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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

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].

with one comment

Post Title: 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](case-sensitive shortlink here ends “-7X8”).

Subtitle:  Who’s Regulating the Regulators? Why are they exempt from the rules they exist to enforce?  Wake Up, People!!

Those Acronyms in the Title:    “MRFP” = (see post title).* “NAAG” = National Association of Attorneys General.  And “NASCO,” it’s said, is “National Association of State Charity Officials.”**

  • *Technically speaking, “MRFP, Inc.” is a business name, not an acronym, but it does seem to represent the phrase”MultiState Registration and Filing Portal.”
  • **“Proof of Life” or business entity personhood is just not found so far, despite other similar or interested entities, even the IRS.gov itself, publicizing, positively, the name in full and as an acronym as if a creditable point of reference and a legitimate entity with a legal domicile somewhere in the USA or one of its territories.
  • **If so, if NASCO exists, where is its incorporation or charitable registration; does it even have an EIN#? If yes, then where are its tax returns or even a single Form 990-N?  Or where is it on someone else’s tax return as its fiscal agent?  
  • **…Speaking of which, I’d ask NAAG (i.e., a NAAG Tax return/Form 990) which seems to be acting as a fiscal agent for some NASCO functions — but where are NAAG’s returns (even though NAAG’s EIN#, no thanks to NAAG’s own website, was eventually found)?? 

For an example of references to NASCO (as well as apparent confusion, as ever, between the puppet and the puppeteers, that is, the creation and the creators — specifically a business with a product, and the product itself), these next two links to a single document written as if responding to the “RFI” (Request for Information) on the Single Portal Initiative, showing the logos for “GUIDESTAR” on the left and “SimpleCharityRegistration.com” on the right, and the found document was actually posted at MRFP, Inc. …

By the time you get through my page on this, you’ll see that SimpleCharityRegistration.com also adds fully FOUR logos labeled “in partnership with” of which one is Guidestar, and another one (BizFilings.com) provides us clues to the whole mess that predates the federal income tax, and how corporate law was adjusted (and by whom) to get around anti-trust laws of the same era. It’s fascinating information and definitely turned on some of my own lights as to the phenomenon I’d already observed of effective monopolies (or “oligarchies”) within the nonprofit sector and intersecting with government itself.

I also discuss several aspects of that situation here, adding some new links.

Annotated: RFI response to MRFP by GuideStar and Simple Charity Registration (4pp, p1 only shown)  My many annotations highlight the troubled verbiage found at a RFI posted at MRFP, Inc.  What’s more, that pdf seems immune to being displayed as an image other than directly from the website (meaning, if the link changes, “too bad.”).. Please do click that link and read my annotations … The annotations make for a visually cluttered page but still raise ongoing and important questions about the language.  I question whether anyone who could produce and would even think it appropriate to post a mess like this should be taken seriously when the topic is organizing and monitoring charitable entities (!!).  Apparently some corners (lots of them) have been cut in putting up a show of fair usage of the funds involved for such a project.

Plain: Link to a clean copy, all 4 pages, posted at MRFPinc.org under “Request for Information” and apparently from this and other context dated sometime after 2015 or 2016, although it’s not actually dated (or signed) within those four pages, at all. One of the companies mentioned on it, I still haven’t found.


On 11/11/2017, after some days of rapt attention to this new area of learning about how many different ways (and how many red flags along the ways) government employees of high rank and authority over and responsibility to regulate major parts of the private sector can and so often do form private-sector corporations, boasting among each other and on the private-sector corporate websites (which many of the public may never stumble across, ever…) about the public benefits for the project — and doing this all while withholding/concealing identifiable registration of the same private-sector (tax-exempt of course), or failing-to-file, and/or failing-to-file-IRS Forms 990 even when they may have registered,* and in general thus distracting the public from one of the most critical things that public deserves to know,** I published a new page containing a helpful list, alpha by state, of where charities have to register…unless they don’t because for some reason they’re exempt.

Page Title: State-by-State Charity Lookup Links (from SimpleCharityRegistration.com’s March 2017 WordPress post)   Started Nov. 8, 2017, Published Nov. 11; intended for my “Vital Links” sidebar menu. Case-sensitive, generated short-link ends “-7Vm”       Recommended — read that Page before this Post for better statement of context.


Without a glossary of organizations and sense of who they are and how they interact, and some examples of how they speak and act (for “act,” I’m talking filing accountability and transparency issues, absence or presence of double-talk, or promoting what may (and sometimes sure seem to be acting like) fake-name persona (repetition of reference among the community substituting for actual registration and production of tax returns, or a declaration why there are none), this gets complicated.  [The complication on the part of above-named organizations seems intentional.]  I’ve been studying this situation for about two weeks (with the new page, which unfortunately doesn’t show automatically on blog “Archives” calendar, published Nov. 11, mid-way), processing information and considering whether it fits with or contrasts/challenges my existing understanding (skepticism) about the field as a whole.

Showing this with exhibits, typically each exhibit becomes its own section, takes some time. I repeat some of the above paragraphs (this post title + acronyms; the paragraph introducing new page title /yellow background) below to help with continuity. //LGH.


This topic takes precedence over follow-up posts which I’d promised recently because it is so current and the issues it signifies so weighty. I also gather this project is probably not reported much outside the government and philanthropic circles (with mutual self-interests on both parts), and on their respective journals, newsletters or “Gazettes” posted on websites.

This post also generated its own follow-up list of three.  In order of writing:

  •  Upcoming, based on my recent check-in with The Urban Institute Form 990:
Title:  A Year In the Life (2015, the latest available from this perspective) of a VFTT (Very Famous Think Tank), through its IRS Form 990 Tax Return. (shortlink ends “-7Xz.” Post begun Nov. 13, 2017).This VFTT entity’s address can be seen in the URL domain name to a one-page, Sept. 2015 description of the Single Portal Initiative and MRFP, Inc. (as “working with” the NAAG/NASCO combo).
  • Then, on another mega (well, large and prominent) foundation in New York, I wrote:  Verrry interesting. It’s a whole other category of “out-there” “You’ve GOT to be kidding!” information and presentations, again, demonstrating how those already IN nonprofit board (or even major program — as in involving decisions on grant-making) power circles manage to spread their roots, quickly transplant operations if deemed a good idea, and seeking to standardize nonprofit measurement globally — while at home, leaving BIG gaps in accountability and transparency on their various organizations… And, I off-ramped it, except just two images to support a reference in the title.  See next five-line post title:
  • and, from RHF, above, tracking just two nonprofits associated with just one of its prominent (“star-studded” might be a better word) board of directors, and one of the nonprofits’ recent contractor, “Blessing White,” where “Blessing White Courses” generated $766K revenue in a single year (FY2015) for the entity, and obviously some certification/ replication / global consultancy with on-line deliverables was involved.

Looks like [Jeffrey] Immelt went straight from Harvard MBA (after a BA/BS from Dartmouth in Applied Math) to GE and hasn’t left yet.  Meanwhile he sits on a variety of foundations, a seat at a White House Admin table (this quote is as of Oct. 2016, obviously before changeover of White House Administration to President Trump), and the Business Roundtable.

[See off-ramped post currently called]: Catalyst Inc, Blessing White Courses, GP Strategies (Global PIC*), GSE Systems, and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation. (*PIC = “Performance Improvement Company”) (shortlink ends “-7YU,” moved here Nov. 17, 2017, cf. Jeffrey Immelt, director of Robin Hood Foundation, a single drill-down on just two nonprofits mentioned from his Bloomberg.com profile….).

Those are the three posts that this one inspired (sections already written in the process of writing it) but for which length restrictions and focus considerations got them bounced off.  The process for each is similar and basic but always time-consuming: I look at the financials (typically mostly the 990s but sometimes also a financial statement, if one is available) and talk about them, comparing sources of revenue, expenses, assets accumulation over time, and sometimes in what they are declaring investments. …. I look at related entities if shown, and connect with other available information on either the directors, or corporations mentioned in them, I compare.

I do not subscribe to Nonprofit Quarterly, Circle of Philanthropy or similar journals (I do to “Institutional Investor” magazine and I also read the paper versions of The Wall Street Journal regularly, and The New York Times, some), but it’s my impression that what I talk about here, in “lay terms” for the general public, they do not. They (such publications targeting the philanthropic sector, whether seeking grantees or grants, or both) also don’t even seem much concerned about the discrepancies regularly found on Forms 990 within and between organizations except as it might discredit the sector and impact: jobs, social status, and the status quo.


Significant elements of the philanthropic and government (private/public) sectors say they have been collaborating on the “Single Portal Initiative” to better streamline, establish and facilitate the rapid increase in filings by the nonprofit sector, already a significant “player” in (influence on) the national and international economic landscapes.  Allegedly this is “the better to monitor them with” also…

And for those who happen to subscribe to philanthropic journals, either looking for grants, grantees, or seeking to align policies for outcomes, and in competition for donation dollars, there have been some articles also.  These journals seem to feed off each others’ energy and optimism, regardless of poor results for some project being promoted, synchronously, among them.

Here’s an article in such a journal commenting on how hard the project must be, since after receiving Department of Commerce Funds for it in 2003, a follow-up “Request for Information” didn’t surface from one of the recipients until 2016!  The article provides more clues to in what direction the credibility crisis on tax-exempt organizations for those who do pay attention, will be, and is being as we speak, leveraged. Please click annotated text image below to read some of the terms in context I will be bringing up repeatedly in this post (and also do on the page):

Nonprofit Quarterly, Summer 2016, 8/11/2016, The Rising of the States in Nonprofit Oversight by Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer, from another article in same publication called  “The New Nonprofit Regulatory Environment: What You Should Know” article (graphic + title only).  Notice my warning “only 3 free articles remaining.”

excerpt from Nonprofit Quarterly, Summer 2016, 8/11/2016, The Rising of the States in Nonprofit Oversight, 8/11/2016, by Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer. Notice references to NASCO (1979), US DOC funding in 2003 to NASCO/Guidestar (another 1995ff highly profitable (program service revenues) nonprofit providing a subscription database of nonprofits, or much less information in less flexible format, for free) for the Single Portal Initiative and to a “National Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School, (NY) working with the Urban Institute, yet another nonprofit known (in part) for its own charitable database (formerly NCCS.dataweb.urban.org).

Only after I did discover the “Single Portal Initiative” looking for the charitable registry of a single state and discovering a list of on-line registration links alpha by state (in states where registration is required, that is), did my more targeted search phrase bring up more material on it and patterns start surfacing; not always the patterns which were being reported on, however.

Did you know that Columbia University’s Law School had a National Attorneys General Program, or than an entity called NASCO is alleged to exist (and whether it does or not?  I’m still looking!).  Is it not a little odd that those reporting on the above information using the FTC’s and unified state attorneys’ general (probably unified via NASCO / NAAG meetings) recent victory over two sham cancer charities becomes a “clarion call” to change the IRS oversight of tax-exempt charities, possibly privatizing it?  Another article — footnoted above — by Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer (also in 2016) proposes this, and makes little mention of why thirteen years of not even an “RFI” after government funding to a NASCO/ Guidestar collaboration is evidence of competency?

Do you feel that the privatization should involve private associations named after public state-level offices which such as NASCO, NAAG (National Association of Attorneys General) who do not post their tax returns (although they seem to be private) on their websites, even in response to their own “FAQ” labeled “Where does it get its funding?”….

I found it odd but relevant (when size and scope of operations is considered) that the top of this article starts out mentioning the cancer charity sham (so does the website NASCOnetSupport.org, apparently the result of the collaboration mentioned above) and the first two footnotes are to that victory.

The third footnote is another article (recommended read!) by the same author, but this time in a Columbia Journal of Tax Law, and apparently part of a Univ. of Minnesota symposium.  It raises the question, and proposes possible answers, to how should the poor (lacking the resources for oversight), reputation-recently-battered-by Congress and the media, IRS reign in the bad charities and preserve the domain for the good guys?  I don’t agree, but it’s well-written and informative.  I suggest reading it, and noting the timeline of even requiring charities to register, and how very recent (2006) the practice of even revoking those who refuse to file three years in a row, are good to know (and that information should also be validated; I haven’t…).

The introduction sets the stage for saying, the IRS just isn’t up to regulation, and I’ve posted links to the concluding sections (a radical alternative) IV and V. Note: this is copyrighted material which can be read on-line and there is as you can see a downloadable link for full text:

 

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 18, 2017 at 8:53 pm

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. [Published Nov. 5, 2017]

leave a comment »

Post Title with Shortlink,  “Blog Genealogy” and Started/Published Dates:

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)

Blogger Alert to Readers: Post Version will be in flux after Nov. 5; it’s currently 15,000 words.  I’m not yet happy with the many sections or their flow, even after creating an experimental “Footnote Post” to this one, and at least two spin-off ones with related content —  however, I left in a major section with some very large images to juxtapose the smaller “ICLEI” organization with the huge, and older “ICMA.org” and its: subsidiary, controlled, disregarded, related (etc.) entities, in order to show at least who IS aware that the collective public sector retirement plans are a MAJOR investment platform, and profitable prize for whose who can manage to position themselves as administrators of it.

Separately, ICLEI is a name-changer with international origins, connections, and purposes. Inbetween I talk about journalism, as it was in a NYT article I first learned about the entity mentioned in the post and more.  For now, the “Read More” link is placed far down on the post.  Publishing now relieves some of the personal pressure mounting as I discover more and more down some of these “rabbit holes”…Thanks for your patience meanwhile. //LGH, Nov. 5, 2017



.. **If your first response is in part “Who the heck is ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA, Inc.?” know that so was mine, on hearing about it only a month ago from an article in the New York Times from more than five years ago:

Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing U.N. Plot 

The article after characterizing the activists (in general, as “Tea Party,” ultra-right, conspiracy theorists complaining about simple plans to help the environment, etc.) claims that one of the targeted groups was this “ICLEI-Local Governments…USA,” above.  People were disrupting local town meetings where it was presenting….

[Some of this text repeated nearer the images, at the bottom of the post:]

So, naturally, I started the process of looking it up as an corporate entity and IRS-filing (and of course its website, which didn’t post the financials) and quickly found a location-shifting, and name-changing, Massachusetts-based nonprofit with Canadian and acknowledged international origins, and purposes, and (at first), even board member, and where the few grants it was distributing were going (the earliest return I found being only 2002) to cities in “SA” — South Africa.  In a FY2002 tax return, two of the street addresses for the Canadian directors/officers were “City Hall,” and one token American involved, just for appearances perhaps.. (See closing pages at the above link)

It is also primarily government grants-dependent, which given its international board, these may or may not be from the USA only, although I did find a reference in the back of one (FY2002) tax return to U.S. Dept. of State (U.S.AID) involvement.  And by this time promoting Agenda 21.

ICLEI (FY2002 BostonMA) FY 2002 PSA*, Related + USAID Statemts (3 images) (*Program Service Accomplishmts). Though the largest expense this year, statement was relegated to back of return and a lesser expense (Agenda 21) left on the IRS Form, alongside blank lines for other PSAs, instead). As THE primary expense, it was that year THE primary activity. This is “avoidance” 990-filing behavior.

ICLEI (FY2002 BostonMA) FY 2002 PSA, Related + USAID Statemts (3 images)

ICLEI (FY2002 BostonMA) FY 2002 PSA, Related + USAID Statemts (3 images)


 

This nonprofit has been active in the country since 1991 and has several extra characteristics which I think should be ON people’s radars, and stay there, along with similarly networked entities. If there is a list of such entities, “ICLEI-Local Gov’t.s” should be added and posted somewhere not to be forgotten — even though in literal size of revenues or assets it’s stayed SMALL (usually less than $5M) year after year.

What’s more, I should not be the only person gradually compiling and consistently publicizing a list of similar organizations as a sub-species of “tax-exempt, not-for-profit” sector, organizations which collectively comprising a type based on their memberships and naming conventions (i.e., being private but named after public institutions or public institution’s known functions, and by membership at times limited to civil servants, or targeted to the same.

Total results: 3Search Again.  EIN#043116623

Notice state entity address location change for FYE 2015.

But lookups show that this organization actually registered in Colorado 2011, filed perhaps one annual report in 2012, then didn’t for long enough to get its status changed for “failure to file” and eventually re-instated itself, and THEN later changed the home address on the IRS form… (Colorado filings details shown in this post, towards the bottom; the Massachusetts ones, shown mid-way..).

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability USA CO 2015 990 28 $603,567.00 04-3116623
ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability USA CA 2014 990 29 $512,936.00 04-3116623
ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability USA CA 2013 990 24 $660,340.00 04-3116623

 

of dwelling or speculating too long WITHOUT coming to solid evidence or conclusions on matters (such as these) reported.

I took the time for some analysis of this article up through its introduction of “ICLEI” not just for that specific content, but also for the principles / reporting practices it demonstrates, sad (this time) to say.

The practices found in the article recur throughout journalism, on well-respected and not-so-well -respected publications (print and digital).  I believe it’s easier to catch and discuss as found in written format (including digital) than in videos in motion which must be freeze-framed, power-pointed or otherwise social/presentation-media-processed to discuss or analyze.

Meanwhile, mainstream and other media, has been and will continue consolidating into conglomerates and selling off the less profitable parts, to maximize profits, and the prior owners will often with their profits form philanthropies or more private foundations for good PR and political activism.** ## They will be de-emphasizing print, and increasingly focusing on dynamic audience + business interactions and feedback, and ways to “amplify” individual pieces across media, and in general are up-front about this.

## After publishing this post, I heard about Disney’s recent discussions on taking over most of “Fox”:

  • In The Atlantic Nov. 6, “A Disney-21st Century Fox Merger Would Be Invincible” by Derek Thomson in “Business” “It would be an enormous movie-and-television company. And an enormous antitrust headache.”
  • In the Financial Times Nov. 6: Disney Held Talks to Buy Most of 21st Century Fox, Matthew Garrahan in London and James Fontanella-Khan in New York.  Fox (owned by Rupert Murdoch) would keep its news and sports channels, but possibly not UK-based Sky (Euro pay-TV broadcaster), of which Fox owns 39% and is trying to acquire more…
  • At Bloomberg.com, Nov. 6 “Disney Starts a Fox Hunt,” by Tara LaChapelle.  Fox overall worth $50 billion:”…This news follows speculation that bubbled up just months ago about Verizon Communications Inc. potentially making a play for Disney — speculation, by the way, that Verizon’s own CEO Lowell McAdam helped fan, which lent more credibility to it than just run-of-the-mill market chatter. Nothing came of it, and that probably has to do with the fact that Verizon couldn’t afford Disney anyway, it being a $155 billion company. || Even so, it just goes to show no merger is out of the question these days.”

The NYT in 2014 had an “innovation report” by its new family scion taking over (5th generation Ochs-Sulzberger) for adopting a “digital first” emphasis…

A.G. Sulzberger Vanquishes His Cousins, Becomes Deputy Publisher of the New York Times  By  Oct. 19, 2016 in “The Daily Intelligencer,” website “NYMAG.com.

A.G. Sulzberger. Photo, “The New York Times”

The digital era is spurring rapid, radical changes to the way journalism is practiced and financed, but a few eternal verities have persisted through the disruption — good writing makes for good reading, reputations for accuracy take years to build and seconds to lose, and a man with the last name Sulzberger will always run the New York Times.

….Still, Sulzberger was always the favorite, and not just because he was the closest blood relation to the sitting publisher in a competition limited to family members: Sulzberger led the team that drafted the 2014 Innovation Report,** a document that outlined the challenges facing the paper in the digital age, and potential ways of trying to overcome them.

….Sulzberger’s father is now 65 — the same age at which his father bestowed on him the title of publisher. It’s not clear when the elder Sulzberger plans to pass the baton.

When A.G. takes the wheel as deputy publisher, he’ll be steering through turbulent water. The 2020 report on how the paper plans to survive in the digital age — and, relatedly, a downsizing of the newsroom — looms on the horizon.

** The 2014 Innovation Report is shown at NiemanLab, which reminds (readers) of the long-standing (1938ff) Nieman Foundation for fellowships in journalism at Harvard, left by Agnes Wahl Nieman, the widow of the man Lucius Nieman behind The Milwaukee Journal.  The $1M was specifically to promote the education of journalists.  Agnes was born (+/- Jan. 1865) to “wealthy German-Americans” in Chicago, the oldest of three daughters, and Milwaukee was at this time considered “the German Athens of the West.”  James Conant Bryant was President of Harvard.  It was eight years before women could apply for fellowships for the scholarships,  etc.  There were some questions about “why Harvard?” (including that the trustee was a Harvard grad) and challenges by family members.  Interesting story, anyhow…

Nieman began as a fellowship for select journalists to spend an academic year at Harvard in pursuit of individual study plans to strengthen their knowledge and leadership skills. That program recently celebrated its 75th anniversary; more than 1,400 journalists from nearly 100 countries have been awarded Nieman fellowships since 1938. Recently we added a short-term visiting fellowship for individuals with a specific project to enhance journalism who would like to spend up to 12 weeks at Harvard advancing their idea. Visiting fellows have included digital innovators, technologists, academics, and journalists from the U.S. and abroad.

A gift to the Nieman Foundation apparently comes through Harvard and not to a distinct foundation of that name filing tax returns.  No Forms 990 found, brief Annual Financial Reports show an endowment of about $130M, and despite donations from many foundations and individuals are reported on the same page (though not in what amounts), about $5M of assets are in the form of net Receivables,  and of Operating revenue, a similar ($5+M) amount of “Endowment returns made available for operations,” while of the Operating Expenses totaling, again, $5M+ more than half goes to “general administration” and less than half to actual Fellowships and awards, with a smaller amount to “outreach.”

Nieman Fndtn for Journalism @ Harvard (“financials” take it on faith) (not ‘audited” or on any official form separate from Harvard itself). Balance Sheet 2016 (left) 2015 (right)

Nieman Fndtn for Journalism @ Harvard (“financials” take it on faith) (not ‘audited” or on any official form separate from Harvard itself) Statemt of Operating Revs & Exps. 2016 (left) 2015 (right)

The 2014 Innovation Report apparently was leaked in the context of a sudden turnover of leadership with Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr. (Chairman) ousted Jill Abramson as Executive Editor, replacing her (first woman in the role) with Dean Baquet after complaints about her management style.  NiemanLab on May 15, 2014, said “The NYT leaked innovation report one of the key documents of this digital age” An innovation team led by Arthur G. Sulzberger did a six-month study on how they could change.

Advisory Board to the Nieman Foundation pictured (click image to enlarge, or link in caption to see the rest of page showing affiliations and, if applicable, “NF” year, i.e., whether person was a former Nieman Fellow (I think).  I see, including those not pictured, 14 men to 8 women, and the general “color” of the advisory board (“not shown” includes Panama’s ambassador to Italy and Harvard’s Henry Louis Gates, Jr.):

 


[Reference from statement above “Meanwhile, mainstream and other media, has been and will continue consolidating into conglomerates and selling off the less profitable parts, to maximize profits, and the prior owners will often with their profits form philanthropies or more private foundations for good PR and political activism.**”] 

** I did a quick look at The New York Times Company Foundation and found that in 2001 it was recording actual grantees (functioning primarily as a grantmaking conduit year after year), but thereafter seem to have just stopped, on the tax returns at least.  (Three pdfs, complete Forms 990PF from 2008, 2003 & 2001 and an detail/ grants page/ from the 2008 return…)

[The NYT Company Foundation, started in 1955 as the New York Times Fund, Inc., has now filed for dissolution; see tax return showing assets “0.”  Meanwhile, a related 501©7 [social or recreational clubs, exempt since 1916) Entity was The NYT Fitness Centers, which I didn’t look up]. So the practice of this one was yearly funding by the company, through the foundation, to the (unnamed, at least on recent returns) grantees, in moderate amounts (under $10M usually), whether or not its assets in a given year were above or below the amounts granted.   Search EIN#136066955 (or entity name) to see more.]



 with commentary on the side, I deal with the concept of “ad hominem” (rightly applied or mis-applied), a reminder of who is the New York Times (Company), and links to a footnote-post to hold more of my deep concerns IF this NYT represents the major information source on its many issues for its many readers.  After that, I explain more of this post’s relationship to its parent post, and have more to show on the organization itself.

For comparison along the way, I referenced (1) another name- (but not content-) changing organization I’ve blogged before (which this one reminded me of in the nature of the namechange), “CFFPP” and, since this one was targeted to “Local Governments,” (2) another one also targeted to “local (City and County, i.e., below the state level), which has been around longer and is much more “flush” and influential — the ICMA (where the “C” doubles for “City&County) and its retirement plan management entity, “ICMARC” (or, it calls itself ICMA-RC”).

In defining this (and as suspected) a third “related” organization under slightly different name has existed since 2008, at the exact same address, as managed by ICMA (financial and administrative services), calls “the Center for State and Local Government Excellence” (“CSLGE”or they call it “SLGE”) — all of this physically at least located in Washington, D.C., and in a leasing from still yet another entity that (it turns out) several of the board members of one group also help run.

