed currently), but not much else except this introduction, between last look at this post (Dec. 2017) and today, and after re-reading it. Tags image posted here may help with its key entities and concepts:
LCM~FCMatters Tags for Mar 23 2018 post ‘RHF Disregarded Entities–all this help poor slash poverty make world better place?’
In my recent (+/- March 21) Tweets, responding to a user who complained about the Christian right’s treatment of women, HHS grants, Wade Horn, etc., I said, OK, but are you aware where progressives stand on the same issues? I thought not and, with quick lookups, posted some links and images from Annie E. Casey Foundation and Open Society Foundations, referenced the “CBMA” (Campaign for Black Male Achievement) as a 2015 entity in which announcements were made ca. 2014 about how many (I believe the number was 40) major philanthropies were collaborating (i.e., putting heads and funds together). See next six-image gallery. The fifth (“Practice Network/Women in Fatherhood”) image wasn’t displaying clearly enough so is repeated individually below. The sixth, a black-and-white table (no pictures) shows Board members, Titles, and (why I showed it) their respective affiliations — Skillman Foundation, Casey Family Programs (CBMA itself), Harlem Children’s Zone (why I included it), and University of Pennsylvania Law School — at the newly-registered nonprofit, for short, “CBMA.”
However as funders starting in 2014 (at which time it was likely still an initiative of the Open Society Foundations — since 2008 was mentioned), you can see from the second (“Funding Partners”) image, a list of philanthropies/foundations contributing to this campaign shown there is:
- Casey Family Programs
- The California Endowment
- Chicago Community Trust
- The Heinz Endowments
- Kapor Center for Social Impact**
- Knight Foundation
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
- The Skillman Foundation
**Having social “impact” is obviously a big sound-byte currently. “Got IMPACT? Want More? Our nonprofit (software, etc.) will help your donations have greater impact / measure impact (etc.). Case in point, 2015 spinoff* from Robin Hood Foundation in this post, “ImpactMatters, Inc.” [*see that section of this and related post for more details].
**The name “Kapor” here is associated with Mitch Kapor and Freda Klein Kapor; he invented Lotus 1-2-3 (she was working there). It’s centered in downtown Oakland, California, and as happens, involves a certain property (with space for rent and an auditorium), a related “Kapor Capital” “Institute” (etc.). A number of other nonprofits plus a Kapor Foundation are referenced in just the co-chairs (of Kapor Capital) bio blurbs. I should blog separately – after locating the various nonprofits. I see among the projects is working to get users access to redeeming their food stamp benefits online (partnership with USDA), and more. For the record however– are any financials for any of the referenced entities posted under the main website? (Apparently, No…) I looked up the Form 990PF (and at the 2016 filing) for Kapor Social Investments. You’d be surprised at its funders, and where it’s holding about half its $35M (yes, Million) “Other Investments”*** assets, with next to no liabilities, and where its $1.9M of grants are — most of them — going. Hint $1.1M went to another named fund underneath another (local, and well-heeled) community foundation. ***Clue: NOT within the USA, or even North America. And it’s a pooled investments hedge fund.
In non-slide-show image, they are all readable except I feel the second one, which is reposted by itself here:
The CBMA launched as a separate NY nonprofit (CharitiesNYS.com shows a tax return claiming NY legal domicile, but other paperwork says DE corporation), and — why it’s mentioned here on a post featuring the RHF (Robin Hood Foundation) — not too surprising, the push was for “Place-based philanthropy” and the initial treasurer was Geoffrey Canada of: Robin Hood Foundation, Harlem Children’s Zone, and probably others.
Other than my additions of images for “ImpactMatters” Board Members and “People,” and I may also add some for Robin Hood Foundation’s Board (organization website profiles) and a minor update on ImpactMatters’ Form 990-N 2(016’s became available while this post was in draft status), the post is basically “as written.” Outside of this introduction.
My focus is more on the character of multiple nonprofits and spinoffs of RHF than the NC Fackrell case which I wished to report and which I felt illustrates the problem with multiple entities per nonprofits, and nonprofits coordinated through funders’ networks and, in opaque money trails involving Do-Good Organizations targeting public institutions (which isn’t to include Fackrell in that category — but Robin Hood Foundation has certainly claimed that organizational purpose).
For more information on both ImpactMatters (and Single Stop, Innovations for Poverty Action, J-PAL, and RHF), see also that related post above, publ. 3/18/2018.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
NYC’s largest anti-poverty organization (so it says) appropriates for its name a well-known 15th century British legend about a 12th century outlaw of noble character, a name preserved by Hollywood and a parade of famous actors for about a century– a name, like many iconic “handles,” often translated into business models (incl. “Anti-Poverty” ones) hoping to absorb some of the glamour, reputed compassion for commoners, and, in general, virtue. Such names are for positive PR connotations, and organizations adopting them, like this one, ALWAYS deserve a Closer Look, especially in this 21stC. I have been….
Two related posts (both named just below) were on hold for some months in Q1 2018 while I restructured blog home page, added some tables of content posts (for Q4, 2017, actually) and posted on more current events, and how “Community Development” as “expanded Real Estate Development” was expanding government costs and concentration, while placing many assets directly in the hands of private investors who needed low-income populations to test their behavioral modification and social science theories upon, globally.
Having worked so hard on this blog, I then visited Twitter after a very long break and saw ongoing questions that a more consistent reading of (at least) this blog with its many links to supporting information on nonprofits and the professionals (attracting parental complaints) who tend to set up and populate them would’ve answered and took some moments to Tweet and reply to some I’d been included in. Here’s a link to a recent Tweet” (3/18/2018, username there is @LetUsGetHonest) with three attached images re: reunification camps [another December, 2017, blog theme] also my chance to practice that new (to me) technique) with, I think, very well-annotated exhibits on some of the same. Some deal with equine therapy treatments and the “aftercare” models so the reunification indoctrination sticks better post-experience. So perhaps it’s appropriate to say regarding the nine-year span this month of investigative blogging and consistent and ongoing acquisition of more in-depth insight through administering (and writing all posts on) this blog you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him (or her) drink,” of people who just can’t be bothered to personally tangle with this scope of information.
And, “oh boy!” do these posts elucidate just how globally such demonstrations are, some programs (and software applications) originating (which by now should not be surprising) out of Harvard, MIT, and a new center at Rutgers University, typically with a variety of creatively named and name-changing nonprofits reflecting the global intents, and justification for continued control of major assets under multiple corporate names by anyone BUT the people whose wages help create them, while those subcontracting or otherwise collaborating as employees with those who have great, innovative ideas (for example, getting MORE people on as many public benefits as fast as possible, digitally) participate in the “fees for friends” and “trickle-down” business of consolidating federal funding across all the various agency “silos.”
Except this intro, post is mostly intact as written. I’ll add tags soon….//LGH March 18, 2018.
Post Title: NYC’s largest anti-poverty organization (so it says) appropriates for its name a well-known 15th century British legend about a 12th century outlaw of noble character, a name preserved by Hollywood and a parade of famous actors for about a century– a name like many iconic “handles” often translated into business models (incl. “Anti-Poverty” ones) — hoping to absorb some of the glamour, reputed compassion for commoners, and in general, virtue. of this well-known hero. Such names are taken for the PR connotations and ALWAYS deserve A Closer Look, especially in this 21stC. I have been…. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8NN.” Moved here Dec. 8, 2017, being published March 18, 2018(!), still under 8,000 words)
Short version of that information? This post exists to preview my upcoming (but previously written) Robin Hood Foundation post*** which just about wrote itself as I summarized the information and thought about the significance of the situation which had gripped my attention for several days. Previously written, moved here.
***RHF post title and link, still in draft as of this writing, Dec. 4, 2017 [and at March 18, 2018] refers to:
That long title took some explaining, resulting in this post.
[This “Pep talk” section added after the move, I’ll mark where it ends]:
Please remember when I explain certain levels of detail on single (or single groups of) organization, it is still “show and tell” mode.
