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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Posts Tagged ‘Access-Visitation’

The Roots of Welfare DeForm — An Off-Road List of Links — and the Virtues of Educating Oneself

leave a comment »

At bottom are the links from the blog  “The Family Court Franchise System.”  In one of the recent posts I said, “I’m not your mother” and suggested people educate themselves.  Plus two interesting links, “Educate Yo’self” and “Educate Yourself” which is where I got part of my education.

Where I got the habit of educating myself goes far back — but in these matters, it came from having relied on others’ information, which — though true enough — was (1) not the overview– critical elements were missing, and (2) given what was missing, almost irrelevant.  Instead they (includes Lundy Bancroft, and classic DV rhetoric) talked psychology and group dynamics and some law — something anyone living through what I did has already figured out (though how nice to have the correct terminology).

But they should’ve talked finances — and corporate influence, federal incentives, and private nonprofit associations running demonstration social science projects on as many POOR people (or other distressed populations) as possible, allegedly for the public’s benefit, and definitely at the public’s expense.  In fact, public and private are so blurred at this point, it might be best to ignore what the law says about domestic violence and criminal behavior, and rebuttable presumptions against custody going to the batterer (after all — plenty of judges, family law attorneys, custody evaluators, guardians ad litem and child support professionals most certainly do.  And we have to deal with them anyhow, so why not figure out what’s going on!

ROUGHLY in TWO PARTS:  I.  “EDUCATE YOURSELF” — and several examples.  And then II. (as to the Roots of Welfare) — some links to do so.  (under 7,000 words this time).  That’s if you care to.  I’m not your babysitter, I do this for conscience, possibly for therapy, and for a track record. But they are — as this shows — hauling off (kidnapping) children systematically from good parents, to get drugged under foster care.  They are, when there are two parents fighting for custody, able to prolong and make horrible the fight for years — and so “justify” major grants continuations (under TANF, which makes this possible) to promote marriage and fatherhood, and other very chauvinistic (antifeminist) ideas.  At the heart of this is the concept that it’s OK to force indoctrination (“education”) on poor people to address why they are poor, that the elite are appropriate in “molding” the poor — through force — to understand their function and place in society.  Religion is a good aid to this policy.

Too much of this policy comes from places like the British monarchy, or the Nazi apparatus, or prior to that, Prussian educational ideas.  Too much of it depends on free time to philosophize on the backs of workers that barely make ends meet and have far less freedom or mobility simply because they have no family wealth (assets), whether earned, or inherited.  Add to this things like eminent domain (government condemning, then seizing, then selling to cronies, private property) and we’re headed back towards the concentrations camps.  Depending on when “Judgment Day” comes — or does not.  Whatever the status of “judgment day” — there is nothing “just” or equitable about Welfare Reform, which enables flexible grants to the states, and gives bribes to states for going along with federal policy.  Federal policy rubberstamped by Congress — but managed by the Executive Branch (White House and friends) through a grants system.  The grants system itself is based on the TAX system — and there you go.

This is commonly called fascism ,centralization and we know already where that heads off to.

I know what dictatorship is at the family level, the personal level — and am pretty hot and bothered to see how far down the line it is at the national level as well.  When one’s life’s work is repeatedly interrupted, and finally stopped — talking about the essential things one has done in life — one has to rethink the “hold a job til retirement model,” particularly being a female of a certain age in the USA, Post-Bush1 & Bush 2.

(Read PART I, those comments will make more sense).

PART I

Educate Yo’self was actually the domain name of a link someone else passed along.  What a source!

The Declaration of Independence – 1776
The Articles of Confederation – 1777
The Constitution for the United States – 1787
Its Sources and Its Application

Commitment One: To Freedom

The commitment of greatest importance is a DEDICATION To FREEDOM at all levels of society, and in all dimensions of our existence.

A commitment to freedom, at all levels, is automatically a commitment to Rigorous Honesty, the Truth of Reality. After all, once freedom is insured, why would one need to lie?

Any “security” that is gained through loss of freedom is a Commitment to Fear. Any nation that puts “national security” above personal freedom has lost its power base

And, tidbits such as (from 2008 — an election year. Worth a review this year?):

545 People Responsible for America’s Woes
by Charley ReeseHave you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don’t write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don’t set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don’t control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices – 545 human beings out of the 300 million – are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

. . . .Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault.    . . .

REPLACE THE SCOUNDRELS . . .

They continue to re-authorize the bastard child called “Welfare Reform,” which has simply expanded the ways to steal from the public, without proper monitoring, to infinity.  Go review the beginnings of the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative (I’ve blogged).  Or, how from state to state, the We, the People method of disciplining criminal judges (leaving ethical ones on the bench) — which was the grand jury — was replaced by “judicial complaint boards.”

It was passed in 1996, a Bill Clinton year.  See “From the Transvaal to TANF” talking about “triangulation” and how Clinton promoted this version of the “contract with America” as inbetween and somehow “above” party politics.  The fact is, the Republicans had succeeded in shutting down government over this, his ass was in trouble with Monica Lewinsky, and there was the Hillary problem; in fact there were plenty of problems.

The “Transvaal’ refers to Cecil Rhodes.  Bill Clinton, among others, was a Rhodes Scholar.   The purpose of the Rhodes Scholarship, and the beyond-my-liftime-goal of Mr. Rhodes, was to regain the British control of the world, particularly the return of “the US colonies” to their master.  Some people were born to lead, others were born to serve, obviously.  Now, fast-forward to TANF reform and look at who it’s targeting for program indoctrination on how to stay married, and quit propagating outside of marriage, etc.

The fact is, were it not for the artificial income tax / fiat currency situation (our $$ is off the gold standard), were it not the need for extremely wealthy corporations to maintain their wealth by a constant flow of competition for jobs in their industries (i.e., keep wages down, profits up) and to through a HUGE variety of means — including trying to designate everyone, almost, a behavioral health case, and where possible, proscribe some nice medication for them (i.e., control by medication, even sterilization) — it would be a piece of cake for an intelligent, motivated and in control of her own infrastructure single mother (or single father) to handle their own affairs.

One of the affairs the largest mistakes made by OUR forebears (generally speaking of USA citizens), over a century ago, was to hand over the raising of our kids to the government in the form of compulsory public education — which is compulsory time-wasting and dumbing down, and has been for decades.  It’s an ABSOLUTE disgrace and has become simply a values battleground anyhow.    And as to equalization — go check your senators — and all the representatives in the state — how many of them are sending their kids to public schools, and were themselves the product of public schools.  How many of them came from honest working backgrounds and were not raised with a silver spoon, or a political spoon?

Some of the greatest minds and leaders had the least traditional schooling — for themselves.   Horace Mann fits that example, and it appears 1837 was the first year there was a “Secretary of Education” at least in massachusetts.  Now we have a Secretary of Health and Human Services (more control over this country than you realize, and the current one is from Kansas), plus the “Czars” — interesting term, huh?  Look at him:

HORACE MANN‘s SCHOOLING

” The Father of American Education”,” Horace Mann, was born in Franklin, Massachusetts, in 1796. Mann’s schooling consisted only of brief and erratic periods of eight to ten weeks a year. Mann educated himself by reading ponderous volumes from the Franklin Town Library. This self education, combined with the fruits of a brief period of study with an intinerant school master, was sufficient to gain him admission to the sophomore class of Brown University in 1816” (4, Cremin). He went on to study law at Litchfield Law School and finally received admission to the bar in 1823 (15, Filler). In the year 1827 Mann won a seat in the state legislature and in 1833 ran for State Senate and won.” Throughout these years Horace Mann maintained a thriving law practice, first in Dedham and later in Boston” (5, Cremin).

” Of the many causes dear to Mann’s heart, non was closer than the education of the people. He held a keen interest in school policy. April 20, 1837, Mann left his law practice and accepted the post of the newly founded Secretary of Education” (6, Cremin). During his years as Secretary of Education Mann published twelve annual reports on aspects of his work and programs, and the integral relationship between education, freedom, and Republican government. He wanted a school that would be available and equal for all, part of the birth-right of every American child, to be for rich and poor alike. Mann had found “social harmony” to be his primary goal of the school. (8, Cremin).

Horace Mann felt that a common school would be the “great equalizer.” Poverty would most assuredly disappear as a broadened popular intelligence tapped new treasures of natural and material wealth. He felt that through education crime would decline sharply as would a host of moral vices like violence and fraud. In sum, there was no end to the social good which might be derived from a common school (8, Cremin).

SO — how’d you say THAT’s going?  Because in Los Angeles, they had a schoolteacher feeding blindfolded teaspoons of his own semen.  THIRD-graders.  Has poverty, violence and fraud been primarily despite the school system, or perhaps as a consequence of it?
Horace Mann had one thing — freedom.  He had another thing — access to the library.  He was also male, and he could vote — it was another century, from his passing the bar (1823) before women could!  Rather than trying to train a nation (how egotistical!), what about establish these basic rights, and make available justice (and libraries).
Horace Mann and Education Reform
Reformers, some influenced by the Prussian education reforms of the early 1800s, emerged at an incredible rate hoping to change the general form and ideals of American education to keep up with the evolving country. No longer would small rural schoolhouses, untrained teachers, or limitations in education opportunities suffice. A more defined system, which, as Mann and others had hoped, would also be free and universal, slowly garnered both grassroots and governmental support. The goal was to mold individuals from all socio-economic backgrounds into good people and good citizens through education. It was believed that in doing so everyone would be able to achieve to their fullest potential.
I would always much rather see a sermon than hear one.   Moreover, we ought to take care about importing Prussian OR German ideas.  Germans tend to be real organized, excessively so, — and I think it’s fair to say, Centralized. There is a LOT of literature out, particularly I’m thinking about Alice Miller, and “The Drama of the Gifted Child,” (d. 2010; she was a Swiss psychoanalyst, the book is about the consequences of repressed trauma)– talking about how the attempts to “mold” good strong citizens with cruel child-rearing practices (from Germany) may have helped created the cruel, socially-detached, amoral child molesters and sociopaths of today that we are now cleaning up after.
Alice Miller, child abuse and mistreatment
And yet, we have in TANF, a government intent on even more education of the public — in morality issues like fatherhood, marriage, abstinence, and so forth.  The truth is — at least as to TANF — I believe it’s simply another form of wealth-transfer; and it’s a VERY high profit-margin on downloading information by the internet, setting up a franchise system, having people BUY into it to be qualified as a marriage educator (etc.) — it was a real smart development for some very dishonest people.

What about Ben Franklin? (1706-1790)– was he adequately schooled?  Methinks not:

Benjamin Franklin was born in Boston on January 17, 1706. He was the tenth son of soap maker, Josiah Franklin. Benjamin’s mother was Abiah Folger, the second wife of Josiah. In all, Josiah would father 17 children.

Josiah intended for Benjamin to enter into the clergy. However, Josiah could only afford to send his son to school for one year and clergymen needed years of schooling. But, as young Benjamin loved to read he had him apprenticed to his brother James, who was a printer. After helping James compose pamphlets and set type which was grueling work, 12-year-old Benjamin would sell their products in the streets.

What about Albert Einstein’s schooling?(1879-1955) (from a UK site): (take some time, here…)

Albert Einstein was born on 14th March, 1879 at Ulm, Germany. He spent his early life in Munich, where his family owned a small manufacturing business. He studied Judaism at home, where he also was taught to play the violin. He showed a great interest in Mathematics and taught himself Euclidian geometry at the age of 12.

What sort of education did Albert receive?

Albert Einstein began school in Munich, but does not seem to have been particularly interested in what was offered there. . .

He was already a self-motivated learner, with experience in (I presume) language, music, and geometry.  Are schools BORING the gifted? along with how many others?

Einstein hoped to become an electrical engineer and, at the second attempt, enrolled at the Swiss National Polytechnic in Zurich in 1896.

It seems that he continued to show little respect for his teachers, as he was not a regular attender at lectures. He spent considerable time studying physics on his own. Despite the lack of time in lecture halls, he graduated as a teacher of physics and mathematics in 1900, but was unable to obtain a post in the university. It has been suggested that he had not impressed his professors enough, which is perhaps not surprising, given his attitude, and so did not receive their all-important backing for an academic career.

Perhaps this lack of respect comes from someone who found something better to do with his time, working on self-assigned projects of interest.

What did he do next?

Albert Einstein became a temporary teacher of mathematics, first at the Technical High School in Winterthur, and secondly at a private school at Schaffhausen.

In 1902 he began work at the Swiss patent office in Bern as a technical expert third class. He remained there until 1909, having been promoted, in 1906, to technical expert second class! He married Mileva Maric, by whom he had two sons, in 1903. They later divorced.

During his time there, Albert Einstein devoted a great deal of his spare time to the study of theoretical physics, and in 1905, received his doctorate for a thesis entitled On a new determination of molecular dimensions. He also published three important papers on theoretical physics

 Anyone who’s honest today will admit that a major function of public school education is babysitter — to soak up the TIME of individuals so their parents (both their parents, if there are two) can go to work and pay their taxes to fund the teachers, among other things (or pay off some interest on the national debt).  As such, the kids (and youth) in school are going to have other things they would rather be doing, and/or exploring — so a good deal of the school day goes into administration and managing the kids.  And (now at least) running mental health screenings on them to see if some drugs can be marketed (see recent whistleblower on TMAP, PennMAP, who documented this).   More on Einstein:

In 1952, he declined the offer of the presidency of Israel and continued his work towards the world renouncing nuclear weapons.

Albert Einstein died on 18th April, 1955 at Princeton and was cremated that day at Trenton, New Jersey. He is, perhaps, the best known scientist of the 20th century

And just imagine — he was bored in school from the start, skipped a lot of classes, didn’t brown-nose enough in Swiss National Polytechnic around the turn of the century, resulting in his having a fairly humble job which left him time to study things of personal interest — eventually a Nobel Prize, etc. What does public education in the US do today?  Soak up time, DELETE a lot of music because not enough children are learning to read and write, substitutes values education, and when that (obviously) fails, recommend more money and start kids earlier and have longer school days and years.
The existence of the public school system, and its lower quality, is a caste-sorter, and intentionally so.   Where did our politicians go to school, prior to sponsoring initiatives to train the rest of us about the purpose of life, relationships, sex, and what and what is not healthy?  For example (to bring us to 2012 Presidential Candidacy, and which conservative do you want….)
Mitt Romney went to a private school from 7th grand onwards, where he met his wife, who also attended private schools.  Described as (Wikipedia):
Cranbrook Schools is a private, PK–12 school located on a 319-acre (1.29 km2) campus in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The schools comprise a co-educational elementary school, a middle school with separate schools for boys and girls, and a co-educational high school with boarding facilities  …Romney went to public elementary schools[17] and then from seventh grade on, attended Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills, a private boys preparatory school of the classic mold where he was the lone Mormon and where many students came from even more privileged backgrounds.[18][23][24][25] He was not particularly athletic and at first did not excel at academics.[18] While a sophomore, he participated in the campaign in which his father was elected Governor of Michigan.[nb 2] 
Cranbrook Schools is a private, PK–12 school located on a 319-acre (1.29 km2) campus in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The schools comprise a co-educational elementary school, a middle school with separate schools for boys and girls, and a co-educational high school with boarding facilities. Cranbrook Schools is part of the Cranbrook Educational Community (CEC), which includes the Cranbrook Institute of Science, the Cranbrook Academy of Art, and Cranbrook House and Gardens. (Nearby Christ Church Cranbrook remains outside this formal structure.) The Cranbrook community was established by publishing mogul George Booth,
 Cranbrook was designated a National Historic Landmark on June 29, 1989 for its significant architecture and design. It attracts tourists from around the world. Approximately 40 acres (160,000 m2) of Cranbrook Schools’ campus are gardens.  As of 2006, Cranbrook Schools had an endowment of $191 million, among the 15 largest held by America’s boarding schools.[1] In addition, the Cranbrook Educational Community, of which the Schools is a member, has an endowment in excess of $300 million.[2]
Where did he get his wife from?

Ann Lois Romney (née Davies) (born April 16, 1949) is the wife of American businessman and Republican Party politician Mitt Romney. From 2003 to 2007 she was First Lady of Massachusetts.

She was raised in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and attended the private Kingswood School there, where she dated Mitt Romney. Influenced by their relationship, she converted to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1966. She attended Brigham Young University and married Mitt Romney in 1969. She completed her undergraduate education through the Extension School at Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in 1975.

As First Lady of Massachusetts, she served as the governor’s liaison for federal faith-based initiatives.

Now THAT is disturbing . . . .

Her background — daughter of the mayor of Bloomfield Hills, who was anti-organized religion.  So, she converts to LDS (like Mitt) and her college is put on hold while he completes his.   Their marriage, being Mormon:

Ann Davies and Mitt Romney were married by a church elder in a civil ceremony on March 21, 1969, at her Bloomfield Hills home, with a reception afterward at a local country club.[4][12] The following day the couple flew to Utah for a wedding ceremony inside the Salt Lake Temple; her family could not attend since they were non-Mormons, but were present at a subsequent wedding breakfast held for them across the street.[4][14]

When she fell ill, she had access to mainstream and alternative treatments for MS (a very serious disease) — such as equestrianism.  Suppose this had been one of her children — they’d have had that access also.

Ann was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998 and has credited a mixture of mainstream and alternative treatments with giving her a lifestyle mostly without limitations. In one of those activities, equestrianism, she has consequently received recognition in dressage as an adult amateur at the national level and competing professionally in Grand Prix as well
The topic is EDUCATION DISPARITIES by WEALTH — as contrasted with Horace Mann’s vision:
By contrast with the ONE child of a black single mother (also in Michigan), who — on finding out that her daughter, having developed complications possibly related to a vaccine, then was given Risperdal — and when that had even worse effects, like any good Mom, she took her child OFF it — and then all hell (including with tanks and helicopters) eventually took place.  (Link is below).  It “just so happened’ that the community they lived in was supposed to do what it was told with their kids, and not buck the system or seek — as Mrs. Romney could — non-mainstream ways to stay alive or keep their kids alive and healthy.  That’s cause for losing one’s kid to the state, apparently.
Ron Paul Op-Ed on Ms. Godboldo in context of overmedication of chidlren in foster care, forced mandatory psychiatric screening of children (think they get that in the Cranbrook Educational Community nowadays?):

“No Mandatory Mental Health Screening For Children!” by Ron Paul

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 Op-Ed by Congressman Ron Paul

Maryanne Godboldo, a mother in Michigan, noticed that pills prescribed by her daughter’s doctor were making her condition worse, not better. So Mrs. Godboldo stopped giving them to her. That’s when the trouble began. When Child Protective Services (CPS) bureaucrats became aware that the girl was not receiving her prescribed medication, they decided the child should be taken away from her mother’s custody on grounds of medical neglect. When Ms. Godboldo refused to surrender her daughter to the state, CPS enlisted the help of a police SWAT team! On March 24 of this year a 12 hour standoff ensued and young Ariana was taken into custody. The drug involved was Risperdal, a neuroleptic antipsychotic medication with numerous known side effects. Ms. Godboldo had decided on a more holistic approach for her daughter. She is still engaged in a costly legal battle with the state over Ariana’s treatment and custody.

This is one example of how government’s increasing proclivity to medicate children with questionable psychiatric drugs violates the rights of parents. Just recently, the Government Accountability Office released a report on the astonishingly high rate of prescriptions for psychotropic drugs for children in the foster care system. It is absolutely astounding that nearly 40% of kids in foster care are on psychotropic drugs, some of them taking up to 5 different pills at a time. Some of these children are under one year of age – too young to safely take over the counter cold medication!

 Another account:

Ethan A. Huff,
Natural News
December 15, 2011

The horrific saga of Maryanne Godboldo’s battle with domestic terrorists in the government of her home state of Michigan appear to finally be coming to an end. TheDetroit Free Pressreports that two higher courts have confirmed the ruling of a lower court several months ago that Godboldo’s refusal to administer the dangerous Risperdal drug to her daughter was fully legal, and that all charges and actions taken against her by the state were unwarranted.

In case you missed the story, Child Protective Services (CPS) in Michigan sent a SWAT team and tank to Godboldo’s Detroit home back in April after the mother refused to keep giving her 13-year-old daughter Risperdal (risperidone), a dangerous schizophrenia drug that had been causing her daughter to experience severe adverse reactions. Godboldo’s doctor had recommended that she discontinue use of the drug, but CPS felt otherwise, and decided to launch a full-scale terrorist raid on the woman’s home, where they proceeded to illegally kidnap her daughter (http://www.naturalnews.com/032090_M…).

In one of the series of articles on this raid, the demographics of the community spoke loudly as to what happened.  It wouldn’t happen in a gated community, and I’ll bet it wouldn’t happen in Bloomfield Hills, either.  However, another clue shows up in this (april 2011) article — not only was this woman acting — in accord with the doctor’s advice to stop Risperdal — not only was she single and African-American, she was also homeschooling her daughter!
Godboldos focus on daughter’s release:  April 17, 2011, The Michigan Citizen, Eric T. Campbell
“This case is very simple,” Defense Attorney Allison Fomar told the Michigan Citizen. “The child was taken out of the home without any legitimate, lawful authority. They took her in the most drastic way they could think of, which was to involve Detroit police.

. . .Ariana has been in state custody since March 25 without medication.

“If the issue was medication, where is the justice?” Penny said. “Why isn’t she home with her father right now? He has complete authority after Maryanne. To me, they sent her into harms way.”

Penny {{the mother’s sister and a dance teacher at Margrove College}} says her niece was active and normal growing up in a home-schooled environment. She was active in church and received lessons in piano and horseback riding.   “There were absolutely no mental issues with her until she had the immunizations and even more with the Risperdal,” Penny said. “It’s been a hell ever since.”

Ron Scott of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality  . . .“The child has a father and an aunt and that’s where the mother thought the child was going when she released her,” Scott said. “Judge Pierce says she’s an advocate for families, so we’ll see what happens.”

According to Scott, CPS knew the daughter was doing fine without Risperdal and she was not considered an imminent danger to herself or anyone else. 

August, in this same case (good article — read it all!)

JURY RULES AGAINST MARYANNE GODBOLDO IN CUSTODY TRIAL

Posted on 08/16/2011 by Diane Bukowski

DETROIT – Despite testimony that Mia Wenk, a “social services specialist” with a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice, authorized the  psychiatric hospitalization of Ariana Godboldo-Hakim, 13, and the administration of four dangerous psychotropic drugs, without reviewing the child’s  medical records, a jury found Aug. 9 that it was Ariana’s mother Maryanne Godboldo who had neglected her.

Godboldo, who obtained alternative holistic treatment for her daughter from a medical doctor, testified earlier that she was suffering from a reaction to immunizations administered in Sept. 2009. She said Ariana had been diagnosed with encephalitis, not a psychiatric disorder. Neither she nor Ariana’s father Mubarak Hakim authorized their daughter’s treatment at Hawthorn Children’s Psychiatric facility after an army of police seized her from her home on Blaine near Linwood in Detroit March 24, 2011. 

Wenk said that as she watched the stand-off with police that resulted at Ariana’s home, her only concern was, “I didn’t want her to end up shooting her daughter.”**  Wenk is currently facing a federal lawsuit  filed by Nathaniel Brent (see next story) for taking his five children, who are of Native American heritage.