This next excerpt from an ICMA-RC’s 2015 Form 990 Schedule O supports my last statement. I’ve followed by “just a few” more showing accumulation of assets, and that its primary income (consistently) is in administering those retirement plans, and that and how movement to investment into wholly-controlled and unregistered (with the SEC) securities has been taking place in this century.  The words “VantagePoint” and “VantageTrust” also will be helpful glossary to the section.

In other words, ICMA, ICMA-RC and CSLGE substance is a major section of this post — and a reminder, at all levels, despite constant talk of deficits, in fact, governments (local, state, county, federal) continue to accumulate assets and place they where, hopefully, the public will not notice — such as under control of private nonprofits and their friends, with sometimes stunning salaries for administering them, and highly incestuous relationships among the board of directors or other controlling relationships over the same. 

Most images are 2014-2015 FY, however, the one with the outrageous salaries showing (2nd one colorful annotations), showing $4.4M (as in “million U.S. Dollars”) base pay for is main officer Joan McCallen (retired in 2015? from there — but not from the other entities shown on Schedule-R) and some others over $1M or $2M

Look at the multiple board overlaps…even with the organization that owns and manages the building it leases from in DC!

As fine print says, this is ICMA-RC for FY2008. Line 1 (with magnifying glass set to the $4.44M base pay (not including benefits — see also any Sched J if some of this may include bonus incentives) for Joan McCallen, she then retired (that year) to be replaced (by recall; check details) Bob Schultze, who besides ICMA-RC has  or has had involvements with related entities, including (see nearby image) as viewed Nov. 2017, the Center for State & Local Gov’t Excellence which entity I noticed in part from a Form 990, when ICMA-RC gave it a nearly $1M ($900K) grant. ICMA-RC’s primary activity certainly isn’t grant-making, so what grants are given, I noticed.  IN turn, on one of the CSLGE’s returns, I also see that ICMA or “ICMA-RC” was listed as the only Part VIIA “independent contractor” for “support services” when in fact, they are at the same DC street address and suite # and from the start were NOT “independent” in the least, even as reported on their tax returns! Maybe this enables yet more deductible contributions to make the donor’s profile and “program service accomplishmt.” activities (which might include grants) look more reasonable — while conserving money on shared expenses. (You Tell Me — why would such situations be set up and continued?) .REMINDER: These salaries are not even direct public sector salaries, but what the public sector (indirectly) still subsidizes to manage its substantial — obviously! — assets, or as many as ICMA-RC managed to get under its DC-HQ-based control  Meanwhile FY2008 was a ROUGH year for the average wage-earner and homeowner, nationwide (see “recession.”). (Myself included, but for far different reasons…)

 

From ICMA-RC FY2015 as it shows, “Other Securities” (as opposed to Line 11 Public-Traded- that it to say, registered through the SEC (or other country’s) regulation and available to the general public) were doubled this year (see other image or that year’s return from “990sFinder” table nearby on the post, or otherwise) from about $73M, while the (larger) amount held in public traded securities DEcreased by about $53M (roughly) to, still, $278M or so. Get the general idea here? This is a PRIVATE SECTOR, PRIVATELY-HELD, TAX-EXEMPT CORPORATION administering primarily (DNR if only) PUBLIC sector retirement plans — tax-exempt and for ongoing profits and high salaries to the administrators, whose background typically was already in government, complete with pension plans from gov’t also, ALL of which the public without access to this type of plans gets to continue funding, although well-managed investments should show enough ROI to sustain itself without constant outside contributions… or why hold all those assets in the first place?

As referenced above, see change in #s (Left column, right column) for lines 11 and 12. Same entity (ICMA-RC), same year (FY2015).

Sched-R Part I Disregarded Entities FY2014 is a category I don’t fully understand it, but the IRS apparently doesn’t consider them really separate from the Form 990 filing entity. “LLCs” may show up in this section….The other categories (Pts. II, III, or IV) would be tax-exempt (II), or, III taxable as partnership or trust, and IV taxable as corporation (or vice versa; I DNR offhand — see basic IRS Form 990), which is to say, federal income “taxable.” You can see which disregarded entities hold the most assets, and that some of these relate to the VantagePoint Funds, and (other references say) companies administering them.** The one in NH was only formed 2001 and I saw a Disclosure Memorandum (or similar term) recently indicating issuance of securities NOT registered under the SEC or insured by the FDIC, etc. — controlled by (essentially) the same top ICMARC and ICMA leadership.

More on the Disregarded Entities FY2014 Image above:

ALL are at the same D.C. street address (left column) with different names, legal domiciles, and data.

Notice (column “(b”) that three out of the four read “SEC-registered” but the fourth, legal domicile NH, is “State-Regulated Trust Company” (NH seems to classify it as “Domestic Bank.”  The others’ legal domicile is “DE.” So, the move seems to be away from SEC-registered entities and brokers which will also be shown in a moment below.  Now look at the INCOME (I have to presume that’s FY2014 income):  #2 the “Transfer Agents, LLC” has $162M income, but shows “0” assets, showing money must be moving through it to somewhere else — or was simply spent.  #4, the newer, NH entity, managing retirement assets, shows $124M INCOME, second in size only to #2.  Meanwhile, #3, VantagePoint Investment Advisors, LLC, is showing a respectable $27M income, but also some retained assets.

I have noticed some other prominent organizations moving from Massachusetts and/or the D.C. area (Delaware qualifies) north to NH, but cannot recall it in enough detail, and won’t insert any official comment on it.  The first one that comes to mind was related to the “CES” (Coalition of Essential Schools”) movement at Brown University (Rhode Island).  Another trend seems to have been moving from “Inc.” (Corporate) to “LLC” (Limited Liability) registration.  LLCs tend to show up in the “Disregarded” section of Forms 990.  (Disclaimer!! I am no expert on this, just observation).

Now look at the right-most column (ICMA-RC controlling entity for all).

**ICMA-RC manages its own set of mutual funds (VantagePoint Mutual Funds) and has been active recently (2001, 2017) in setting up another specialized, and limited-involvement type of investment NOT registered under the SEC while apparently (from what I can see at this level of looking — and I’m  no investment broker or adviser…!)  closing out access to purchase from those particular named funds as of Sept. 2016.

VantagePOINT Funds (as opposed to “VantageTrust Funds, or “VantageTrust Funds II” (see nearby images from Sept. 2017 disclosure memo and of NH registration for 2001-formed company as VT Trust Funds II “Trustee”)

The next round of offerings seems to be as I said, or at least in part, issued under exemption from Securities Exchange Commission registration.

The involved personnel here are well-paid and highly positioned.


 

VantageTrust Funds (replacing VantagePOINT Funds??) described (part of a brochure found on org. website), see named organizations under Sept. 2017 Disclosure Memo “INTRO.”


Search for “VantageTrust Company LLC” (blue bordered, wide image).NOTE:  The New Hampshire SOS registry doesn’t show this as one word (“VantageTrust”) as listed here, and described internally, but as two separate words, in its face sheets.  A search without the space between may not show the company’s registration initially.

(Searching NH Corp. Division database for the VantageTrust Company, LLC, after hearing about its 2001 registration. Notice it’s a “Domestic Bank” and business name is mis-labeled at the NH Corp. Division label, so appearing [unlike certain others beginning “Vantage” with no space before next word- see “Vantagefive”] out of sequence (although it was still found..)

Face sheet to 2001 NH VantageTrust Company, LLC Registration. Notice para. 2 named incorporators / first directors..

Face sheet, cont’d. to 2001 NH VantageTrust Company, LLC Registration. Notice the “LLC” isn’t referenced, and (bottom of this image) the name Joan McCallen of the 2008 $4.44M salary (!!) from ICMA-RC + benefits. She retired in 2015, at least from that ICMA-RC position.

VantageTrust II Funds (“Intro + Mgmt of the Trust” from Sept. 2017 Disclosure Memo (found on-line during Google search) establishes the NH LLC (formed 2001 and classified as “domestic bank”) [“NON-depository banking institution”] as Trustee and as wholly-owned subsidiary of ICMA-RC AND (as trustee) having complete control of the funds.  And, the availability of funds “generally to “eligible trusts” incl. “Public sector plans AND their participants. (Note: not SEC-registered).

VantageTrust II Funds (Sept. 2017 Disclosure Memo cont’d. listing other players (See Form 990 Sched R Pt. I, “Disregarded entities” list for ICMA-RC) announcing Exemption from Registration under Federal Securities Laws (i.e., not SEC-of-1933 registered) or Investment Company Act of 1940.


Re: the 2001 change of registration — An article on “CIT” (collective investment trusts) vs. mutual funds may be found at Manning & Napier Advisors, LLC, The Re-emergence of Collective Investment Trusts correlation to changes in the IRS (allowing tax-exempt status for CIT banks) since 1936, 1955, and the availability of a NCSS trading platform in 2000 may relate to the ICMA-RC decision (quote inside blue-borders, below):

I came to realize this may represent what ICMA-RC is marketing (in part) on seeing an example of it being passed at the Village of Germantown (WI) General Government & Finance Committee meeting, that is, reference to the specific phrase “Collective Investment Trusts” in association with Vantage Trust Company.  Few people were at the meeting, but the “new business” to subscribe to this investment apparently was passed without much fanfare.  It may have also been on the Sept. 2017 Disclosure memo above; at this point, I don’t remember which came first:

Village of Germantown Gov’t & Finance Committee Mtg Minutes 2/23/2016 (Image #1 of 2) shows how ICMA helps gain control of assets for the new type of CIT funds (VT II)

Village of Germantown Gov’t & Finance Committee Mtg Minutes 2/23/2016 (Image #2 of 2) shows how ICMA helps gain control of assets for the new type of CIT funds (VT II)

…The first CITs were pools of securities that were traded manually and typically valued only once per calendar quarter. In addition, they were limited to a few investment objectives, primarily concentrated in Stable Value. Since early CITs were unique to each bank and portfolio manager, information was not publicly available. In contrast, as of 12/31/2014, there are over 3,2002 CITs open for investment and covered by Morningstar, Inc. Furthermore, those CITs represent 75 different Morningstar Categories.

When 401(k) plans were developed in the 1980s, CITs were an option in many of the early plans; however, given the operational constraints of CITs and their lack of widely available information, mutual funds soon became the preferred vehicle in most 401(k) plans. Mutual funds offered many of the features that CITs lacked. They provided a wider array of investment objectives, were traded and valued daily, were marketed to retail and institutional investors, and were easily followed in the news media.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE! © Manning & Napier Advisors, LLC (shown for definition/background on CITs only, not legal advice).

An important development for CITs occurred in 2000 when the National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC) added CITs to its mutual fund trading platform, Fund/SERV®, allowing CITs to trade daily and as fluidly as mutual funds. ….many plan sponsors are once again considering CITs as investment alternatives.

...The most obvious difference between CITs and mutual funds is how they are regulated. Mutual funds are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act of 1940, whereas CITs are regulated by the OCC and state banking authorities. As a result, CITs do not have the additional compliance costs associated with SEC-required disclosure and filings. Being exempt from SEC registration also allows CITs to avoid the costs associated with other activities the SEC requires of mutual funds, such as creating and delivering proxies, prospectuses, and Statements of Additional Information. Furthermore, given their exemption, CITs may be quicker and less expensive to create, and may provide more flexiblity with regard to pricing than mutual funds, as CIT fees may be negotiable in some cases, especially for larger institutional investors. Investment expense is typically the largest expense of a retirement plan; thus, the lower expenses of CITs provide potentially considerable savings that can be passed on to plan fiduciaries and participants

 

Anyone that recognized the nonprofit “ICLEI-Local Governments (etc.)”  named in my post title here, once you see it, as important to track, should realize that any such sentiment should be amplified about 100 times for ICMA and (its) friends.

ICMA has been around for over a century (it says) and its retirement plan (ICMA-RC) maybe at this point a half-century, is large, established, connected, and is going for control of a known major source of investment assets in “Retirement plans” from government employees.  As such, and over time, they (ICMA-RC dating to 1970? and before it the ICMA (dating back it says to 1914) by now know WHERE major institutional (public sector employee) profits are going, and are going for control with purposes to manage them, for profit [very high salaries] obviously, to their CEOs, while some of such CEOs also come from the public sector of MAJOR systems (example:  Virginia Retirement System, i.e., handling an entire state’s pension investments…)

Bob Schultze has run ICMA-RC since February 2015 — before which he ran the “VRS” for 10 years.

The image here is from another nonprofit, “CSLGE” (they seem to call it the “SLGE”) which I saw an ICMA-RC tax return donate $900K to.  Just read the bio blurb for a description of ICMA-RC’s activities!

CSLGE –Center for State & Local Gov’t Excellence, Vice-Chair Rob’t. P. Schultze bio blurb also describes his previous employer, and the one before that.

CSLGE “Affiliations” fails to identify ICMA and ICMA-RC. This center is less than a decade old, and its first tax returns clearly identify both those orgs. as Sched R “related entities.” Interesting that it was started right after the “Great Recession” and when the IRS Form 990 reporting requiremts. changed significantly, asking more detail about the organization itself on page 1, adding certain Schedules, etc.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 5, 2017 at 7:40 pm

“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. [Published Oct. 26, 2017]

leave a comment »

Why This Post?

The last post, on the global promotion of “HiAP,” — Post title and shortlink: HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7LY”).  About 12,800 words, published Oct. 24, 2017 referenced a “Health as an Asset” section on another of my recent posts, but I didn’t remember which one by name.

Looking to include a link, I discovered that section was so hard to find and so far down on an already information-and-image-loaded post (for which I hadn’t yet added any tags*), that I’m copying it here under its own title, to juxtapose it to the HiAP post.  (It also remains at the prior location).

(*but now have — and over a dozen of them to the HiAP post too).  This was an important post! It contains among other things a colorful WHO Banner explaining around which basic life elements and processes the calling-card “HiAP” intends govt – private – regional -local – and other powers to collaborate (to reduce air pollution) and clear statements of intent to impose HiAP on all — with the corollary, universal health care for all — demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt how fast this was spread through the system, and lists several organizations, of the type I continue to document and sound the alerts on throughout this blog’s history — at least one U.S. agency (HHS/CDC) and — who else?  the State of California (by Executive Order 2010) all united for a cause whose name seems to have only originated in 2006! The US is also being used as a major financial base to impose/implement this on other countries as well as our own selves, which again gets again down to our own tax base supporting the same.

So, the “half-parent” post to this one (I say “half-parent” because it was only part of the above post, and despite the move, is still about half (the bottom half) of this post too)…is:

Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”) published Oct. 20, 2017.

The concepts in the recent (10/24/17) “HiAP” post belong alongside this one too: we are talking about setting global health policies, including those impacting federal agency activity (which is determined in part by Congress, but Congress is also influenced, as I continue to say, by the private sector, both for-profit and nonprofit — as ever) from afar, that is, through global and internationally connected regional governments and related, networking NGOs.

Preparation for this way of running things of course requires restructuring business and management education (schools, academia), which apparently is where the thought leadership by the Academy for Business In Society comes in as a platform from which to proselytize, help organize, and of course advertise the transformation/s.

This time I wrote the post before the title, but the title still came out long and sarcastic—

“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 NJ state university system has other campuses and colleges.  This one, in Newark (commuting distance to NYC) is just the most famous one. To show that the J&J CCT is as I said, from its website (top, and bottom/footer info) we can see that it’s about 10 years old, a slight reminder who J&J is, if this is needed, and (from the footer) that while its registered HQ is in Belgium (not “Brussels” that I can see), it is registered as a Scottish company, putting it firmly in the UK, not in the EU or the USA

## The Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust (Trust) was founded in 2007 as a registered charity and a company limited by guarantee. The Trust is funded by the J&J Family of Companies through J&J Global Community Impact and J&J Operating Companies in EMEA.  {{stands for “Europe, Middle-East & Africa”}}

Operational structure and management
— The Trust is managed by a Board of Directors consisting of 14 senior J&J leaders across the Pharmaceutical, Consumer, Medical Devices and Global Supply businesses in the EMEA region. (etc., there are three more bullets)

[J&JCT: Johnson & Johnson Corp Citizenship Trust Footer showing legal domicile Scotland and registered office Belgium]


*(the Academy of Business In Societya global network of over 100 companies and academic institutions whose expertise, commitment and resources are leveraged to invest in a more sustainable future for business in society. ABIS enables informed decision-making on business in society issues through collaborative research, education, thought leadership, policy insights and business acumen.

“Thought leadership” — I told you so!

“are leveraged” The main verb of the leading ABIS statement is in the passive tense, leaving it open to speculation by whom they are leveraged while emphasizing scope and respectability of the network.  Question:  Who is leveraging it for the noble cause? Why not just say it up front?

ABIS Image #2 showing some of the organization’s purposes, and delineating four kinds of Projects: EU&UN sponsored (sky blue) | ABIS (red) | Corp. (purple) | Academic (orange)

Answer:  Apparently, the EU and the UN, that is to say, briefly, one regional federated government (which the UK recently voted to exit — remember “Brexit”??) and (if the UN is an “NGO”) a prominent post-World War II NGO for the NWO.

As you can see, the ABIS conducts projects, and lists four types of them.  It does not, obviously, list the EU or the UN as one of its members (how could it?), but it lists the EU and the UN first in four groups of sponsors (funders) of its projects, then itself (wonder what those membership fees are….), then “Corporate” then “Academic” although it is itself composed of both corporate and academic members.  (See “Image #2”, above left).

The next image is from ABIS Home page (one of several available on its main url):

Some initial comments on and images from “ABIS.”

I’m commenting on what I saw on-line so the images will illustrate the comments.

Above, those are “ABIS” home page images (not all clearly visible) on a sliding banner with a secondary (subsection at bottom left) sliding banner advertising an upcoming conference, and it being only the 16th shows the organization isn’t that old.  This is where I found the reference to (and conferences about) “Health as an Asset.”  Another project was “Thought Leadership…” and another “Government Relations for the 21st Century: Beyond Lobbying..” (See nearby images).

Nice to know these things are going on internationally on the behalf of all people who are hereby relieved individually (it seems…) from thinking about structuring their own lives, futures, prioritizing their values, etc. without such mediation and (paternalistic) oversight.
Read the rest of this entry »

HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. [Published Oct 24, 2017]

with one comment

Post title and shortlink: HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7LY”) Published Oct. 24, 2017.  About 12,800 words. Tags, more than a dozen, added Oct. 27.

Two spinoff posts promised below (still in draft Oct. 27) are:

ICLEI in particular shows pre-planned globalism and tactics for it (with Canadian ownership from the start, and prominent connections to UNincorporated association in Europe, as I recall). ICLEI’s previous name is a big clue.  “EI” stands for Environmental Initiatives as I recall offhand.

[“Spinoff posts” are portions of drafts of this post which are felt to be significant enough for more attention under their own titles, and usually were nearly complete before moving them under their own titles.]


This post was written basically Oct. 14-16, and continues from a theme who has been promoting “Health as an Asset” globally (and some of the organizations involved) from an earlier post. Published without further work (now that “Governance: The Final Frontier” is done and has undergone the “post-publication review” (and extensive tags have been added). This one is published Oct. 24, 2017 (a Tuesday evening, my time zone) and will likely undergo a similar post-publication review (incl. added tags).


Why post-publication revisions:  As just one blog administrator, it helps sometimes to PUBLISH, then REFLECT/REVIEW MORE (which are activities with different modes and focus of attention).  If this were a subscription blog (currently it isn’t yet) of course that would be less acceptable, although even on-line MSM show “updates” after the original publish time.  I am also considering other timelines for the blog, urgencies to publish, responding sometimes to current events, such as government in motion,* outside the immediate scope of the blog and at times, when I publish after working on a specific post and its topics is just gut instinct.  I also maintain (again, a gut-level instinct) awareness of my personal limits on how much effort can be put into a single topic.


Source: WHO. Click image to enlarge. Notice at bottom: “Health is the driver” and at the top “Health requires…. all sectors work together…” and a collective set of conditions to re-organize society, throughout. (image is unusually long and looks like it might have been a hanging banner for a conference…)

Found in a list of resources at a CDC website:

Health in All Policies (HiAP): Framework for Country Action
Developed by the World Health Organization to serve as a “starter’s kit” for applying HiAP in decision-making and implementation at national and subnational levels, this framework can be easily adapted for use in different country contexts and at the regional and global levels.

! ! ! ! ! !

Notice the elements of WHO’s HiAP Banner for Worldwide Implementation, “How Does It Work?” Clean Energy | Housing | Urban Planning | Transport | Industry | Waste Mgmt | Local and Regional Authorities | Health MinistryMore Collaboration to Tackle Air Pollution.

[I’ve noticed that] Whatever the cause (Tobacco Control, HiAP, Environment, Peace, Equity, Sustainability) the push will alway be for more collaboration (coordination) of geopolitical jurisdictions, *government agencies, and between governments and private businesses (corporations) + corporate wealth.  All individuals are expected to understand that this is for their own good, regardless of where in the world they live, including in the USA.

*[i.e., focus on Local and Regional where in the USA, the States are primary levels of jursidiction on things not reserved to the federal government by the US Constitution],

This was also the request when the cause was to “prevent family violence” only then the preferred term was “coordinate” — Coordinated Community Response.” All terms will speak in collective (or “collectivist”) language. Individualism as a principle is throughout discouraged.  [Green font here just represents text added during post update Oct. 27]

In case the phrase or its acronym “HiAP” is unfamiliar, see the “infographic” to right, from the World Health Organization, also labeled as a tool for promoting HiAP at the Country level.  I’ll show it again below, larger.

Key concepts — consolidation of departments and agencies within government, and planned communities with not even a complete concept — just a single word “health” as the organizing factor.

Relevance to “FamilyCourtMatters” issues:

The immediately preceding post introduces my concerns about this topic, using “Big Tobacco” litigation (Public policy and economic impact)” under “health” rationale as compared with “Domestic Violence” (Child Abuse is related and parallel), something I had experienced and whose advocacy organization, both HHS and DOJ-funded, and others, I had researched (primarily posted on this blog).  After writing (but not publishing yet) that, I became engrossed in this aspect, especially after finding WHO citing to its involvement in a global treaty around tobacco (introduced 2003, signed by over 170 members or “signatories” – i.e., mostly countries — by 2005) as an example of why it should also lead setting the framework for HiAP — after all, it was experienced.

In that postSmoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I see is By Design GUARANTEED, (like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates), (short-link ending “-7Lp”), which I plan to publish same day or within 24 hrs of this one,…

I discovered connections between major pharmaceutical (and other products) multinational corporation, its trust started only in 2007 (in Europe) but the company home base in New Jersey, USA — and meetings under the “Chatham House rule” (it said, “rules” but it seems there is only one — anonymity!) which is a connection to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) in London. Which brings up the question, if we are to be globally aligned, and one country (the USA) doesn’t have a monarch, titles of nobility or a national (declared at least) religion, why would be be seeking to align one of our most expensive areas of public policy (i.e., “health”) with a country, formerly an empire, and to this day still characterized as a “kingdom” although with a queen instead?


If – hypothetically —  I were, from a position of authority (elected, appointed, or corporate, whether in the for-profit or not-for-profit sectors) to say over several years, and from a variety of platforms (each time referencing organizations or offices I held to underscore the authority of the message), such as a keynote speaker at a conference or university center, to say to Americans, that is U.S. Citizens, or (which is closer to the reality of networked organization communicating public policy themes), if I and my friends and colleagues… were, concurrently, repeatedly and openly, to say:

Hypothetical message/directive:

Everyone stop talking about legal rights and due process, justice as it relates to anything expressed in the U.S. Constitution, or state laws, as passed by the U.S. Congress or state legislatures (respectively), and instead, repeat after me:

“Health in All Policies”

…In fact, let’s not talk about laws at all — just policies, as enacted and implemented through the executive branch of governments, plural, of course in closest meaningful consultation with local, state, regional, national and international associations/NGOs working collaboratively. … From now on, when a conflict between law and policy comes up, policy wins every time.  When a geopolitical jurisdiction conflict comes up, regardless of the law, the argument, practice, or ideas originating in the larger body’s jurisdiction prevail and will become standard practice  — even if that’s not what either its or the smaller body’s law says (for example, federal vs. state).  From now on, right and wrong are no longer expressed in law, but in “policy.”

From now on, national sovereignty, and concern about it by any nation’s citizens, especially for the U.S.A. and its citizens = “bad.”  Global citizenship = “good, equitable, sustainable, fair and necessary for world peace (and the planet).**  And anyone who disagrees or protests is a lunatic/fringe element/conspiracy theorist, or _____(substitute other negative name-calling at will).  We allow freedom of expression, and value it — so they can talk, but we, the intelligent and reasonable, should not engage with such backwards nutcases.##

## The two sentences in blue weren’t in my original hypothetical, but after running across an OpEd and NY article using some of those terms (mocking the concept of “conspiracy theory” and applying certain labels to those in protest) — and having just been researching the organization being defended — I felt it appropriate to add.  A large part of public policy IS marketing it to the public; advertising, “PR.”  Part of PR is discrediting the competition, which here appears to be, using a different set of language, vocabulary and concepts to discuss common concerns….i.e., independence of thought, or reference to a different standard for reasoning and evaluation of public policy.  … Keep reading, I have examples….