Many transferable principles (practices) can be seen in operation across different organizations, including organizations following even vastly different stated purposes. Seeing these principles (common practices) also builds for the person looking IF he or she consistently fact-checks my statements, as I intend people should, transferable skills which, put into practice, build at least three valuable things:
(1) An growing and ongoing awareness that there are many and significant other places to look for information often not on an organization’s [or university center’s] on-line advertising website,** and how to access them on-line and many, for free –**which term applies even if it’s a public-supported one and not soliciting donations — the websites still justify the existence and funding of the organization, and promotes the involved personnel (lead staff, boards of directors, etc.), and provide a story line to pull it together, while helping out friendly organizations through mutual referrals and mentions, i.e., “our funders” pages…), which once become familiar, is “communicable.” And I do hope readers will acquire a “communicable awareness” which becomes contagious –others, by association, might get a case of it too.
(1a) With exposure over time, acknowledgement that the organization and functionality of these various places changes over time, does not easily compare across jurisdictions (when it comes to state-level registries), and
(1b) How flawed (not to mention, how consistently accompanied by disclaimers) and time-limited (how far back it goes) and these various databases are. By “flaws” I mean both fields available on which to sort, and regarding lack of style consistency (i.e., quality enforcers to) the data input into them.
(1c) Some sites provided pdf images which show what appears to be hand-stamps (i.e., personal handling) and signed or show official seals (Secretary of State, Attorney-General’s Office, or, for example, with tax returns, received by the IRS, at which office), others don’t even show that level of detail, while at the state level, an emphasis on electronic filing occurs, bypassing human interaction and, it seems, screening. Some websites (such as Arizona’s comes to mind) provided the pdfs in “barely-visible” font, etc.
(1d) given the distance between actual registered document, or an image of it, and user search input forms, (unless the process is somehow truly automated and flawless) data entry errors or OCR (Optical Character Reading/ scanning process) affecting search accuracy (or flexibility) can occur at any level of search: first results, second level leading to a summary page (for states or agencies that even have them), or anything which is not actually the document itself, but extracting information from it for display.
1a, b, c and d are important for acknowledging what is NOT there — reliably consistent and functional for the public (not just for grantseekers, grantwriters, or foundations seeking grantees) information about the commerce done (for-profit or not-for-profit) within individual (U.S.A.) states, across state to D.C. to territorial jurisdictions, and of course internationally.
(2) In the process an ongoing mental database and familiarity with/awareness of some of the key influences (translation: major foundations, significant geographically-focused nonprofits they sponsor, and related government entities — not to mention key universities, private (esp.) and public); and
(3) Better 3D vision – comprehension — while reading major media headlines, including to what is NOT being reported when the experts are quoted or key policies or organizations featured.
Of course people who never get to “fact-checking” or testing what I’m saying on, for example, some organization of more personal interest to the reader — don’t expect better comprehension. You’re probably content with hearsay mode from both MSM and my blogging and don’t value highly enough getting to the point of understanding if either one is consistently lying, or censoring information, which one it is. In such case, I’d guess that may indicate satisfaction with the self-declared “thought-leaders” and acceptance of (their) designation of YOU as passive consumer, i.e., thought-follower. That characterization of course doesn’t apply to people who are already experts in finance, investments, accounting, and helping their friends, colleagues and clients continue to raise funds, build resumes, and publish endlessly, with no real conscience about using everyone not in this class for (a) a financial resource (tax receipts, remember?) and (b) appropriate subject matter for increasingly sophisticated behavioral modification test subjects, individually and en masse.
If that characterization offends you, wait for the next three posts: One, “The Money Maze” (where I moved this one from) on the Giffords Gun control lobby incl. four or five “Americans for Responsible Solutions” entities, with the Super PAC started by recently deceased (through suicide, using a gun) megadonor Steven “Hurricane” Mostyn (and some on the much smaller foundation people are encouraged to support for a memorial, “Mostyn Moreno Education Fund” or similar name); Two, this post, and Three, the RHF post identified to just above which this one exists to preview. In addition, I am finding the “facilitating” nonprofits (GiveWell, GiveDirectly, Good Ventures, Open Philanthropy Project, etc.) and yet more nonprofits (“Ideas42.org” with previous name “Behavioral Lab, Inc.” (or similar –details coming up) and its previous Harvard connection, although the two-cofounders of that MA entity with a NY address are now associated with MIT and Princeton…
So I do not believe readers’ time who may not be particularly interested in a New York anti-poverty organization with Ivy League university connections (when professors’ CVs are also considered, and in this one, a related university “center”) is really wasted time.
[End of “Pep talk” section added after the move]
The title I’m previewing, again:
I’ve split the explanation (of that long post title!) into three parts* (each labeled in blue) (*and this short preview — four more paragraphs [I numbered them <Para.1,2,3,4>] and one quote — leading up to those three named parts labeled in blue). The first part …(“Disregarded Entities…Ponzi Scheme”) raises some questions which aren’t fully answered yet but regardless of Yes/No answers as to RHF involvement, the possibility still demonstrates that the most important information about any organization (especially tax-exempt foundations, including those classified as public charities like RHF) even when truthful still cannot be found on an organization website, or considering even its charitable projects and benefits. Only by actually looking at the other evidence can whether it, or the charitable events and website “About Us/History” is more relevant to WHO the organization is, and what its agenda is individually, or collectively with other like-minded organizations and people!
<Para.1>The picture is always incomplete without an eye to the assets and connections to other wealth-building activities and where/how/if this also relates to the leadership’s outside activities. RHF dates to (as I recall) about 1989, so it’s had time to develop those, form related entities, and buy and sell investments over time. RHF calls itself the “largest anti-poverty organization in New York City and is consciously looking to export its model practices further abroad (certainly at least nationally), yet they do not even post their own Forms 990 as I recall. The chosen popular folklore name also is associated with radical do-good activities and as though going after the perpetrators (those with stockpiled wealth) to help the exploited victims (the poor). Whether it fits or not might bear a closer look, and if not, then the name could or should be considered an attempt to throw others off-track when tracking the “macroeconomics”of the organization and whom it networks with. (Famous actors who have played Robin Hood in film (LA Times 2010 recounts (May 12, 2010, Susan King)* about the time a Russell Crowe version was coming out). Not counting the animated, musical or comedic versions, also includes: Errol Flynn, Douglas Fairbanks, Sean Connery, Kevin Costner). Said the LA Times article, though the setting was 12th century, the earliest ballads recounting it weren’t until 15th and 16th centuries:
*The legend of Robin Hood is firmly entrenched in British folklore — an archer and swordsman who, with his band of merry men, robbed from the rich and gave to the poor during the early 12th century in Nottinghamshire’s Sherwood Forest. Originally portrayed as a commoner, Robin’s image changed so that he was later thought of as a nobleman who lost his lands and was cast out as an outlaw. …The earliest surviving ballads telling his story are dated to the 15th century or early 16th century.
<Para.2> When, and what cost, will we learn that corporate names can be mis-leading, and that there’s always more than one angle to what’s considered charitable organizations? Even the best of them operate in a field which is vast, uncharted, and fast-growing, and whose collective economic impact is unknown and cannot be fathomed even in legitimate cross-sections within slice of time. One reason why: the potential for so many related entities per 501©3 (or ©4 or © 6 — that is, per entity), and lack of shareholder oversight because a nonprofit is by definition non-stock issuing. But any nonprofit with assets can invest them in a variety of other companies (Public traded, private-traded, other investments, other assets are all categories shown in a standard IRS Form 990 Pt X Balance Sheet), and it can contract independently with all types of companies (private, public, or other tax-exempts, and corporations or LLCs — and/or overseas companies according to their home country’s regulations), donate to other tax-exempts and government, take government grants (in essence, redistributing public funds), and likewise donate to a variety of other organizations (although most often it’s other tax-exempt private entities and/or government entities). And, let’s talk universities — these donations to, investments in, subcontracting with university to serve the organization or vice versa, often come with professors or associate professors (whose careers have many times involved major grants from public, and/or private foundations; and universities in the USA also span the public and private sectors, and when private mostly as nonprofits often with their own companion or attached foundations(!!). Some are organized at the state level and supported by people within the state, and typically commandeer significant institutional funds which can (“Go back to Square One”) be invested in a variety of vehicles both domestic AND off-shore, and employ many. … Also, leadership (board of directors, etc.) any public charity (501©3-filing corporation) leadership must declare “interested persons transactions” and business or family relationships — but simply having them is not prohibited.
Read the rest of this entry »