Captions: Maryanne Godboldo speaks at rally July 17, 2011 . . . Children’s Center recruits foster parents in billboard off John C. Lodge Fwy.; they are paid $34 per day per head by DHS for each child they take

(**Wenk provoked the crisis to start with, which seems to be pretty standard protocol, where possible to get away with.   It also signifies a serious attitude problem, job description or no job description.   In this situation, they simply didn’t reckon with an armed mother, and a supportive community expressing its outrage AND investigative reporting on it!  The problem is the presence of a system which enables this.  That the SWAT team would come in this situation shows that Wenk and friends hold far too much sway.  Meanwhile, over in Connecticut, a little boy (and across the country this is happening) is being tortured with symptoms BOTH medical and behavioral, as attested to by doctors — and the GAL in the case still has custody with the father who is doing this!  WHy not remove THAT child?) (Answer:  money in the family hasn’t been sucked out yet. See CT page on my other blog).

I keep finding more — and very disturbing — information on this case.  First of all — we note that this is a mature mother, not a teen mother (see photo, and article below says she’s in her 50s).  She is dedicated to taking care of her daughter who is an amputee, and was doing a good job of it; the troubles began with a school-required vaccination, and reactions to it.   And although parents are separated, this was not a case which could be played Mom VERSUS Dad.

“Police use Assault Weapons and Tank against Home School Mom wanting to protect daughter from Dangerous Medications.”

Health Impact News Editor

According to the Detroit News, a 56-year-old woman faces multiple felony charges and is being held on $500,000 bond after a 10-hour standoff with police, claiming she was protecting her 13-year-old daughter from unnecessary medication. The story which led to this incident, as reported in the Detroit News and The Voice of Detroit, is quite disturbing.

Maryanne Godboldo’s daughter was born with a defective foot that required amputation of her leg below the knee, which led to Maryanne becoming a stay-at-home mother after her birth. Maryanne and her sister Penny now run a dance school in Detroit. Penny Godboldo reported in the Detroit News her niece’s confidence grew, and despite her handicap, she swam, sang, danced and played the piano. However, as she approached middle school age, she apparently wanted to start attending school, and therefore had to “catch up” on required immunizations.

As the Detroit News reports:

“We believe she had an adverse reaction to her immunizations,” Penny Godboldo said.

“She began acting out of character, being irritated, having facial grimaces that have been associated with immunizations.”

Evans said Maryanne Godboldo sought help for her daughter from The Children’s Center, an organization that helps families with at-risk children, where a medical and mental health treatment plan was developed. Godboldo told relatives the medications ordered by the doctor worsened symptoms, including behavioral problems.

“It is an undiagnosed condition, but the doctor had given her psychotropic drugs that caused a bad reaction, made things worse,” said the girl’s father, Mubuarak Hakim. “Maryanne’s decision to wean her from that was making a difference, making her better, helping her to be a happy kid again.”

Maryanne Godboldo apparently has a good reputation in her community, and during the 10 hour standoff many people from the community offered to help with the negotiations, including ministers and community activists, according to reports in the Detroit News. Ironically, it was Wayne Circuit Judge Deborah Thomas, a former polio sufferer and advocate for the disabled, who finally convinced Maryanne to surrender

Embarrassed — or exposed? — although the mother had her criminal charges dropped, and her child back (late December) the Wayne County District attorney, per spokesman, is thinking of re-instating them.  They are crazy — but smart enough to know that this case is probably a good chink in the wall.

http://www.miweekly.com/news/85-detroit/5705-mom-in-police-standoff-awaits-decision-on-charges

Last Updated: December 10. 2011 1:00AM

Doug Guthrie/ The Detroit News

Detroit— A judge is expected to announce his decision Monday whether to reinstate criminal charges against a mother who resisted police who forced their way into her home to take her teenage daughter during a dispute over medications. . . .

Acting on a call from a Wayne County Child Protective Services (=CPS) worker, who told police she had obtained an order to remove the child on a claim of medical neglect, the officers responding to Godboldo’s home accused her of firing a handgun at them through a plaster wall after she refused to let them in. Godboldo was talked out of the house. She was jailed for several days until her release on bond, and her daughter was held in a state psychiatric facility for almost two months.

Godboldo was charged with resisting and assaulting police, as well as use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. Giles tossed out the charges in August because he said the order used by police as authority to enter the house was invalid. It was never authorized by a judge, but had a rubber stamp signature. Police also testified they don’t normally enforce civil court orders, but had been told by the protective services worker it was a criminal warrant.

And the police didn’t LOOK at the warrant?  Do criminal and civil warrants look different from each other?

http://justice4maryanne.com/

Some excellent reporting.

Talk about the disparity of viewpoints:  Family, Community — versus the System who wants the child to be medicated.

My reading has led me to the conclusion — this is a class war, and at the bottom of the barrel (as to scapegoating) are women who look and act like this one.  Like Albert Einstein, Horace Mann, and other leaders, her daughter’s education was not traditional — and part of schooling these days is getting the vaccinations (I even found a reference to James Franklin — Ben’s older brother — protesting vaccinations in his time!).   Drugging people is a form of medical control — not just profits — get it?  If certain classes of people are being used as test cases for the effects of dangerous drugs, then this comprises a class war against them.   Why should this mother AND her community have to wage a legal battle to “buy” back a daughter which had been kidnapped improperly?   Why should anyone have to?

At some level, we have got to start acknowledging that mature, independent mothers are a threat to the status quo.   For the rest of us, the family law system with its fatherhood funding gets the job done without SWAT teams.  But both methods are extortionist.

Listen to “Managing Oneself” (found by checking out the spelling: Onesself or Oneself?)

(Peter Drucker, Harvard Business Review, 1999)  It’s password protected from copying a single sentence, but (bottom of page 5 or so) talking about what a knowledge ecomony we have, and how one must manage oneself, including knowing one’s learning style.  Are you a writer or a reader?  For those who learn by writing, he says, school is pure torture– writers learn by writing  — not by listening and reading (guess I’m one of those!).  Because schools don’t let them learn that way, they get poor grades (speculation, I suppose, as to cause)….

Schools do not accommodate the different learning styles, forcing everyone to learn “the way the school teaches” is “sheer hell for students who learn differently.”   

“Success in the knowledge economy comes to those who know themselves, their strengths, their values and how they best perform.”

Easy to say, but that Michigan Mom seems to be someone who knows herself, her strengths (and her daughters) and certainly her values — so why should she catch this kind of hell, and have her daughter in a psychiatric institution for two months or more, where there is some question whether or not she was also sexually assaulted (some news accounts bring this up) — in the land of the free and the home of the brave?

In case you can’t guess why this case has so grabbed my attention, even though I don’t have a disabled child, while my children were not (to my knowledge) forcibly medicated, the “kidnapping” was enabled around accusations of educational neglect (among others, none of which were proved, as is common) which was in fact educational choice, and an informed one.  When we’ve come to kidnapping and tanks/helicopters to prop up a bad decision by a CPS worker, and (see Voice of Detroit reporting, plus I recognized some of the companies investigated, and the system) everyone has to go into behavioral health testing grounds EXCEPT those who are rich enough and independent enough to escape the target range of these programs – then I have to ask –  what are we putting our lives and taxes toward to start with?  Is THIS something you want to really endorse?

 

A closer look is warranted at the entire system, and its background.  It’s already “culling” the population and in a crisis (see Katrina) guess who gets sacrificed.  Now read from Transvaal to TANF, read the congressional testimony just prior to enacting 1996 Welfare Reform (or even read some of the current talk/writing — if you can do so without regurgitating — and, in the mirror, ask whether this was accidental or planned.)

It took me a while to come to the conclusions I have, and I don’t expect others to agree immediately — or ncessarily ever.  But I do stand my ground — pay less attention to the talking heads, the mainstream media, and a lot more to your legislators and do NOT underestimate the influence of the family court system.  After all, a lot of money is going missing in the process — so what’s that money going INto?  Drugs?  Legal or illegal, or is there a difference?

 

It takes a good deal of context to separate Info from DISinfo. And it’s work, too.  With time, it gets a lot easier, though.

At bottom are the links from the blog  “The Family Court Franchise System.”  In one of the recent posts I said, “I’m not your mother” and suggested people educate themselves.  Plus two interesting links, “Educate Yo’self” and “Educate Yourself” which is where I got part of my education.

 

Where I got the habit of educating myself goes far back — but in these matters, it came from having relied on others’ information, which — though true enough — was (1) not the overview– critical elements were missing, and (2) given what was missing, almost irrelevant.  Instead they (includes Lundy Bancroft, and classic DV rhetoric) talked psychology and group dynamics and some law — something anyone living through what I did has already figured out (though how nice to have the correct terminology).

But they should’ve talked finances — and corporate influence, federal incentives, and private nonprofit associations running demonstration social science projects on as many POOR people (or other distressed populations) as possible, allegedly for the public’s benefit, and definitely at the public’s expense.  In fact, public and private are so blurred at this point, it might be best to ignore what the law says about domestic violence and criminal behavior, and rebuttable presumptions against custody going to the batterer (after all — plenty of judges, family law attorneys, custody evaluators, guardians ad litem and child support professionals most certainly do.  And we have to deal with them anyhow, so why not figure out what’s going on!

 

ROUGHLY in TWO PARTS:  I.  “EDUCATE YOURSELF” — and several examples.  And then II. (as to the Roots of Welfare) — some links to do so.  (under 7,000 words this time).  That’s if you care to.  I’m not your babysitter, I do this for conscience, possibly for therapy, and for a track record. But they are — as this shows — hauling off (kidnapping) children systematically from good parents, to get drugged under foster care.  They are, when there are two parents fighting for custody, able to prolong and make horrible the fight for years — and so “justify” major grants continuations (under TANF, which makes this possible) to promote marriage and fatherhood, and other very chauvinistic (antifeminist) ideas.  At the heart of this is the concept that it’s OK to force indoctrination (“education”) on poor people to address why they are poor, that the elite are appropriate in “molding” the poor — through force — to understand their function and place in society.  Religion is a good aid to this policy.

Too much of this policy comes from places like the British monarchy, or the Nazi apparatus, or prior to that, Prussian educational ideas.  Too much of it depends on free time to philosophize on the backs of workers that barely make ends meet and have far less freedom or mobility simply because they have no family wealth (assets), whether earned, or inherited.  Add to this things like eminent domain (government condemning, then seizing, then selling to cronies, private property) and we’re headed back towards the concentrations camps.  Depending on when “Judgment Day” comes — or does not.  Whatever the status of “judgment day” — there is nothing “just” or equitable about Welfare Reform, which enables flexible grants to the states, and gives bribes to states for going along with federal policy.  Federal policy rubberstamped by Congress — but managed by the Executive Branch (White House and friends) through a grants system.  The grants system itself is based on the TAX system — and there you go.

This is commonly called fascism ,centralization and we know already where that heads off to.

I know what dictatorship is at the family level, the personal level — and am pretty hot and bothered to see how far down the line it is at the national level as well.  When one’s life’s work is repeatedly interrupted, and finally stopped — talking about the essential things one has done in life — one has to rethink the “hold a job til retirement model,” particularly being a female of a certain age in the USA, Post-Bush1 & Bush 2.

(Read PART I, those comments will make more sense).

 

PART I

Educate Yo’self was actually the domain name of a link someone else passed along.  What a source!

The Declaration of Independence – 1776
The Articles of Confederation – 1777
The Constitution for the United States – 1787
Its Sources and Its Application

Commitment One: To Freedom

The commitment of greatest importance is a DEDICATION To FREEDOM at all levels of society, and in all dimensions of our existence.

A commitment to freedom, at all levels, is automatically a commitment to Rigorous Honesty, the Truth of Reality. After all, once freedom is insured, why would one need to lie?

Any “security” that is gained through loss of freedom is a Commitment to Fear. Any nation that puts “national security” above personal freedom has lost its power base

And, tidbits such as (from 2008 — an election year. Worth a review this year?):

545 People Responsible for America’s Woes
by Charley ReeseHave you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don’t write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don’t set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don’t control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices – 545 human beings out of the 300 million – are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

. . . .Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault.    . . .

REPLACE THE SCOUNDRELS . . .

They continue to re-authorize the bastard child called “Welfare Reform,” which has simply expanded the ways to steal from the public, without proper monitoring, to infinity.  Go review the beginnings of the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative (I’ve blogged).  Or, how from state to state, the We, the People method of disciplining criminal judges (leaving ethical ones on the bench) — which was the grand jury — was replaced by “judicial complaint boards.”

It was passed in 1996, a Bill Clinton year.  See “From the Transvaal to TANF” talking about “triangulation” and how Clinton promoted this version of the “contract with America” as inbetween and somehow “above” party politics.  The fact is, the Republicans had succeeded in shutting down government over this, his ass was in trouble with Monica Lewinsky, and there was the Hillary problem; in fact there were plenty of problems.

The “Transvaal’ refers to Cecil Rhodes.  Bill Clinton, among others, was a Rhodes Scholar.   The purpose of the Rhodes Scholarship, and the beyond-my-liftime-goal of Mr. Rhodes, was to regain the British control of the world, particularly the return of “the US colonies” to their master.  Some people were born to lead, others were born to serve, obviously.  Now, fast-forward to TANF reform and look at who it’s targeting for program indoctrination on how to stay married, and quit propagating outside of marriage, etc.

The fact is, were it not for the artificial income tax / fiat currency situation (our $$ is off the gold standard), were it not the need for extremely wealthy corporations to maintain their wealth by a constant flow of competition for jobs in their industries (i.e., keep wages down, profits up) and to through a HUGE variety of means — including trying to designate everyone, almost, a behavioral health case, and where possible, proscribe some nice medication for them (i.e., control by medication, even sterilization) — it would be a piece of cake for an intelligent, motivated and in control of her own infrastructure single mother (or single father) to handle their own affairs.

One of the affairs the largest mistakes made by OUR forebears (generally speaking of USA citizens), over a century ago, was to hand over the raising of our kids to the government in the form of compulsory public education — which is compulsory time-wasting and dumbing down, and has been for decades.  It’s an ABSOLUTE disgrace and has become simply a values battleground anyhow.    And as to equalization — go check your senators — and all the representatives in the state — how many of them are sending their kids to public schools, and were themselves the product of public schools.  How many of them came from honest working backgrounds and were not raised with a silver spoon, or a political spoon?

Some of the greatest minds and leaders had the least traditional schooling — for themselves.   Horace Mann fits that example, and it appears 1837 was the first year there was a “Secretary of Education” at least in massachusetts.  Now we have a Secretary of Health and Human Services (more control over this country than you realize, and the current one is from Kansas), plus the “Czars” — interesting term, huh?  Look at him:

HORACE MANN‘s SCHOOLING

” The Father of American Education”,” Horace Mann, was born in Franklin, Massachusetts, in 1796. Mann’s schooling consisted only of brief and erratic periods of eight to ten weeks a year. Mann educated himself by reading ponderous volumes from the Franklin Town Library. This self education, combined with the fruits of a brief period of study with an intinerant school master, was sufficient to gain him admission to the sophomore class of Brown University in 1816” (4, Cremin). He went on to study law at Litchfield Law School and finally received admission to the bar in 1823 (15, Filler). In the year 1827 Mann won a seat in the state legislature and in 1833 ran for State Senate and won.” Throughout these years Horace Mann maintained a thriving law practice, first in Dedham and later in Boston” (5, Cremin).

” Of the many causes dear to Mann’s heart, non was closer than the education of the people. He held a keen interest in school policy. April 20, 1837, Mann left his law practice and accepted the post of the newly founded Secretary of Education” (6, Cremin). During his years as Secretary of Education Mann published twelve annual reports on aspects of his work and programs, and the integral relationship between education, freedom, and Republican government. He wanted a school that would be available and equal for all, part of the birth-right of every American child, to be for rich and poor alike. Mann had found “social harmony” to be his primary goal of the school. (8, Cremin).

Horace Mann felt that a common school would be the “great equalizer.” Poverty would most assuredly disappear as a broadened popular intelligence tapped new treasures of natural and material wealth. He felt that through education crime would decline sharply as would a host of moral vices like violence and fraud. In sum, there was no end to the social good which might be derived from a common school (8, Cremin).

SO — how’d you say THAT’s going?  Because in Los Angeles, they had a schoolteacher feeding blindfolded teaspoons of his own semen.  THIRD-graders.  Has poverty, violence and fraud been primarily despite the school system, or perhaps as a consequence of it?
Horace Mann had one thing — freedom.  He had another thing — access to the library.  He was also male, and he could vote — it was another century, from his passing the bar (1823) before women could!  Rather than trying to train a nation (how egotistical!), what about establish these basic rights, and make available justice (and libraries).
Horace Mann and Education Reform
Reformers, some influenced by the Prussian education reforms of the early 1800s, emerged at an incredible rate hoping to change the general form and ideals of American education to keep up with the evolving country. No longer would small rural schoolhouses, untrained teachers, or limitations in education opportunities suffice. A more defined system, which, as Mann and others had hoped, would also be free and universal, slowly garnered both grassroots and governmental support. The goal was to mold individuals from all socio-economic backgrounds into good people and good citizens through education. It was believed that in doing so everyone would be able to achieve to their fullest potential.
I would always much rather see a sermon than hear one.   Moreover, we ought to take care about importing Prussian OR German ideas.  Germans tend to be real organized, excessively so, — and I think it’s fair to say, Centralized. There is a LOT of literature out, particularly I’m thinking about Alice Miller, and “The Drama of the Gifted Child,” (d. 2010; she was a Swiss psychoanalyst, the book is about the consequences of repressed trauma)– talking about how the attempts to “mold” good strong citizens with cruel child-rearing practices (from Germany) may have helped created the cruel, socially-detached, amoral child molesters and sociopaths of today that we are now cleaning up after.
Alice Miller, child abuse and mistreatment
And yet, we have in TANF, a government intent on even more education of the public — in morality issues like fatherhood, marriage, abstinence, and so forth.  The truth is — at least as to TANF — I believe it’s simply another form of wealth-transfer; and it’s a VERY high profit-margin on downloading information by the internet, setting up a franchise system, having people BUY into it to be qualified as a marriage educator (etc.) — it was a real smart development for some very dishonest people.

What about Ben Franklin? (1706-1790)– was he adequately schooled?  Methinks not:

Benjamin Franklin was born in Boston on January 17, 1706. He was the tenth son of soap maker, Josiah Franklin. Benjamin’s mother was Abiah Folger, the second wife of Josiah. In all, Josiah would father 17 children.

Josiah intended for Benjamin to enter into the clergy. However, Josiah could only afford to send his son to school for one year and clergymen needed years of schooling. But, as young Benjamin loved to read he had him apprenticed to his brother James, who was a printer. After helping James compose pamphlets and set type which was grueling work, 12-year-old Benjamin would sell their products in the streets.

What about Albert Einstein’s schooling?(1879-1955) (from a UK site): (take some time, here…)

Albert Einstein was born on 14th March, 1879 at Ulm, Germany. He spent his early life in Munich, where his family owned a small manufacturing business. He studied Judaism at home, where he also was taught to play the violin. He showed a great interest in Mathematics and taught himself Euclidian geometry at the age of 12.

What sort of education did Albert receive?

Albert Einstein began school in Munich, but does not seem to have been particularly interested in what was offered there. . .

He was already a self-motivated learner, with experience in (I presume) language, music, and geometry.  Are schools BORING the gifted? along with how many others?

Einstein hoped to become an electrical engineer and, at the second attempt, enrolled at the Swiss National Polytechnic in Zurich in 1896.

It seems that he continued to show little respect for his teachers, as he was not a regular attender at lectures. He spent considerable time studying physics on his own. Despite the lack of time in lecture halls, he graduated as a teacher of physics and mathematics in 1900, but was unable to obtain a post in the university. It has been suggested that he had not impressed his professors enough, which is perhaps not surprising, given his attitude, and so did not receive their all-important backing for an academic career.

Perhaps this lack of respect comes from someone who found something better to do with his time, working on self-assigned projects of interest.

What did he do next?

Albert Einstein became a temporary teacher of mathematics, first at the Technical High School in Winterthur, and secondly at a private school at Schaffhausen.

In 1902 he began work at the Swiss patent office in Bern as a technical expert third class. He remained there until 1909, having been promoted, in 1906, to technical expert second class! He married Mileva Maric, by whom he had two sons, in 1903. They later divorced.

During his time there, Albert Einstein devoted a great deal of his spare time to the study of theoretical physics, and in 1905, received his doctorate for a thesis entitled On a new determination of molecular dimensions. He also published three important papers on theoretical physics

 Anyone who’s honest today will admit that a major function of public school education is babysitter — to soak up the TIME of individuals so their parents (both their parents, if there are two) can go to work and pay their taxes to fund the teachers, among other things (or pay off some interest on the national debt).  As such, the kids (and youth) in school are going to have other things they would rather be doing, and/or exploring — so a good deal of the school day goes into administration and managing the kids.  And (now at least) running mental health screenings on them to see if some drugs can be marketed (see recent whistleblower on TMAP, PennMAP, who documented this).   More on Einstein:

In 1952, he declined the offer of the presidency of Israel and continued his work towards the world renouncing nuclear weapons.

Albert Einstein died on 18th April, 1955 at Princeton and was cremated that day at Trenton, New Jersey. He is, perhaps, the best known scientist of the 20th century

And just imagine — he was bored in school from the start, skipped a lot of classes, didn’t brown-nose enough in Swiss National Polytechnic around the turn of the century, resulting in his having a fairly humble job which left him time to study things of personal interest — eventually a Nobel Prize, etc. What does public education in the US do today?  Soak up time, DELETE a lot of music because not enough children are learning to read and write, substitutes values education, and when that (obviously) fails, recommend more money and start kids earlier and have longer school days and years.
The existence of the public school system, and its lower quality, is a caste-sorter, and intentionally so.   Where did our politicians go to school, prior to sponsoring initiatives to train the rest of us about the purpose of life, relationships, sex, and what and what is not healthy?  For example (to bring us to 2012 Presidential Candidacy, and which conservative do you want….)
Mitt Romney went to a private school from 7th grand onwards, where he met his wife, who also attended private schools.  Described as (Wikipedia):
Cranbrook Schools is a private, PK–12 school located on a 319-acre (1.29 km2) campus in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The schools comprise a co-educational elementary school, a middle school with separate schools for boys and girls, and a co-educational high school with boarding facilities  …Romney went to public elementary schools[17] and then from seventh grade on, attended Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills, a private boys preparatory school of the classic mold where he was the lone Mormon and where many students came from even more privileged backgrounds.[18][23][24][25] He was not particularly athletic and at first did not excel at academics.[18] While a sophomore, he participated in the campaign in which his father was elected Governor of Michigan.[nb 2] 
Cranbrook Schools is a private, PK–12 school located on a 319-acre (1.29 km2) campus in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The schools comprise a co-educational elementary school, a middle school with separate schools for boys and girls, and a co-educational high school with boarding facilities. Cranbrook Schools is part of the Cranbrook Educational Community (CEC), which includes the Cranbrook Institute of Science, the Cranbrook Academy of Art, and Cranbrook House and Gardens. (Nearby Christ Church Cranbrook remains outside this formal structure.) The Cranbrook community was established by publishing mogul George Booth,
 Cranbrook was designated a National Historic Landmark on June 29, 1989 for its significant architecture and design. It attracts tourists from around the world. Approximately 40 acres (160,000 m2) of Cranbrook Schools’ campus are gardens.  As of 2006, Cranbrook Schools had an endowment of $191 million, among the 15 largest held by America’s boarding schools.[1] In addition, the Cranbrook Educational Community, of which the Schools is a member, has an endowment in excess of $300 million.[2]
Where did he get his wife from?