From now on,  leave the complex thinking –including about your families and children’s educations, public schools, housing, transportation or energy infrastructure, etc.  — up to the experts, and go back to work funding them.  During your work, family, schooling or any leisure time, stay tuned in for any major changes in the current catechism…and what to think and talk about…”

**Interjection on the two-word phrase “Global citizenship” and logical corollaries:

In writing this, the phrase “global citizenship” slipped out so normally as a concept in common usage, that I didn’t at first consider how it implies but does not cite to a supreme or “sovereign” power over the entire planet.

Because the phrase and concept of “global citizenship” (unlike citizenship of known political States with their defined land and water masses) does not or cannot cite or refer to such a supreme or sovereign power with geographic/territorial authority over the whole planet (which I learned is key to the concept of “sovereign”) while also protesting allegiance to the same (warring nations, states, sovereign entities seeking to expand themselves) as the innate cause of war (and poverty, inequity, slavery and other human rights violations and social ills), the rationale for any means to achieve the concept of, and the ongoing use of the two-word phrase “global citizenship,” and corresponding allegiance to it, as a way of life or principle for assuming or assigning duties and responsibilities, however, fails.

Historically (especially post World War II) the call for global government by consensus as opposed to “national sovereignty” (which by definition comes with subjects or citizens attached…) comes from criticizing and attempting to distance all people (especially the more powerful, “developed” nations) from over-commitment to their own countries.  But, without an organized body politic which implies, historically, something “sovereign” and reigning supreme over all owned territories, there can’t be “citizenship.”


RELATED, PREVIOUSLY POSTED DISCUSSIONS: I’ve already blogged repeatedly over time about the concept of “functionalism” (David Mitrany, his involvement with the RIIA Royal Institute of International Affairs (US parallel might be the Council of Foreign Relations), (the RIIA, or “Chatham House” comes up again in the “Health as an Asset” context) and the incremental way of disemboweling, so to speak, or draining the innate power of governments — such as ours here, or the Brits, or the Germans, or the French, or the Spanish (the RIIA dating only to 1927, and it is in London) — by outsourcing it to trans-national bodies.  Or, within the USA, trans-state authorities, an early example of which would be the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) — as an example, of by persuasion, different states giving up some of their autonomy for a common geographic, regional good.

THIS ROUND, Fall 2017, having just used the word “global citizenship” almost without thinking, I went looking again for definition of “sovereign” and “citizen” and came across two Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (“SEP”) articles (one written in 2003, “substantively revised” 2016; the other in 2006, “substantively revised” 2017), which presented enough historical narrative to, I feel, communicate the concepts in a historic context well enough to explain my concerns.  (SEP “Citizenship” & “Sovereignty“)

From SEP on “Citizenship:”

Supporters of global democracy reject the conventional identification between demos, territory and citizenship. In their view, citizenship is not a set of practices and rights that need to be anchored in a particular demos defined by specific territorial boundaries. On the contrary, citizenship is ideally exercised in a multiplicity of ‘sites’, situated at different levels of governance: local, national, regional and global. Global democrats sketch a multilayered, global democratic order in which no single layer or site is dominant (Pogge 1992, 58, Young 2000, 266). This scheme {{scheme or sketch — which is it?}} implies a ‘vertical’ dispersal of power above and below existing sovereign states, which are stripped of their centrality. This would give less of an incentive for conflicts over power and wealth within and between states, “‘thereby reducing the incidence of war, poverty, and oppression’ and environmental degradation” (Kuper 2004, 30, quoting Pogge 1992, 102–105).  [[Citation: Leydet, Dominique, “Citizenship”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/citizenship/]]

(I notice in the news, the word “democracy” is so often used as opposed to “republic” when referring to the USA also, and intents to help promote it internationally.  When I was young, in school, I do not remember pledging allegiance to the “democracy” of the United States of America, but to the “republic.”…Apparently “republic” along with “Republicans” (unless you’re one) is also a bad word…)

The SEP article on sovereignty spoke of a major turning point (at least in Europe) between religious wars and the concept of sovereign states as recent as 1647: “the Peace of Westphalia” (History.com reference) ending the Thirty Years’ War AND, separately (though obviously with religious overtones) an Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Dutch. And of the role of Martin Luther and the Reformation in changing the concepts of temporal versus spiritual power at the time.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 24, 2017 at 7:59 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Governance the Final Frontier (NCSC © 2013), This [Harvard-Kennedy-School-of-Gov’t.-based] Executive Session Detail includes an SF BAY Area Nonprofit APIAHF, which had 2013 spinoff API-GBV (Symptoms: DV Solutions are Mainstreamed, Well-Heeled, and Often Reluctant (or at least slow) to “Come Out” as Separate Entities.)

leave a comment »

……… As I say within this post:

My protest, as a domestic violence survivor (1990s) myself in the same area, is that the opportunity for some of US to provide intelligent feedback against overwhelming built-in infrastructure funds from both private AND federal sources has become like spitting in the wind.

Perhaps that’s where this blog fits in, I am tacking against the wind in public/private partnerships and am certainly no cheerleader for all this (financially) coerced “collaboration” in a vaccuum of financial transparency among the nonprofit sector, …

 

This post is: 

Currently about 9,000 12,200 words [@Oct24].  Moved here Sept. 21, 2017 from page “How and When Collaborative Justice (Problem-Solving) Courts…” (etc.**)..  There is considerable overlap of content. Most images are “click image to enlarge” so I won’t say this for each one (some more touch-based viewing devices, like many cell phones, tablets or I-pads, won’t need to “click to enlarge”; desktop or laptop computers more dependent on keyboards probably will). Some images may be linked to a larger website, but typically most are linked just to the screenprint image.  Added “SF” to the title (“SF Bay Area”) Oct24.

Meanwhile, on Oct. 20, 2017, I also posted:

Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern Cali fornia Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”). 

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

That post features a 2008 NCJFCJ “Synergy” newsletter literally narrating (not 100% accurately, but at least naming the component parts) and timing of some networked family violence institutes and resource centers (NRCs and SIRCs for “National” and “Special Issue”) which I’d already identified at the TAGGS.hhs.gov level, and flagged at the time (on this blog). … The same “Synergy” newsletter also referenced NCJFCJ’s 2007 “Wingspread” conference with AFCC and self-congratulated the NCJFCJ Family Violence Department for mending fences with AFCC (although it seems they started out on or near on the same page anyhow, with probably major membership overlap and viewpoints.).  This newsletter itself was public-funded by HHS, as its final page showed:  

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

It also claims the “National Resource Center on DV: Child Abuse and Custody” which the newsletter appears in part to represent, dated back only about five years to 2003). The key feature, however, is that NCJFCJ is the sponsoring entity; who they are as an organization. The public (HHS) funded this project (see nearby image).  NCJFCJ years earlier was deeply involved with the Greenbook Initiative also, opposite or with the then-“Family Violence Prevention Fund” (namechange to “Futures without Violence” occurred ca. 2010).    

Brief reminder of NCJFCJ conference and training activity, and with whom, and promoted by whom, funded in part by whom (if you’re working and registered with the IRS in the US, pull out a mirror)…(Section added post-publication, Oct. 23)  ADDED section about 1,000 words with images.

NCJFCJ 81st Annual Conference in Denver

Factoids:  NCJFCJ’s 79th annual conference in Monterey, CA was Summer 2016. In other words, they claim to pre-date World War II.   They do regular conferences and trainings:   Summer 2018 in Denver (see image), December 2017, now regularly training it seems with Futures without Violence (and the USDOJ), in Santa Fe, NM, Enhancing Judicial Skills in DV Cases.” This one is open only to certain kinds of people and limited to 50 participants, and designed to inculcate certain understandings and behaviors, I see:

… an essential foundation for new and experienced state, tribal and territorial judges and judicial officers to enhance their skills in handling civil and criminal domestic violence cases. Judicial participants will leave the workshop with greater knowledge and skills for handling cases involving domestic violence. …

A long list of points follows, incl. one that sounds in part like a CYA protection for intended judicial and judicial officer participation in local leadership councils (etc.) regarding DV):

  • Identify administrative and community barriers to accessing/achieving justice in DV cases
  • Devise methods of overcoming barriers to justice, become motivated to work to remove barriers, and use information regarding available community resources to assist in removing barriers.
  • Recognize and apply ethics rules that govern participation in extrajudicial activities, e.g., domestic violence councils, legislative proposals, local court rulemaking, and education programs of non-judge providers. …

“There is no charge for the educational portion** of the workshop. Participants are responsible for their own lodging, travel arrangements, and costs.”

**What other portions of an “enhancing judicial skills” workshop besides educational would there be?  Practice sessions, role-playing to solidify concepts? (Eating, socializing…etc.)

Here’s the 79th Annual (2016 in Monterey, CA, conference) advertised at “NationalHealthyMarriageAndFamilies.org,” itself an HHS-funded project (incl. website) with a focus on “HMRE” (Healthy Marriage Relationship Education) training with an “underpinning of family safety,” presided over by their “Family Violence Advisory Committee” of three men and two women.*

One of the men comes up around (as board member on) an organization (Nat’l Latino Alliance for the Elimination of Domestic Violence) on the post below referenced as a multi-cultural institute for violence prevention, which is not mentioned here, although his other fatherhood connections are (Fernando Mederos of Boston MA).

And two of the three men on the “Family Violence Advisory Committee are from MenStoppingViolence.org in Atlanta Georgia. One woman is from a Rutgers University (NJ) Center on Violence against Women and Children,  and the other, the only listed attorney in the mix, from Los Angeles, at an LGBT center. I saved it to pdf, in case of future broken link above, with some comments at the top, however some right-margin text is lost and content harder to read: Family Violence Prevention Advisory Panel | National Resource Center for Healthy Marriage and Families (5 people viewed Oct 23, 2017~>this NRCHMF is HHS-funded, says footer info) its Goal? Apparently ~Integrating HMRE educ into the Safety Net~5pp

Men Stopping Violence Inc. (EIN#581618891, since1982ff, GA, running BIP, 90% gov’t supported (ProgrRevs and-or grants), year after year, is primarily government sponsored, whether through grants or through government fees and contracts under “program service revenues.”  Unfortunately, after 2008, IRS Form 990 doesn’t break down (have a printed line-item designation for) “government fees and contracts,” which pre-2008 shows that most of its Program Service Revenues were so classified. It’s maintained a moderate size. I annotated two tax returns, one from 2005 and one from 2008:

Detail from IRS Form 990 FY2005 of Men Stopping Violence reveals that most of its “program service revenues” come from (Line 93g), gov’t fees and contracts, regardless of whether most of its direct grants (contributions) for a given year did or did not. Over the years, Schedules of support show increasing revenue from “services provided” — but those services apparently were provided mostly under gov’t contracts and fees. Even so, it’s still managed to overspend and deplete standing assets.

I should do follow up, however, please note the connection of board member with “Georgia Commission on Family Violence” which was set in place by the legislature in 1992, and that (I just saw from its website) apparently the same “Enhancing Judicial Skills in Domestic Violence Cases“** workshop was brought to Georgia, co-sponsored by (its) Judicial Council/AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts) and the Family Violence Council, with NCJFCJ, and help from the “Criminal Justice Coordinating Council.” This is going on as I write, Sunday – Wednesday this week! (FYI, NCJFCJ’s home base is, mostly, Nevada).

Current look at GA Commission on Family Violence Pls. notice “Enhancing Judicial Skills” at bottom right. This is taking place (as I write)  Oct. 22 – 25th, 2017! Below (but not visible in image) a Sept. one was for DV advocates.

** Through a grant from the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC), the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) is bringing its workshop entitled “Enhancing Judicial Skills in Domestic Violence Cases Workshop for the State of Georgia” to metro Atlanta in October of 2017.  Specifically, the training will take place from Sunday, October 22, 2017 (beginning at noon) and will continue through Wednesday, October 25, 2017 (ending at noon), at Mansour Center in Marietta.

The Judicial Council/Administrative Office of the Courts and Georgia Commission on Family Violence will be sponsoring the training.  The class size is limited to 50 judges, one judge from each of Georgia’s judicial circuits. The registration website is set up so that one judge from each circuit may sign up.  After that, your circuit will show as “sold out,” but the names of any other judges from that circuit who wish to attend will be put on a waitlist.  If we do not have one judge from each circuit sign up, we can then register judges from that list.

There is no fee to attend.  Some meals will be provided by ICJE and the Judicial Council/AOC.

Click to enlarge, or here for the website (the MSV Bd of Directors shows powerful connections still.

Kirsten Rambo, Ph.D., I see, in Dec. 2016,  was reported as becoming the new Executive Director in a domestic violence shelter on the opposite coast (California), San Luis Obispo County, after a leadership pair (Exec. and Deputy Exec. Director) resigned suddenly, complaining about work conditions and a “climate of chaos and distrust.”  I felt this was odd enough to report, especially if she’s Exec Dir. of a California entity while on the board of a batterers-interventions-services provider on the opposite coast (i.e., Georgia) and with a background under HHS, that is the CDC (which has a major foundation supporting it, by the same name, in Georgia).  If she is still at the California shelter AND “men stopping violence” board member, this should be made known on the shelter website.  IS IT?

“Kirsten Rambo, who was recently hired as executive director of the Women’s Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County. Courtesy of Kirsten Rambo” LOCAL Read more: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/ local/article118738393.html#storylink=cpy]
Dec. 3, 2016 by Kirsten Rambo, Ph.D., CDC Violence Prevention Center and MSV (Men Stopping Violence) Board of Directors, assigned to a California (not Georgia) shelter Exec. Directorship (San Luis Obispo County, CA) in Dec. 2016. Still there? I didn’t check, yet.

Women’s Shelter Program of SLO Hires New Exec Director Dec. 3, 2016, Lynn Holden, in the “NewsTribune” LOCAL:

The Women’s Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County has hired a new executive director after its longtime former head suddenly resigned in June.

Kirsten Rambo, formerly of the Division of Violence Prevention at the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention in Atlanta, will assume her new position on Dec. 12. [2016] Adrienne Harris was contracted to serve as interim director after Marianne Kennedy’s departure, according to Robin Mitchell Hee, president of the shelter’s board of directors. …

Kennedy and Deputy Director Jason Reed resigned during a third-party investigation into undisclosed employee concerns about work conditions. The nature of the concerns remains unclear, although Reed told The Tribune in June the organization’s board of directors had “created a climate of chaos and distrust within the organization.” Read more here:

(This Women’s Shelter Program was decent enough to post its EIN#, 95-3370729, in fine print on a web page, at least…)

SLO County (CA) Women’s Shelter Program detail posts its EIN#95-3370729 in small print (but the financials are not uploaded on the website).

I see from the “resigned” article (or main one) that the leadership duo had been there for 30 (Marianne Kennedy) and 11 (Jason Reed) years, respectively, and that from now on there won’t be a “Deputy Director” but the new Exec. Dir. (Rambo) “and other staff members” will take over those duties — mostly grantwriting.  (So, the shelter had had a man as primary grant-writer those 11 years, sounds like).

Mitchell Hee said the shelter isn’t planning to hire a new deputy director, a position primarily devoted to grant writing. Instead, Rambo and other staff members will assume those duties

As for any problems the shelter may have faced at the time of Kennedy’s resignation, Mitchell Hee said the organization has since moved on.  [Read more here: …/article118738393.html#storylink=cpy]

Last 3 tax returns shown on 990finder website (EIN# 953370729 search results):

Total results: 3Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Womens Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County CA 2015 990 37 $2,503,905.00 95-3370729
Womens Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County CA 2014 990 32 $2,408,852.00 95-3370729
Womens Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County CA 2013 990 31 $2,412,754.00 95-3370729

Among other things, the latest return here is only FY2014 (Marianne Kennedy still shown as Exec. Director, and Robin Mitchell Hee shown, but not as President). In other words, despite the negative/positive publicity in 2016 and 2017, it doesn’t seem to have generated an updated tax return with the IRS (990finder gets them from the IRS…).  Fiscal Year end is June 30.  So in October 2017, at least FY2015 (YE 6/30/2016) should’ve been uploaded — but seemingly it isn’t. FY2016’s would be (if timely) due soon, but what’s shown above does not represent the transition which took place almost a year ago, per the news articles.

EIN#95-3370729 under a different org. name, FY2003 (see footer & header on image). Simpler program service description back then..

EIN#95-3370729 under a different org. name, FY2003 (see header on image). Ms. Kennedy and two other women were paid officers, total pay for all three only $155.7K. This is ODD: The org. name GLINDA SErVICES, INC., bears NO resemblance to the website shown on the return, womensshelterSLO.org. Why? [2003 return from “990finder” HERE

EIN#95-3370729, WomensShelterSLO.org (bd of director excerpt, site viewed Oct. 2017). An Exec Director =/= a Board Member; the website may not be current; last available tax returns aren’t either, it seems.

As Deputy Executive Director, I guess Jason Reed wouldn’t have shown on the Part VIIA listings of “Bd of Directors, Officers, Directors, Key Employees, Highest Paid Employees” and he doesn’t.

I looked back at returns for several years (Here’s for FY2005), and saw it was formerly called “Glinda Services, Inc.” and has (at least now) an endowment controlled separately (from a related entity trust), with income fr om it varying radically (but never really that high) and in some prior years, the controlling board members were men.   And that their main program service (versus all kinds of revenues including grants/contributions) revenues seems to be counseling fees required of DV victims.

I also note that on their website, currently under volunteer “Board of Directors”, the Secretary (a woman) shown is also “Chief Deputy District Attorney” for the county, i.e., on city payroll.  Interesting…I realize this happens, but question how this would benefit conflict-of interest free operations.

Of interest:  http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2530

As late as FY2008, tax returns retain the name Glinda Services, Inc. but have deleted the reference on header to any website.  Tax information it says, is offered on “Another’s website, “but whose is not shown.  However, by 2010, based on letterhead of a supporting letter to the City Planning Commission for permit to allow a “Homeless Services Campus” on surplus city property adjacent to Social Services.  This would combine two operations (daytime core services + night time shelter) by other organizations, and (says a letter of support from, by now it’s called “Women’s Shelter Program of SLO”) within walking distance of the Women’s Shelter.  I found this reference looking for board of directors “Willo Cather” to find out (after noticing board tended to be run by men) whether this is a man or a woman. They were planning for a 24-hour building with a central courtyard to be set up.

Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County (CAPSLO) has submitted an application for a Planning Commission Use Permit to allow a Homeless Services Center (HSC) to be developed on the vacant property adjacent to the Department of Social Services at 3451 and 3511 South Higuera Street. CAPSLO is the operator of the Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter and the Prado Day Center. The new HSC would combine the functions of these two facilities and would provide comprehensive services to the area’s homeless population. The HSC would be a regional facility and is a key implementation measure of the 10-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness.

These are FY 2008 returns (4 images).  By June 23, 2010 (above letter of support for Planning Commission permitted development of surplus city land for centralized / “regional” homeless services center with beds, courtyard, a kennel for pets, and more) the entity had changed its name to better match its website held for years previously.

Image 1 of 4, IRS, FY2008, EIN# 953370729, Pg.1 top, Glinda Services, Inc.

Image 2 of 4, IRS, FY2008, Pg1 BOTTOM, Glinda Services, Inc.

Image 3 of 4, IRS, FY2008 top Glinda Services, Inc., Form 1023 available on another’s website (but “website” marked N/A on this return….)

Image 4 of 4, IRS, FY2008 top Glinda Services, Inc., (now “Women’s Shelter Programs of SLO, Inc.” under the same EIN# 95-3370729;) Just pointing out, sometimes public interface for a “Woman’s Shelter” may be female, but the power structure (board) still male-dominated. As of 2008, seems to hold, here…8 yrs later, the Exec Director who signed this return (but is NOT listed on this page, Marianne Kennedy) made headlines by, with another man (also not listed on returns, as “deputy” exec. director, mostly a grantwriting position said the news article, Jason Reed)


Back to “National Healthy Marriage and Family” (“NHM&F”) website promoting an NCJFCJ 79th annual conference, remembering NCJFCJ’s prominent role in the “DV network” at least as to federal funding, and its relevance to FAMILY COURTs and proceedings under STATE (not Federal) control.

The funding disclaimer on the “NHM&F” (NOT “Men Stopping Violence”) website footer, in fine print, is a grant I’ve talked about before on this post (long ago) (See “Disclaimer” quote with dark-teal background):

Disclaimer: Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant: [90FH0003]. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.

An HHS-funded website advertising nonprofit (that also takes significant HHS funds) NCJFCJ’s annual 2016 conference in California.

Pushing Marriage and Relationship Education AND responsible fatherhood year after year (a PRWORA 1996 welfare reform “special feature”) requires at least token lip-service to the existence of domestic violence. So they have an advisory council of, it says, four people.


Incidentally, where I said I remembered that grant “90FH0003” above, I did.  Link to a saved “TAGGS.HHS.gov” search to show it was granted to “I C F, Inc” which is an improper spelling of the name — there are no spaces between), three years in a row for $1.5M/year to, probably, set up and maintain this website, a grant to a multi-national GLOBAL, FOR-PROFIT corporation (financials not readily traceable because it’s for-profit), to help other nonprofits continue taking TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) funding away from families, and diverting it through “CFDA 93086,” as the image says, to run people through curricula, endlessly, sponsored by nonprofits also, often, taking more 93086 grants, and/or other ones (Compassion capital funding) etc. to get themselves set up to run the curricula, and make sure America remains properly patriarchal according to the protocol.

Click on image to repeat the search (results will change if data changes meanwhile at “TAGGS”  Recipient name is 3rd column from the right; notice this happened, it’s saying, 2015-2017…

Before 90FH0003, ICF got also 90FH0002 (also $1.5M/year for three out of four years, starting in 2011), purpose: ”

90FH0002 National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy MarriageNon Competing Continuation Application

but the only other entity getting a “90FH00##” grant raked in even more and was also a for-profit PR firm — in Oklahoma.  Public Strategies, Inc., deeply involved from the start with the “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative.”   (Saved Search) showing all three and that Public Strategies, Inc. got first $2M, then (4 yrs in a row, “noncompeting continuation) $3.25M ANNUALLY for “developing materials.”  This is an advanced search (I picked the columns displayed.  Above was a basic “Award”search, so picking columns wasn’t an option.

Click on image to see the saved search, which includes grants 90FH0001 and “0003” as well. This just shows the predecessor grant to “I C F Inc.”

Does it sound like, perhaps, running periodic domestic violence prevention trainings serves as a “heat shield” to facilitate and continue (silently when the headlines around DV roadkill surface, year after year) running VERY profitable — to those running them — private practice HMRE “professions“?

And the public pays for both sides of the argument — that’s genius policy design, if you ask me!  Not ethical, but definitely brilliant foresight of just how much the public doesn’t investigate things they aren’t prodded to from mainstream media, or political Left/right debates on a particular set of causes as defined by each political party, for the most part.  All kinds of protests and women’s rights organizations can continue going on, year after year, so long as this business agenda utilizing public institutions, goes on.

Anyhow, I have just shown you that so-called “I C F Inc.” as legitimized by the HHS appropriations (and during Bush AND Obama White Houses/Presidential Administrations, two four-year terms each) was fine with advertising the NCJFCJ annual conference. So we must get to know both financing and specific nonprofits, as a general rule, in the power plays of the nation…

The Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation. Guaranteed..(Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. post is Recommended reading if you haven’t yet!  Look for section around the above-left (“Synergy” Page 1) image (shown larger on the post,  and unlike here, with more caption and commentary). FYI so is that newsletter, even though it’s nine years old now.

Continuing some commentary still on that Oct. 20 post……
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 22, 2017 at 6:57 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates)

leave a comment »

__

Smoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I See Is By Design Guaranteed, (Like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern Cali fornia Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates) (case-sensitive short-link ending “-7Lp”)


Post Technicalities: Tags may be added later. After over a week reviewing and supplementing this post, I’ve decided to “punt” (publish). It MIGHT also be split later, but the sections on exploring national DV networking over the years (from key organizations’ narratives) and “Health as an Asset,” an academy (“ABIS”) globally networking under the “Chatham House Rule” (basically, anonymity)(which brings the topic to the RIIA / Royal Institute of International Affairs in London and its historic intentions, as expressed in its founding documents) towards the bottom, which has a sequel, actually belong together. And this still IS “Domestic Violence Awareness Month,” for what that’s worth, in the USA..so I took a closer look at how certain organizations like to collaborate for a unified voice, and consequences of that collaboration, down the road a few decades….//LGH, Oct. 20, 2017


Or, you could call this “October Local & Posts-in-the-Pipeline Update” which is how it started out, attached to another post started earlier I’d hoped to publish with just a brief update.

As my About Holidays / Personal Backdrop” (posted Oct. 10)** says, I took a brief, about half-month, pause while handling (different kind of writing required) personal things and am now catching up on some of the posts already in the “pipeline” referencing, basically and most recently the themes of (a) Big Tobacco Litigation/Smoking Cessation Control (Public policy) Efforts and (b) The Problems with Problem-solving Courts (“Collaborative Justice”), which includes the development and implementation nationwide of family courts, too.  [** after next few reminder images…]


I wrote about an East Coast/West Coast connection involving one government sub-sector (Administrative Office of the Courts, under the Judicial Council of California, the ruling body of the Judicial Branch in the state) with an improperly named non-entity (it’s not its own legal business OR government entity) — the “Center for Court Innovation” in New York.  You will not find it registered under that name on CharitiesNYS.com or Business Entity search, and so far as I know, it’s not a trade name of some registered entity — because the EIN# associated with it, generally speaking, belongs to a private foundation, “Fund for the City of New York.”

Four logos show sponsorship (not membership) of the Executive Session for State Court Leaders” (click image to enlarge, for fine-print commentary) as I recall. Only 1 logo represents part of government (BJA is under the USDOJ) directly; the other 3 (including Harvard) count as “tax-exempt, privately controlled entities” even though the NCSC Board will have public officials on it. 

I talked about how organizations like the NCSC got involved and discovered yet two more (subsequent to “The California Story” published in 2005) 501©3s promoting the same “collaborative justice” concept, keying off the concept of drug courts:

Fund for City of New York is one-half (the Private) half of the Public/Private (agreement, project, collaboration — whoever it’s defined) comprising the “Center for Court Innovation”. Look at the affiliations of the Board members — former NY Attorney General, Designer of the World Trade Center, Adm. Judge of the City of NY…!

(There’s also a foundation to go with this one).

**(The rest of that title, the same link as just given above: “….Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page].”(ends “-7AD”)

The other “Collaborative Justice” non-profit showing clear judicial membership and sponsorship, as well as an MSW involved in “Children and Family Futures.”  I won’t say more on that in this post, just pointing out that the process seems never-ending:

CCJCF-related, image series labeled: “Search for CCJCF President turned up EARLY Annual Rpt (Final Draft) WITH EIN# attached and its Significant Others (Judge Lynn Duryees, Peggy Hora)”

[Image may be added here post-publication, can’t locate a certain annotated one just now. It may be on the bottom of the related page]

One post in the pipeline taken from part (b) above again (“Governance, the Final Frontier,” now in draft, full title further below) reminded me of how early (how long ago) I’d realized that the “powers that be” within the domestic violence field obtained, and maintained, control over the field with an agenda to “therapize” the nation’s language of crime and consequences under the health, social science, and behavioral modification treatment [“therapeutic jurisprudence” and other concepts] paradigm — while still claiming to be tough on crime and domestic violence. And that one of the ways of doing this to mimic popular, grassroots demand from multiple seemingly diverse platforms (organizations) was having already-established tax-exempt foundations first internally sponsor projects, then spin off the projects off into more 501©3s (nonprofits) which, while the names may be new, the world view, personnel, response to the problems and practice of letting philanthropists run government or organize with intent to run it, is not. In other words, by setting up interconnected nonprofits collectively run by people of, except perhaps subject/topic focus area, the same general persuasion, having been so persuaded possibly in part because alternate viewpoints or alternate solutions to the problem were out-funded, and out-maneuvered.    

[Phrases above in this color were added long after the original paragraph; it this is too much overexplaining, read around them.]


Both this post and the one whose title shows next, linked from the “Collaborative Justice/Problem-solving Courts” page, should be published today, Oct. 20, 2017, or within 48 hours of each other.  (That “today” date kept getting moved back as I continued adding to the top part of this post!) The one you’re reading now will be published first.

I’ll repeat that link near the bottom of this post.


VERY early on, assumptions about WHICH are the KEY POINTS IN (foundational to) any new field or regime (for the DV field, that treatments and interventions, such as batterers’ intervention, or supervised visitation, mandatory mediation, parent education, etc.) become foundational, basic for that new field or regime’s claims to even BEING a field of practice or a new profession or area of professional practice (example:  “fatherhood” or “domestic violence PREVENTION”). Assumptions and omissions of relevant information which might speak against that selection of points get “baked-into the infrastructure and system” (including to its literature and downloadable curricula, webinars, etc.) as entrenched positions, and continually a part of whatever solution is chosen.

This proprietary, linguistic control makes later protest by people harmed by such policies, even if among the classes the policies are allegedly representing in the first place — for example, survivors of domestic violence, and/or child abuse who, with full information up front might have made different choices in picking their court battles, or how and how hard to fight back once they were dragged into one — an even heavier burden and uphill battle.  The public is fed information leading (or at least encouraging) readers/viewers to believe (until personally involved) that “the experts are on it,” so where there’s evidence to the contrary, maybe it was just the family’s problem, or one of the family members.’  Or a rogue judge, or a local problem..

After all, don’t we hear about domestic violence on TV shows, sometimes in a movie, in ads, and after headlines involving recent roadkill, perhaps from experts on one of the major organizations’ comments?

A SHORT SECTION ON THIS, FOLLOWED BY MORE ON THE NETWORKS:

Who can even find the long-standing/oft-quoted SF Domestic Violence Consortium?  What does its spokesperson do for a living? Take tax-free donations (It’s not an incorporated entity, but its “Executive Director” maintains apparently a speed-dial on some local news media with each new domestic violence vitality — year after year — or otherwise disaster that has potential for making national news too.

Looking at this one, I also took a quick re-view of California’s registered and still active known major DV organizations, including (but not posted here) the “NNEDV.”  I also added a section in which one of the networked entities did us (belatedly) a courtesy summary of the networks themselves, nationally, that is. Recommendation?  Pretend this is a conversation, and just deal with its about 15,000 words as they come up.  When you see a new section coming up, so be it, and remember that some of the material that inspired a post may (in my writing style) still end up closer to the bottom, while what’s in between is, to say the least, “illuminating.”….
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 20, 2017 at 7:47 pm

Posted in Checking Out a Nonprofit (HowTo), Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Fatal Assumptions, Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011), Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Train-the-Trainers Technical Assistance Grantees, warfare: strategic, Where (and why) DV Prevention meets Fatherhood Promotion

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page].

leave a comment »

I might as well get this over with, and am taking the opportunity at the same time to say I finally published a related PAGE, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov  (Page started 8/29/2017, published Mon 9/18 evening. With case-sensitive shortlink ending “-7w9″).

Together, that page, another post introducing that page (full title soon, just below) and this post About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page](case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7AD“) are “good stuff” and history on some major program-propagation vehicles in New York and in California, with more in their middles on Minnesota-related events, people, and even a few nonprofits.


What’s here below was originally an insert or aside.  At the bottom here, I again provide the link to both the page and my post introducing the page.  I hope readers will go back and read both if they haven’t yet.


There are reasons we are continuing to have “family court fiascoes” and destructions of household wealth generation after generation by way of prolonged litigation IN these courts.

Why not take a closer look at how they were assembled, systematically, in recent decades (generation or so) and the pieces from which the parts comprise the whole, or the engine, chassis, fuel, guidance system, [I’m no auto mechanic, but consider the essential parts — and the roads as part of the infrastructure too] and ensuring a constant stream of passengers, with “no stone left unturned” and no child, or life, left unscathed….?]   That’s what I tend to do, when not speaking personally..take closer looks.  Lots of them.


“ABOUT HOLIDAYS, SPEAKING PERSONALLY:”

About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women who Say No! to Abuse and Proceed to Exit it) (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7AD.”)

This post, while written (except this foreword) around Sept. 4, Labor Day Weekend 2017, was taken from another post then still waiting publication; its full title (and basic background-color) is “Introducing A New Page, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov. AND Some of the Backdrop (Personal Experience of Turn-of-Century Social Policy towards Women Reporting Abuse and Their Efforts to Exit It… ).”(case-sensitive short-link ends “-7xs“)

Exactly one week later, in fact another historic (but not “holy”!) day in recent history, I was still working on both post and page, as I was over Labor Day weekend, a major US holiday from September 2, 3, and (Monday) Sept. 4, 2017,* through to that day, Sept. 11, 2017

{*The aside added for  international visitors to the blog.  I don’t know all their national holidays, and they might not know all ours, either. While this blog covers some international issues because it covers private associations dealing with US courts — many of which make sure to advertise that they have an international membership— FamilyCourtMatters still primarily addressed to people dealing with Life In The USA… because the courts here are tax-supported and public institutions in every state, and in territories, of the USA.  We pay plenty for them, while we also through our system here (as to the income tax, corporate taxes, and tax-exemptions) sponsor, incubate, and overall, encourage the formation of tax-exempt corporations to fix whatever national, state, or local governments omit, forgot, or “got wrong..”}

BELOW HERE (within this blue box) is “Soap Box” talk on public vs. private.  If you “get this,” skip it this time. If you don’t, please consider the stakes are high in blurring one with another, which is a known practice and agenda now commonplace in the country (and not USA only).

These tax-exempt and other corporations can legally register as domiciled in one place, but operate and influence operations across state and national lines.  But the family courts regulating life within the states are subject to state legislatures for individuals once they obtain jurisdiction over a case — and through that, the family members involved — do not have innate jurisdiction over people outside the state except as related to something anchored in it. There’s a division, in other words, between jurisdictions within states, and federal. What I’m saying here – it seems to take corporations to overcome legal boundaries to representative government at the state level — and that seems to be the intent and purpose of a variety of such corporations who would rather “legislate” or at least influence, rule, and have power, over whole regions, or nations, at a time, and the streamlined ability to also influence legislation in multiple jurisdictions without having to fight it locally, place by place — and deal “face to face” with those who might, were they aware of the purposes — have cause to oppose them.  (See “Big Seven Associations” and/or the variety of “Do You Know Your NGA, NCSC” etc. posts I’ve written within the last year, or maybe two.. for how this seems to work when those on the private corporations ALSO hold public office, either concurrently, or in revolving-door fashion, recently…


{{As I understand it, there ARE no “regional governments” under the US Constitution, that I’m aware of. Some people have a problem with that (search “functionalism” on this blog for more info), and want it changed. The more and more functions that can be “outsourced” to regionally organized private-sector organizations (or JPA’s — Joint Powers Authorities) — the less and less individually responsive less-than-regional governments become.  They feel the pressure and appreciate the prestige of “belonging” as evidence of good governmental behavior.   

Sure, federal government’s Executive Branch Departments (like HHS, which was formerly — taken together with the part that split off, the Dept. of Education and any other — “HEW”) organize operationally by regions (cross-state lines), as do Districts of the Federal Court system yes — but even those are not independent government entities.

To organize legally cross-jurisdiction WITHIN government here, one must either be anchored in some part which IS either federal  OR state, i.e. be state government or something underneath it– or simply be a corporation, including tax-exempt ones.  Joint Power Authorities such as I’ve been blogging, like WestED, SWRL, or FWL (Far West Labs, South West Regional Labs — subject matter, education) still must anchor with a state domicile.  WestED’s state domicile, so far as I know, is in California, although other states are spanned in its OPERATIONS (shared programming).}}

That’s why, at a time when “Public/Private Partnerships” (or, strategic operating relationships in the forms of Memos of Understanding — one shown below here as to CENIC and California’s HighSpeedRail Authority) are MOST popular with those already in power — we really should be able to tell the difference between that which is public — and its LEGAL power over individuals, including the power to tax, incarcerate, seize assets, seize children, etc. — and that which is NOT public, over which when we are not consumers of the product or entering into conscious contracts with the corporations, we don’t have many real rights.  So government uses corporate to cross jurisdictions, and to (as privatized) avoid full responsibility for its actions, and streamline (efficiency) and corporate uses government to encourage conditions it finds conducive to operations and bottom-line profits.  This may or may not include the public interest or health; it depends on the situation.   [[end of “SoapBox” commentary.]]

Personal timing & publication dates:

The weeks between Sept. 11 and now (early October, 2017), I was working again on some personal writing for an ongoing situation, which was because of its nature and, shall I say, “tenacity,” triggering PTSD and some deep, deep considerations about how far I should or dare take the push for justice in that situation and with these particular individuals who have gained a legal inroad into my life recently, caused damages, and then inflicted further distress through minimizing/dismissing the same.  Classic gaslighting and strategy for controlling personalities and/or abusers.

In “About Holidays,”  I also speak about some of the long-term tenacity of the prior personal situations, without naming names — because the names aren’t the point.  The patterns are.  I realize this type of communication is anecdotal, and speaking about it here is for general info.; expressive, not presented as a basis for policy.

When that communication (or at least the initial stage of it) Sept.11 / end of Sept. was handled (or, at least, delivered) I worked again diligently to update this post’s Table of Contents page, a project I am finally, for the most part, satisfied with (for now) and which led to more fascinating subject matter to research, involving consolidation of telecommunications (broad-band-providing) companies servicing government entities (like schools, public and private universities and research institutes), and such.**

**[Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California, “CENIC.org”; its network “CalREN,” and as it’s a membership association, one of its Auxiliary Associate members (in fact the only one currently) “City of Hope” (hospital, institute, development corporation, foundation all inter-related) and dark-fiber network subcontractor, “Level 3 Communications” with its own fascinating history, intersecting with some of the giant telecommunications providers (esp. broadband) mergers of the turn of the century — and its predecessor entity “Kiewit Diversified Group,” which came out of Peter Kiewit & Sons (or similar name), the construction industry.  This is basic communications history in the US, and fascinating.  It also speaks to the access to high-quality internet capacity and speed of higher education institutions (membership to CENIC or groups like it) vs. the average person, who is the subject matter of so many of the programs, including the social science R&D, federal designer family, poverty research, behavioral mod etc. — while when working as employees, contributing to support the same infrastructure financially based on the trickle-down premise.

Californians are aware of longstanding plans, highly political in nature, for a high-speed physical, commuter (to carry human beings!) rail system connecting Northern Cal. to SoCal (take another look at the map of the USA and see — that’s a good distance!).

So, it looks like CalREN’s (CENIC’s network name) involvement with this high-speed rail project may result in communities along the intended route getting an upgrade to their free? Broadband service.  Amazingly, the researchers figured out that poorer, less-educated people living in rural areas are less likely to have internet connections –aren’t they smart?  Courtesy “California Emerging Technologies Fund” field research poll, I see.  

CENIC article referencing Calif. HighSpeed Rail Authority (a gov’t entity) plans to make broadband communities. CENIC is private nonprofit, so that’s another Public/private partnership, assuming it goes through.

Announced at “Cenic.org · PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES & NPSRENS & NRENS

“SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Today, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) and the Corporation for Education Networking Initiatives in California (CENIC) announced that they have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding that will foster initiatives to expand the availability and accessibility of high-capacity broadband to communities and institutions throughout California.

“As a part of the high-speed rail system corridor, the Authority and CENIC will create an ultra-fast broadband network, connecting into CENIC’s statewide research and education network, as well as to other public and private sector broadband networks.

This new network will provide needed connectivity for communities located near the high-speed rail system starting in the Central Valley,” said Authority Chief Executive Officer Jeff Morales.  “This partnership and new network will advance economic development and public benefit while generating ancillary revenue for the high-speed rail program,” said Morales.

According to a recent Field Research Corporation Poll, conducted for the California Emerging Technology Fund, the lowest income, least educated, and most rural Californians are living without this reliable internet access. {{Theoretically, and probably…}} This investment in broadband connectivity will allow these communities access the educational, employment, healthcare, and civic engagement opportunities that lead to greater economic opportunities and to a better quality of life.”


In general, the HSR will connect Los Angeles to San Francisco at 200mph or in about 3 hours by (2025?  see info).  Another phrase that comes up is “Silicon Valley to Central Valley” with Central Valley being an area where unemployment (and poverty) are high.  I see from HSR website that ARRA funds were involved:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. –The California High-Speed Rail Authority today announced it has met federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 requirements by fully investing the more than $2.55 billion granted to the State since 2009 to build the nation’s first high-speed rail system. These funds have helped to create thousands of new jobs and generated approximately $4 billion in economic activity in the Central Valley and across California. Read our News Release to see what Board Chair Dan Richard is saying about meeting the ARRA deadline. For more information, read the full Investing in California’s Future through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 report.

Wow.  I remember where I was in high-employment area SF Bay Area in 2009, after child-stealing events, retroactive reduction of child support arrears owed, dramatic curtailment of my own work as I went repeatedly to court in an attempt to resolve the household who stole the kids’ reluctance to comply with court orders granting me:  visitation, or even at its lowest point, weekly phone calls placed by the children (after my attempts to reach them weekly went unanswered time after time), and by 2009 I had not one job in the profession left.  No one in the agencies or law enforcement seemed to care about enforcing any court orders which would mitigate the situation, and I was running out of the wherewithal to keep coming back to court (let alone even get TO the courthouse) time and again.  During that time I had not yet “figured out” what I have since (on this blog) regarding potential financial DISincentives for continuing any government OR nonprofit advocacy group, i.e., the whole systems, to protecting maternal parenting time once it’d been eradicated without legal cause stated on the record, let alone proved on any record…

In other words, those “access and visitation” grants aimed at increasing non-custodial parenting time, apparently lost their motivational impact when that non-custodial FATHER time had been increased to 100% and mother’s to “0%.” I had never been offered or encouraged to do supervised visitation to prevent the stealing in the first place, and when it was brought up, a commissioner said “there’s no money for it here..” — AFTER which I realized, well, yes there was, in the form of those grants to the state of California for such supervised visitation and exchange — to protect the children from being stolen, and myself from injury or repeated forced dealings with traumatic situations absent support for them, in the context of known prior domestic violence…

That fall 2009, I also had learned my children had been abandoned by their father (physically and it appears financially) and was dealing with both stalking while attempting to extract information from ANYONE involved on WHEN this occurred (including what month/year) or in what manner (two conflicting versions were presented by the ex-girlfriend and my ex-batterer (husband) and father of two children by then both almost adults, with me.    Abandonment is also a felony, so I was working through both shock and again attempting to speak with law enforcement on this (district attorney’s office, as I had when they were stolen the first time three years earlier).  This went nowhere — other than that in my need to speak to their father for this information, he somehow decided again to claim me “before God” as his wife, resulting in the need to at this low point now deal (again) with the stalking issue — which was terrifying… especially without funds to leave the area even temporarily which was a need.

But that commentary is getting ahead of the subject matter of this section…. Just correlating the State-level developments with my personal timeline developments.  Back to “HighSpeedRail”….


Read it from the HSR.CA.GOV (HSR=”High Speed Rail”) point of view — this is their MOU (Memo of Understanding) which, actually, clarifies that one is a 501©3 and the other a state agency, and that a partnership, this absolutely does not make!.  The signatures of each party are shown — but not dated (so this is probably not an executed copy of any MOU, despite its title page):

MOU as shown (Nov. 2016) header.

 

REGARDING OTHER CENIC or “NATIONAL LAMBDARAIL, LLC” referring to a different kind of “rail” with different kind of cargo (the optic fiber kind) images I may include below — these are obviously another story waiting to be posted (here — it’s already posted elsewhere!), consider these footprints and reminders for now.//LGH 10/9/2017

This excerpt of a Form 990 shows Nat’l LambdaRail as a related entity of CENIC, though not the largest one… || … “NLR” has a major, and dramatic though short history, and was purchased in 2011 by a billionaire from its university (public/private) membership. Won’t fit in a single caption. Stay tuned (or look up yourself!)It is a 12,000 mile optic network and the first one to go transcontinental (See Wiki or Bloomberg.com for more; also IO.com)

just web page header.

CENIC corporation, California Registry of Charitable Trust (search results page)

These sprang from an unusually-named corporate (nonprofit) visitor to the blog, but in general reflect major themes and turning points in U.S. history, i.e., control of access to the internet, and characteristics of the organizations controlling this access.  For the general outline, see my 2017 Table of Contents page, about half-way down, and the bottom section, and the second section of my Oct. 9, 2017 post talking about SIZE STILL MATTERS.  …..

WOW:  See that image on National LambdaRail, LLC, above?  Well: from Wikipedia:

…National LambdaRail was founded in 2003 and in 2004 its national, advanced fiber optic network was completed. In addition to being the first transcontinental, production 10 Gigabit Ethernet network, National LambdaRail was also the first intelligently managed, nationwide peering and transit program focused on research applications.

In 2008, a company named Darkstrand purchased capacity on NLR for commercial use.[1] By the end of the year the Chicago-based company was having trouble raising funding due to the Great Recession.[2] On May 24, 2012 the NLR network operations center services were transferred to the Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California.[3] In October 2009 Glenn Ricart was named president and CEO.[4] On September 7, 2010 Ricart announced his resignation.[5]

In November 2011 the control of NLR was purchased from its university membership by a billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong for $100M, who indicated his intention to upgrade NLR infrastructure and repurpose portions of it to support an ambitious healthcare project through NantHealth.[6] The upgrade never took place. NLR ceased operations in March 2014.[7][8][9][10]

 

Bloomberg.com on National Lambda Rail. Bloomberg.com gets its data from S&P Global Marketing, part of S&P Global Group (S&P = Standard & Poors, probably)

http://internet2.edu/news/detail/3695. Not shown — this is a 2003 article. See Wiki for follow up info on NLR.

Please click link (or image to enlarge) and read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_LambdaRail#cite_note-5

At Bloomberg.com, but can’t read more w/o subscription to “Professional Services.”See more at NLR “Wiki” page.

 

Internet2® started in 1996 and has a timeline. See website for more info.

Internet2® doesn’t post its financials With offices in these states, perhaps they could be found. If “internet2” isn’t an entity, then some membership organization ENTITY does have financials somewhere…

Found at Internet2.edu home page, blog article Sept. 17, 2017.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Separately, which I know from email news alerts and family court reform advocacy groups’ social media sites, there are also pending “current events” in local (California) “family court reform” news making the rounds which I feel urgent to address in new posts.  I have an idea of a better way to present the situation to people new to it (those familiar with it are welcome to watch from the sidelines, or inbetween rallies, re-blogging, or complaints about the overall injustices in the system, judge by judge or jurisdiction by jurisdiction, something I can’t remember the last time I EVER signed onto that approach as halfway sane, or effective, given the disparate resources….).  Some of that way is blended into this otherwise more anecdotal, expressive post about the personal backdrop to our so-called problem-solving courts.


I keep hoping to squeeze enough blogging and activism in between my own ongoing, though more periodic, life events which have been incited by the systematic disruption of my household, work and relationships through the family court and now, probate court, systems and self-important, self-congratulating, and overlapping circles of well-endowed and court-AND social-service-systems-connected “fauna and flora.”

That is, just as in any domestically violent relationship, while there may be at times a “plateau” between incidents (events), during which not a whole lot can be done to push them forward (whether through availability, regulations, or simply personal stamina), and then, responding to moves the individual (here, me) might make to change the status quo or resolve the conflict — there’s an escalation, or other way in which “power-over” is communicated.  This communication may be first made in private, but sooner or later can be gestured towards (by the abuser) should it go public, “we attempted to communicate with [____].”  Communicate in that context is a euphemism.  Something WAS communicated — message of intent to continue the dynamic was sent-and-received — but it’s not what witnesses or outsiders are, for lack of tangible substance, or facts in context, unable to do anything other than assume might be meant were both parties above-board and honest.   [I don’t know how that last sentence in green may read to others, but I do know what I meant.  There are just multiple layers of meaning, and a style of speaking — which I hate! in trying to actually get down to the facts and resolve the situations — which is more theatre than written communication of important truths.  It’s for show, but only those closest to the situation and “in the know” about the overall pattern of the relationship in question, realize how fake it is.

So, again, stamina, or consequences, etc. I don’t know how much longer this can be kept up, either the personal fight, or the writing.  It worries me, and may be prompting to get what’s done already in order, backed up, and on-line.  And it’s no way to live… with constant risk management while resources are drained, year after year.

Moving on….

Blogging Context/Sequence:



Introducing A New Page… Problem-Solving (‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts…,” (for short) has a case-sensitive short-link ending “-7xs” and is now published.

 See next inset block:

[That] page (#28901)  I have named:  How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov 

I was talking on [the] post  —  NAATPN, Inc (2000ff, Total Current Assets, $0) and Caffee, Caffee and Associates PHF, Inc. (Hattiesburg MS, 2003ff, Total Assets $0, Tax Filings Questionable), and others trying to squeeze a California Race-Based Stop-Smoking Network (AATEN) into that recipe. ..  [Published 8/28/2017 evening and as usual may be updated for clarity, basic copyediting, or length (splitting)//LGH]  —— about how the 1996ff (PRWORA-related) events overlapped with my current blogging interest, the 1998 (Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement) events, and similarities (not to mention overlap) of involved networking nonprofits, along with the stories told the public omitting the details of Who’s Who and the gradual, (dare I say “progressive” in today’s political climate, but referencing the generic, not political, meaning of the word?) incremental erosion of local or even state-level accountability to citizens living within those state, as opposed to privatized special-interest nonprofits continually telling us all that the same are protecting against other privatized special-interest FOR profits as though these two were unrelated….

Again, the genealogy (so to speak) of that page, includes ITS originating post, on the NAATPN. So, the sequence is from NAAPTN {already published} ==> Page “How and When Problem-Solving..” ==>Post “Introducing New Page+ ===> before I publish either that Page (or the post introducing it), I sequestered my expressive/reflective section “About Holidays” which you are now reading.


The originating post (“Introducing a New Page…”) will contain some lead-in and concluding material from below for a “footprint,” as is my writing style.

Impediments / Other reasons for the delays:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 9, 2017 at 7:51 pm

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: