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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

State-by-State Charity Lookup Links (from SimpleCharityRegistration.com’s March 2017 WordPress post). [Published 11/11/2017].

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”

I intend this page as a service to individual researchers of charities.  And a general alert on new developments by at least two “where’s your Tax Return and Corporate Registration?” entities  coordinating the state charities regulators through associations whose primary members are high-level state employees, and the internationally-connected Corporation Trust (“CT”) Company syndicate, now apparently run from or at least headquartered in the Netherlands.  What they want is digitized Forms 990 — something there are definitely pro’s and con’s to — for better support of (in this case) their “MultiState Filing and Registration Portal, Inc.” projects (“MFRP”) incorporated in Delaware in 2013; I haven’t found its tax returns yet either, although it’s classified as “Exempt” and described as “nonprofit.”

Delaware Corporations Division showing 12/12/2013 filing date for (“MFRP”) and its registered agent business.

I finally found an EIN# for this entity with the IRS Exempt Select Organization Check, and that it had registered as “exempt” (from having to file as a charity) in “Hartford, Connecticut (Mis-spelled on the IRS listing).  I then went to the State of Connecticut and found it had registered at a CT address on 6/15/2016, citing a Washington, D.C. address.   EIN# 46-4341792.











First, I submitted a comment (shown further below on this page) to the SimpleCharityRegistration.com’s March 2017 post, requesting permission to post the alpha list of state registrations, then started tracking down and looking at who was behind the website.  Who would be giving such permission was a bit unclear, as the LLC shown at the bottom of the page, who presumably set up SimpleCharityRegistratation.com website, I’ve not yet been able to locate.

After gaining basic understanding which associations are  behind the concept of the “Single Portal Initiative” for multi-state charity filings, and which nonprofit & for-profit corporations are backing the SimpleCharityRegistration responding to the Single Portal Initiative, I decided to publish this page, with both the table of alpha links by state and my initial background information, in the public interest.  I found two renowned organizations — at least in the nonprofit professional circles — both missing tax returns (though EIN# on one has been identified).

Notice the second line of title under “Single Portal MultiState Charitable Registration” Stating that “MFRP” is “working with” NAAG/NASCO may be a little misleading as those two formed it, and MRFP membership is limited to those with authority over charities (see footer** on the one-page announcement here)

Two foundations are mentioned near the bottom of that page, and notice that contact information email addresses all end in *.gov, yet MRFP, Inc. is a corporation.

Footer + last para. of an MFRP, Inc. announcement (same as above) on the Single-Portal Initiative. Click image to enlarge.

The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, describing MFRP as its grantee ($30K, FY2016) says that the state charitable agencies formed it:  “…The Multistate Registration and Filing Portal, Inc., is a nonprofit corporation created by state agencies in 2013 to develop and manage a single portal system of online registration for nonprofits….” **Footer on the MFRP page reads:

MRFP members are state agencies (Attorneys General, Secretaries of State, or other agencies) with direct oversight responsibility for charitable assets and charitable solicitations.

(The basis for Charles Stewart Mott Foundation’s wealth was originally automotive  supplier and  family beverage companies, but on selling 100% of the company stock to GM in 1908 and again in 1913 (!!), C.S. Mott eventually became a GM director 1913-1973 (he died in 1973). This Mott foundation was set up in 1926, and is based in Flint, Michigan. (See its “About/History” page). In other words, the wealth pre-dates the income tax, and the foundation pre-dates the Social Security Act of 1934, and the Great Depression of 1929…Currently (foundation only, last year available to see FY2015) it’s about $2.7 billion.

CSMott Fndtn,$1.8B of $2.5B total Assets held (as shown here FY2014) in category “OTHER” with the largest portion ($866M) in Private Equity, $376M in Hedge Funds, etc.

CSMott Fndtn FY2014 Highest Paid Professionals mostly managing investmts.

Disclosure (FY2014) that CS Mott Foundation holds 18% of U.S. Sugar, which is not public-traded.

FYI, my quick look at its 990PF (which the site actually links to — although FY2016 hasn’t showed up yet) shows a $2.7billion assets tax-exempt foundation who in FY2014? Total Revenues were $144M, Grants distributed $90M (i.e., still operating at a profit despite giving away on average 5.7% to charity and some substantially well-paid officers and professionals).  Any gift to MFRP didn’t show up yet, which makes sense with the grant saying it started as of July 1, 2016, and that year’s tax returns not in yet.

The Mott Foundation, from grantee search on its website, also granted $1.625M (one grant rounded up to the nearest $1K) between 2002 and 2006, starting out with $450K, then $250K, to Guidestar, one of the organizations involved in this project (but all marked “General Purpose”).


It’s amazing how often references among “colleagues” within the nonprofit sector to organizations as if the organizations were registered entities is repeated over time, even without evidence of any registration.

This story also connects through at least one of them (“NAAG General Mission Foundation“) to “Big Tobacco” litigation collectively by many state attorneys general, “MSA”  — Master Settlement Agreement.  This 2002ff organization apparently was first funded from tobacco class action lawsuit settlement fees, litigation brought by the well-organized state attorneys general (now you’re about to see why and how they got so well organized). It apparently started with millions of dollars in assets and basically has no need for contributions of any sort: buying & selling securities and investment income (dividends, interest) seems to be working well so far.  (Tax Returns posted below on this page).

Recently — which I picked up on one time from the California Office of Attorney General’s website, looking for my usual link to the Registry of Charitable Trusts, record of a major, collective-action (multi-state) lawsuit against fake charities raising funds for cancer, to the tune fraud of $187M.  I read further on this at the time (starting an on-line folder).  Family last name involved in some of the (four) sham charities included “Reynolds.” So I recognized it at once on seeing the NASCO so proud of and interesting in this particular litigation.

p2 of 2, NASCO testifying before Senate Finance (Business Tax) committee, Apr. 9, 2015, signed by NASCO President, then in TN AG office.

It is one of the main featured pages on the “NASCO” website (another “where’s your tax return??” AND “what’s your EIN#? organization” which comes up below).  (See annotated two images above.)

NASCO certainly exists – somewhere, somehow — at least its President is testifying, before the US Senate, according to an April, 2015 testimony before Senate Finance Committee plugging mandatory electronic filing of all Forms 990.  Page 2 of 2 mentions that, “incidentally,” several of our members are involved in a pilot program involving a single portal for filing… and shows that the 2014-2015 President was Deputy Attorney General in the State of Tennessee:

My Nov. 8 comment to SimpleCharitiesRegistration.com (apparently a WordPress blog) read:

**[under username “aka Let’s Get Honest”] I am investigative blogger on, initially, the issue of family courts, which topic expanded due to the types of tax-exempt organizations influencing the practices and operations of the same over the decades. I [have been] research[ing] and writ[ing] up certain types of nonprofits, in the public interest, for years.

I am more familiar with charitable registration sites in some states (such as my own, California) than others. I spend more time typically on corporate database (and databases posting IRS returns, such as 990finder.foundationcenter.org) than on charities in part because I don’t have all the links, and from time limits.

I will be posting this link to Simplecharityregistration.com on my sidebar and probably in an upcoming post; and wondered if you have an issue with my posting also the above list of US state-based links (with acknowledgements to this site) as a post, to assist my readers. I run a non-monetized commercial wordpress blog which isn’t selling anything (after nine years of posting), although it does have a few “Donate” buttons (which make it also clear I’m not a charity or posing as one).