Ann Lois Romney (née Davies) (born April 16, 1949) is the wife of American businessman and Republican Party politician Mitt Romney. From 2003 to 2007 she was First Lady of Massachusetts.

She was raised in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and attended the private Kingswood School there, where she dated Mitt Romney. Influenced by their relationship, she converted to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1966. She attended Brigham Young University and married Mitt Romney in 1969. She completed her undergraduate education through the Extension School at Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in 1975.

As First Lady of Massachusetts, she served as the governor’s liaison for federal faith-based initiatives.

Now THAT is disturbing . . . .

Her background — daughter of the mayor of Bloomfield Hills, who was anti-organized religion.  So, she converts to LDS (like Mitt) and her college is put on hold while he completes his.   Their marriage, being Mormon:

Ann Davies and Mitt Romney were married by a church elder in a civil ceremony on March 21, 1969, at her Bloomfield Hills home, with a reception afterward at a local country club.[4][12] The following day the couple flew to Utah for a wedding ceremony inside the Salt Lake Temple; her family could not attend since they were non-Mormons, but were present at a subsequent wedding breakfast held for them across the street.[4][14]

When she fell ill, she had access to mainstream and alternative treatments for MS (a very serious disease) — such as equestrianism.  Suppose this had been one of her children — they’d have had that access also.

Ann was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998 and has credited a mixture of mainstream and alternative treatments with giving her a lifestyle mostly without limitations. In one of those activities, equestrianism, she has consequently received recognition in dressage as an adult amateur at the national level and competing professionally in Grand Prix as well
The topic is EDUCATION DISPARITIES by WEALTH — as contrasted with Horace Mann’s vision:
By contrast with the ONE child of a black single mother (also in Michigan), who — on finding out that her daughter, having developed complications possibly related to a vaccine, then was given Risperdal — and when that had even worse effects, like any good Mom, she took her child OFF it — and then all hell (including with tanks and helicopters) eventually took place.  (Link is below).  It “just so happened’ that the community they lived in was supposed to do what it was told with their kids, and not buck the system or seek — as Mrs. Romney could — non-mainstream ways to stay alive or keep their kids alive and healthy.  That’s cause for losing one’s kid to the state, apparently.
Ron Paul Op-Ed on Ms. Godboldo in context of overmedication of chidlren in foster care, forced mandatory psychiatric screening of children (think they get that in the Cranbrook Educational Community nowadays?):

“No Mandatory Mental Health Screening For Children!” by Ron Paul

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 Op-Ed by Congressman Ron Paul

Maryanne Godboldo, a mother in Michigan, noticed that pills prescribed by her daughter’s doctor were making her condition worse, not better. So Mrs. Godboldo stopped giving them to her. That’s when the trouble began. When Child Protective Services (CPS) bureaucrats became aware that the girl was not receiving her prescribed medication, they decided the child should be taken away from her mother’s custody on grounds of medical neglect. When Ms. Godboldo refused to surrender her daughter to the state, CPS enlisted the help of a police SWAT team! On March 24 of this year a 12 hour standoff ensued and young Ariana was taken into custody. The drug involved was Risperdal, a neuroleptic antipsychotic medication with numerous known side effects. Ms. Godboldo had decided on a more holistic approach for her daughter. She is still engaged in a costly legal battle with the state over Ariana’s treatment and custody.

This is one example of how government’s increasing proclivity to medicate children with questionable psychiatric drugs violates the rights of parents. Just recently, the Government Accountability Office released a report on the astonishingly high rate of prescriptions for psychotropic drugs for children in the foster care system. It is absolutely astounding that nearly 40% of kids in foster care are on psychotropic drugs, some of them taking up to 5 different pills at a time. Some of these children are under one year of age – too young to safely take over the counter cold medication!

 Another account:

Ethan A. Huff,
Natural News
December 15, 2011

The horrific saga of Maryanne Godboldo’s battle with domestic terrorists in the government of her home state of Michigan appear to finally be coming to an end. TheDetroit Free Pressreports that two higher courts have confirmed the ruling of a lower court several months ago that Godboldo’s refusal to administer the dangerous Risperdal drug to her daughter was fully legal, and that all charges and actions taken against her by the state were unwarranted.

In case you missed the story, Child Protective Services (CPS) in Michigan sent a SWAT team and tank to Godboldo’s Detroit home back in April after the mother refused to keep giving her 13-year-old daughter Risperdal (risperidone), a dangerous schizophrenia drug that had been causing her daughter to experience severe adverse reactions. Godboldo’s doctor had recommended that she discontinue use of the drug, but CPS felt otherwise, and decided to launch a full-scale terrorist raid on the woman’s home, where they proceeded to illegally kidnap her daughter (http://www.naturalnews.com/032090_M…).

In one of the series of articles on this raid, the demographics of the community spoke loudly as to what happened.  It wouldn’t happen in a gated community, and I’ll bet it wouldn’t happen in Bloomfield Hills, either.  However, another clue shows up in this (april 2011) article — not only was this woman acting — in accord with the doctor’s advice to stop Risperdal — not only was she single and African-American, she was also homeschooling her daughter!
Godboldos focus on daughter’s release:  April 17, 2011, The Michigan Citizen, Eric T. Campbell
“This case is very simple,” Defense Attorney Allison Fomar told the Michigan Citizen. “The child was taken out of the home without any legitimate, lawful authority. They took her in the most drastic way they could think of, which was to involve Detroit police.

. . .Ariana has been in state custody since March 25 without medication.

“If the issue was medication, where is the justice?” Penny said. “Why isn’t she home with her father right now? He has complete authority after Maryanne. To me, they sent her into harms way.”

Penny {{the mother’s sister and a dance teacher at Margrove College}} says her niece was active and normal growing up in a home-schooled environment. She was active in church and received lessons in piano and horseback riding.   “There were absolutely no mental issues with her until she had the immunizations and even more with the Risperdal,” Penny said. “It’s been a hell ever since.”

Ron Scott of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality  . . .“The child has a father and an aunt and that’s where the mother thought the child was going when she released her,” Scott said. “Judge Pierce says she’s an advocate for families, so we’ll see what happens.”

According to Scott, CPS knew the daughter was doing fine without Risperdal and she was not considered an imminent danger to herself or anyone else. 

August, in this same case (good article — read it all!)

JURY RULES AGAINST MARYANNE GODBOLDO IN CUSTODY TRIAL

Posted on 08/16/2011 by Diane Bukowski

DETROIT – Despite testimony that Mia Wenk, a “social services specialist” with a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice, authorized the  psychiatric hospitalization of Ariana Godboldo-Hakim, 13, and the administration of four dangerous psychotropic drugs, without reviewing the child’s  medical records, a jury found Aug. 9 that it was Ariana’s mother Maryanne Godboldo who had neglected her.

Godboldo, who obtained alternative holistic treatment for her daughter from a medical doctor, testified earlier that she was suffering from a reaction to immunizations administered in Sept. 2009. She said Ariana had been diagnosed with encephalitis, not a psychiatric disorder. Neither she nor Ariana’s father Mubarak Hakim authorized their daughter’s treatment at Hawthorn Children’s Psychiatric facility after an army of police seized her from her home on Blaine near Linwood in Detroit March 24, 2011. 

Wenk said that as she watched the stand-off with police that resulted at Ariana’s home, her only concern was, “I didn’t want her to end up shooting her daughter.”**  Wenk is currently facing a federal lawsuit  filed by Nathaniel Brent (see next story) for taking his five children, who are of Native American heritage.

Captions: Maryanne Godboldo speaks at rally July 17, 2011 . . . Children’s Center recruits foster parents in billboard off John C. Lodge Fwy.; they are paid $34 per day per head by DHS for each child they take

(**Wenk provoked the crisis to start with, which seems to be pretty standard protocol, where possible to get away with.   It also signifies a serious attitude problem, job description or no job description.   In this situation, they simply didn’t reckon with an armed mother, and a supportive community expressing its outrage AND investigative reporting on it!  The problem is the presence of a system which enables this.  That the SWAT team would come in this situation shows that Wenk and friends hold far too much sway.  Meanwhile, over in Connecticut, a little boy (and across the country this is happening) is being tortured with symptoms BOTH medical and behavioral, as attested to by doctors — and the GAL in the case still has custody with the father who is doing this!  WHy not remove THAT child?) (Answer:  money in the family hasn’t been sucked out yet. See CT page on my other blog).

I keep finding more — and very disturbing — information on this case.  First of all — we note that this is a mature mother, not a teen mother (see photo, and article below says she’s in her 50s).  She is dedicated to taking care of her daughter who is an amputee, and was doing a good job of it; the troubles began with a school-required vaccination, and reactions to it.   And although parents are separated, this was not a case which could be played Mom VERSUS Dad.

“Police use Assault Weapons and Tank against Home School Mom wanting to protect daughter from Dangerous Medications.”

Health Impact News Editor

According to the Detroit News, a 56-year-old woman faces multiple felony charges and is being held on $500,000 bond after a 10-hour standoff with police, claiming she was protecting her 13-year-old daughter from unnecessary medication. The story which led to this incident, as reported in the Detroit News and The Voice of Detroit, is quite disturbing.

Maryanne Godboldo’s daughter was born with a defective foot that required amputation of her leg below the knee, which led to Maryanne becoming a stay-at-home mother after her birth. Maryanne and her sister Penny now run a dance school in Detroit. Penny Godboldo reported in the Detroit News her niece’s confidence grew, and despite her handicap, she swam, sang, danced and played the piano. However, as she approached middle school age, she apparently wanted to start attending school, and therefore had to “catch up” on required immunizations.

As the Detroit News reports:

“We believe she had an adverse reaction to her immunizations,” Penny Godboldo said.

“She began acting out of character, being irritated, having facial grimaces that have been associated with immunizations.”

Evans said Maryanne Godboldo sought help for her daughter from The Children’s Center, an organization that helps families with at-risk children, where a medical and mental health treatment plan was developed. Godboldo told relatives the medications ordered by the doctor worsened symptoms, including behavioral problems.

“It is an undiagnosed condition, but the doctor had given her psychotropic drugs that caused a bad reaction, made things worse,” said the girl’s father, Mubuarak Hakim. “Maryanne’s decision to wean her from that was making a difference, making her better, helping her to be a happy kid again.”

Maryanne Godboldo apparently has a good reputation in her community, and during the 10 hour standoff many people from the community offered to help with the negotiations, including ministers and community activists, according to reports in the Detroit News. Ironically, it was Wayne Circuit Judge Deborah Thomas, a former polio sufferer and advocate for the disabled, who finally convinced Maryanne to surrender

Embarrassed — or exposed? — although the mother had her criminal charges dropped, and her child back (late December) the Wayne County District attorney, per spokesman, is thinking of re-instating them.  They are crazy — but smart enough to know that this case is probably a good chink in the wall.

http://www.miweekly.com/news/85-detroit/5705-mom-in-police-standoff-awaits-decision-on-charges

Last Updated: December 10. 2011 1:00AM

Doug Guthrie/ The Detroit News

Detroit— A judge is expected to announce his decision Monday whether to reinstate criminal charges against a mother who resisted police who forced their way into her home to take her teenage daughter during a dispute over medications. . . .

Acting on a call from a Wayne County Child Protective Services (=CPS) worker, who told police she had obtained an order to remove the child on a claim of medical neglect, the officers responding to Godboldo’s home accused her of firing a handgun at them through a plaster wall after she refused to let them in. Godboldo was talked out of the house. She was jailed for several days until her release on bond, and her daughter was held in a state psychiatric facility for almost two months.

Godboldo was charged with resisting and assaulting police, as well as use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. Giles tossed out the charges in August because he said the order used by police as authority to enter the house was invalid. It was never authorized by a judge, but had a rubber stamp signature. Police also testified they don’t normally enforce civil court orders, but had been told by the protective services worker it was a criminal warrant.

And the police didn’t LOOK at the warrant?  Do criminal and civil warrants look different from each other?

http://justice4maryanne.com/

Some excellent reporting.

Talk about the disparity of viewpoints:  Family, Community — versus the System who wants the child to be medicated.

My reading has led me to the conclusion — this is a class war, and at the bottom of the barrel (as to scapegoating) are women who look and act like this one.  Like Albert Einstein, Horace Mann, and other leaders, her daughter’s education was not traditional — and part of schooling these days is getting the vaccinations (I even found a reference to James Franklin — Ben’s older brother — protesting vaccinations in his time!).   Drugging people is a form of medical control — not just profits — get it?  If certain classes of people are being used as test cases for the effects of dangerous drugs, then this comprises a class war against them.   Why should this mother AND her community have to wage a legal battle to “buy” back a daughter which had been kidnapped improperly?   Why should anyone have to?

At some level, we have got to start acknowledging that mature, independent mothers are a threat to the status quo.   For the rest of us, the family law system with its fatherhood funding gets the job done without SWAT teams.  But both methods are extortionist.

 

 

PART II LINKS:

 

First set of links are ###  some stats (food for thought in a land flush with marriage/fatherhood theory — and grants).

Second set of links are $$$ — including some searchable databases to know about.

The three links beginning with  “—” I just felt were important summaries.  Right about now, J.A.I.L.4Judges is making a whole lotta sense (see site).  I also put my “What Rhetoric Are You” up there just to remind us — be aware whose rhetoric you are hearing.  It’s in the tone, language, and framing.  The third “—” link is an unbelievable account (except it’s happening nationwide; the rarety here is what a mother did to stand up, and that her case was eventually turned around) that we should read, it’s symptomatic.  (Maryanne Godboldo case).

After that, I go into some chrono links — at least a few references by year.

After that, it’s alphabetical by some of the organizations.

 

There’s a reason librarians are paid — and I’m not one.  But I felt that if I continue writing posts, and writing posts — no one will get through this information.  The best learning — anyhow– is situation relevant, and from people who are highly motivated to acquire the understanding or skill RIGHT NOW to address a problem facing them.  In other words, the best learning is self-taught, and from someone or some source you’ve checked out as reasonable, which knows more than you do.  Period.

Failure can be a far better teacher than success.  Perhaps that’s why I can’t look to those still holding on to their middle-class or lower-middle class jobs to figure this out.  People who’ve been treated like tetherballs IN the public institutions tend to be better reporters; they’ve had to work harder to regain their center of balance.  I am one of many such people around; look for loners, not followers! And always check out FIRST (as to organization) are they honest in (1) corporation status (2) filing tax returns with the IRS and (frequently missing) (3) filing with their local state as required by corporation and by charitable trust, if required.

Another common lie I find is date of the beginning of some organization.  When the corporation “begins” it has a record with a year attached.  Unless mythology is OK, check talk to incorporation.  You’d be amazed what’s out there.

“It’s Elementary” — The Links Tell The Story

Previous posts of this blog have had a little yellow flag labeled “Expose Corruption” up next to some of the posts on parenting coordination and/or Kids’First.  From Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania (next to the infamous Luzerne County).  The visuals (which a forum Administrator only could put up) have rather changed in quality recently, which exposes — well, the mentality or an assumed mentality that’d discredit the gravity of the situations they are handling, namely racketeering, money laundering, child abuse coverups, in general corruption of public officials.
Without saying too much more, I have had some private conversations (there is a messaging function) on the board with its moderators, who were first a couple, then just the wife.  It seems to me that the present graphics are hardly her style, and they do resemble Mr. Pilchesky’s style — but then again, what do I know?  With any forum, there can be multiple identities and some gamesmanship to keep the discussions going.
Either way, FYI:

Also, after several months on a forum in Scranton, the forum message board is posting a photo of a targeted public person (I gather) in his briefs.  JUST FOR THE RECORD — in the past week or so of 2012, the leading photos have featured a hooker leaning over onto a police car, a crude graphic of a man trying to plug a damn with water spouting out through his ear (i.e., flowing through his body) and then this.  Either Mr. Pilchesky is back on board, or something happened — but FYI, I wouldn’t have put out all that research onto the site with this level of visuals, and (though it’s been deleted since) inf act spoke up about some of this in 2011.

 There’s a line between expression and simply sharing the same gutter, and this is over it. There are individuals taking legal action to change the dynamics, but part of life is definitely who you hang out with.  That’s just plain offensive; it doesn’t help the cause at all, and may have been intended to hurt it by association.

PART II LINKS:

First set of links are ###  some stats (food for thought in a land flush with marriage/fatherhood theory — and grants).

Second set of links are $$$ — including some searchable databases to know about.

The three links beginning with  “—” I just felt were important summaries.  Right about now, J.A.I.L.4Judges is making a whole lotta sense (see site).  I also put my “What Rhetoric Are You” up there just to remind us — be aware whose rhetoric you are hearing.  It’s in the tone, language, and framing.  The third “—” link is an unbelievable account (except it’s happening nationwide; the rarety here is what a mother did to stand up, and that her case was eventually turned around) that we should read, it’s symptomatic.  (Maryanne Godboldo case).

After that, I go into some chrono links — at least a few references by year.

After that, it’s alphabetical by some of the organizations.

There’s a reason librarians are paid — and I’m not one.  But I felt that if I continue writing posts, and writing posts — no one will get through this information.  The best learning — anyhow– is situation relevant, and from people who are highly motivated to acquire the understanding or skill RIGHT NOW to address a problem facing them.  In other words, the best learning is self-taught, and from someone or some source you’ve checked out as reasonable, which knows more than you do.  Period.

Failure can be a far better teacher than success.  Perhaps that’s why I can’t look to those still holding on to their middle-class or lower-middle class jobs to figure this out.  People who’ve been treated like tetherballs IN the public institutions tend to be better reporters; they’ve had to work harder to regain their center of balance.  I am one of many such people around; look for loners, not followers! And always check out FIRST (as to organization) are they honest in (1) corporation status (2) filing tax returns with the IRS and (frequently missing) (3) filing with their local state as required by corporation and by charitable trust, if required.

Another common lie I find is date of the beginning of some organization.  When the corporation “begins” it has a record with a year attached.  Unless mythology is OK, check talk to incorporation.  You’d be amazed what’s out there.

“It’s Elementary” — The Links Tell The Story

Previous posts of this blog have had a little yellow flag labeled “Expose Corruption” up next to some of the posts on parenting coordination and/or Kids’First.  From Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania (next to the infamous Luzerne County).  The visuals (which a forum Administrator only could put up) have rather changed in quality recently, which exposes — well, the mentality or an assumed mentality that’d discredit the gravity of the situations they are handling, namely racketeering, money laundering, child abuse coverups, in general corruption of public officials.
Without saying too much more, I have had some private conversations (there is a messaging function) on the board with its moderators, who were first a couple, then just the wife.  It seems to me that the present graphics are hardly her style, and they do resemble Mr. Pilchesky’s style — but then again, what do I know?  With any forum, there can be multiple identities and some gamesmanship to keep the discussions going.
Either way, FYI:

Also, after several months on a forum in Scranton, the forum message board is posting a photo of a targeted public person (I gather) in his briefs.  JUST FOR THE RECORD — in the past week or so of 2012, the leading photos have featured a hooker leaning over onto a police car, a crude graphic of a man trying to plug a damn with water spouting out through his ear (i.e., flowing through his body) and then this.  Either Mr. Pilchesky is back on board, or something happened — but FYI, I wouldn’t have put out all that research onto the site with this level of visuals, and (though it’s been deleted since) inf act spoke up about some of this in 2011.

 There’s a line between expression and simply sharing the same gutter, and this is over it. There are individuals taking legal action to change the dynamics, but part of life is definitely who you hang out with.  That’s just plain offensive; it doesn’t help the cause at all, and may have been intended to hurt it by association.

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

March 10, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), Bush Influence & Appointees (Cat added 11/2011), Business Enterprise, Child Support, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011), My Takes, and Favorite Takes, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids

Tagged with , , , , ,

Substance-Poor, Repetition-Rich: Parsing ~ Parent Coordination ~ Rhetoric ~ and some Organizations..(Publ. Dec. 14, 2011, updated (format) Oct. 30, 2017)

with 5 comments

POST TITLE IS: 

Substance-Poor, Repetition-Rich: Parsing ~ Parent Coordination ~ Rhetoric ~ and some Organizations..(Publ. Dec. 14, 2011, updated (format) Oct. 30, 2017) (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-WN”

My practice of adding borders and listing the post title with shortlink is more recent.

Currently this post is NOT listed on any Table of Contents (my lists only go as far back as Sept. 2012)…I see that many of the logos will not display, and that this post as written was about 10,000 words long. This update made only because a basic search on the blog for an organization I’m writing about again brought it up. (Update this time is only minimal format changes for easier reading; is not in detail and doesn’t include fixing broken links/missing logos, or more recent information on the organizations referenced).//LGH Oct. 30, 2017.

INTRO:

Overall, I seriously doubt that it’s possible to clean up or straighten up the family law system — at all, and I am utterly serious in saying this.  There is too much incentive for fraud, and too much need to “pay the mortgages” in the courthouses by ordering more services, and too little oversight and tracking of the funding.  There are too many public employees forming nonprofit corporations to franchise for-profit curricula (marriage, parent education, etc.) — in the old NonProfit/ForProfit combo.

There are too few tools in many states to track WHO is repeatedly forming corporations that go belly-up, only to have a partner or other person formerly on one board just go forth and from another one — in another state.   Many of these groups, as my last post showed, are membership organizations — membership is charged, conferences run, and we have some evidence from county payrolls or vouchers from court-connected professionals, that the public is billed to fund attendance at nonprofits whose ONE purpose is to expand their services.  Child support is one of the worst of these, but they come in all flavors.

Despite the bleak outlook — I still report and I am going to finish reporting on this field of Parent Coordination until it is CLEAR what the AFCC professionals’ intent is in establishing this field and, if possible, having it legitimized at the state level by establishing standards, or by mandate.

The Association for Family and Conciliation Courts runs many task forces at a time, as part of its strategic plan to expand (itself) and transform the “old” language of criminal law into more friendly-to-its-practitioners concepts.    One of them which they are taking VERY seriously in promoting — and I take VERY seriously in protesting — is Parenting Coordination.

Parents didn’t ask for this — it’s no grassroots movement, and from what I can tell how it’s been (1) advertised (2) pushed and (3) practiced — there’s no genuine NEED for it either.  For that matter, I see no historical record that parents as a sector (both male and female) asked for the family law system, either.

Why I’m addressing it — again:   

(1) AFCC PROMOTED IT – NOT PARENTS.  NO REAL NEED EXISTED, and SERIOUS ISSUES & OBJECTIONS AS THEY DID.

The LizLibrary lists a page of them, and towards the bottom, some legal opinions, too:  Parenting Coordination:  A Bad Idea

Here’s less than half the list — and so far I agree with ALL of them.  Thank you, Liz (Kates, the FL Family Law attorney, not Richards, of NAFCJ.net)
© 1996-2011 argate.net        frcp:

  • Parenting coordination is an inappropriate delegation of the judicial function
  • Parenting coordination is an impediment to court access
  • Parenting coordination is a denial of due process
  • Parenting coordination violates privacy
  • The parenting coordinator concept encroaches on family liberty interests
  • Parenting coordination represents arbitrary dictate by a person, in denigration of rule of law
  • Parenting coordination is a make-work role newly invented by psychology trade promotion groups
  • No studies indicate parenting coordinators make good decisions
  • No studies indicate parenting coordination improves families’ lives or child wellbeing.
  • Nothing qualifies a stranger to make family decisions for other people
  • Nothing qualifies a mental health professional to interpret a court order or legal document
  • Nothing qualifies a lawyer to play at being an unlicensed, unregulated therapist for hire
  • Nothing qualifies any third party to “fill in the gaps” in someone else’s contract
  • There is no definition of what constitutes a successful parenting coordination
  • Parenting coordination does not, in the long run, alleviate court docket congestion
  • It creates additional issues and leaves the door open for return trips to resolve them
  • Parenting coordination provides a new forum for squabbling over petty disputes
  • Parenting coordination is an additional expense that many can ill afford
  • Parenting coordination enables one parent to spend the other’s funds
  • Parenting coordination is time-consuming and tedious
  • Parenting coordination is not confidential
  • Parenting coordination constitutes continuous government discovery, 4th Amendment
  • Parenting coordination constitutes continuous discovery by each parent into the affairs of the other
  • Parenting coordination can never be “voluntary” because it implements unwanted court orders
  • Parenting coordinators demand that the parties sign “consents” that give up constitutional rights
  • Some have demanded that parties give up the right to go to court, contact police, or involve their lawyers
  • They are hired or appointed under shadow of the threat of court sanctions or loss of custody
  • They are agreed to by parties ignorant of the repercussions, in fear, out of funds, or overwhelmed
  • Parenting coordination does not result in increased family well-being
  • Parenting coordination does not make children happier, healthier, or better adjusted
  • Parenting coordination is not therapy but coercion backed by the state’s police power
  • Parenting coordinators tend to be hostile to, and at odds with attorney-client relationships
  • They align with GALs and other court appointees in a pretext of “focus on the children”
  • They encroach on parental-child relationships and decision-making
  • They undermine the parental authority children require for a sense of security and well-being
  • Instead of at least one authoritative parent, children have no authoritative parent
  • Petty tyrants place a premium on the perception of who is cooperating with them
  • Cooperation with the parenting coordinator is court-ordered and
  • They alone decide if a parent is “cooperating” with them

From the same page, a case “Parenting Coordinator Out of Control” — and I have to note that it’s an appeal from an order at the FL (presumably 20th) Circuit Court Level bearing Judge Hugh Starnes‘ name!

The Hon. Hugh Starnes showed up in yesterday’s post, where I was simply blogging an AFCC judge, and also his nonprofit in FL with the initials AFLP (logo on the post).  I also happen to know he was quite active in FL-AFCC Chapter establishment, which seemed to have the primary agenda of getting parenting coordination passed in Florida.  They have since succeeded, I believe, too.
Like I keep saying — sometime others will acknowledge — parenting coordinators are themselves pushy, and AFCC pushed Parenting Coordination, in fact they are one set of bullies when it comes to getting THEIR priorities into practice, then law – citing it’s already in practice anyhow.
This is primarily what AFCC does.  From the organization’s point of view, this is phrased as “innovative” and “helping” and “problem-solving.”  The problem (sic) is always the recalcitrant parents, and the UNFORTUNATE vestiges of separation of powers (legal/judicial/executive branch) and little details like confidentiality in a lawsuit, and legal restraints.
Here’s a link to Parentcoordination.com’s complaint about the legal limits part – and their plan of PC as an end-run around those limits!   {{It looks like I didn’t post that link, or it wasn’t saved to final… unless it’s shown in the DVLeap 2010 brief.}}

“The Court’s parenting coordinator orders unconsitutionally delegate judicial power and violate due process… The Special Master Order’s requirement that Appellant pay for the parenting coordinators to whom she objects violates law and public policy… The Special Master Order requiring Appellant to waive her medical privilege violates her statutory and constitutional rights to privacy…”

AFCC could care less.  They DEMANDED it and are still finishing up trying to get this mandated in every single United State.

  •  Even the brother of the Marriage Promotion President, the “Family” family, George Bush — as Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, FL (2004) had the sense to object based on sound principles.  A newly formed (probably for this purpose) chapter of AFCC strategized, lobbied, publicized, practiced, and finally managed to ram it through, over his veto.  It only slowed them down slightly.

June 18, 2004   

Ms. Glenda E. Hood Secretary of State Florida Department of State

By the authority vested in me as Governor of Florida, under the provisions of Article III, Section 8, of the Constitution of Florida, I do hereby withhold my approval of and transmit to you with my objections, Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2640, enacted during the 36th session of the Legislature, convened under the Constitution of 1968, during the Regular Session of 2004, and entitled:

An act relating to Parenting Coordination. . .

Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2640 authorizes courts to appoint a parenting coordinator when the court finds the parties have not implemented the court-ordered parenting plan, mediation has not been successful, and the court finds the appointment is in the best interest of the children involved.

 

  • He lists 5 objections, two of which clearly recognize that it in effect allows a parent coordinator to function as both judge and jury of parents’ or children’s rights, and one of which is that it fails to protect victims of domestic violence.   I also note from the language that it looks like a Committee (not the general legislature) attempted to have this substitute for an existing Senate Bill. . . . . 

(2) The “Termini/Boyan Factor” —

  • The People fixed on training parent coordinators have a terrible track record when it comes to staying incorporated(I found another one today — Seminars for Advanced Interdisciplinary Family Professionals, or “SAIF.”  Formed in 2006, it’s already behind in its filings, in the state of Indiana. And it appears that, again, a nonprofit/for-profit combo, originating not with litigants, but with the professionals, was set up to give (again) some family law attorneys the right to crow about their own parent coordination training seminars they helped run themselves.  By and large, that seems to be the situation in Indiana — which it seems New Hampshire liked a lot, too. Termini/Boyan are Georgia/Pennsylvania — but same general idea.

(3) The language of “parent coordination” is impoverished and repetitive.

Here’s an example, from a family law attorney, a bona-fide certified one  (although the nonprofit membership she cites all over is anything but “bona-fide” when it comes to filing charitable returns in the home state!)

It’s even from an Amicus Brief (I THINK it got filed, although this isn’t the stamped version). Actually, this is where the title to my post came from:

 

CASE NO. C064475

SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 34-3009-80000359

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

__________________

RANDY RAND, ED.D. Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY, Defendant and Respondent. __________________

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE

ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS __________________

Face sheet as posted at CaliforniaParentingCoordinator.com (using link from this 12/14/2011 post).

[Three images, inside blue borders, added in 2017 update.  See also their list Table of Authorities].

 

In the statute of authorities for this brief, bearing the name “Leslie Ellen Shear” and “Stephen Temko” (although the certificate of interested parties form bears the name Shear, and is dated 1/27/2011), after the legal and rules of court list, comes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents from Amicus Brief (source url shown on gray window-frame at top of image).

 

 

 

“Treatises, Law Reviews and Other Authorities” – and on reading it, I see it quotes, among others:

  • The nonprofit ACFLS (which she’s head of Amicus Brief Committee on, or was)
  • AFCC itself (at least twice)
  • A host of people, known to be AFCC professionals anyhow, for those who pay attention — such as Ahrons, Coates, Deutch, Greenberg, Kelly, and who knows about some of the others.  These quotations include those from the AFCC publication, Family Court Review (joint with “Hofstra Univ. School of Law”) and AFCC newsletters, etc.
  • Herself, like 3 times, in:
    • Shear (2008) In Search of Statutory Authority for Parenting Coordinator Orders in California: Using a Grass-roots, Hybrid Model Without an Enabling Statute 5 Journal of Child Custody 88…………………………………………..5, 18, 25  (cited on page 5, 18 & 25).

(I’m also adding this quote in 2017 update, from the Amicus Brief):

ACFLS’s purposes in appearing as amicus are to protect and perfect the parenting coordination service model in California family courts, discuss the implications of the issues raised in this case for the future of parent coordination in California, and address the implications of those issues for other family court appointed neutrals including but not limited to child custody evaluators4, minors’ counsel appointed per Fam. Code §3150 et seq., mediators, therapists, members of collaborative family law teams, and other court appointed or connected quasi-judicial dispute resolution professionals.

In other words, to protect her own kind….

 

Note title — trying to legislate parenting coordination.

Another set of professionals tried to write “Kids Turn” into law around 2002, right? (see my “Kicking Salesmanship Up a Notch post.”) then-Governor Gray Davis (properly!) vetoed even the version of it put out which didn’t overtly say “Kids’ Turn” on its face.

So here’s a sample section of this Amicus:

On page 4, quoting AFCC person Greenberg (whose writing I also ran across) cites who came up with the idea, vaguely characterized as:

In 1994, the concept of parenting coordination was spawned by a concerned group of professionals in California and Colorado who realized that some high conflict families remained chronically mired in conflict and required something different. . . For these families, the traditional tried and true approaches to containing familial conflict such as litigation, mediation, forensics, and therapy had not worked. Thus, the concept of parenting coordination was conceived as a different and needed dispute resolution intervention.

(Tried and True?  [is that really an appropriate phrase for use in an amicus brief?]

Try “Tried and found seriously wanting.”  Don’t believe me?  Look here.  I’ve already mentioned the Seal Beach (CA) massacre enough times, so here’s one fresh off the press — like YESTERDAY, in Florida.  Actually, it seems there’s an acquiescent mother in this one: even after Dad murdered the son, the surviving children (including one witness to that murder) miss their Daddy.  And they shouldn’t even be supervised, but be able to go to events like church, sports, etc.

Sounds like perhaps this is a stepfather (or second family) situation here, judging by age of the children.  And the shooter was a retired police officer!

Dad accused of killing son wants custody rights to surviving kids; judge lets him have unsupervised contact (Orlando, Florida)

POSTED: 5:56 pm EST December 13, 2011
UPDATED: 6:45 pm EST December 13, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. — A former Orlando police officer accused of killing his son was back in court, arguing for custody rights to his other children. 

Timothy Davis Sr. won a victory of sorts Tuesday when a judge granted him the ability to pick up his younger children from school, including his 9-year-old daughter who authorities said witnessed the killing.

The retired police officer is accused of shooting his son, 22-year-old Timothy Davis Jr., to death at their Apopka home in what he said was self-defense after his son attacked him, injuring his knee in October.

Here’s another involving 3 children, and a custody hearing, plus prior assaults on the child and wife.

Dad managed to get himself shot (to death) after apparently attacking a state trooper.  I do not call this ‘tried and true.”  This was an American military, married in Germany, but the divorce action  appears to be HERE. He also was Marine Corps.

Here’s one from Texas; 40 year old father, who apparently had custody? (or certainly unsupervised visitation), emails nude pictures of his 12 year old daughter.   This man was living with his mother who, thankfully, was honest enough to do something about her pervert son, although somehow the courts weren’t alert to this in custody decisions:

by KHOU.com staff

khou.com
Posted on December 8, 2011 at 8:58 PM

KATY, Texas – A 40-year-old father is facing charges for allegedly distributing nude photos of his 12-year-old daughter online.

According to court documents, the suspect was living with his daughter at his mother’s house in Katy when the offenses occurred.

Investigators said that in August of 2011, the suspect’s mother found emails sent from the suspect’s gmail account that contained nude images of children.   Some of those images were of the suspect’s daughter, the grandmother said.

Sorry to bring up this very unpleasant reality-check, but when in Amicus Brief a parent-coordinator pusher talks about previously tried methods that work — the definition of “works” or “tried and true” apparently / generally just means “tried, sometimes resulting in death, physical or sexual abuse of minors post-separation, or having minor children showing up in child pornography in father’s possession.”  All of these were from December 2011 news articles, only.

Keep these incidents for a point of reference while I quote from p.12, a whole chapter on how parent coordinators have such difficult parents to deal with, “poor them”:

 

III. Parenting Coordinators Work With the Most Difficult Family Court Population – Those Most Prone to Assert Grievances and Challenge Decisionmakers

… cases are usually referred to parenting coordination because they are chronically litigious and difficult to manage.** These parents have often had several attorneys, evaluators, and mediators — professional hopping and shopping is rampant. Their court files are thick with motions, court appearances, and allegations of wrongdoing by the parents.

Coates, Deutsch et al. (2004) Parenting Coordination for High-Conflict Families 42 Fam. Ct. Rev. 246, 252

**Difficult-to manage parents are the bread and butter of the family court.  They are the income producers.  Assigning them to parent coordination is yet one more source of income for the professionals, taken from either the parents, or (looks like there’s some effort to make even broke parents participate in this too — AFCC-CA has a workshop or presentation, on the 2012 hearing on this).

Perhaps the professionals in question should re-think the business of “managing parents” to start with.

So, the opening quote to this chapter is from two long-time AFCC professionals (Coates/Deutsch) in an AFCC publication?, although it’s only 2004, using an AFCC-originated concept and term, “high-conflict families” (although I hear Bill Eddy now says they are high-conflict individuals — see my post on “yet another AFCC wet dream.” and his High-conflict Institute….)

The child custody cases referred to parenting coordinators are the most complex, acrimonious, difficult and demanding cases. Most parents regain their perspective and bearings within two years of separation, and do not need this kind of intensive and ongoing service model. Parents who continue to re- turn to court with enforcement and modification requests after completing co- parenting educational programs,* and after a child custody evaluation are can- didates for parenting coordination,

* perhaps this speaks to the quality of the co-parenting educational programs, more than the parents.

* or perhaps they are pissed at being forced to take co-parenting classes to start with, not mentioning affected if they also have to pay.

Parents who need a PC intervention are typically a special group for whom the passage of time has not reduced the rage and angry behaviors of at least one if not both parents.

A casual dismissal of whether it’s just one — or both — parents here.  We KNOW that many of these cases — not just some — are in fact cases involving danger, abuse, and etc.   These cases do NOT belong in family court at all — but they are there because of greed of professionals, and because of the fatherhood movement (backlash to feminism) that incentivizes and insists that single motherhood is bad for kids.  For that matter, even if Mom remarries happily, it’s still supposedly bad for the world if biological father isn’t in his kids’ life.

In short — Ms. Shear and Mr. Temko (whoever drafted this) — are, with their colleagues — unable to literally distinguish between one parent and another when discussing “parents” in front of others who have some privilege (like a statutory justification) or grant to give them.

BUT — their own handbooks, and some appellate cases already involving parenting coordination, show clearly that they are QUITE able to distinguish one parent from another, and not only do, but literally plan how to, target mothers, specifically, for badmouthing and possible intervention in the form of getting the kids away from her.  (I have two links to parent coordination handbooks on this post, you can check them out.).

The 10–20% of parents who remain in entrenched and high conflict two to three years after separation/divorce are significantly more likely to have severe personality disorders and/or mental illness (Johnston & Roseby, 1997).

You can’t see it here, but on the pdf it shows:  in this quote, we have a triple-layer AFCC site.  I believe Johnston is probably Janet Johnston (AFCC Board, or was).  Kelly, (below) who’s being quoted in the section, if it’s Joan B. Kelly, has been called the “grande dame” of AFCC and mediation promotion in the family law courts.  She runs a Northern California Mediation Center, and obviously publishes too.   And Shear is AFCC.  So — if so — that represents:

AFCC Shear quotes AFCC Kelly quoting AFCC Johnston, as to parent coordination, which is an AFCC idea.  (this is FAR more common than most people — who are less obsessive about looking things up than me — realize.  I have labored through some pretty detailed writings (NYState) where when they ran out of ideas, they simply restated them, and I literally read ALL the footnotes too, most of which were “ibid.”   

Understanding the characteristics of parents with severe borderline, dependent, narcissistic, and antisocial personality disorders, why these parents react so strongly to rejection and loss, how the child is used in attempts to re-stabilize their functioning and punish the other parent, and how personality disorders are exacerbated by stress, conflict and the adversarial system will facilitate more effective work with these difficult clients.

Kelly (2008) Preparing for the Parenting Coordination Role: Training Needs for Mental Health and Legal Professionals 5 Journal of Child Custody 140,149-150

I don’t know how to state this clearly enough.  The difficulty any professional has — who by definition holds an option to quit the profession (which they chose) in dealing with a ‘difficult client” is no comparison with the difficulty of dealing — year after year thanks to policies — with an “ex” who has threatened to kidnap or kill, who has beaten one before, or who may be and/or has molested children, possibly one’s own (dep. on the case) before.   Suppose the shoe was on the other foot?  Again, if professionals don’t like the difficulty they have an option — find another line of work.

But thanks to their insistence on THIS line of work, i.e., at public AND private expense, and explicit danger to the communities — almost no parent — and I’m going to say mother, specifically– can actually get free from real criminals they’ve had children with, even when he’s already in jail.

I know of one case where the person has already done time in an unbelievably severe situation, and this mother/daughter who already went through hell — is being stalked again.  Until she’s safe, I’m not naming names, but once she is/they are, I will – because this case was high-profile and has been in the news.

One point of view is dealing with comfort, and potential burnout, in the performance of one’s duties that have internationally networked, federally-funded, county-judicial-level endorsed, and more — support groups.  The other is of staying alive, housed, and after that, functional and employed at all.

If one continues to read the Amicus, it continues to complain and blame.  The next quote by Shear is of Shear.  Here’s a little further on in the Amicus:

Parenting coordination is a very intrusive model, inserting state authority into the daily family lives of parents and children. With those intrusive powers comes a duty to exercise restraint, discretion and wisdom.

This work often creates the perfect storm. Parenting coordinators struggle to avoid being triangulated into the family’s conflicts.

Well, they triangulated themselves in there to start with, intentionally!   Which shows a lack of:   “restraint, discretion, and wisdom” per se.

From page 18 (“just one more”!) – This chapter complains that California hasn’t legislated parenting coordination by stipulation (i.e., authorizing it by force)  yet:

The only thing that is clear about appointment of parenting coordinators in California is that family courts are without jurisdiction to make them without a stipulation. Moreover, no published case has upheld orders resulting from a stipulated appointment of a parenting coordinator.

The quote from Greenberg in this Amicus acknowledges that professionals in California & Colorado (two hotspots of family law leadership; Center for Policy Research/Jessica Pearson et al. are in Denver) “spawned” the concept.  Or rather, it “was spawned” — we can’t name an individual father, so perhaps it was a sort of psychological gang-rape that produced the idea (just kidding).  Unlike “collaborative law” which actually names a father, “Stu Webb” out of MN. . ..      And that this began in the 1990s.

We are now in 2011.  Perhaps it’s time to admit that it’s a bad idea to start with; if even in California — where AFCC originated — they can’t get it into law!

The text continues — and understanding that I don’t know the underlying case, have not read the entire brief and am not an attorney, I’m to add a comment to the next section:

Of course, courts have no power to modify statutes. Statutes prescribe and proscribe what courts may do.

Damn right they do! On the other hand, has that really slowed down AFCC initiatives, has it?  I think there’s been a track record of resounding success, if getting around constitutional and statutory limits pending changing the statutes to accommodate more income streams to court-connected (or formerly court-connected, like retired judges) professionals… is what’s intended.

The California Constitution (art. VI, § 22) prohibits the delegation of judicial power except for the performance of subordinate judicial duties. A trial court lacks either statutory or inherent power to require the parties to bear the cost of a special master’s services, even where it may have the authority to make the appointment. (People v. Superior Court (Laff) (2001) 25 Cal.4th 703)

The Court of Appeal reversed trial court orders delegating authority over the visitation schedule to a child custody evaluator, requiring one of the parents to participate in psychotherapy and requiring that all future custody mat- ters be heard before the same bench officer in In re Marriage of Matthews (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 811, 816–817 because there was no statutory authority supporting such a delegation.

Just GUESSING here, but perhaps if over a 21-year period (in one state), it’s still being stated that there are Constitutional limits on delegating Judicial power, and three years later the Governor of Florida (Jeb Bush) brings it up in a reason for vetoing a parent coordination stipulation — there just MIGHT be a good reason!   Parent Coordination is hardly an Occupy San Francisco (or anywhere else in California) grassroots protest or demand, is it, either?

We’re third generation fatherhood programs out here, we are also probably at least second-generation post-TANF (1996), post fatherhood (i.e., about 15-16 years since they passed), and perhaps– just perhaps — the last thing this state needs is more ideas originating from this nonprofit and all its collaborators in therapeutic jurisprudence great ideas.

Perhaps — just perhaps — it’s a good thing if constitutional and statutory limits on out-sourcing the judicial function mean something around here, for a change! Be content with what you got so far, as authorized by access/visitation (three categories of potential program fraud enabled) and all the marriage promotion money too, plus lots of the nonprofits — like ACFLS — not even bothering to report into the state Registry of Charitable Trusts (OAG) anyhow!

(REASON 4)

(4)

Moreover  — like most AFCC promotions — the language promoting parent coordination continues to refuse to think or talk in terms of legal rights to INDIVIDUALS as the Declaration of Independence asserted, which helped kickstart the USA, claims they are.   The language of parent coordination is continually pluralized, or group-talk.  It does not, really, acknowledge that a person could be a member of a family (like “parent” “father” or “mother”) and yet really have — and deserve — equal standing as an individual in any matter, before the law.

Here’s an example from ParentCoordinationCentral.com (Termini/Boyan site).  These are the supposed GOALS OF PARENT COORDINATION:

  1. Educate parents regarding the impact of their behaviors on their child(ren)’s development.

    [supports my thesis that AFCC members are often frustrated teachers.  They want to teach EVERYONE, and if people don’t agree, they are clever about figuring out ways to force this, and be paid for it, too.]
  2. Reduce parental conflict through anger management, communication and conflict resolutions skills. 
    [increasing the expense of divorce, treating parents like kids, undermining judicial authority, & due process, and invading one’s privacy sure will “reduce parental conflict”!! . .. And I haven’t even got (this post anyhow) to the training manual which has an openly hostile attitude towards mothers, it’s unbelievable).
  3. Decrease inappropriate parental behaviors to reduce stress for the child.
    [goes with AFCC goal of switching from a legally defined set of prohibited behaviors to an arbitrary, subjective, and personalized version of what is appropriate or inappropriate parental behavior.   Instead, how about just accept the basic definitions in the law, and as to court orders, compliance with them?]
  4. Work with parents in developing a detailed plan for issues such as discipline, decision-making, communication, etc.
     [Good Grief! — Go have your own children, and raise them — well.  Let’s see what fine examples they are, then parents can judge FREELY whether Mr. , Ms. & Mrs. Parent Coordinators are competent to make these plans.  I mean — the concept is ridiculous!  What about various cultures and family values, so long as they are not child abuse, domestic violence, or otherwise illegal?] [Even then it probably wouldn’t be a comparable situation, because the psychologists involved with the court, and AFCC professionals can usually drum up plenty of high-paying business, whereas a lot of the parents they are dealing with probably, by the time they are on the scene, absolutely cannot.]
  5. Create a more relaxed home atmosphere allowing the child to  adjust more effectively with the new family structure.
    [You want to have a more relaxed home atmosphere with children/  Again, go have your own and show it to us.  Then we can, awestruck by your competence – – and if we want to — copy it!]
  6. Collaborate with professionals involved with the family in order to offer coordinated service.
    [that’s closer to the real reason for it — more business referrals to colleagues]
  7. Monitor parental behaviors to ensure that parents are fulfilling their obligations to their child while complying with the  recommendations of the Court.
    [Children need due process, and they need an active, and respected Bill of Rights, for when they grow up.  One purpose of the Bill of Rights was to keep snoops out of one’s private business, so long as that business didn’t ramble over into the criminal arena.   It’s called LIFE, LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.  How can one pursue anything with the thought police on one’s heels?. . . . .
    Anyone who’s trying to function as a parent coordinator, and talking about children’s needs constantly (to justify it) apparently doesn’t comprehend what long-term dedication to one’s family AND country entails.  It entails respecting its laws.  I have before blogged an SF-area parent coordinator and family law attorney, who posted on his own site that the Constitution needs to be scrapped and rewritten, why revere it like Christians revere their Bible (guess he’s not one, and doesn’t understand how few Christians actually practice what’s in their Bible — or Constitution — to start with…)]
  • The NH “Parent Coordinators” Association of 2009 “FAQs” suggest a benefit is:
  • Q. What are the benefits of Parenting Coordination?

Parenting Coordination offers a much better way of resolving parenting plan issues than returning to court. And the resolution comes much faster than waiting for a court date and then the court decision. The Parenting Coordinator educates the parents about the harm to the children of hostility between parents, mediates issues as they arise, and if the parents are unable to resolve minor issues, makes the decision.

As ever, when selling their services, AFCC professionals see themselves as the mature adults on the scene, and the parents as a “plural,” and refuse to assign responsibility where it’s perhaps due.  They seem to utterly lack curiosity in fact-finding as to that matter.  This is understandable, because they deal in “psychology” more than law– which is the culture of the association.  While two individual parents are often involved, in the marketing prose, it’s always “the parents” v. “the helping professionals”

However, once in the door, and in practice — then they are quick to blame ONE parent, often the mother, and recommend severe intervention, often removing of contact with the children to counter supposed “alienation.”   In other words, they are hypocrites — professing neutrality and to be helping, but planning in advance (in this case) to do harm to one gender — the female, should she as a parent (mother) counter them.

I blogged this earlier, but again (from the same site) — here is their “sample” report from the handbook:

Handbook

A handbook for the purpose and practice of parenting coordination prepared by PCANH.

 Parts of this were credited (fn1 inside) to “Families Moving Forward, Inc.” in Indiana.  This is a nonprofit formed in 2005, EIN# 432074631 with principal listed c/o “Gloria K. Mitchell.”

So of course I looked this person up — she is a Rising Star Super Attorney, member of National Association of Counsel for Children, and works in a four-woman firm.  The nonprofit, however, is categorized as “exempt — earning under $25,000).  website’s “Divorce and Parenting Research Links” is typical, plus a direct link to the Children’s Rights Council” (hover URL).  CRC is pretty big in Indiana…  Six years after passing the bar, Ms. Mitchell was on the Executive Committee of Family Law Section of Indiana Bar Assoc., and chaired it in 2005.   The articles of incorporation show it’s a 501(c)4 (not “3”) and by address its place of business is another law firm in Noblesville, Indiana:  Holt, Fleck & Romini.  If the image (showing org.’s purpose) doesn’t show, it’s viewable for free on the site below.

Entity Name Type Entity Type City / State
FAMILIES MOVING FORWARD, INC. Legal Non-Profit Domestic Corporation INDIANAPOLIS, IN

Gloria K. Mitchell, and the four attorneys in the law firm, 
Though only incorporated in winter (February) 2005, by summer (July) 2005,  Indiana, “Families Moving Forward”** already had a “Parent Coordination Committee” and presented the following report in this context:

Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum

3rd Annual Family Law Summer Institute

and Family ICO Training Session July 28-29, 2005*

 *Note:  the Nonprofit to present this was incorporated 2/14/2005, in time for this, 3rd Annual Family Law Summer Institute agenda (see link) doesn’t show anything about parent coordination, although certainly it could’ve happened.  Law firm page for Ms. Mitchell notes that she was “Executive Committee of the “Family Law Section” 1994-2005 and its chair in 2004-2005.     So it would make sense that her nonprofit would have a good shot at presenting at that summer institute.
I note that at Ms. Mitchell’s office, one of her associates began as Parent Coordinator in 2006.
Another very smart attorney with stellar credits is Amy Stewart  (valedictorian of her law class) is president of this nonprofit (FMF):  notice also collaborative law emphasis, plus an AFCC affiliation.   In 1999 she had an article published on “Covenant Marriage:  Legislating Family Values”  Good summary of the issues of religiosity in marriage by a UK author, here  Actually, it’s a good summary and a timely read of marriage/divorce, and role of rising religiosity (UK/America) in the mix.
But it was a search for “Families Moving Forward, Inc.” that brought her name up.
Here’s Ms. Stewart’s bio (notice “Collaborative Law”); she works at Bingham McHale, LLP, a large firm with locations in 3 Indiana counties.  She is a partner.

Amy concentrates her practice in matrimonial and family law matters. She was one of the first Indiana attorneys trained  in collaborative law, and she has been instrumental in introducing the approach in Indiana. She has practiced collaborative law since 2007, has attended several conferences of the International Association of Collaborative Professionals,* and has been trained by collaborative law founder Stuart Webb. In addition, Amy also practices traditional litigation.   

*Readers probably may not remember, so I’ll remind us.  the “IACP” is another incarnation, membership association — out of many — formed by AFCC-type professionals, as you can see by the description:

iacp,collaborative law,collaborative practice,collaborative divorce,international academy of collaborative professionals

ACP is the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, an international community of legal, mental health and financial professionals working in concert to create client-centered processes for resolving conflict.

I probably blogged it, too.  I remember looking up the various websites, corporate registrations, etc.   Here’s their About Us/History narrative.  I notice a good chunk of it (after inspiration by “Stu Webb” in MN) took form in the Northern California family court association nonprofit factor, aka the SF Bay Area, including Oakland (East Bay) and other well-known cities:

In May of 1999, the first annual AICP [=American Institute of Collaborative Professionals] networking forum was held in Oakland, California. The following year, a meeting was held in Chicago to discuss the state of Collaborative legal practice across the country. The nearly 50 practitioners who attended this meeting agreed that AICP should serve as the umbrella organization for our rapidly-growing movement. At the same time, they recognized that since Collaborative Practice was also developing exponentially across Canada, the organization needed a broader, more inclusive name and mission. Thus the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals was born in late 2000, officially changing its name in 2001.

The Collaborative Review has been published continuously since May, 1999. The work begun by initial editors Jennifer Jackson and Pauline Tesler. . . 

Jennifer Jackson (FYI, I’ve never met, spoken to, or dealt with her in court) is kind of branded in my mind as having helped start up Kids’ Turn (SF):

FYI — here is another Super Lawyer, high-profile, longstanding success.  Her “about” page lists many accomplishments. Notice which comes first; notice also the variety of terms which are basic to the field:  I’ll bold them:

About Jennifer Jackson

Before becoming a family lawyer in 1985, Jennifer Jackson was an illustrator and photographer, raising three children.

A LITTLE LOCAL COMMENTARY relating to this Super-Productive/Super Attorney and her many Nonprofits:  

I know artists, including photographers and illustrators.  It’s not that easy to make a living at; this speaks of either a good prior divorce settlement, (or not marrying) or some substantial education somewhere along the line, undergrad plus law school.  That’s quite a set of accomplishments, but I don’t think represents an indigence.  See Resume:

  • BA with Honors in 1966, became family lawyer (passed bar?)
  • 1985, with Professor’s Assistanceships (in law school) on child-related and mediation topics.  Maybe I can assume that almost 20 year gap is called “Mom” and “Wife” time.
  • In 1987, she helped found Kids’ Turn and was simultaneously involved in PTA Board at “Campolindo High School” where her kids probably attended.   Campolindo is — well, its site describes it well:

“Located in the hills east of the University of California, Berkeley, Campolindo serves the professionally-oriented and well-educated suburban communities of Moraga and Lafayette. Students, teachers and parents work together to provide a positive climate for learning where mutual respect, trust and esteem are valued. ” . . .”In statewide API (Academic Performance Index) ratings, for the fifth year in a row, both the Acalanes District and Campolindo are ranked in the very top percentiles of all public high schools in California with an API score of 919. Nationally, Campolindo is recognized regularly in Newsweek magazine as one of the “Best High Schools in America”.  The Association of Californa School Administrators honored Campolindo’s Principal, Carol Kitchens, as the Secondary Principal of the Year in 2009

This is my way — as is this demographics piechart** of saying, as fantastic as these achievements are for Ms. Jackson — something had her living (presumably) in Moraga around the time she passed the bar — and that’s a privileged community.   A neighboring one, Orinda, shows has a 2009 median household of $156K, and more than half the town earning that much, and the largest sector earning over $200K.
To get a general feel for housing in the area — this is my tactful way of saying that until the 1960s, some of these communities did not allow African-American housing loans, or greatly restricted them — read this thoughtful summary of Berkeley, including a lot on demographics and migration.
Essentially, people that might work as professors, or other high-paying jobs in SF or Berkeley (or even Oakland) would then leave those urban areas and commute straight past (on highways like as not) the dangerous and darker-skinned areas, right on back to the suburbs.  Just keep this in mind when someone from this area (however s/he got there) is all excited about helping poor kids, single mother or no single mother. And I don’t know specifically that Jennifer Jackson was; although no mention of a husband is made, or the children’s father.
(**scroll down to see race (total African Americans:  166, Hispanic, invisible — they are living elsewhere and working on the lawns and in the retail & domestic sectors no doubt (wikipedia, though, says 7% in 2010) — how few single parent households, and almost NO violent crime).  As of 2010, Moraga had a total population of 16,016 people.  As of the 2000 census, Moraga was the 79th wealthiest place in the US with a population above 10,000.   The median income for a household in the town is $98,080, and the median income for a family is $116,113. Males have a median income of $92,815 versus $51,296 for females.[almost 2:1!!] )

Blending this background of creativity, caring and flexibility with her legal training enhances her practice of family law and expands the options for her clients.

Jennifer believes that a lawyer must be actively involved in her professional community, and that life is about making a difference. Jennifer is one of the founders of Kids’ Turn, a program for separating families begun in San Francisco which has expanded exponentially in size and in quality of service to children and families.

(If you know my blog, you know EXACTLY why and how Kids’ Turn “expanded exponentially in size” — see family law attorneys, evaluators & judges on the board, see access/visitation funds “facilitating” parent education programs. . . . .As to the quality of service?  That’s debatable, but as I haven’t sat through any of the classes — except to note they use the word “parental alienation” a lot in stating benefits, i.e., “reduces parental alienation” type claims.  I’ll withhold judgment on this, as should others who haven’t  !!)

She is one of the founders of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals and served for eight years as co-editor of its journal, The Collaborative Review. She has had leadership roles in her professional organizations at local, state national and international levels, and is a past president of the Northern California chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

Within five years of passing the bar, she is serving as a judge pro tem– how common is that? Or this?

Standing Committee on Custody, North: Chair 1988-1990

San Francisco Bar Association

Executive Committee, Family Law Section: Chair, 1992; Member: 1987-present
Fee Arbitration Panel: 1988-1990
Barristers Club, Co-Chair, Family Law Committee: 1988-1990
BASF Delegate to the State Bar Convention: 1989, 1990
Volunteer Legal Services Program Volunteer Attorney: 1986-2000  

[[This is almost another topic — I’ve footnoted it [VLSP* at bottom of post, a section in itself….]

Expert: Temporary Restraining Order Clinic

Jennifer has been given an “AV” rating by Martindale-Hubbell and has been named one of the top 50 female lawyers (“Super Lawyers”) in Northern California in all areas of practice by Law and Politics Publications for the past five years in a row. Jennifer practices alternative dispute resolution exclusively; she has trained extensively in mediation and collaboration, and is committed to keeping clients out of court and at the negotiating table.

The IACP has created Standards for practitioners, trainers and collaborative practice trainings. It has promulgated Ethical Guidelines for Practitioners, and continues to support excellence in collaborative practice through resources, training curriculum, practice tools, mentoring and a comprehensive website, allowing collaborative practitioners to continue our tradition of sharing and learning from one another.

Where we are going…

Today, the IACP has over 4,000 members from twenty four countries around the world. We are dedicated to educating the public about the Collaborative alternative. We are committed to fostering professional excellence in conflict resolution through Collaborative Practice. We invite you to peruse this site to learn more about IACP, our services and initiatives.

Amy is the past-chair of the Family Law Section of the Indianapolis Bar Association (2003) and is president of Families Moving Forward, Inc., a multi-disciplinary non-profit organization devoted to developing healthy approaches to family transitions.. . .[Law Degree summa cum laude Indiana Univ. School of Law, 1999; admitted to IN bar same year, graduate “with high distinction” in 1986. ]

5 years of work and/or law school, and within 4 more years she’s charing the Family Law Section of Indianapolis (that’s one city, not the whole state’s) Bar Assocation.  What a nice nonprofit and what accomplished professionals, and how successful they are.  As such, we should believe what they say, especially as the nonprofit “Families Moving Forward, Inc.” is DEVOTED to a HEALTHY APPROACH to “Family transitions.” (typically called divorces or custody matters).
 ** a name in other states used for purposes such as helping with homelessness, or infants with fetal alcohol syndrome, other issues, here it’s referring to divorce:

FAMILIES MOVING FORWARD, INC., is an interdisciplinary organization of attorneys, mental health providers, accountants, and other professionals committed to improving the process of family transition in Indiana, by reducing conflict and cost, creating healthier outcomes for children, and enhancing the satisfaction of professionals serving families.

(However, notice the articles of incorporation say it’s there to serve the families as well as the professionals serving the families)
This report is on-line at “SAIF” where it probably was presented:

Seminars For Advanced Interdisciplinary Family Professionals


This For-Profit group incorporated as below in Indiana, with the address “9000 KEYSTONE CROSSING, STE 600, INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46240 (which is “HuirasLaw,”  Wm. E. Huiras, although the Registered Agent is another attorney, Robin Brown Neihaus (LinkedIn)

Date Name (Type)
7/27/2006 SEMINARS FOR ADVANCED INTERDISCIPLINARY FAMILY PROFESSIONALS, INC. D/B/A SAIF  (Assumed))
(the entity filed one report in 2008, file notes, it owes 2010/2011 – perhaps IN is only every 2 years).

Segments from the Indiana 2005 Sample PC report (handbook):

The sample report begins with a situation between father and stepfather which was hostile.  Both wanted to coach on Little (10) Joey’s baseball team.

Therapy for both TOGETHER is recommended:

5. Mr. Smith and Mr. Doe should attend counseling sessions together to attempt to resolve their(For example, the mother did not want the father to volunteer on Fridays at school any longer. She maintained that the children were emotional and upset on those mornings and did not want to go to school. The teachers were contacted and reported that the children looked forward to and enjoyed their father’s presence.

AFCC CLAIMS CREDIT FOR HAVING DEVELOPING PARENT COORDINATION:

From their 5-year prospectus:

AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination

In 2003, AFCC President George Czutrin appointed a Task Force to develop Model Standards of Practice for Parenting Coordination, following the first Task Force on Parenting

Coordination that conducted research and published the 2003 Report on Parenting Coordination Implementation Issues. The Task Force determined that the Parenting Coordination process was too new to use the term “Model Standards” and, in May 2005, proposed to the Board of Directors the AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination. The Guidelines passed unanimously and are available on the AFCC Web site at http://www.afccnet.org/resources/standards_practice.asp.

AFCC Parenting Coordination Task Force: Christie Coates, J.D., M.Ed. (Chair), Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., (Secretary), Barbara Ann Bartlett, J.D., Robin Deutsch, Ph.D., Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, J.D. , Philip Epstein, Q.C., Barbara Fidler, Ph.D., Jonathan Gould, Ph.D., Hon. William Jones (ret.), Joan Kelly, Ph.D., Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D., Robert N. Wistner, J.D

. . . .

The following new publications have been developed since 2002 while dated products were been eliminated:

• Parenting Coordination: Implementation Issues

There are scholarly articles galore about this.  One by matthew Sullivan, Ph.D. (and a parent coordinator) uses the phrase repeatedly in the abstract — but to access the article one-time costs $34 and permanently $155.  Needless to say, not many people who have parent coordinators in their lives can afford to read up on it….

“In 1994 the concept of parent coordination was spawned by a concerned group of professionals in California and Colorado who

WHILE PROMOTION EFFORTS TEND TO PHRASE PARENT COORDINATION PASSIVELY (as if a natural development), IN PRIVATE PUBLICATIONS, IT TAKES RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROMOTION OF THE FIELD:

AFCC STAYS FOCUSED ON IMPLEMENTING AND PROMOTING PARENT COORDINATION:

And I am going to show you what apparent frauds some of the prime “trainers” are in this field too.     But first, let’s look at the upcoming 2012 conference called:

The New Frontier

Exploring the Challenges and Possibilities of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts:

This is an upcoming (Feb. 2012) meeting of the California Chapter of the AFCC.  An entire day is dedicated to a workshop on Parenting Coordination, and a secondary one talks about how to get it in there — even if parents are indigent.

Here are the presenters’ bios (please scroll through).  Some are more than a page, others short.  Notice the types of professionals involved (typical), Judges, Attorneys and Psychologists, Mediators, etc.    Some have been around forever (Joan B. Kelly, Dianna Gould-Saltzmann) others seem newer:

Abbas Hadjian, JD, CFLS

Graduate of Tehran University School of Law and Harvard…

Abbas Hadjian, Esquire devotes a substantial part of his family law practice to educating the Farsi‐speaking community on the comparisons between the American and Iranian legal system and recently published “Divorce in California,” which is written in Farsi. He is an expert on Iranian culture and laws.

(from his website, partial description of an amazing background):

Mr. Hadjian was born, educated and lived in Iran until 1980. Between 1959 and 1968 Mr. Hadjian was a professional journalist in Iran, with positions including editor, writer, reporter, translator and commentator in major Iranian publications and news agencies. His profession a journalist required and helped Mr. Hadjian’s foundational understanding of the Iranian legal, social, economical and political structure. Between 1962 and 1966, Mr. Hadjian attended the School of Law, Political Science and Economics in Tehran University. Among others, he received courses in Iranian Constitution, Civil, Family and Probate law, furthering his understanding of the legal, social, economic and political infrastructure of his native country.

Upon graduation. Mr. Hadjian became a political appointee in the Office of the Governor General, Iranian Southern Ports and Islands (Persian Gulf), where he acted as a ranking civil officer in the region until 1978, the year of the Iranian Revolution. As deputy to the Governor General in social and economic affairs, Mr. Hadjian relied heavily on his legal studies and implemented them in real life situations. In 1975, Harvard University accepted him to the renowned Edward S. Mason Program for Public Development on full scholarship, acknowledging five years of Mr. Hadjian’s services in developing the Persian Gulf region as one year of post-graduate studies. He was awarded a Masters Degree in Public Administration

A related site from “Culture Counts.net” (site has three diverse professionals) has a page about fatherhood, the new normal, which “surprisingly” reminds readers about:

Positive Effects of Father Involvement on Children

  • Children display increased self-confidence.
  • Better able to deal with frustration and other feelings.
  • Higher grade point averages.
  • More likely to mature into compassionate adults.
  • Paternal emotional responses to sons were associated with a 50% decrease in sons’ expressions of sadness and anxiety from preschool to early school age

Positive Effects of Father Involvement on Men

  • Helps men reevaluate their priorities and become more caring human beings who are concerned about future generations.
  • May reduce health-risk behaviors.
  • Decreases psychological distress as emotional involvement with children acts as a buffer against work-related stress.
  • Happiness and increased physical activity.
  • Sense of accomplishment, well-being, and contentment.
  • Men tend to be more involved with extended family and others in the community.
  • Over time, fatherhood increases marital stability.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
Here is the rather short blurb of a long-time attorney in California, who in this conference is presenting an all-day workshop on Parenting Coordination:

Leslie Ellen Shear, JD, CFLS, CALS

Ms. Shear is a graduate of UCLA School of Law and admitted to the California Bar in 1976 and maintains her practice in Encino, California. A frequent lecturer in custody matters, she has been involved in a number of high-profile custody cases over the years – most recently, Marriage of LaMusga and Marriage of Seagondollar.

I note she was admitted to the bar fully 20 years before welfare reform and almost as much before VAWA.
These three are going to present on Parenting Coordination — an all-day institute.  It must be important:

9:00am – 5:15pm

All Day Institute (2)

(I2) Inside Parenting Coordination Practice in California: Managing Roles, Responsibilities, and Risks

  • Lyn Greenberg, Ph D
  • Alexandra Leichtner, JD
  • Leslie Ellen Shear, JD, CFLS, CALS
Apparently even indigent people need parent coordination — there’s a workshop on how to get it to them:
  • W1 Establishing a Local Parenting Coordination Program Including Pro Bono PC Services to Indigent FamiliesHonorable Lorna Alksne// Charlene S. Baron, JD, MA // Shirley Ann Higuchi, JD  // Lori Love, Ph D


http://www.link.cs.cmu.edu/link/submit-sentence-4.html

III. Parenting Coordinators Work With the Most Difficult Family Court Population – Those Most Prone to Assert Grievances and Challenge Decisionmakers

… cases are usually referred to parenting coordination because they are chronically litigious and difficult to manage. These parents have often had several attorneys, evaluators, and mediators — professional hopping and shopping is rampant. Their court files are thick with motions, court appearances, and allegations of wrongdoing by the parents.
Coates, Deutsch et al. (2004) Parenting Coordination for High-Conflict Fami- lies 42 Fam. Ct. Rev. 246, 252

The child custody cases referred to parenting coordinators are the most complex, acrimonious, difficult and demanding cases. Most parents regain their perspective and bearings within two years of separation, and do not need this kind of intensive and ongoing service model. Parents who continue to return to court with enforcement and modification requests after completing co- parenting educational programs, and after a child custody evaluation are can- didates for parenting coordination,

Parents who need a PC intervention are typically a special group for whom the passage of time has not reduced the rage and angry behaviors of at least one if not both parents. The 10–20% of parents who remain in entrenched and high conflict two to three years after separation/divorce are significantly more likely to have severe personality disorders and/or mental illness (Johnston & Roseby, 1997). Understanding the characteristics of parents with severe borderline, dependent, narcissistic, and antisocial personality disorders, why these parents react so strongly to rejection and loss, how the child is used in attempts to re-stabilize their functioning and punish the other parent, and how personality disorders are exacerbated by stress, conflict and the adversarial system will facilitate more effective work with these difficult clients.

Kelly (2008) Preparing for the Parenting Coordination Role: Training Needs for Mental Health and Legal Professionals 5 Journal of Child Custody 140,149-150

+ + + + = = = + + +  = = =

[VSLP*].  This footnote comes from a fragment of attorney Jennifer Jackson’s resume, which itself came from a bio of another nonprofit, Families Moving Forward, Inc. in Indiana.  I was following up in another nonprofit, “International Association Collaborative Professionals” and I guess you can see about how curious I am about the inter-relationships of various nonprofits.

I looked at the staff.  This one caught my attention — because of the specialties, not him personally:

Chris Emley (in 2011, or at least now on the website.)

Chris is a certified family law specialist and a Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, with 41 years of experience focusing on child custody litigation.  He has been included in Best Lawyers in America since 1991.  He has helped to govern VLSP since its inception in 1979.  He received the State Bar President’s Pro Bono Service Award in 1983, the Legal Assistance Association of California’s Award of Merit in 1989, and two Awards of Merit from The Bar Association of San Francisco (1977 and 2004).  He was a BASF board member from 1979 through 1981, and chaired the Lawyer Referral Service Committee.  Chris was Vice President of the San Francisco Child Abuse Council, Chairman of the Board of Legal Assistance to the Elderly, and Chairman of the Board of Legal Services for Children, Inc.

There happens to be one pro bono group in the SF Bay area which used to help women leaving violence and eventually in the news (and had I known at the time to check all these 990s, I’d have seen the notation that it specialized in helping NONCustodial, low-income fathers, I’d have realized why this group refused to help so many mothers stuck in the family law system.).   The presence of a Certified Family Law Practitioner on the board of VSLP, with his emphasis being on children’s rights, and without question, children in ANY institutional system these days need help and representation, does make me wonder who is helping with women’s rights when it comes to actual mothers who aren’t in jail for killing their batterers (which have some groups advocating) — but actually dealing with the horrors of year after year in a custody battle with a violent or abusive ex, and doing so without even a grasp of how it works, or who pays its bills.

General Comments:

I don’t see anything in VSLP which remotely deals with the situation, and was able to get no actual help (legal representation of any sort, pro bono) in my case either, not past the initial restraining order, and a perfunctory (and NOT in court) attempt to renew it, which I was told would be a non-issue, it’s often granted automatically!  No one came to court where I, like many, many other “custodial” mothers after leaving abuse, was blindsided by a prior ex parte movement consolidating renewal with a divorce and custody matter, thus shifting the case into the family law system, where it remained, and where the actual topic of ongoing DV was drowned by the type of talk we see in these realms — psychological states, not literal deeds!

The moral is, every program and every nonprofit has its target clientele.  As the target clientele (for keeping in their proper place) in so many federal grants to the states are fathers (when it comes to custody matters), it would make no “sense” for the government to also pay the opposing side, the protective mothers!

[[Interesting program, project of SF Bar: its family law person Chris Emley also on Board of “Legal Services for Children” which (as of 2001) got funding from City & County of SF, SF Dept. of Public Health, and SF Dept. of Children, Youth & Their Families.

Its address seems to be a few doors down from Kids Turn:  1254 Market vs. 1242 Market Street.  “Legal Services for Children” (2010) shows no Chris Emley on the Board, but its main purposes are:  1.  Guardianship for children wanting it; 2.  Helping kids dealing with expulsion and school-related issues; 3.  Immigration. . ..It also represents children in foster care and helps support LGBT youth.  200 Volunteer attorneys gave over $1mil worth of their help.    The group received over $1 mill. of contrib& grants, and gave $65,000 to a DC nonprofit, National Juvenile Defender Center (EIN# 02060456.  On “Foundation Finder” this EIN doesn’t pull up a tax return…..for any year.  Nor does a name search! However from NCCSdataweb, I see that it was incorporated in 2002 (legal services for children, in 1975).  This “National Juvenile Defender Center” interests me:  2002 income, 0.  A 2007 letter from Andrea Weisman, signed DC Dept of Youth Rehab. Services (“DYRS”)  (shares address with a Board member of NJDC, Mark Soler, 2002) expresses the serious problems of Youth in Adult Facilities.  Weisman and Soler (again, board member of the group which got $65K grant from the West-Coast “Legal Services for Children,” which takes funding from various depts. of SF and its city & county) worked together (1999?) on “No Minor Matter:  Children in Maryland’s Jails.”  Weisman notes she got a $1.6mil grant from OJJDP.   ]]

National Juvenile Defender Center:  

2002– income is zero.  By 2009 — they are into Technical Training and Assistance.  And ExDir. Patricia Puritz as only paid director, gets $134K salary) — and have landed over $5 million of grants, and earning $10K from investment income and have some serious program income in 2010 ($119K= almost (but not quite) enough to pay their own Exec. Director:.  Check it out.  So why, in the following year (revenues down to $405K — but probably some leftovers, wanna bet?) did a group in SF just grant them $65,000?  Or was that a sort of tax equalization between them both.  I live in the same state as “Legal Service for Children, Inc.” and we know that our K-12 schools are taking a serious hit?  Why should enough money to feed, clothe and house three families in this area for a year, be given to a nonprofit out of DC that just got $5 million the year before?

http://njdc.info/about_us.php

The National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC) was created in 1999 to respond to the critical need to build the capacity of the juvenile defense bar and to improve access to counsel and quality of representation for children in the justice system. In 2005, the National Juvenile Defender Center separated from the American Bar Association to become an independent organization. NJDC gives juvenile defense attorneys a more permanent capacity to address practice issues, improve advocacy skills, build partnerships, exchange information, and participate in the national debate over juvenile crime.

They operate 9 US Regional Centers; the California one is in SF and among its projects is:

MacArthur Juvenile Indigent Defense Action Network (JIDAN)

In 2008, California was selected by the the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation as one of four sites in the nation to participate in the foundation’s Juvenile Indigent Defense Action Network (JIDAN).  The four JIDAN sites, Massachusetts, Florida, New Jersey and California, join the four MacArthur Models for Change “core” states of Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Washington to form an eight-state network.

The California team is led by the Youth Law Center, and includes members from the Center for Families, Children and the Courts of the California Administrative Office of the Courts; the Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law & Policy; the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office; theSan Francisco Public Defender’s Office; the Contra Costa County Public Defender’s Office; andHuman Rights Watch.

The eight-state network is coordinated through the National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC), and engages juvenile defenders, policymakers, judges and other key stakeholders in designing strategies to improve juvenile indigent defense policy and practice. California was chosen as a result of its demonstrated ability to achieve measurable reform on juvenile indigent defense issues.  California’s JIDAN work will be centered in the Pacific Juvenile Defender Center.

The Exec. Director of this “NJDC.INFO” nonprofit (inc. 2002) was in 2003 appointed by the Governor of Virginia to a Board of Juvenile Justice:

This bio/blurb places Ms. Puritz Professionally, prior to here, she was ABA Juvenile Justice Center, etc.

Much of this relates to the “OJJDP” and the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act.  This is an entirely different category than “Parenting Coordination” through the family law center; it is dealing with things such as the US being the world largest per-capita jailor, that those in jail are disproprotionately minority, that horrible things are happening to youth while in confinement, etc.  By comparison, the “Parent Coordinator” issue seems like kids’ play unless one begins to wonder how many of the youth in detention had parents stuck in the family law system, which definitely cuts down on actual parenting time and focus!

p://www.americanbar.org/groups/child_law/policy/juvenile_justice.html

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

December 14, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), AFCC, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Child Sexual Abuse, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Bush Influence & Appointees (Cat added 11/2011), Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Lackawanna County PA Corruption Protests, Lethality Indicators - in News, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Parenting Coordination promotion, Psychology & Law = an AFCC tactical lobbying unit, When Police Shoot / Shoot Back, Where's Mom?, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

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

ABOUT THIS BLOG (@11/2011) There’s (still) No Excuse For Abuse, Including Economic Abuse of Taxpayers to Allegedly ‘EndAbuse.’

leave a comment »

A Few FAQs, but first

let me invite readers to something normally beyond my social media skillset: a Tuesday Night Blogtalk Radio show

My email alert said

“It’s going to be a hell of a show.”
(it was).
This is not your typical Battered Women’s Protective Mothers–Reform CPS–Involve More Fathers  show.
(Nor is my blog typical)
Like me (nowadays) I don’t want to hear it.  For one, we already tried (to cite a Bible reference) the
“widow and the unjust judge” theme, the “two women before King Solomon” theme,
and many also tried actually reporting to what we considered the proper authorities such things as:
Violations of Court Orders, Domestic Violence (or threats, stalkings, etc.) against us, violations of due process,
and in some cases, M.I.A. children the context of an ex who had threatened to run off with them.
ALSO this 64/34 effect show is NOT about
~ ~holding Congressional Hearings and Rallying in front of the White House in hopes that
the residential Change Agent (President Obama) will please help our cause ~ ~ ~  do something ~~  do anything! ~~ just make us feel heard!!
(As some have felt might be more effective the the representative form of government called one’s state & federal legislators)

NOPE.  It is different.  So I hope you will call or tune in next Tuesday at 9pm EST (til further notice):
THIS TUESDAY NIGHT @ 9pm, Abuse Freedom Presents: The 66/34 Effect Radio Show,
Funding in the Courts
With Host Athena Phoenix
November 15, 2011 at 9:00 p.m. EST
This week ABUSE FREEDOM UNITED welcomes our newest team member, Athena Phoenix to help us improve the justice system by bringing reformation to the apathetic and corrupt divisions of our state and federal governments.
Dear Abuse,
(From the Show Description, continued):
Have you ever wondered why the justice system and the media ignores some predatory CPS or child support enforcement programs which target and exploit families? Are courts and the Department of Children and Families receiving financial incentives from the Federal government to increase conflict in family court cases by awarding custody to unfit and unwilling parents, and even taking kids out of good homes and into the system?
Abuse Freedom Radio invites you to tune in this Tuesday night at 9:00 EST to welcome Host Athena Phoenix to the AFU family and support our newest program, The 66/34 Effect: Funding in the Family Courts with host Athena Phoenix.  Guests this week will be:
  • LIZ RICHARDS, Founder of National Alliance for Family Court Justice (www.nafcj.net) For over 20 years, Liz has been a pioneer in the mother’s rights movement a national expert on HHS funding research, fraud, and political reform.
  • FRED SOTTILE, President of the LA Chapter of Fathers 4 Justice, author, radio host, and a prominent TANF Title IV-D abolition activist.
  • JACK KELLY, Democratic party political activist, Boston based blogger and columnist who wrote about the Penn State scandal.

See Jack Kelly’s article here:

A Message To PennState Prez

Rodney Erickson: Clean House!

November 12, 2011

By 

Find out from special guest Fred Sottile why father’s rights groups are joining the fight to cut $5 billion in wasteful spending on IV-D TANF programs, including fatherhood programs funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS].  Also learn about Fred’s work on judicial reform and transparency with activists like Richard Fine, Full Disclosure Networks, and Judicial Watch.

Liz Richards will educate listeners on the politics of HHS Fatherhood and Healthy Families program funding, and how these funds are used to effect the outcome of court cases. Are grant programs administered through child support enforcement agencies, such as Responsible Fatherhood programs and Access and Visitation programs meeting their funding and accountability requirements? Is there a connection to the Penn State scandal and Occupy Wall Street?
Please join us, and feel free to call in and join the discussion as we find ways to improve the system.
Sincerely,

Jane Boyer & Josie Perez

Abuse Freedom United

IF HHS PROGRAMS ARE FAILING FAMILIES, WHY DO WE KEEP FUNDING THEM?  What can we do to reform them?
Why is child support enforcement creating TANF programs which waive due process, collecting billions in child support, then fail to disburse it to the children it is intended to benefit? How much does your judge know about HHS funding and family services? How much of your tax dollars is being used to support programs like CPS, foster care, The Second Mile nonprofit, and Penn State who failed to protect the children raped by Coach Sandusky? Tune in and find out.

Join Athena Phoenix
Tuesday Nights at 9:00 p.m. EST  

GUEST CALL-IN #
(646) 595-2134
PRESS #1 TO SPEAK WITH GUESTS OR ATHENA
9:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time
4:00 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time
5:00 p.m. Alaska Standard Time
6:00 p.m. pacific Standard Time
7:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time              8:00 p.m. Central Standard Time


                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

I believe this 11/15/2011 show is now available to hear, and it will be weekly (though with which guests, I don’t know).  However, the “64/34 Effect” — which has nothing to do with what most “expose the impact of domestic violence” or Train The Judges to recognize it — movements talk about.  That 64/34 effect, however, has had greater influence in preventing families from getting out of it.

You’ll also note that there are both men and women on the show, and (for the record) that’s not men and women who are all pro-feminist, or pro-father.  Rather, at least some people have started figuring out it’s time to stop playing the Good Cop Bad Cop (Men v. Women) themes that have been fed us by media campaigns — and instead look at some of what I have begun to (for some years now) report on this blog.  I report on organizations, nonprofits, foundations, and funding behind the policies that messed with my family (yes, even my ex, who was also a batterer) and compromised our futures –badly.

(I hope the show is helpful//for the record, I’m not a regular listener and don’t know about previous episodes), or the hosts Boyer & Perez)

NOW —

ABOUT ME (& the Let’s Get Honest BLOG)

I am What I am, which is changing with time. . ..  (so is the blog, only it’s an it).

  • I don’t tag consistently, so if you’re hunting for something, use the search field.
  • I don’t proofread, copyedit, and once the thing is off my chest and published, usually that’s it’s format (love it or leave it).
  • I know — and deduce, from who’s watching it — that this blog has information on it you will NOT typically find elsewhere.  I know that, because I’m a diligent person and voracious reader, and I explored the usual alternatives –consistently and hard — during a seven-year period (and thereafter) between filing a domestic violence restraining order with kickout, and watching my children have a custody-switch overnight (not getting to say goodbye to them, or vice versa) after which they basically disappeared out of my life.  This was a planned event, and an enabled event — and in this blog, I am going to talk about the CONTEXT in which planned and enabled events of this sort take place.
  • I quit dealing with nonprofits, or asking them for help, after I realized who they are actually answerable to — and that’s their funders, NOT their clients, who represent warm bodies that come and go through their doors, justifying the funding.  This includes all kinds of nonprofits.
  • The most important things needed for a mother (specifically, but it can also help nonabusive fathers) to know in the court system — to possibly stop getting screwed with (pardon the French) will NOT be found on domestic violence prevention sides, family court self-help sites (naturally), or even protective mothers sites.
  • I can document a family law case (Sacks v. Sacks) that had all of the above type groups backing it from Florida to the Supreme Court of the USA (where it was declined for a hearing) and back, which chose to ignore what I blog, and think that the case was “about” their individual judges, custody evaluators, attorneys, or situation.  It’s not.  Get over it.  Deal with it.   Grow up.  What happens in the courtroom — in the bottom line — is NOT about you, and in many cases, the outcome is often settled before you get there (if you have the privilege, which some don’t).

(Sample of the language — notice the drama — and people are supposed to write the judges about all this:)  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

WE ARE ALL WITH YOU LINDA MARIE

We thank you Linda Marie for your courage, faith, and strength to speak for those who have been silenced by their abusers and the courts.

CASE UPDATE: JUNE 27, 2011 CASE

US SUPREME COURT: “WE DONT DO FAMILY LAW”

THE US SUPREME COURT DENIED LINDA MARIE SACKS PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IN SACKS V SACKS. WE ARE DISSAPOINTED BUT NOT SHOCKED AT THE US SUPREME COURTS COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN. DESHANEY V WINNEBEGO, CASTLE ROCK V GONZALES, TITELMAN V TITELMAN ARE PRIME EXAMPLES OF OUR NATIONS HIGHEST COURT IGNORING THE PLEAS OF PARENTS TRYING TO FIND JUSTICE FOR THEIR CHILDREN WHO ARE SEVERELY ABUSED OR MURDERED. OVER AND OVER AGAIN THE STATE SUPREME COURTS AND THE US SUPREME COURT REFUSE TO PROTECT VICTIMS AND POLICE THEIR OWN. WHY HAVE SUPREME COURTS THAT ARE DEAF TO THOSE MATTERS THAT REALLY COUNT. IS BURNING OUR FLAG, STRIP SEARCHING OF SCHOOL CHILDREN, SCHOOL PRAYER, AND THE LIKE-MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE RIGHT OF PARENTS TO PROTECT THEIR CHILDREN FROM ABUSE AND MURDER?

READ MORE  www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org

Write the judges in SACKS V SACKS   

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ All the groups involved should thank her for free (negative) publicity at her children’s expense.  However, ignorance — and this WAS ignorance, and pigheaded refusal to smell the coffee – – – – is no excuse, either.  (I wouldn’t say this, but tried to present information to this mother as well.) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

This  Petition for Writ of Certiori, i.e., to be heard by the US Supreme Court under “Other Authorities” cites Dr. Phil and the O (Oprah’s) magazine, a SF online weekly, a radio interview of Linda Sacks, and basically a laundry list of the nonprofits and individuals that did NOT inform this parent about what just happened to her.  Or  why a Supervised Visitation Center — or having a person on her case (Dr. Deborah O. Day) who just happened to be a founding board member of the Florida AFCC, and a Certified Family Mediator and is big on Munchhausen’s by Proxy — might relate to the problems she, like others, has been having. Instead, she focused on being “squeaky clean” and how unfair the system was to her — rather than studying the system.  The groups cited (see the writ) don’t talk about AFCC, either, nor does a recent tome called Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and Custody (see the groups listed).

 

Meanwhile — in Lancaster, Pennsylvania very recently– a forum exists “Expose Corruption” exists, which reports on its local courts and potential corruption, and the moderator (I think it’s the moderator) simply sent off a “Right to Know” information request on one of the court personnel, and got payment vouchers,* (*it doesn’t look like Ms. Sacks ever did this) discovered no contract exists for the person in question, found out  what a nice living she is making at public expense, as either Guardian Ad Litem or Parenting Coordinator.  She sued him for inadvertently posting SS#s that the responding officials “forgot” to redact on the vouchers, and the game’s on.  But it began with someone noticing that judges were steering cases to certain profiteers, and inquiring about the profit.

FBI searches court administrator’s office

BY BORYS KRAWCZENIUK (STAFF WRITER)
Published: November 15, 2011
FBI agents executed a search warrant on Lackawanna County Court Administrator Ron Mackay’s office Monday afternoon as part of an investigation into a program that provides lawyers for children in family court cases.

Mr. Mackay declined to answer questions about the visit and answered “no” when asked if he would provide The Times-Tribune a copy of the search warrant.

The visit lasted less than an hour.  For a while, as agents worked in his office, Mr. Mackay was required to stand in a waiting room outside the suite that houses his office. An FBI agent stood near Mr. Mackay guarding the entrance to the suite.   Eventually, four men dressed in plain clothes, only one of whom acknowledged being an FBI agent, walked out, with one carrying a box with white papers sticking out of the top.

. . .The FBI has been investigating the county’s guardian ad litem system, which is in the hands of one lawyer, attorney Danielle Ross. The county court sometimes appoints a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of children in family court disputes between parents, often in cases of divorce or when custody is at stake.

Late last month, agents served subpoenas at the county courthouse and administration building as part of their investigation. In September, a federal grand jury subpoena ordered County Controller Ken McDowell to produce all bills, invoices, receipts and statements for every case assigned to Ms. Ross.

Now THAT’s how you investigate!

Read more: http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/fbi-searches-court-administrator-s-office-1.1232356#ixzz1e62IvTLL

 

Funny how Sacks’ coaches and/or centers of reference:   Battered Women’s Custody Conference, Barry Goldstein, The Leadership Council, California Protective Parents Association, Center for Judicial Excellence, etc. But ordinary citizens (well, perhaps some “extraordinary” is involved here) on a forum can pick up:

(etc.)(who you know I’ve been looking at too — as I can’t see where Termini & Boyan are currently incorporated — and I don’t think they are.  Termini’s making a good living in Lancaster County at the courthouse, since (it seems) about 2008.  Coincidentally?  The “National Association for Parent Coordination” in Georgia got dissolved in about 2008 (same dynamic duo in charge).  now they run advanced parent coordination training (for a stiff price) and well they should — because in Lancaster at least, it seems to net $60/hour, plenty of referrals (and without a contract even??). . . We, too, can do “right to know” or “FOIA” inquiries, and should do more.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

On the other hand, knowledge — and knowledge you can act on locally — is empowering, even if the scenario is daunting.  I have learned so much by having all systems fail in the family law, family, (religious institutions), criminal justice system (i.e., law enforcement), and a few more along the way.  I know I am a better woman for it, though sorry it took so many years (i.e., I got older in the meantime) Forgot to add

  • I’m longwinded.  The posting has really gotten out of hand, and while it may be a warm blanket to me, I’m getting ready to let go of it and go Facebook, Twitter, or something else.  I don’t seriously believe anyone reads the entire posts.   It’s where I keep (SOME, FYI, not all), of my research, for the record.  The research has borne out, and there IS a clearer picture (in my understanding) of what to ignore and what to pay attention to in these systems.  And of the country I live in (shudder!) as a woman, particularly a woman beyond kicking out some more babies, or with an appetite for raising someone else’s.  That frees up a lot of thought time ..  … ….
  • Oh yes — there are about 9 different pages on here.  But only the main page, generally, is added to.  It’s structured like this.  I write until I’m done (and only a small portion of the screen is visible at a time; no hardcopy printouts or second drafts).  When I’m done –or sometimes several paragraphs beyond that, then I stop, and usually hit “Publish.”
Whatever I am saying, visits are steadily coming from state & county & city governments, various court systems, law firms, the California Judicial Council, 

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Alaska Court System (209.165.166.194) [Label IP Address]    0 returning visits
United States FlagAnchorage, Alaska, United States
(No referring link)
16 Nov 13:00:29

– – – – – or, say:

Total Visits:1

Location:San Francisco, California, United States

IP Address:City & County Of San Francisco (204.68.210.39) CA CityCnty of SF – KT artklReferring URL:

(No referring link)

Visit Page:

 familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/lets-get-honest-about-kids-turn-and-judges-profit/

 – – – – -or, say:

Total Visits:1

Location:San Francisco, California, United States

IP Address:American Lawyer Media (208.8.241.6) [Label IP Address]Referring URL:

(No referring link)

Visit Page: familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/lets-get-honest-about-kids-turn-and-judges-profit/

– – – – – or …

State Of New Jersey (12.195.10.99) NJ State of (undistrib CS)    0 returning visits
(No referring link)

16 Nov05:35:30

 familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/66-to-34-undistributable-child-support-collections-and-why-hhsoas-is-more-concerned-about-its-share-than-kids-getting-theirs/

Total Visits:

United States FlagSouth Amboy, New Jersey, United States     Show Full URLs


1Location:Baltimore, Maryland, United States

IP Address:Psinet (38.112.73.146) [Label IP Address]

Referring URL:(No referring link)

Visit Page:    familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/tag/parents-day-comes-from-true-parentsunification-church/

   [[that post has a lot of corporation / charitable regisration lookups on some well-known California Marriage Promotion groups — more on that later]]
or, ..
County Of Los Angeles(159.83.4.157)[Label IP Address]    0 returning visits
(No referring link)

15 Nov14:02:52

 familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/pc278-5-arresting-moms-at-least-for-felony-child-stealing/

United States FlagLong Beach, California, United States

or … (i’m not sure if this is good news, or not good news….).

Executive Office Of The President Usa (198.137.240.197) WDC EXEC OFC PRESIDNT! 9/2/11    0 returning visits
United States FlagWashington, District Of Columbia, United States     Show Full URLs
(No referring link)
2 Sep 08:55:24familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/page/18/?pages-list
 
(No referring link)
15 Nov 05:53:57familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/ocse-child-support-enforcementfederal-grants-to-states-lets-look-at-the-taggs-hhs-charts-cfdas-93-563-93-564/
Executive Office Of The President Usa(198.137.241.197)WDC Exec Ofc Pres!198137241197    0 returning visits
United States FlagWashington, District Of Columbia, United States     Show Full URLs
(No referring link)
2 Sep 08:55:17   familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/category/wheres-mom/page/2
(No referring link)
15 Nov 05:53:55

 

– – – – – Or (just one last one!):

Calnet2 St Of Ca Judicial Council (aoc San Francis(63.202.171.143)CA SF CalJudiCouncil SFAOC    0 returning visits
United States FlagSan Francisco, California, United States     Show Full URLs
(No referring link)
26 Jul 12:23:39familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/05/28/whats-money-got-to-do-with-it-calif-legislators-judges-at-play/
(No referring link)
4 Aug 11:34:38familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/06/18/afcc-coordinates-parenting-coord-and-the-courts-democrats-spearhead-next-fatherhood-legislation-hr-2193/
 
(No referring link)
18 Aug 14:28:21familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/how-nonprofit-status-all-nonprofit-status-large-small-leads-to-abuse-of-individuals-money-flows-towards-the-visionary-dictatorial/
(No referring link)
14 Nov 09:22:46familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/say-no-to-sb-557-contd-local-connections-faith-focused-ovw-grants-all-in-the-family-but-whose/
(I’m not going to keep posting visitors here, but the posts they chose to look at are an indicator of possibly something YOU might want to look at.  Also, I believe we should keep certain public entities on their toes (if possible), particularly ones that have been on our HEELS, dogging us, driving us — and for what?  For profit?  For someone’s career track?  To bring world peace or solve world poverty?
(besides which it was seriously difficult to get those stats into the WordPress margins… ) 
 
 
 
IN THE BOTTOM LINE, THE QUESTION BECOMES — WHOSE LIFE IS MINE?  WHOSE MONEY IS THE MONEY I EARN?  
WHAT ABOUT CHILDREN?  IF A MOTHER AND FATHER HAVE CHILDREN AND A CUSTODY DISPUTE, WHOSE CHILDREN ARE THEY?    
By law, the ANSWER is here, and the answer is NOT his or hers….
 
The UCCJEA talks about which STATE has jurisdiction, when it’s a multi-state custody matter.  But what about within a single state?
 
JURISDICTION:
So what is jurisdiction?  It is the right, the power, and the control that the court will have over a certain legal issue or subject.  Thus there is geographical jurisdiction (where can the case be heard?), subject matter jurisdiction (which court has authority to hear and decide this particular legal issue?), personal jurisdiction (does the court have the power to make a person obey its orders?) and there are other jurisdictional questions. 

What we normally call FAMILY COURTS ( as I am understanding this) are actually by statue “CONCILIATION COURTS….Now the type of people going to the family law system are not typically the happily married couples, but couples with often “irreconcilable differences” this may come of a bit of a shock — while you are figuring out how to separate, the court is actually (by legal purpose) trying to get you back together, apparently (I’ll use that word a lot so no one thinks about accusing me of practicing law ….).

No, seriously …..

WHAT IS A “CONCILIATION COURT” (ever heard the term?)

Conciliation Courts

California was one of the first states to establish conciliation courts. The purpose of a conciliation court is to encourage families to attempt reconciliation and reduce litigation in family law cases. In California counties with conciliation courts, parties may petition the court for help in resolving disputed family law matters prior to, or even after, filing an action for dissolution. While the matter is under advisement by the conciliation court, neither party may file an action for dissolution without permission of the court.

(taken from Robert L. Lewis site; San Jose Family Lawyer)

How many mothers or fathers are even aware that in having ANY custody dispute and going before a judge to settle it, they have entered “Conciliation Court Land” (I think.  NOTE:  I’m not an attorney, and reader is advised to consult, law, a licensed attorney or a better source before acting on any FYI information I post, from other sites, hereon!)

Basically when there is a custody DISPUTE (parents cannot work it out separately) in — I believe most counties in the US, but don’t know for sure — that opens the doorway for all THIS:

(CALIFORNIA LAW — which may explain where all the behavioral scientists get off in studying your children and collecting data from courthouses about this or that):

 FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS (California Code 1800ff (part, below:)

1814.  (a) In each county in which a family conciliation court is
established, the superior court may appoint one supervising counselor of conciliation and one secretary to assist the family 
conciliation court in disposing of its (ITS, not YOUR) business and carrying out its functions. In
counties which have by contract established joint family
conciliation court services, the superior courts in contracting
counties jointly may make the appointments under this subdivision.
   (b) The supervising counselor of conciliation has the power to do all of the following:

   (1) Hold conciliation conferences with parties to, and hearings
in, proceedings under this part, and make recommendations concerning
the proceedings to the judge of the family conciliation court.
   (2) Provide supervision in connection with the exercise of the
counselor's jurisdiction as the judge of the family conciliation
court may direct.
   (3) Cause reports to be made, statistics to be compiled, and records to be kept 
as the judge of the family conciliation court may direct.
   (4) Hold hearings in all family conciliation court cases as may be
required by the judge of the family conciliation court, and make
investigations as may be required by the court to carry out the
intent of this part.
   (5) Make recommendations relating to marriages where one or both
parties are underage.
   (6) Make investigations, reports, and recommendations as provided
in Section 281 of the Welfare and Institutions Code under the
authority provided the probation officer in that code.

(7) Act as domestic relations cases investigator. 
 (8) Conduct mediation of child custody and visitation disputes.
   (c) The superior court, or contracting superior courts, may also appoint, 
with the consent of the board of supervisors, associate counselors of conciliation 
and other office assistants as may be necessary to assist 
the family conciliation court in disposing of its business.
Which, for the record, may or may not relate to YOUR business or intents in being there.
In fact, the two purposes are often at odds.  But did you know what its business was to start with?
This is not told you in the basic self-help legal center, but it appears to be so....
The associate counselors shall carry out their duties
under the supervision of the supervising counselor of conciliation
and have the powers of the supervising counselor of conciliation.
Office assistants shall work under the supervision and direction of
the supervising counselor of conciliation.
   (d) The classification and salaries of persons appointed under this section shall be determined by: 
(1) The board of supervisors of the county in which a noncontracting family conciliation court operates.

(2) The board of supervisors of the county which by contract has the responsibility to administer funds of the joint family
conciliation court service.

OK, Let’s review this:  COUNTY (financial) vs. STATE (pays judges) responsibilities and associations:

And State to Federal ….

The county commissioners (or, “Board of Supervisors of the County”) in which a conciliation court operates appoint the classification and salaries of people helping there work. Got that? (Judges, in California, are to be paid by the state — not the counties).

SO — when here comes the United States (federal) Child Support & Welfare System and says — “we will fund you, only it’s a $2/$1 relationship (or the 66/34% effect), …

provided you follow our rules — some of which includes, we want to do social studies on your families, (Just whatever the Head (Secretary) of HHS says to ….)

and we also believe that you should be running some marriage, fatherhood promotion, abstinence education, supervised visitation, mediation, counseling and parent education classes too, or other “access/visitation” programs — to reduce the overall divorce rate, which WE assert relates to the overall POVERTY RATE  for which we are (see?? ) giving your state $XX b/million per year — if you want it that is…”

— GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE STATES (AND COUNTY SUPERVISORS OF CONCILIATION COURTS) ARE GOING TO LISTEN.

AND JUDGES ARE LIKELY TO ORDER SERVICES — THAT’S HOW WE GET THE INAPPROPRIATE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SOME OF THESE NONPROFITS AND INDIVIDUAL JUDGES ON SPECIFIC CUSTODY CASES THEY ARE TO HELP PARENTS SETTLE THEIR “DISPUTES,” and this JUST — PERHAPS — MIGHT INVOLVE FORCING THAT COUPLE TO GO SIT IN FRONT OF A COUNTY-PAID COUNSELOR (OR MEDIATOR), OR TAKE CLASSES BY A JUDGE- LAWYER-RUN PROGRAM THAT QUALIFIES FOR SOME OF THE GRANTS. . .

.Which may explain why American Lawyer Media — (or quite a few others visiting the same site) are somewhat interested in my post on “Kids Turn” . . . or why the California Judicial Council/Administrative Office of the Courts (perhaps) may be interested in my reporting on the A/V grants, or OCSE — or “AFCC” which includes personnel with a penchant for ordering a whole lot of these types of income-producing programs:

(CODE, continued — but in more normal print so it will wrap to the margins right):

  1815. (a) A person employed as a supervising counselor of conciliation or as an associate counselor of conciliation shall have all of the following minimum qualifications: {{NOTICE THE FIELDS}}

(1) A master’s degree in psychology, social work, marriage, family and child counseling, or other behavioral science substantially related to marriage and family interpersonal relationships.

(2) At least two years of experience in counseling or psychotherapy, or both, preferably in a setting related to the areas of responsibility of the family conciliation court and with the ethnic population to be served.

(3) Knowledge of the court system of California and the procedures used in family law cases. {{notice this is qualification #3, not #1}}

(4) Knowledge of other resources in the community that clients can be referred to for assistance.

(5) Knowledge of adult psychopathology and the psychology of families.

(6) Knowledge of child development, child abuse, clinical issues relating to children, the effects of divorce on children, the effects of domestic violence on children, and child custody research sufficient to enable a counselor to assess the mental health needs of children.

(7) Training in domestic violence issues as described in Section 1816. {{notice this is #7, not #2, although DV issues do result in disputed custody situations that come before this court!}}

(b) The family conciliation court may substitute additional experience for a portion of the education, or additional education for a portion of the experience, required under subdivision (a).

(c) This section does not apply to any supervising counselor of conciliation who was in office on March 27, 1980.

 

Does that explain why your life as a disputed custody parent (if that’s you) are now filled with these social science, behavioral modification, psychopathology & psychology of families & psychotherapist personnel?

NOW — a voice from 1977.  I notice that it was published in the National Council on Family Relations.  
Who are they?  Well not in this post, but this is the grant they got recently from our government (HHS) to keep marriages together or help persuade more people to marry
Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS  MINNEAPOLIS MN 55421-3900 ANOKA 078679974
$ 1,286,457
(click on name to see what the grant 90FM0001 was about, from 2004-2008)(then click on the grant# and see that its 2011 continuation for only $785,612 was continued at Utah State U.  Utah appears to be a very marrying state, one might think, given the prevailing religion..
 

“CONCILIATION COUNSELING:  THE COURT’S EFFECTIVE MECHANISM FOR RESOLVING VISITATION AND CUSTODY DISPUTES“

(excerpt)
The Family Coordinator © 1977 National Council on Family Relations

Abstract

Counseling processes utilized by the Santa Clara County Conciliation Court in in resolving litigated visitation and custody disputes are described. The responsiveness of parents and their children is discussed as are the roles of both counselor and judge in these matters. A sample case reflecting a broad range of family dynamics is presented and the procedure by which cases are received and evaluated is reported. The practical and salutary features of this court-oriented program are set forth.
 
(Excerpt):  “It has been acknowledge for some time by judges and lawyers, as well as those inviduals affected (note order — judges & lawyers 1st, affected people, 2nd) that the process by which custody and visitation issues are decided is in need of change.  With that in mind, THE CONCILIATION SERVICE OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY (California) SUPERIOR COURT  IN 1972 LAUNCHED A PILOT PROGRAM WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN FULLY INTEGRATED INTO ITS FAMILY COURT PROCEDURES (caps & emphases= mine).  PROFESSIONAL MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COUNSELORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM’S IMPLEMENTATION….
 
At the calling of the Family Court Calendar each morning and each afternoon, all those awaiting hearing on visitation matters are promptly and directly referred to the court’s Conciliation Service.  (etc.)
That’s how the counselors get in there. . . .  Note the date –1972.  The AFCC (which is an association of judges, lawyers, and exactly these types of counselors — must be coincidence!) didn’t actually finish getting caught and forced to incorporate (in IL) til around 1975.  No-fault divorce was here or near, and FEMINISM was on the Ascent in America….  This caused some marital issues, obviously. ….
 
 

WHAT I WAS NOT TOLD — EVER — BY ANY COURTHOUSE I ENTERED< ANYWHERE< OR ANY MEDIATOR:

WERE YOU?  WHOSE CHILDREN ARE THEY?  

WHO HAS JURISDICTION IF YOU HAVE A CUSTODY DISPUTE?

THIS IS A 2009 blog from an attorney who works in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties.  It’s not hard to understand, it’s fairly clear — but were you told?

L.A. Divorce Blog (Nov. 24, 2009)

When a controversy exists between spouses, or when a controversy relating to child custody or visitation exists between parents (regardless of their marital status), and the controversy might otherwise result in divorce, annulment, legal separation, or the disruption of the household, and there is a minor child of the spouses or parents whose welfare might be affected thereby, the Family Conciliation Court has jurisdiction over the controversy, the parties to the controversy, and all persons having any relation to the controversy. Where the controversy involves domestic violence, the Family Conciliation Court has jurisdiction over the controversy, whether or not the parties have a minor child.

The purpose of filing a Petition for Conciliation is to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction to preserve the marriage, to effect a reconciliation of the parties, or to amicably settle the controversy to avoid further litigation over the issue.

While this is talking specifically about someone wishing to stop the divorce via a “petition of conciliation,” the existence of this code – has affected all “custody disputes” and also how domestic violence is adjudicated.  Cindy Ross (also of California, and who writes better) described:

(notice — this is an older post, 2/19/2003) and talks more about the impact.

AFCC was originally established in California as the means to enact Conciliation Court Law (CA Family Codes 1800-1852), an obscure set of codes used to prevent divorce in counties where the court itself deems it necessary to “promote the public welfare by preserving, promoting, and protecting family life and the institution of matrimony“. [15]  While the Conciliation Court identifies children’s rights to “both parents”, it is used only to assist fathers take custody away from mothers and/or to otherwise gain inappropriate or illegal “access” to children.

Enacting Conciliation Court Law gives the family court jurisdiction over domestic violence cases, in violation of appropriate family codes and “child’s best interests” laws. For example, in California, while Family Code §3044 establishes a presumption that sole or joint custody for a parent convicted of domestic violence is not in the best interests of children,  Conciliation Court codes are used not only to assist abusive men get custody, but to help them avoid criminal prosecution. [16] Because blame is shifted to mothers by concealing evidence of paternal crimes against women and children, in the Conciliation Court, victims of abuse (not perpetrators) get convicted in accordance with PAS “threat therapy”. [17]

PAS court-ordered threats include jail terms for mothers and institutionalization of children to convince them that the abuse never occurred, but their mothers are crazy. [18] PAS threats have been linked to the death of at least one child. When forced to “choose” between visiting his violent father in a positive frame of mind, or having his mother jailed for his refusal, Nathan Grieco chose suicide instead. [19]

The Conciliation Court uses PAS methodology to give abusive men the legal upper hand. However, “shared parenting” has become the rallying cry of the fathers’ rights movement, primarily because joint custody also means no child support obligations. When AFCC affiliates assist fathers get custody and get out of paying child support, they instigate frivolous litigation for their own financial gain. They take kickbacks and other improper payments to rig the outcomes of the cases.

She hasn’t reported on a few others factors, but at least this explains why, when coming in for a divorce, the court seems more interested in assigning you a few (dozen) experts.  As also explained (again, long ago) on

Dedicated to Exposing Illegal and Immoral

practices in the court

… Particularly the Family Law System which includes the Courts, Attorneys, Family Services, Psychologists and Therapists,Visitation Monitors, Ad-Litems, Social Workers, Child Protection Agencies and all of the agencies that support these so-called professionals.

Collusion among individuals within the family law system takes place to extract assets from troubled parents. The system is designed to increase the wealth of the family law professionals at the expense and heartbreak of families. Corrupt practices abound. This website is dedicated to exposing the corruption in detail. Areas where corruption exists are identified below.

To which I’d add — and related federal programs, as they may be available.

To people who file civil restraining orders — this information is not shown them (last I heard), but if children are involved, they are then escorted (at least in my area) to a quick run by the local family mediator –who just happens to be in this conciliation court.  The place looks, acts, and sounds like a courthouse, but in fact it is a support service, under conciliation law, to a conciliation court.  Funny that, when divorce actions sometimes read “irreconciliable differences” — and yet someone is going to give it a try, for public benefit.  Or at least pretend to.  Heck, it’s a job, right?

I know many women who filed for safety and ended up in this court before they knew what hit.  Sometimes the actions are consolidated Ex Parte to get them into this venue.  Then we wonder why, when we talk about matters of law, due process, (particularly DV law), or even crimiinal matters, the judges, GALs, and evaluators jsut cannot hear — and talk a different language (as above, see the code).

 
The entity which lobbied for conciliation code to start with, in California, is known as the AFCC (association of family and CONCILIATION courts — get it?).  Their job is to extract as much wealth as possible for as long as possible (this may include from extended family, foster care situations, adoptive families, you name it) and try to convince — or force — you to believe that this is in the best interests of what you think are YOUR children, but they know (by knowing about this section of code) are actually NOT your children — not until you and the Dad can agree.
 
Your judge or lawyer is bad?  Your ex done you wrong?  Start a blog and unload there — but I am more interest in system change and reporting how systems have changed over time.  When I feel I’ve said this well enough (or as well as I can on this blog), then I’ll stop saying it.  Don’t hold your breath.
 
 

SO, ABOUT THIS BLOG:

Scroll down to “READ THIS FIRST” page for a history of family law starting from the consequences of it, back down to the shady beginnings, one generation after women got the vote and between the world wars. Yep, that’s when the first law was passed, which eventually morphed, evolved, or as one summary puts it, “metastasized” into what we have now. And, like Hollywood, and other exports, this one seems to have originated in Sunny California, Southern part…

  • This post doesn’t contain any porn, graphic violence, or disgusting images (as I recall), but it is going to include plain talk on what comes from papering over these things.
  • [2011 update]. I investigate and report on corporations and nonprofits taking business from the court system, and taking diversionary monies from needy families through the 1996 TANF welfare reform and OCSE loopholes.
  • Originally the blog was intended to develop and report on matters covered (since ab. 1993) at http://www.NAFCJ.net and others, which at least gave a sensible explanation for weird behaviors by family court officials. I continued researching, observing, and learning.
  • A good deal also covers the “Faith-Based Behaviors” which have been enabled to expand beyond even the “Fatherhood Factor Funding” of 1994 & 1995. In 2001, GWB began office with two executive orders, 13998 and 13999, which opened the door for these (crooks).
  • Recently, articles are hitting the press about the scandalous “take the money and run” grantees, the “steer the money to our friends” process exhibited by program managers at the state level, and more. Not to mention, the black hole of undistributed child support collections, which (as reported in part by Richard Fine in 1999) shows a system of bribery and kickbacks are steering custody results, and kicking too many kids into bad situations — or state care.

I also note that tools available to the public to study these things are indequate and limited; that there exists — both on database and (some indications) literally, a dual-docketing system, such that decisions made with a parent’s or child’s name on them — which bring federal program funding opportunities — can continue without that parent or child’s knowledge. Some of these do not seem to require a judge’s signature. Others may have such signature, but litigants somehow can’t get a copy of their own files.  The database TAGGS is not set up to produce truly flexible reports which would help track down who is doing what and for whom.  It is there for an appearance of transparency, as far as I am concerned.  Before I re-read NAFCJ.net (Liz Richards’ site) and began my own research, I didn’t run into a single protective mother or DV advocate who even used this database, or told women — or men — about it.

Above all, it’s time to let the idols, the myths about justice hit the dust (which is where idols belong anyhow) and go roll up the sleeves and start looking things up.

My blog is dense to read, and shows affects of PTSD (many times) — BUT I’ll bet you will not find many others reporting what I do.

Fathers in custody battles need to know — it’s NOT about you, or your story, or a particular judge; it’s about the system. Fathers also need to know that SOME of us mothers, while we do not back up one inch on abuse is wrong, or buy your stories about how much false allegations of it exist, we do know that you, too, have been extorted by at least the OCSE system, and we will work along the non-rabid community of fathers to do something about the kickbacks and lack of accountability.

And I personally wish to tell leaders of domestic violence coalitions and certain other agencies receiving major HHS and/or DOJ funding that — we mothers exiting abuse do NOT appreciate our legitimate needs having been SOLD OUT by your groups, to take funding for speculative theories and PR/educational campaigns on what “prevents family violence” let alone “poverty.”

NOW –that’s the N.O.W. — has no excuse for basically dropping the ball, not when in 2002 an excellent Family Court Report laid out the roadmap, and 2005 your California Leader called for an investigation of HHS use of Fatherhood Funds.  (What she didn’t realize then is WE have to do this investigation, then bring it to legislators).  NOW is still active in matters of domestic violence, and has a Family Law Task Force — but other priorities. NOW has done a lot (and I think them), but here — for all to see — is a clear indication that (as with other DV groups) the “Family Law” issue is not seen as a Violence Against Women issue:

Key Issues

NOW’s Top Priority Issues: (the top 6, and the “other important issues”)

Other Important Issues:

Suffice it to say, I think a more singular focus is needed, and as NOW didn’t continue to report some of the material about Bush, Fatherhood, Welfare Reform, and other issues. I don’t even share 100% of those issues, or agree with all of them.  I want to stay alive and exercise my rights, and my kids to NEVER have to repeat what happened and what they witnessed, while growing up, half in violence, and half in a custody war with a basis in extortion from more than one sector, with them, their distress, their simply being minors, as the bait.  But we all need some NOW — because without a dose of them, it’d be The USA of Shari’a (Christian, Jewish, Muslim & Mormon versions, plus the same general themes among the agnostics and atheists).  It’d be off the deep end and in over our heads.  But they lost the focus on the HHS matters, which are also national matters because they involve the economy and systems change to push marriage and fatherhood programs (notice, I didn’t say to push marriage, or fatherhood — but to push the programs).

LIKEWISE:

The NCADV and Domestic Violence Statewide Coalitions have no excuse.  Stop SELLING stuff (including conference attendances, memberships) and start reporting — for free– on welfare reform and what it did to battered women who are also mothers’ chances of EVER getting completely free from such dangerous relationships.    You do NOT speak for mothers who have their lives or kids’ lives on their line.

Family Violence Prevention Fund is now “Futures Without Violence” (facelift, namechange, physical move to the SF Praesidio).  I went up down and around the SF Bay Area looking for help, only to find out (once I got regular internet access and knew to look) that you, too, believe that the real way to prevent violence by men against women is to take funding from wealthy foundations who believe that the way to stop violence against women is to make sure that there is a man in all their homes, and a father in every abused child’s life.  Then I learned you were a resource center for women like me, and I know lots of us in the area.

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND  SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103-5177 SAN FRANCISCO 618375687 $ 22,368,114
Family Violence Prevention Fund  SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103-5178 SAN FRANCISCO 618375687 $ 31,000
FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
2005 90XA0109  CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT 1 0 ACF 08-03-2005 618375687 $ 496,000 

That’s from Health and Human Services.  Overall (not that this site is usually complete) USASPENDING.GOV shows the OVW funding as well:

  • Total Dollars:$41,512,886
  • Transactions:1 – 25 of 92

$34 million of this was straight grants, some was contracts…..

Somehow (when I check “Grants/HHS” at USASPENDING.gov — only $13 million shows up)

so often, “Discretionary”:

Program Office Recovery Act Indicator Award Number Award Title Budget Year Action Issue Date CFDA Number CFDA Program Name Award Class Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
CB  90XA0109 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT 1 08/03/2005 93670 Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities DISCRETIONARY ESTA SOLER $ 496,000
Used to write up a report on yourself?
Title: International Center to End Violence: Addressing Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and Neglect. Final Report to: DHHS/Administration on Children, Youth and Families under CAPTA. Grant Number 90-XA-0109. October 31, 2007.
Published: 2007
Available from: Children’s Bureau
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/
Administration on Children, Youth and Families
1250 Maryland Avenue, SW, Eighth Floor
Washington, DC 20024
Abstract: This final report discusses the activities and outcomes of the federally funded Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF), an organization committed to building safer and stronger families by ending domestic violence, sexual assault, and other forms of abuse against women and children. Major activities and accomplishments of the FVPF are described, including: the development of an Interactive Learning and Exhibit Center, the development of the International Center to End Violence,** and the implementation of training programs and experiential learning for engaging everyday gatekeepers and young students. Activities of the FVPF’s Teacher Training Academy are also highlighted, as well as public educational and engagement activities and school-based programming.
Results 1 to 1 of 1 matches.

**

by Philip V. Scribano, Pediatrician

and here:

New International Center for Family Violence Prevention Fund

Quote from Ban Ki Moon

(in case graphic doesn’t show…)

“Violence against women is an issue that cannot wait . .. and we know that when we work to eradicate violence against women,
we empower our greatest resource fro development; mothers raising children; lawmakers in parliament;
chief executives; negotiators; teachers; doctors; policewomen; peacekeepers and more.”
..Ban Ki Moon, Secretary General, United Nations
And we were the first to engage men – as coaches, mentors, and positive role models to boys.

New Home, new name – in the SF Praesidio  (while – in this area — I know women who went homeless after custody-switch in the family courts; I almost did.  That’s partly a child support matter, and a child support motivation.  Where’s your blog — your website — your publication of how child support and the state of the OCSE/welfare reform affects custody decisions??  Which, in the case of women leaving violence — affects their and their kids’ safety and well-being?)

Montgomery Street Barracks

Built in the 1890s, the six red-brick Montgomery Street Barracks that frame the Main Parade have become Presidio icons. All will be rehabilitated and will feature activities and services for visitors, such as restaurants, galleries, and cultural institutions. Activities will spill out on to the Barracks’ expansive front porches and the Main Parade Ground. The Walt Disney Family Museum opened in one of the barracks in fall 2009 and the International Center to End Violence will open in another in spring 2011.

(OVW grant for this center includes a 2009 one of $2,000,000)

Yes you did engage boys and men — jumped on the bandwagon:  Fatherhood as a tool to stop domestic violence.

I saw the funding surge behind the change of tune, too:

National Institute on Fatherhood and Domestic Violence

Fatherhood can be a strong motivator for some abusive fathers to renounce their violence. Some men choose to change their violent behavior when they realize the damage they are doing to their children.

 In partnership with the Office on Violence Against Women, we have trained practitioners from over 40 communities across the US, including: DV advocates, supervised visitation, batterers intervention and fatherhood programs, judges and other law enforcement, and child protection workers

Did you train whoever trained Scott McAlpin?  Scott DeKraii? Cody Beemer?

(yet — no mention, for the sake of the single, female-headed households in the State of Ohio, that it has a Fatherhood Commission, Fatherhood Practitioners, Fatherhood Summits, and that a Legislator is still running around strengthening fatherhood to stop child abuse (like that’s the solution); that it had an Governor’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, that is ripping off the public – in a large way — in an effort to turn back the clocks to the 1950s, pre-feminism and pre-VAWA?

in 2011, it’s up to $3,000,000

FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
2011 90EV0401  FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES 2 0 ACF 08-04-2011 618375687 $ 250,000 
2011 90EV0414  FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND SERVICES 1 0 ACF 09-17-2011 618375687 $ 1,100,000 
2011 ASTWH110025  PROJECT CONNECT: A COORDINATED PUBLIC HEALTH INITIATIVE TO PREVENT VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 1 00 DHHS/OS 08-26-2011 618375687 $ 1,650,000 
Fiscal Year 2011 Total: $ 3,000,000

Never-Ending Education . . .

2010 ASTWH090016  FY09 HEALTH CARE PROVIDER RESPONSE TO VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN – EDUCATION, TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 1 03 DHHS/OS 11-17-2009 618375687 $ 1,500,000 

And taking money and direction from Annie E. Casey Foundation, which virtually ensures that NONE of your media campaigns are going to tell women such as myself the relevant facts about 1996 Welfare Form, of the existence of the National Fatherhood Initiative (from the start, 1994, same year as VAWA) or how these funds have been used in family court situations.  It sure has changed the tune — if, indeed, the tune ever was anything other than media campaign, technical assistance, and training since about 1997ff…   While I am very thankful to be informed that strangulation, for example, is a high indicator of lethality, as a mother experiencing it in the home, I had that figured out (particularly in contexts of the talk that went along with it). Or that my dentist should’ve reported or further questioned (he didn’t) a certain suspicious & bloody incident involving my teeth.

Sample Annie E. Casey Fatherhood program (this is a small one)

“On Thursday, October 20th, eighteen men graduated from the Newark Y Fatherhood Program. Funded through the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 167 men have participated in our workshops during the past year. …A major highlight of theFatherhood Graduation was the presentation of  awards from President Barack Obama to the Y’s CEO, Michael Bright and the Director of the Fatherhood Program, Daryl Brown. ThePresidential Award was given in recognition of their  “devotion to service and for doing all you can to shape a better tomorrow for our great Nation.”

FVPF Program purpose (from the tax return, the 2009 Form 990, below):

“1. TO PREVENT VIOLENCE WITHIN THE HOME, AND IN THE COMMUNITY,

TO HELP THOSE WHOSE LIVES ARE DEVASTATED BY VIOLENCE BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO LIVE FREE OF VIOLENCE.”

4.  Describe the exempt purpose achievements for each of the 3 largest program services by expenses:

  • INTERNATIONAL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE – THE FVPF HAS HELPED CRAFT LANDMARK FEDERAL LEGISLATION, CO-FOUNDED A NATIONAL NETWORK TO END VIOLENCE AGAINST IMMIGRANT WOMEN , AND CONTINUES TO MUSTER THE FINANCIAL, POLITICAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE RESOURCES TO SAFEGUARD IMMIGRANT WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN – AMONG THE MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS. THE FVPF HAS FORMED PROGRAMMATIC PARTNERSHIPS AROUND THE WORLD IN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CLINICS TO EXCHANGE WISDOM, IMPROVE HEALTHCARE, AND RAISE PUBLIC AWARENESS.
  • HEALTH – THE FVPF HAS HELPED EXPOSE A CONNECTION BETWEEN HISTORY OF ABUSE AND CURRENT HEALTH,** FURTHER SPOTLIGHTING THE CRITICAL NEED FOR SUSTAINING ASSESSMENT, INTERVENTION, AND ADVOCACY IN CLINICAL SETTINGS. THE ORGANIZATION PROMOTES A HEALTHCARE RESPONSE THAT CONSIDERS THE ENTIRE LIFESPAN AND THAT INCLUDES PREVENTION. THE FVPF OPERATES THE NATION’S HEALTH RESOURCE CENTER ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROVIDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND INFORMATION TO THOUSANDS OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS AND OTHERS EACH YEAR. THE ORGANIZATION HAS ALSO DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED STATE-WIDE PLANS FOR A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

**astounding.  And this was figured out when? …..

  • (this is the “We Got Fatherhood Funding” segment)  PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS – THE ORGANIZATION LAUNCHED THE FIRST-EVER NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION CAMPAIGN ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – THERE’S NO EXCUSE FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – IN 1994. {{yes, but this is 2009!}} NOW THE ORGANIZATION IS REACHING YOUNG MEN AND BOYS THROUGH THE COACHING BOYS INTO MEN CAMPAIGN, ENCOURAGING MEN TO TALK TO THE YOUNG MEN AND BOYS IN THEIR LIVES THAT VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IS WRONG. THROUGH MEDIA AND THROUGH WORK WITH ALLIED ORGANIZATIONS, COACHES, AND OTHERS WHO REACH MEN AND BOYS, THE FVPF IS DELIVERING THE MESSAGE THAT MEN CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE ORGANIZATION’S RELATED FOUNDING FATHERS CAMPAIGN ENCOURAGES MEN TO STEP FORWARD ON FATHER’S DAY AND JOIN IN MAKING A PUBLIC STATEMENT ABOUT ENDING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN.

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2009 $26,157,567 990 16 94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2008 $22,018,363 990 31 94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2007 $17,917,034 990 33 94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2006 $13,612,574 990 33 94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2005 $9,114,506 990 31 94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2004 $7,045,197 990 24 94-3110973
Family Violence Prevention Fund CA 2002 $6,261,569 990 22 94-3110973
EIN# 94-3110973

Also described by them at

Grants — $11.5 million

Program income — $181K

Salaries this year — $4 million

One resource is ERI (Economic Research Institute or “http://www.eri-nonprofit-salaries.com&#8221;) which runs comparisons on non-profit organizations salaries;

 the search I just did shows their assets about $22million — and their contributions and expenditures similar, at around $13 million.  It shows a nice chart (I searched by EIN#)and has nice summaries, bar chats, etc.

Salaries in 2009 — not that running a large non-profit shouldn’t be well-rewarded.  They have offices (it says) in Boston, Washington, D.C. & San Francisco.

Except that this group — in an area where women are still being stalked, robbed of (their children, among other things), having child support reduced to nothing or being forced to pay their former batterers (innumerable), finding next to no response with law enforcement when this occurs, women have been burnt and found hogtied around a road sign (2006, unidentified, Oakland-Temescal), kidnapped from their homes, stabbed repeatedly, then dropped off on the side of the road to bleed to death in front of motorists  (Oakland/Orinda Elnora Caldwell), shot at work while IN tollbooths (2009, Ross), shot in church parking lots on a weekday morning (2007, McCall, Oakland), doused with gas and burnt alive, murdered and put in car trunks, shot (along with 6  others in beauty salons (2011, Seal Beach, CA Fournier 8 killed, 2008 Torres, Martinez 3 killed including responding officer),. . .

killed at court-ordered weekend exchanges and buried in a shallow grave only to be found when the murderer father plea-bargained it down by agreeing to locate the body (Wife missing 2006, conviction 2008, Oakland Reiser).    Children have been also kidnapped galore, sometimes being murdered afterwards by overentitled fathers, while D.A.’s are soliciting campagns to standardize their Family Justice Center model in D.C. and in the California Legislature.    I haven’t even linked to children and bystanders in this list; nor is it complete — but  a LOT of it happened around divorce, separation and child custody — and yet where is even a mention of the AFCC, CRC, or the welfare reform that funds “increased noncustodial parenting time” and forces women to try to co-parent with their batterers under fatherhood theory — such as you also have??

Here is the California Charitable Registration results for their 2010 filing (as “Futures WIthout Violence”):

Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-10
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-10
Total Assets: $36,603,585.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $17,118,149.00
RRF Received: 14-JUN-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Rejected

(For the record, it was incorporated as a nonprofit in California, in a simple filing with Esta Soler and a few others, in August 1989.  To get the VAWA passed in 5 years is indeed an accomplishment, or may reflect connections the women had initially, I do not know.)

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1648791 08/30/1989 ACTIVE FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE ESTA SOLER
  • September 10, 2010 notice from California Attorney General — they forgot their fee:
  • FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND CT FILE NUMBER: 077397 383 RHODE ISLAND STREET, NO. 304 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103-5133

RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT

The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

1. The $225 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

  • LETTER from California Attorney General, who handles charitable registrations:

RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT (August 26, 2011)

The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

1. The $225 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.

Must’ve just forgot — I’m sure they can afford $225.

  • Another notice says they forgot to attach a list of contributors; also 8/26/2011.

FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE CT FILE NUMBER: 077397 100 MONTGOMERY STREET, PRESIDIO – MAIN POST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94129

RE: IRS Form 990, Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors

We have received the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF submitted by the above-named organization for filing with the Registry of Charitable Trusts (Registry) for the fiscal year ending 12/31/10. The filing is incomplete because the copy of Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors, does not include the names and addresses of contributors.

The copy of the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF, including all attachments, filed with the Registry must be identical to the document filed by the organization with the Internal Revenue Service. The Registry retains Schedule B as a confidential record for IRS Form 990 and 990-EZ filers.

Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please submit a complete copy of Schedule B, Schedule of

Contributors, for the fiscal year noted above, as filed with the Internal Revenue Service. all correspondence to the undersigned.

I think that along with this many people earning over $100K per years, someone should’ve taken – I did — maybe an hour of their precious PR time to read some of the material put out by UNpaid mothers who have watched and documented what the family court systems is doing to their current safety levels.  It’s not as though we aren’t on the web and aren’t talking !!!

2009 SALARIES OF FVPF, or, currently the ICEV:  (Salary to left, “estimated other compensation from other organizations”) to the right of each name

$234,229 ESTA SOLER PRESIDENT + $71,069

$168,216 THOMAS FERGUSON CFO,CAO + $14,717

$ 166,265 DEBBIE LEE SR.VICE PRESIDENT + $34,928

(also a program director for a joint project with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, “Start Strong, Building Healthy Teen Relationships”)

“Start Strong: Building Healthy Teen Relationships is a national program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in collaboration with Futures Without Violence, formerly Family Violence Prevention Fund. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Blue Shield of California Foundation* are investing $18 million in 11 Start Strong communities across the country to identify and evaluate best practices in prevention to stop dating violence and abuse before it starts.

Or — take a look at the assemblage of personnel on the campaign to end teen pregnancy, underneath this study of “What Research Tells Us about Latino Parenting Practices and their Relationship to Teen Pregnancy” starting with Thomas Kean, Chair of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (and former Governor of NJ). These are, basically, the rich studying and categorizing the poor — by ethnicity and about every other category — in order to better manage the population.  They are particularly interested in breeding habits, which I think is borne out of fear of being outbred (take a look at the U.S. Congress by ethnicity and gender, and make an educated guess why….)

$ 163,251 LENI MARIN SR.VICE PRESIDENT + $50,806.  (That would probably, with creativity, feed & house 3 families in the Bay Area on those benefits alone….)

$ 196,620 RACHAEL SMITH DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR + $21,418

$ 148,996, BRIAN O’CONNOR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC COMMU + 13,426

$ 148,841 MICHAEL RUNNER DIRECTOR OF LEGAL PROGRA + $20,176

$ 136,681 KIERSTEN STEWART DIR OF PUBLIC POLICY PRO + $18,891

$ 125,685 LONNA DAVIS DIR OF CHILDREN’S PROGRA + $16,601

$ 112,139 COLLIN CASEY DIR OF ADMINISTRATION  + $29,491  (any relationship to the Annie E. Casey people?)

In addition, contractors over $100K included:

LAURA HOGAN,  PETER D. HART RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC., (WASHINGTON, DC),  DEBORAH KARNOWSKY

@ $144,737. $143,855. $139,731. == for respectively:  Project Building, Project Building, and Campaign Building.

Other projects on the 990 — grandiose in scope — described on Schedule O:

FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4D, OTHER PROGRAM SERVICES:

WORKPLACE – THE NATIONAL WORKPLACE RESOURCE CENTER ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE FVPF, EMPLOYERS, AND UNIONS AROUND THE NATION THAT HAS REACHED MILLIONS OF AMERICANS. THIS PROJECT MAKES POSSIBLE EMPLOYER AND UNION DISSEMINATION OF HELPFUL, EASY-TO-FOLLOW INFORMATION TO EMPLOYEES AND UNION MEMBERS ON PREVENTING AND REDUCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DEVELOPMENT OF WORKPLACE POLICIES ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND WORKPLACE SUPPORT OF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE VICTIMS. THE ORGANIZATION PROVIDES RESOURCES ONLINE THAT GIVE WORKPLACE LEADERS WHO WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE CLEAR AND IMMEDIATE EXPERT ASSISTANCE.

EXPENSES $ 110773.

and for   “CHILDREN / YOUTH / YOUNG FAMILIES:  EXPENSES $709,895 (no description) and “PUBLIC POLICY / NEW PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT” exp. $80,900.

and the plan to end all plans:

  • INTERNATIONAL CENTER TO END VIOLENCE – THE ORGANIZATION IS CREATING AN INTERNATIONAL CENTER IN SAN FRANCISCO AS A HUB OF EDUCATIONAL AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY TO ADVANCE US TOWARD A VIOLENCE-FREE SOCIETY. THE CENTER SEEKS TO PROMOTE THE VALUES OF RESPECT, EMPATHY, AND RESPONSIBILITY; EXPOSE THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE AND ITS IMPACT ON FAMILIES AND SOCIETIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD; ASSIST THE PUBLIC IN EXAMINING ROOT CAUSES OF VIOLENCE AND ITS INTERCONNECTIONS TO BIGOTRY AND HATE; AND ROUSE INDIVIDUALS EVERYWHERE TO TAKE A STAND AGAINST VIOLENCE, HATRED and BIGOTRY.   

EXPENSES $ 220,101

and of course:  another expense was “LEGAL  $501,366

Well, I’ll find some of the descendants, if any, of the women mentioned above and tell them they didn’t die in vain, the 

International Center to End Violence has a plan...

I believe a better use of time would for be for these directors to go hang out in homeless camps and at soup kitchens and ask the people how they came to be homeless, and in need of eating at soup kitchens.  In the years that FVPF funds were doubling and increasing, I have noticed more and more women in those lines.  Preach for hire  in an open marketplace– not at their expense!  While this group is not actually (that I can see) taking money direct from money dedicated to welfare, they ARE taking a helluva a lot from the HHS pot to forward the fund’s personal (shared by others, but it is personal to the fund) belief (or assertions) that more training will stop violence.  Really?   You just want my children and future grandchildren, currently this is in the USA, to fund your vision about fixing the WORLD?  While in the entire time of their childhoods here, I can’t identify ONE thing that this group did to stop the battering in my home, or the family court gauntlet that followed.  (And under what name is it doing business in San Francisco, anyhow?)

Incidentally (see TAGGS grants) — many of the grants which would otherwise go to shelters are going to this type of “training and technical support” activity – it’s lumped under the same labelThen.

To be fair, here is a 2010 statement with a California Assemblyperson naming FVPF (Futures without Violence) founder Esta Soler his 2010 Woman of the Year.  It also says the organization was started — with a federal fund — in 1980 30 years ago.  Perhaps in DC or Washington – the charitable and sec of state records in California both say about 21 years ago (as of 2010), i.e. 1989 – 1999 – 2009 -that’s 20 years.

Contact: Quintin Mecke @ (415) 557-3013

Sacramento, CA – Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) chose Esta Soler, the head of the Family Violence Prevention Fund, as his 2010 Woman of the Year.

“I am proud to announce Esta Soler, one of the world’s foremost experts on violence against women and children, to be Woman of the Year for Assembly District 13”, said Ammiano. “Esta is a pioneer who founded the Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF) nearly 30 years ago and made it one of the world’s leading violence prevention agencies.”

Under her direction, the FVPF was a driving force behind passage of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 – the nation’s first comprehensive federal response to the violence that plagues our families and communities. Congress reauthorized and expanded the law in 2000 and again in 2005.

“It’s a tremendous honor to receive this award from Assemblymember Ammiano, a wonderful friend to all of us working to end domestic, dating and sexual violence and help victims,” said Family Violence Prevention Fund President and Founder Esta Soler. “At a time when state funding for domestic violence programs is in peril, we especially appreciate champions like Tom Ammiano.”

Esta Soler first established the organization with a federal grant in 1980.

This 1980 is commonly cited — BUT unless it’s in Washington, D.C. (a corporations search page I can’t seem to sign into yet), the SF one was definitely 1989 — and thus the 1980 statement is an exaggeration.  If the grant was received in 1980, I’d like to know how much, from which department and under what name.  Most on-line databases don’t go back that far.  I hope to research this a little further perhaps to better understand this organization.

It has become the nation’s leading expert on violence against women and children, the source of numerous trailblazing prevention and intervention campaigns, and a major force in shaping public policies that prevent violence and help victims in the U.S. and worldwide.

Soler, along with the honorees, was recognized today in the 2010 Woman of the Year ceremony. Each year, members of the California State Assembly and California State Senate honor a woman from their district who has distinguished herself in service to her community.

MINNESOTA-STYLE DV ORGANIZATIONS

The Minnesoh-tans (DAIP, MPDI, BWJP, Praxis, et al.) have done heroic things — but that’s no excuse for ‘taxation without representation” and the early-on insistence that your model CCR and its institutional ethnography become a nationwide model, without proof it works.  And, it doesn’t.  I hit on this particular set of nonprofits pretty hard throughout this blog, s am giving them a break today, except to mention that it took me a long time to realize that what “MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT INC.” was actually about — (and which its name says) — developing (and selling) programs, 

Not stopping domestic violence

and some pretty good grants behind that business, too….

STATEWIDE COALITIONS AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE:  Standardized & co-opted, used as heat shields for marriage entitites, didn’t include enough mothers leaving violence in their plans.  DIDN’t PUBLICIZE FATHERHOOD COMMISSIONS, FAITH-BASED OPERATIONS, IN THEIR RESPECTIVE STATES.  Didn’t teach women the 1996 welfare reform information in its context.

This sounds harsh, so here’s an example:

Tim Carpenter reportedrecently some juicy details about a secret April meeting to design Brownback’s marriage agenda. The Topeka Capital-Journal uncovered some information on Brownback’s plans  through a Kansas Open Records request.

The Kansas government spent $13,000 to bring together 20 mostly far-right marriage “experts” for the closed door meeting.

Organizations represented included the Heritage Foundation, Institute for American Values, Georgia Family Council, National Center for Fathering, Stronger Families, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, Marriage Savers, Kansas Healthy Marriage Institute, and National Center for African American Marriages and Parenting.

Thanks to information from Carpenter and sources, we know something of what Brownback has in mind, even though the details of the meeting remain confidential.

And (from a link in this article to another one) — ALL of these characters should be knowledgeable, household names, to anyone sitting under CADV state teachings or in their meetings. They deserve to know how things got started, and where they are going now, above the din of same-sex marriage and abortion rights issues.  This affects mothers AND fathers:

Brownback program promotes marriage

July 2, 2011, Tim Carpenter, the Topeka-Journal

(listing attendees)

Wade Horn, who redefined President George W. Bush’s faith-based initiatives in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, preached a gospel that encouraged poor women to marry their way out of poverty.

Marriage Savers creator