If there is some permissions problem with my copying the above links to a free-standing post with title relating to the list of links, please let me know. Although theoretically individual links could also be located and compiled by anyone who took the time to do so, and sometimes they do change form (search options/results) as do the corporate (Sec. of State level) databases.


My page here in addition to the Lookup Links (Alpha by State) provides some background on the company and situations behind the creation of “SimpleCharityRegistration” website (“SCR” for short), which began taking paying nonprofit customers, I see, only in 2015.  No wonder I hadn’t run across it earlier… I have yet to find the LLC referenced on the bottom of the page.  For one, it provides no state legal domicile, so looking it up would seem to involve going through all 50, or looking for more clues on where to start.

SimpleCharity Registration.com obviously is a service (not necessarily the company providing it) for those who would be subject to charitable filing requirements, especially in more than one state.  By contrast, I am posting it for a service to people living in areas where charities required to register might have done so, and which information should give date of registration and more helpful information.

As usual, there is a story behind the initiation of this service the underlying company, and the underlying company’s listed Partners, whatever that signifies in each case…

From the footer on the pages the company providing this service seems to be is CBT Tech, LLC and from the SCR website’s “In Partnership With” logos, apparently: (1) “Guidestar,” (2) the “National Council of Nonprofits,” (3) “BizFilings” (which logo hides its larger owner), and (4) the law firm Perlman & Perlman are helping in some manner to provide the service:

[SCR.com] See Partners list near bottom of image: Guidestar, BizFilings? Nat’l Council of Nonprofits Council and Perlman & Perlman. || Guidestar provides a nonprofit database I used before discovering Foundation Center’s results provided in easier-to-print summary tables .

Looking at each of those “partners” in sequence: The “BizFilings” connection (note: no logo shown below was interactive on the site) off-site led to  eventual realization that we’re dealing here with CT.wolterskluwer.com, a publisher based in the Netherlands that dates back to the 1860s and who functions as a sort of robo-filer for corporations (as opposed to, here, charities).

I am familiar from my time on so many Secretary of State “Business Entity Search” websites in a variety of similar names.  “CT” is part of Wolters Kluwer, NV based in the Netherlands but operating globally (over 140 countries, I think it was) and traded on a Euro stock exchange, (“AEX” the Amsterdam Exchange).

Found the reference again: each reference has its own link:

Q: On which exchanges is Wolters Kluwer N.V. listed and what are the ticker symbols?
A: Shares of Wolters Kluwer N.V. are listed on the stock exchange of Amsterdam and the ticker is WKL. See Ordinary Shares.  (<==it’s also on several indexes; also USA CUSIP#s, etc., shown there)

Q: Where can I find historical prices of Wolters Kluwer N.V. stock?
A: Please consult the Interactive Share Price Chart.

from Wolters Kluwer “Investors” section. What exchange, including in the USA via ADR (“American Depository Receipts“) and various indexes the stock is listed in.

For example, on the “CT” (not main K-W) websitehttps://ct.wolterskluwer.com/sop-locations where “SOP” must stand for “service of Process” (i.e., state-by-state and I’m sure “D.C.” corporations under this umbrella willing to serve as registered agents), I see many I recognize from my time on those SOS databases:  Name variants in this list include: “CT Corporation System,” [in by far the most states] “The Corporation Company,” (Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas) “The Corporation Trust Company” (for Delaware),  “The Corporation Trust Incorporated” (Maryland), and (an individual? “Bill Battles” (for Navajo Nation).  I’ve always viewed it as a sort of “robo-Corp” or incorporation-mill, and aware that lawyers seemed to use it often.

Apparently I was right, and the lawyer behind this company name, James Brooks Dill (1854-1910), also has a history in helping re-define corporation law as we now know it, at a time when it seems anti-trust, anti-monopoly sentiment was strong.  It seems that this was a technically legal way to basically maintain monopolies without running afoul of the Sherman Act — but (disclaimer!) that’s just <>my first impressions in just starting to learn about the history of the “Corporation Trust Company” and its founding lawyer from just a few sources and <> as my gut instinct, overall sense from (over nine years of) lookups in the nonprofit area is saying “makes sense..” More info. + links on that is below; one thing at a time here…

Again, the four logos from the SCR “In Partnership With” image lead to:

  • Guidestar.org  {“GuideStar is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Copyright © 2017, GuideStar USA Inc. All rights reserved.” So perhaps we should presume (or check to see whether) there is some international or non-USA “Guidestar”somewhere also, or that the business owners or controlling entity either may no longer be inside the USA, or is busy colonizing databases elsewhere.  Founded in 1995 per its Forms 990.
  • Does Guidestar post its own financials?  Well, if you look, yes — but only one year’s worth and that year is 2014 (YE Dec) — and not openly revealing (except if you click on that one Form 990) its own EIN#.  So where is Guidestar.org’s Form 990 for 2015 (due to IRS April 2016), or for 2016 (due to IRS April 2017 and I’m now in Nov).
  • Incidentally, that EIN# is 541774039 and another database (Foundationcenter.org) has already uploaded GUIDESTAR’s FY2015 Form 990 (though in typically crappy-format visuals).  “Guidestar.org” itself just hasn’t….
  • Formerly called “Philanthropic Research, Inc.” (Form 990 FY2005, the last few pages showing where its revenues, from the start, were being made, primarily), as well as two “mortgages or loans” it was paying off, one to a former chairman, and one to “nonprofit finance fund.” The name change happened (IRS-verified Nov. 24, 2008) in 2008 per that return.
  • Mission To revolutionize philanthropy by providing information that advances transparency, enables users to make better decisions, and encourages charitable giving. *****

Prior website name on tax returns already read “Guidestar.org” (i.e.,didn’t reflect entity name) but in 2008, under Pres. Robt. G. Ottenhoff, the legal name was updated. Notice also main source of income is NOT contributions (Ln. 8) but program service revenues (Ln. 9), which expenses have included royalties paid by nonprofits, and its 1995 start date.

[Guidestar as an organization based on the quick look at those returns, probably deserves its own post…] List of the logos shown as SimpleCharityRegistration.com partners, cont’d.

  • http://www.councilofnonprofits.org (The National Council of Nonprofits (some tax returns read “Of National Nonprofit Associations“); website on earlier tax returns reads “NCNA.org”, formed in 1990, based in D.C.  {{more on this, below the table of links}}
  • https://www.bizfilings.com/about  Says that website, founded by two men (last names, Wiegand and Oster) in 1996; in 2002 “became part of CT”; “CT is part of Wolters Kluwer Corporate Legal Services, a distinctive, global portfolio of market-leading legal services companies. To learn more, visit  ct.wolterskluwer.com“; assumed the dba “BizFilings in 2006, contact mailing address at least in Wisconsin:  BizFilings  8020 Excelsior Dr.  Suite 200  Madison, WI 53717.  However, (details under “Terms of Services”) it’s a Delaware corporation and if there’s a dispute, see a “court in the State of New York sitting in Manhattan.”    Obviously providing incorporation services for businesses. Also, under “Bizfilings.com,” see also Wolters Kluwer:
  • http://www.perlmanandperlman.com/about-our-firm/our-story/  (Bernard Perlman in 1955 helped set up the first agency to regulate charities, which later became (the NY one)…

CT Corporation (see dialogue referencing the names from its “SOP” site, i.e., by what names the companies providing registered agent services in each state (and D.C. and the Navajo Nation) went; this will shed more light on it as to where this robo-filing under similar, and obviously related, names came from originally.  Like, the late 1800s and a lawyer…

#1 of 3 CT Corp History

#2 of 3 CT Corp History. Pls. DO Click image and read, with annotations… It’s important!

#3 of 3 CT Corp History









WoltersKluwer is fascinating, but after taking a trip through its various web pages (aware that it uses cookies to track), I think that should be posted separately.  The “Our Heritage” link (an easy, recommended read with just a few sub-categories in the timeline). An “At a glance” link on the company under its “About” as well are fast reads and give the general idea.

Click image to access whole document (as found-on-line) and citation. Submitted in partial fulfilment of requirements for a Masters in History (55pp double-spaced w/ Bibliography, a quick and beneficial read…)


Also, regarding James B. Dill (referenced in Image #2 of 3 above), this 2009 Seton Hall University (it’s in NJ) thesis found on-line explains how the Corporation Trust Company (I guess that’s what the “CT” originally stood for) helped major businesses survive the anti-trust sentiment of the turn of the century (1890s -1910) — and they did it in New Jersey, too.  Recommended:  Read at least the intro!  My initial sense is — it makes sense with my perception (experiential through all this blogging, and some, personally) HOW the law was set to enable monopolies which didn’t look, on the surface, like monopolies.  I’ll include the title page and two short excerpts:

2009 Seton Hall U. theses, #1 of 2 excerpts; click image to enlarge.

2009 Seton Hall U. theses, #2 of 2 excerpts; click image to enlarge.



One thing about Wolters Kluwer readers should be aware of is its US market niche and typical professions served (next two images) and consistent increase in dividends over time for its investors (third image. bar chart, expressed in euros).

Wolters Kluwer description

Wolters Kluwer description







From Wolters Kluwer Investor Relations section; increase in dividends 1992-2016. Compare to “Our Heritage” timelines for the same period.

Also, if this may help indicate size and scope, Wolters Kluwer is one of only six publishers working with WHO to implement the Hinari Program (started 2001/2002) providing access to biomedical and health information to “middle-income and developing” companies.  You should see the global map of registered institutions.

If INDIVIDUALS in other countries, for example, the poor or low-income population of the USA (and probably of other EU countries) want access to the things being provided by WHO to other countries, well these people should, I guess, just budget better, or get another job to pay for the subscriptions, I suppose, that is, assuming they’ve already handled ongoing expenses of their own: housing, transportation, as needed health care, and — for many — legal costs to defend themselves or their minor children from being abducted, harassed, stalked, harmed, including for some, killed — or for trying through the courts to regain contact with (or, for many, to also pay “supervised visitation fees for nonviolent parent “alienators”) their children after they’ve been abducted. For those who have enough for all of the above and basic life necessities, and still want the type of proprietary information WHO (Primary funder, the USA) and or Wolters Kluwer (taking receipts through a variety of businesses, including registered agent businesses of “CT” in MOST states), well, good luck.

Likewise, if individuals such as the late Aaron Swartz, get it into their heads to, having first had access to such proprietary information through some means (such as enrollment at universities or colleges providing access, or being a practicing white-collar professional who can afford the subscriptions to the professional journals) make such proprietary information available to a wider audience through sharing too much of it, they (he, she or they) may possibly face similar federal prosecution and threats of imprisonment to what the young man in question felt so unable to face, he avoided by committing suicide. Keep reading if that doesn’t sound familiar yet….

Feb. 2015 in the Guardian says it well, I think:  “Aaron Swartz stood up for freedom and fairness — and was hounded to his death by John Naughton in “Opinion.”  Reviewing (apparently) a BBC film, documentary of this man and situation, “The Internet’s Own Boy.”

On Monday, BBC Four screened a remarkable film in its Storyville series. The Internet’s Own Boy told the story of the life and tragic death of Aaron Swartz, the leading geek wunderkind of his generation who was hounded to suicide at the age of 26 by a vindictive US administration. The film is still available on BBC iPlayer, and if you do nothing else this weekend make time to watch it, because it’s the most revealing source of insights about how the state approaches the internet since Edward Snowden first broke cover.

To say Swartz was a prodigy is an understatement. As an unknown teenager he was a co-designer of tools – like RSS and Markdown and of services like Reddit – that shaped the evolution of the web. He was also the kid who wrote most of the code underpinning Creative Commons, an inspired system that uses copyright law to give ordinary people control over how their digital creations can be used by others…

I believe the next quote (part of paras. 5, 6, and part of 7) will show why I bring it up in this Hinari Programme context:

…So he morphed into the most technologically-gifted political activist in history. He looked for instances of manifest unfairness and developed software to remedy it. Discovering that the provision of court transcripts in the US was essentially a commercial racket, he teamed up with other activists to right an obvious wrong: that the law was only readable by those with money.

Access to readings in LAW…

He was similarly exercised at the fruits of taypayer-funded scientific research being monetised by a few ruthless publishing firms which charge outrageous fees to access the resulting academic papers. His first foray into this field involved downloading a trove of medical research papers and then data-mining them to uncover hitherto-undetected links between pharmaceutical firms and the authors of articles in prestigious journals.

Access to readings in MEDICAL RESEARCH, including biomedical.

His downfall came when he turned his attention to JSTOR, a digital library of academic articles hidden behind a paywall. He devised a method of downloading large numbers of articles from JSTOR, using a computer hidden in a closet at MIT….

Years ago, probably at about the time of his death, I looked up and looked for JSTOR, being frustrated with its tendency to show up as a search result on something of interest, only to find just one page of any article available. That also goes for scores of other digitized sources (publishers) of professional journals discussing, many of them, what to do with the American public their professions preside over (as lawyers, mental health professionals, psychiatrists, etc.)

(Quickly reminding myself), what was formerly called “JSTOR” under a certain EIN# is (incorrectly, by the Foundation Center) called “JSTOR” while actually being, “Ithaka Harbors, Inc.”  Ithaka Harbors, Inc. (under a different EIN#) terminated itself around 2007, 2008 and thanks to Access Capital Fees, and Annual Access Fees to the educational and other institutions, has a VERY well paid leadership board, and — while it gets some — obviously no real need for contributions of any sort.  It’s operating basically at a profit:

Former Ithaka Harbors, Inc. EIN#: 30-0152775.  Current Ithaka Harbors, Inc. EIN# (but Foundation center, again, labels it differently):  13-3857105. (Anyone who is inclined to look further should look up and look through the various Forms 990).  A “search again” link occurs several times on this page… A related organization apparently was “ARTSTOR.”  JSTOR reports, in post-2008 IRS Forms, having started in 1995.  etc… Look at pages 1, pages 2 (2008 or later) and Schedules A.  Just LOOK! I’ll post both sets of Form 990 tables, “such as they be.”

Total results: 3Search Again.  (The database has used the wrong label.  click through to see the underlying return, and note date of origin):

JSTOR NY 2015 990 47 $159,440,168.00 13-3857105
JSTOR NY 2014 990 42 $156,592,109.00 13-3857105
JSTOR NY 2013 990 38 $151,889,404.00 13-3857105

This is really Ithaka Harbors now.  That it was apparently formerly “JSTOR” seen from earlier returns, also in one of the next images, you can see the heading reading “Ithaka” but the description (describing the filing entity) says “JSTOR……” (force of habit, I guess?)

Ithaka Harbors (formerly “JSTOR”), EIN#13-3857105 Supplemental Info describes sources of program revenues: ARCHIVE CAPITAL FEE (ACF, one-time) AND “ANNUAL ACCESS FEE” (AAF, ongoing) Also note it’s called “JSTOR” but see header.

ITHAKA HARBORS (formerly, I think, called JSTOR), EIN#13-3857105, FY2015, SCHED A OF SUPPORT (past 5 yrs); see where most revs. come from (not contributions but archive capital and annual access fees by the various institutions, i.e., Line 2).


Ithaka Harbors (formerly “JSTOR”), EIN#13-3857105 Supplemental Info, showing where its $119M of “Investments-Other” are being held..

#1 of 5, ITHAKA HARBORS (fka JSTOR) EIN#13-3857105, FY2009 (merger year) PAGE 1

The name change (resulting from a merger) occurred in 2009.  As it says, the Old “JSTOR” was the surviving entity (and received $15M funds from the terminating “Ithaka Harbors, itself only created ca. 2003) but then changed its name to take the no-longer-in-use name.  Also of interest on page 1, besides its gross assets ($60M) being obviously higher than total revenues that year ($40M) is that there are 211 employees, and the figure (pg.1 line 15?) for “Salaries” DOUBLED, putting it into a “deficit” position for that year.  Supplemental information shows it, however, started a deferred compensation (i.e., employee retirement) plan — and those are well-paid employees, imho.  [FY2009 return In 5 images, layout in reverse order…]

#2 of 5, ITHAKA HARBORS (fka JSTOR) EIN#13-3857105, FY2009 (merger year), Showing five professional services (Journal Scanning from Herndon VA, Repository incl UC Regents, etc. incl. one individual Karen Inal.

#3 of 5, ITHAKA HARBORS (fka JSTOR) EIN#13-3857105, FY2009 (merger year)

#4 of 5, ITHAKA HARBORS (fka JSTOR) EIN#13-3857105, FY2009 (merger year)











Total results: 4Search Again.

  • Ithaka Harbors checked “Initial Return” for FY2003, and with an address reading ℅ JSTOR and citing JSTOR and ARTSTOR as “related” organizations.  Ithaka Harbors, Inc.  under this incarnation only had to register (at least FY2003) in NY and NJ.
  • No results past 2008 shown for this EIN#.  Apparently assets were transferred elsewhere.
Ithaka Harbors NY 2008 990 42 $18,185,664.00 30-0152775
Ithaka Harbors Inc. NY 2008 990PF 47 $26,520,817.00 30-0152775
Ithaka Harbors Inc. NY 2007 990 33 $35,845,291.00 30-0152775
Ithaka Harbors Inc. NY 2006 990 33 $35,776,259.00 30-0152775


Ithaka Harbors (as EIN#30-0152775) FY2003 (Initial Form 990) showing address “℅ JSTOR” and about $15M gross receipts…

And with startup year also, it seems 2003, here’s ARTSTOR, which also acknowledges The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation paid its first year of salaries, which expenses were later allocated to its books:

Total results: 3Search Again. (ARTSTOR, Started 2003, EIN# 30-0152767)

ARTstor NY 2015 990 30 $5,824,595.00 30-0152767
ARTstor NY 2014 990 30 $7,625,856.00 30-0152767
ARTstor NY 2013 990 26 $9,602,573.00 30-0152767

ARTStor Year 1 (2003) Form 990 shows who paid salaries when it had no employees..

Continuing quote from Feb. 9, 2015,  “Aaron Swartz stood up for freedom and fairness — and was hounded to his death by John Naughton in “Opinion” in The Guardian; I’ll backup a sentence or two for the JSTOR context:

His downfall came when he turned his attention to JSTOR, a digital library of academic articles hidden behind a paywall. He devised a method of downloading large numbers of articles from JSTOR, using a computer hidden in a closet at MIT….

Academic, undefined, at least here… So that’s health, legal and academic realms (although academic might cover both health and legal also).  Still more from the John Naughton (Guardian) review on Jonathan Swartz:  what happened next:

He was arrested in January 2011 and pursued by federal prosecutors with a vindictive zeal, eventually being indicted on a raft of charges which carried a potential jail sentence of 35 years. Ground down by this, he hanged himself on 11 January 2013. News of his death left countless people saddened and enraged. What had made the Feds so vindictive? Sure, he had broken the law. But it wasn’t as if he’d hacked a bank.  … “There was no actual physical harm, nor actual economic harm. The leak was found and plugged; JSTOR suffered no actual economic loss. It did not press charges. Like a pie in the face, Swartz’s act was annoying to its victim but of no lasting consequence.”  [Read more at]

The Wikipedia on “Internet’s Own Boy” contains links to “Participant Media,” which Wiki is flagged as too subjective — however informs us that Participant Media was formed in 2004 by Jeffrey Skoll, billionaire in part (or maybe the main part?) from his involvement with eBay, for which see also Pierre Omidyar, Meg Whitman, etc.  (I have some “Omidyar” posts on this blog also, see “Table of Contents” or search function), and there is of course also a Skoll foundation.

For general context, anyhow..

The Internet’s Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz is a 2014 American biographical documentary film about Aaron Swartz written, directed, and produced by Brian Knappenberger.[3][4] The film premiered in the US Documentary Competition programcategory at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival on January 20, 2014.[5]

After its premiere at Sundance, Participant Media and FilmBuff acquired distribution rights of the film. The film was released to theatres and VOD on June 27, 2014, in United States.[6] It will be followed by a broadcast television premiere on Participant’s network Pivot in late 2014.[7][8][9][10]

The film also played at the 2014 SXSW on March 15, 2014.[11] It served as the opening film at the 2014 Hot Docs Canadian International Documentary Festival on April 24, 2014.[12]

The film’s UK premiere took place at Sheffield Doc/Fest in June 2014 and won the Sheffield Youth Jury Award that year.[13] In August 2014, the film was screened at the Barbican Centre in London as part of Wikimania 2014. The BBC also aired the film in January 2015 as part of its Storyville documentary brand. It was also released on the Internet with a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.[14]

Back to the HINARI PROGRAMME (from a WHO website, but accessed via Wolters Kleuwer website). Notice the type of health information also includes the social sciences, of course:

HINARI PROGRAMME (2001-02ff, Six Publishers involved) by WHO — found+accessed thru WoltersKluwer’com

HINARI PROGRAMME (2001-02ff, Six Publishers involved) by WHO — found+accessed thru WoltersKluwer’com









What’s inside the blue borders (further, not immediately) below on this page) comes from SimpleCharityRegistration.com: basically, a list of links alpha by name of states (within USA) and just another scrap or two of information of prose, in blue-bordered quotes, on in how many states one must, and in which states one might not have to (depending on the currency of this information and other potential exemptions from the requirement to) register.

From here, ideally, people could search and know which ones are or are not (and historically have or have not been) compliant, as well as since when or for how long, then if still interested, pursue certified copies for specific entities. (Most databases, especially ones reflecting electronic filings or without uploaded pdfs (scanned images of paper files) showing date and time-stamp by the official, mandated recipient of that. Repeated lookups will also provide a sense of common patterns, or common types (subject-matter related) of the same.

NOTE:  These lookups should not be in isolation; the other logical step is locating the IRS Form 990 or 990PF filings, and the corporate (where applicable) registrations typically under a Corporations Division under Secretary of State.  For example, in Maryland, it’s called “SDAT” (State Dept. of Assessments and Taxation).  Exposure to those databases quickly also shows how UNrelated and NONtransferable their respective formats are.  Some track LLCs separately, some only allow tracking on one or two fields (California is notorious, at least in my book, for that), some smaller state (Florida, Massachusetts, Colorado, others) allow more types of searches.  But, my page here is not dealing with those sectors, but one which on this blog, I haven’t followed up thoroughly enough on (again, personal limits is one factor), with several exceptions for my home state, California (and in part because of its accessible charitable registration site) — that of charitable registrations.

Obviously that’s not going to cover all nonprofits, all 501©s (that I’m aware of) and probably doesn’t apply to private foundations, or trusts.  But it’s a start!

“40 states and the District of Columbia require that 501(c)(3) charitable organizations operating in the state to register with their charity offices. They want to know who is soliciting money from their residents. …”   {found at StateRequirements. page on the SCR site}


 In which states am I required to register? 
“You will need to register in any state in which you solicit, providing that you do not fit in one of their exemption categories. Arizona, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Indiana, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, and Wyoming all do not require charitable solicitation registration.”  {found under FAQs, “FAQ#4” on the SCR site}

More information from the “SCR” website leads to better understanding where it came from, although the website itself certainly does NOT provide, or encourage people to comprehend where it came from.

Website footer, however reads © 2014 CBT Tech, LLC, which along with the SCR website was strangely non-committal as to who it was, or where (in what state) incorporated, and didn’t show (although many look-alikes did) up readily.

Looking that up, I found (WHY is this no longer surprising?) two more associations named after public officials with the word “National” in front of them (NASCO and NAAG), had collaborated to form another corporation (MFRP, Inc.)  — to develop a Multi-State Filing Registration Portal — and formed a Delaware Corporation to do so.  Meanwhile, it seems a Guidestar IT person, Jim Dobrzeniecki (listed on the organization’s tax returns among “highest paid employees” for many years) served on the advisory board for this initiative… (see large image below, fine print, white background, blue borders).

Search results for NASCO. A section on my page tells more about “TheCRC.org.”

THIS SECTION IS HERE BECAUSE OF NASCO REFERENCE SEARCH RESULTS “TheCRG.ORG.”  Not recognizing it, I looked it up and discovered some things worth reporting, particularly the involvement of an $11 billion (2015) tax-exempt foundation named after a well-known global pharmaceutical company (which is MUCH larger of course) backing the concept of, I guess you could call it “faith-based coaching centers” which would prove beneficial to other charities too in terms of human capital and spinoff donations (plus fees for the consultants).  In general, it presents a commentary also on organized religion’s willingness to sign up and bring on the consultants regardless of their affiliations, to do “corporate outreach” for the Fortune 500, as it were, offering up their membership (and pastors) as participants and subject matter for further studies.  It seems the state of Indiana was chosen for a pilot here (cf. the progressive “Models for Change” (MacArthur Foundation) which also picked entire states — and lead “agencies” (nonprofits) in each state, to work their diversionary justice and other “model practices” miracles — in the tax-exempt sector.

Image of sample search results for NASCO (written out) showing several websites representing various organizations referencing it, and that the website NASCOsupport.net is actually hosted by NAAG.

Among these, it took me a bit to realize who was the “theCRG.org” — essentially, the Lilly Endowment funding the Alban Institute in Herndon, VA, to run (since 1996) a “resource center” — for the state of Indianapolis and IN Indianapolis –to better coach pastors and congregations on civic service, engagement etc.  Matching grants and seminars are involved.   The “Center for Congregations” web footer (which a click on “theCRG.org” redirects to) doesn’t use the word “Indianapolis” as part of the name “Center for Congregations” but places I found it advertised (including a 2008 Lilly Endowment Annual Report, and a Calvin Center for Christian Worship) did. Unbelievable….

Footer to Center for Congregations (Lilly Endowmt- referenced) in Ind’pls

Image #2 of 2 from theLilly Endowmts (see left-margin url) annual report. Congregants — as coached by Centers for Congregations as funded through a Lilly Endowmt grants-supported concept — as “social and intellectual capital,” although it’s clear here who’s done the strategizing and steering the conversation with matching grants under mis-leading entity names… (see last sentences). Again, ICC is a project, not a partner or “person” so saying it both “was launched” and “sponsored” is like saying a ship exists with no real pilot, or captain,or crew, and raises the question “who, really, is “on board” the ship itself?” (sentences near the star at top).

Image #1 of 2 describing how pastor + laypersons can be persuaded to attend certain seminars and, at least for the preacher, improve their craft.

Apparently more engaged congregations are good for other business in the nonprofit sector, too, surprise, surprise.  So why shouldn’t a publishing and education company a.k.a. “Institute” in Virginia make a few extra bucks (probably also tax-exempt) along the way?  And perhaps if this can be done in the conservative MidWestern state of Indianapolis, just imagine where else it might work…

The Alban Institute (per 990s) — lasted 40 years (1974-2014 termination), a FY2002 return towards the end has a letter-head printout of trustees, honorary trustees, and (that year — not typical) a  list of recipients of $728K worth of grantees. It’s close-out address was in Chicago, but legal domicile still VA.

Rev. James P. Wind throughout was well-paid for his services as President, or at least was paid $207K + benefits FY2002 and over $180K towards the end, although the organization was frequently posting losses.  (FY2002 return, some pages were scanned upside down). I see more than I have time to narrate at this point — but general impression is that the work involving projects prompted by outside grants (such as from the Lilly Endowment) were the money-soakers, while consulting, generally, was more profitable (revs. exceeded expenses — by a lot) (FY2002 supports this — look at Program Service Accomplishments, Pt. III? Ln. 44d compared to lns. 44abc).  Contributions (see Schedules A of support over time; a Sched A has columns showing the prior 5 yrs of support and other revenues, such as program service-type (i.e., from the consulting); the amounts vary widely some years…)  That said, they also claimed to be selling inventory at a major loss, or barely any profit, in at least recent years.

Total results: 3Search Again.

Alban Institute IL 2014 990 38 $0.00 52-0992700
Alban Institute VA 2013 990 34 $1,839,691.00 52-0992700
Alban Institute VA 2012 990 32 $3,243,287.00 52-0992700

The same website now leads to “Alban at Duke” (Duke University School of Divinity) and explains the transfer of assets and intellectual property to “a number of partners, including Duke,” and who (Rev. Loren P. Mead) started the nonprofit in 1974.

A list of “Partners” on the same page is revealing and shows a “Center for Congregations” and a network of independent “pastoral consultants” who make it clear — they’re in no way, shape, or form a partnership, do participate in Amazon affiliate program to earn fees, but they WERE, previously, Alban Institute consultants…. Meanwhile, the Lilly Endowment continues soliciting (through grantmaking) opportunities for training and providing connectivity sessions, etc. for clergy.

Formerly, (pre-2014) “Center for Congregations” was a Lilly-funded project of the Alban Institute in VA (Existed 1974-2014). Now, under the Lilly Endowment (FY2015) a $2+M grant to it shows it classified (and with the word “Indianapolis” added to its title” as Foundation Status (column also showing “PC” or “Gov” for others) “SO I.”

Lilly Endowment (EIN# 35-0868122, tables below) has $11B assets (as of about two years ago), and the average contributions to others, while huge in absolute terms, and by most standards (In FY2015, it was $439M — paid during year or approved for future payment), relative to the “net value of non-charitable use assets” seems to be on average for the past five years (this info. from Form 990PF FY2015) only about 4%.  In religious terms, it’s “less than a tithe” (10%).  It was also –see page 1 of the 990PF — still less than its total revenues shown.  Just look at the lines labeled “Total Revenues”and “Contributions.”

Just a reminder, we are dealing with a global pharmaceutical corporation based in Indiana here.  Its dramatic giving — and the losses and closing of the Alban Institute — has hardly slowed the increase in value of its assets –most of them held in Eli Lilly Stock, but some others (oh, somewhere around 3/4 billion only) held in Vanguard and other funds….  Look at the increase in values from 2013 – 2015 under “Total Assets” or see image below reflecting increase in value for just one year.

Total results: 3Search Again.

Lilly Endowment Inc. IN 2015 990PF 101 $11,781,125,034.00 35-0868122
Lilly Endowment Inc. IN 2014 990PF 116 $9,995,102,248.00 35-0868122
Lilly Endowment Inc. IN 2013 990PF 114 $7,621,499,889.00 35-0868122

Click image to enlarge or HERE for the Sept. 9, 2017, article at CNBC.com: “The company expects most of the cuts to come from a voluntary early-retirement program it is offering in the United States. It is also closing a plant in Iowa and research and development offices in New Jersey and China…. shares rose $1.46 to $81.97 in afternoon trading.”

Sept. 2017, CNBC, says  Eli Lilly is going to cut about 3,500 or 8% of its workforce (most “through early retirement offering in the US) to focus more on developing blockbuster drugs.  On hearing this, its stock price went up $1.80/share.  But, the Endowment, meanwhile, is distributing millions to religious organizations (or was in 2015) for “Economic Challenges Projects.” … At least the grants section is filled out legibly and on the forms provided…

Here’s the date (Sept. 7, 2017) announcement, but at Bloomberg.com:

Drugmaker Eli Lilly will cut 3,500 jobs” by Jared Hopkins.

…The Indianapolis company said some of the 3,500 job cuts will come from early retirements, with about 2,000 positions set to be eliminated in the U.S. Lilly plans to close a research facility in Bridgewater, New Jersey, and consolidate some manufacturing operations in its animal health unit, it said in a statement.

Endowment holding $10.7B of company common stock (FY2015)

Endowment Investments-Other (see Balance Sheet section; this is some of its detail): $595M in Vanguard INST Total Stock Mkt Index PD (Probably “Institutional.” Think about it…); $225M in “Developed Mkt Index” and smaller ($44/$45M) amounts in Emerging Markets (Index) and “Allworld Ex-US SMCAP..[Small Cap].” (and $15.3M without any “FMV” because it’s in some sort of designated holding pen for later investment.)

Faced with expiring patents on a number of its medicines, Lilly has been focused on diabetes drugs, which account for three of its 10 top-selling products. Its biggest seller is insulin. But intense competition from a flurry of new treatments in that market has helped drive down prices and profits. …Lilly has cut thousands of jobs in recent years amid a slide in sales caused by generic rivals. It’s been hurt by research failures, as well. Last year, it eliminated 500 positions following the failure of an experimental Alzheimer’s disease drug. It had about 41,000 employees as of June.

The company from Wikipedia perspective, including its $1.4 billion fine in 2009 (four sales reps filed separate “qui tam” lawsuits) for marketing Zyprexa for non-FDA-approved uses, like dementia in the elderly.

Zyprexa (in alpha list of drugs):   (for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, as well as off-label uses) Released in 1996, and as of 2010, Lilly’s best-selling drug of all time[113]

In January 2009, the largest criminal fine in U.S. history, totaling $1.415 billion was imposed on Lilly for illegal marketing of its best-selling product, the atypical antipsychotic medication, Zyprexa.[75]

It’s huge, it’s long-standing (started bringing in non-family leadership only in 1953), while also, it seems, changing the face of the pharmaceutical industry with some of its earlier developments, such as the manufacturing of gelatin capsules, and manufacturing concepts.  …There is besides the endowment, which the Wiki says was set up in 1937, an “Eli Lilly and Company Foundation” which is about 1% of its size, but granting out on average 32% of its noncharitable use assets, while being funded through donations of Eli Lilly Stock (for example, in FY2015, the amount granted was $43,000,000).  For what it’s worth in this context:

Eli Lilly and Company Foundation IN 2015 990PF 112 $97,834,657.00 35-6202479
Eli Lilly and Company Foundation IN 2014 990PF 101 $87,492,660.00 35-6202479
Eli Lilly and Company Foundation IN 2013 990PF 100 $105,476,499.00 35-6202479

Page 1 Top, Eli Lilly + Company Fndtn (EIN#35-6202479, NOT the Lilly Endowmt) FY2015 990PF excerpts

Pg1 bottom + top of Pg2, Eli Lilly + Company Fndtn (EIN#35-6202479, NOT the Lilly Endowmt) FY2015 990PF excerpts.

Average Distributn rate (distributions / Noncharitable Use Assets) on average 32% = reduced taxes on the same.

Grants Summary Page, Eli Lilly + Company Fndtn (EIN#35-6202479, NOT the Lilly Endowmt) FY2015 990PF excerpts (here, there are detailed statemt pages later). Check out the “Matching Grants” details (American Cancer / Lung / Diabetes/ Alzheimer (etc.), page after page, typically smaller amts.

Sched B single Contributor TO this foundation is the company. [Eli Lilly + Company Fndtn (EIN#35-6202479, NOT the Lilly Endowmt) FY2015 990PF excerpts]. That’s $43M more the global pharmaceutical company wasn’t taxed on this year...

Where most of its assets are being held (cf $43M contrib this year, total gross assets ca $97M at this point) [Eli Lilly + Company Fndtn (EIN#35-6202479, NOT the Lilly Endowmt) FY2015 990PF excerpts]

Finally (phew!), tax returns for NASCO and/or NAAG.  More text and images from them (supplementary info) is below the alpha by state list of charity registration links.

There is, as happens, the main “NAAG” and a related foundation.  I found the related Foundation first, with its about $73M (YE2015) gross assets (of which $13M @ FYE2013 invested in Central America and the Caribbean) and from there, identified the EIN# of the main NAAG.

I also learned (from its 2013 return, shown next) that it leases space to the main NAAG (for that year, at $595K, stated as an about $249K profit), and its officers are paid by the NAAG.  It apparently does the conferences, and has few liabilities, and not that much income, despite having managed to obtain $79M of investments to work with and hold under its name. Probably acquired on the spinoff ca. 2001/2002.

  • NAAG General Mission Foundation EIN#: 300088843.  Formed only in 2002, Legal Domicile, “D.C.”
    • Subsequent description at the NAAG website shows it was first funded from the MSA Tobacco Settlements.  As such, it really doesn’t need any outside income, such as donations.  It sells securities, obtains some interest income, and rents to the NAAG for what looks like from $400K = $600K or so per year.  There is some — but not much — program service revenue.  A FY2006 return I saw showed $43,000,000 assets as “restricted.”
    • Most tax returns will show a very large # of “gross receipts” at the top ($15M, $25M even), but depending on the Gross vs. Net, the Profit on these may be +/- $5M or a loss.  The Schedule A of support (that I saw) seem to show “0” in “contributions.”
  • NAAG EIN#: #521322260.  (Found on the above EIN#’s Form 990 — a Google Search even didn’t produce it)

Total results: 3Search Again.

Hmmm….. Some tax returns of both NAAG and NASCO seem missing.

Volume 2 #1 of the NAAG Gazette, dated 2008, talks about the importance of “Enforcement of Charitable Organizations”  Interesting reading.  How about some application of this to the enforcers themselves as a private, 501©3 NONgovernment association with a DC domicile, and leasing from another, related, 501©3?

Well, after over an hour of searching on-line (in known places, and some new ones) I confirmed that the EIN# associated with the NAAG, 52-1322260, does exist, does represent a 501©3 (PC) according to the IRS, is generally recognized as separate EIN# from the General Mission Foundation, above, and besides finding it on several lists — and every EIN# 30-0088843 I was able to find*, I even found what looks like part of a legal filing ca. 2012 requesting reimbursement from the State of Missouri’s AG office, and showing two invoices by NAAG, one of which was $200,000 + interest and the other $16K+.  Not to mention, the General Mission Foundation year after year claims it’s supporting the NAAG in amounts sometimes $1M, or $2M — we should be able to find at least one tax return filed, UNLESS it has qualified as somehow in some category exempt from filing tax returns.  And nothing I’ve found — including the IRS’s own Exempt Organization Select Check — indicates that the NAAG does not have to file. What’s more, their helpful and informative website on the importance of enforcement of charitable registrations, which they work together on it seems, makes ANY reference to (let alone) posts either:

  • Their own financials (presumably they do not exist?) or even
  • The NAAG General Mission Foundation’s financials.

The term “990” came up blank.  The term “EIN#” in reference to anything involving these two entities also produced nothing.

(*The earliest year Form 990 found even for the General Mission Foundation being only FY2006 (YEJun30 2009), and that much, thanks to CitizenAudit.org.  The FoundationCenter didn’t seem to have anything (for #30-00088843) pre-dating FY2008.  I may not have tweaked the year right, or a fiscal year might have changed, but so far as I know, that’s the earliest date.


NASCO Tax Returns: — I could not find them, or even an EIN#.  I’m not sure one exists, although there is NO lack of on-line reference to the same association.

At the bottom of this page,  after the short list of state-by-state charitable registration sites, and after a brief look, I’ll show more from their websites and/or financials on the NAAG and NASCO, respectively the National Association of Attorneys General and the Nat’l Association of State Charities Officials (there is more than one organization with the acronym “NASCO”), with screenprints from websites showing dates formed, mission, some of its acknowledged funding sources (a foundation, a “Neurotin settlement”, and purposes (including some global alignments; what else is new!).  And a 2008-formed “Training and Research Arm” (NAGTRI) which I will look to see if it’s filing separately or as a NAAG project.  I am just learning this myself at the same time…  I will put their IRS forms, however (those I found) from resource 990finder.org, before the other table.

[SCR.com] See Partners list near bottom of image: Guidestar, BizFilings? Nat’l Council of Nonprofits Council and Perlman & Perlman. || Guidestar provides a nonprofit database I used before discovering Foundation Center’s results provided in easier-to-print summary tables .

I also have below the table of charitable registration links alpha by state a separate section on the National Council of Nonprofits, and perhaps will will add some on the law firm Perlman & Perlman, but  Guidestar, Inc. (formerly Philanthropic Research, Inc.) and the BizFilings (Wolters-Kluwer) topics I think require each their own post.   That said, all four elements shown in the single “partnerships” image from SimpleCharity (shown again here click image to better see the four logos) are deeply significant for dating and evaluating (especially in their handling of the tax-exempt and IRS reporting processes themselves) as characterizing the issues presented by the tax-exempt sector outside government, which does NOT pay taxes, obviously, on its own profits) itself.

Brief Reminders on the Tax-exempt vs. Taxed-based Sectors in the the context of government-entity-controlled of most assets (i.e., “wealth”) per the CAFR reporting system, often locally, and definitely, collectively):

As a reminder, central to some of my understandings developed on this blog is the chronic, and expanding problem to governmental integrity — and financial transparency of government to those it governs — of the nonprofit sector AS A WHOLE, and not only specific to the types of organization, a sub-sector of the whole, formed to coordinate government functions under state control, nationally, and complaining constantly about anything “patchwork” “fragmented” or not otherwise coordinated.  That is, in order to even have a tax-exempt sector, one must have the counterpart, a taxed sector.

One attracts money and money flees away from the taxed sector through taxation itself.

As I’m writing this (Nov. 2017, nearing one year into President Donald Trump’s Administration in the White House), headline news is the House of Reps and Senate’s speculations about what kind of “tax reform” package it’s going to pass.  The above entity “National Council of Nonprofits” certainly has something to say about the situation, and so do I. (From the four-logos shown on “SimpleCharityRegistration.com” Partners page, again their respective websites:

  • https://www.bizfilings.com/about  Founded by two men (last names, Wiegand and Oster) in 1996; in 2002 “became part of CT”; “CT is part of Wolters Kluwer Corporate Legal Services, a distinctive, global portfolio of market-leading legal services companies. To learn more, visit  ct.wolterskluwer.com“; assumed the dba “BizFilings in 2006, mailing address at least in Wisconsin:  BizFilings  8020 Excelsior Dr.  Suite 200  Madison, WI 53717
  • http://www.councilofnonprofits.org (formerly “NCNA.org” per its tax returns — see bottom of this page), formed in 1990, based in D.C.
  • http://www.perlmanandperlman.com/about-our-firm/our-story/  (Bernard Perlman in 1955 helped set up the first agency to regulate charities, which later became (the NY one)…


But I dare you to find me ONE congressperson (US House or US Congress – or at any State legislature either) who has not been provided, every year, a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (“CAFR”) for the state they represent, and for the US Federal Government itself (not to mention probably also, separately, for the District of Columbia where Congress meets), and who through reading it, or even having staff to read and summarize it for them, really doesn’t “get” that the assets are being warehoused in phenomenal amounts under “government” while producing revenues both as investments (pooled, often), let alone the many enterprises government entities engage in for which the public pays — after paying (through taxation and life energies) to set them in place in the first place.  And that another way of doing business COULD involved using the revenues from the stockpiled wealth including its investments and enterprise operations — to fuel government itself, instead of using deductions from the majority of the population as if it were necessary for the purpose.

These officials have enough access to information to realize how little taxes actually contribute compared to the collective revenues (including from fiduciary and proprietary– business enterprise — activities) of government when taken as a whole, as opposed to “primary government” only.  Therefore arguing about more or less taxes without discussion of the overall, and taken as a whole assets and activities (including revenues and expenses derived from government entities directly or pass-through) philanthropic/tax-exempt sector — is a “crock.”

It’s partial, it’s in denial of known reality, and as major an impact as it has on all, I say it’s still theatre.

Guidestar and the 2012-formed CBT Tech, LLC (no state of legal domicile shown) sought to get in on the opportunity, and responded to MRFP’s “RFI” per this website (which at the top bears the Guidestar and Simple Charity Logos at top left and right, and no others):  MRFP, Inc. RFI response

Paragraphs 1 & 2 explain the situation. Found at website MRFP, Inc. (url provided above). Look at the dates.

The website MRFP.org now, in very large font, declares its purposes (and some of its backers and intents) with the project, i.e., the “Single Portal Initiative” which would populate charitable registration data from Form 990 (that is, IRS returns).  THAT should be interesting, considering how, from the lowest (smallest, recent) to some of the highest (most assets, well-known, long-standing) level of charities, those returns are filled out inconsistently and often inaccurately.

On February 17, 2016, MRFP posted a Request for Information to invite input and proposals for development of this unified “one-stop” portal. The RFI and additional information about MRFP and the project will be available at mrfpinc.org. MRFP anticipates launching an operational website in phases beginning in 2016. Thirteen pilot states, including California, Illinois, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Tennessee, and Georgia will participate in initial development of a platform that will then be expanded to include all states that require registration.

After launch, the system will be supported by assessments or the participating states’ filing fees. NAAG, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and Newman’s Own Foundation have invited grant proposals to fund the system’s development, launch and testing, including Christopher Wong of NYU’s Govlab as our project manager and services by the Urban Institute’s Regulation of Nonprofits and Philanthropy Program to facilitate stakeholder input and system testing. Over 40 assistant attorneys general, state registration and IT managers, Urban Institute Senior Fellow Cindy Lott, The Govlab founder Beth Noveck, NAAG Staff, and other professionals have contributed hundreds of volunteer hours to making unified multistate electronic filing possible. For information, contact Hugh.R.Jones@Hawaii.gov, Karen.Gano@ct.gov, or Bob.Carlson@ago.mo.gov.

* MRFP members are state agencies (Attorneys General, Secretaries of State, or other agencies) with direct oversight responsibility for charitable assets and charitable solicitations.

==>How interesting that Delaware — a favorite state in which to incorporate it seems — isn’t on this list. Or Nevada — but for Nevada a “no search” was typed in, while the list simply omits any line-item (row) for Delaware.

Below is the most up-to-date list of charity search, sometimes called Check a Charity. You’ll see that a few of the states don’t have a search available and a couple will turn out to be pdfs that the states regularly update.Overall, the states are making it easy to find out whether you are in compliance, and using Simple Charity Registration will make it easy and affordable to attain or remain in compliance.

AL https://ago.igovsolution.com/online/Lookups/Business.aspx
AK http://www.law.state.ak.us/pdf/consumer/registered_charities.pdf
AR http://arkansasag.gov/arkansas-lawyer/public-protection/column-one/charities/charities-search/
CA http://rct.doj.ca.gov/Verification/Web/Search.aspx?facility=Y
CO https://www.sos.state.co.us/ccsa/CoInquiryCriteria.do
CT https://www.elicense.ct.gov/Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx
DC https://eservices.dcra.dc.gov/BBLV/Default.aspx
FL https://csapp.800helpfla.com/CSPublicApp/CheckACharity/CheckACharity.aspx
GA http://verify.sos.ga.gov/Verification/Search.aspx?facility=Y
HI http://ag.ehawaii.gov/charity/search.html
IL http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/charities/search/index.jsp
KS http://www.kscharitycheck.org/search.asp
KY http://ag.ky.gov/family/consumerprotection/charity/Documents/charity.pdf
LA no search
ME https://www.pfr.maine.gov/almsonline/almsquery/SearchCompany.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
MD http://sos.maryland.gov/Charity/Pages/SearchCharity.aspx
MA http://www.charities.ago.state.ma.us/
MI http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,4534,7-164-17337_18095-45043–,00.html
MN http://www.ag.state.mn.us/Charity/CharitySearch.asp
MS http://www.sos.ms.gov/Applications/Pages/Charities-Search.aspx
MO no search
NH http://doj.nh.gov/charitable-trusts/documents/registered-charities.pdf
NJ http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca2/charities/
NV no search
NM https://secure.nmag.gov/CharitySearch/
NY http://www.charitiesnys.com/RegistrySearch/search_charities.jsp
NC https://www.sosnc.gov/search/index/csl
ND http://sos.nd.gov/files/auto-uploads/charorg.pdf
OH http://charitableregistration.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Charities/Research-Charities.aspx
OK https://www.sos.ok.gov/corp/charityInquiryFind.aspx
OR http://www.doj.state.or.us/charigroup/Pages/searchcharities.aspx
PA http://www.charities.pa.gov/EntitySearch.aspx
RI https://elicensing.ri.gov/Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx
SC http://www.scsos.com/Public_Charities/Search_Charities
TN http://tnsos.org/charitable/CharitableOrgReports.php
UT http://consumerprotection.utah.gov/consumerinfo/lists.html?list=CH
VA http://cos.va-vdacs.com/cgi-bin/char_search.cgi
WA https://www.sos.wa.gov/charities/
WV http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/
WI https://www.wdfi.org/ice/berg/Registration/OrganizationCredentialSearch.aspx


[Table format altered somewhat for visual — added borders and background color. Table content NOT altered, though — copied and pasted from SCR to here.]

NAAG and NASCO section:

 From: http://www.naag.org/publications/naagazette/volume-4-number-5/get-to-know-national-association-of-state-charities-officials.php

NASCO was born of necessity because of the patchwork of state laws governing charities. Most Attorneys General have inherent parens patriae powers under common law to prevent the misuse of charitable assets and to ensure that trustees of charitable trusts and fiduciaries of charitable corporations fulfill their duties of loyalty and care to the charities they govern. Some states also have statutory schemes requiring charities to register and file annual financial reports with Attorneys General and other state officials, who oversee and regulate a variety of charitable activities including fundraising, bequests, asset transfers, nonprofit conversions, mergers, and dissolutions.

Although NAAG provided a forum for state Attorneys General with charity oversight responsibilities, that forum did not include Secretary of State offices and other state officials with some of the same charity oversight responsibilities. NASCO therefore was organized to represent all such charity officials. NAAG’s Charitable Trusts and Solicitations Committee operated independently from NASCO for several years, but in 1984 NASCO informally merged its activities with NAAG’s.

This sounds like some parallel activity was going on for a while under the two separate charities NAAG and NASCO (until I look closer, if possible from other sources, at this point, I don’t know).

NASCO members communicate through a list serve, a members-only portion of a NAAG-hosted Web sitewww.Nasconet.org, and through an annual educational conference co-sponsored with NAAG.

NASCO and NAAG turns out to be a much larger topic than I’d anticipated, particularly as I have not been able to locate the tax returns for either one — and suspect that NASCO may not have one, but actually be a NAAG project.

. . .

National Council of Nonprofits section:

The National Council of Nonprofits gets a “+” from me for at least posting 10 years’ worth of Forms 990 AND financial statements on its home website:

That said, I took advantage of the ease of access to look at recent, 2008 and earlier ones, and find that both the most recent and the FY2008 one show in Schedules B (names redacted) its SOLE contributions (not sole source of revenue, but typically the main source) both years — one at $1.4M, the other at $650K — come in large amounts from just three contributors.  The entity doesn’t use any subcontractors, posts “membership dues” on Line 2 (ignoring the IRS Prompt for “membership dues” on Line 1, FY2008ff Forms 990), and failing to identify WHAT “program services” are involved in the other source of revenues on Line 2, which section is named “Program Service Revenues” and prompts with blank lines for a little better description.  From this we can deduce that the overall purpose is to form a parallel organization (for which this Washington-based one, founded ONLY in 1990) serves as an umbrella and information source advocating for its own kinds — charities — with intent to also monitor and influence charities operating in all states where it has a toe-hold.  According to the maps provided, right now, that’s most states, although it started out (see “nonprofit must be filed in” section of any year’s tax returns) operational in far fewer ones.


Our Financials

Printer-friendly version

As a recognized tax-exempt nonprofit organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code the National Council of Nonprofits seeks to be transparent in its financial operations by making the following information publicly available.

Nat’l Council of Nonprofits IRS Form 990 2005-2015

Nat’l Council of Nonprofits Audited Financial Statements 2005-2015


Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

November 11, 2017 at 8:53 pm

%d bloggers like this: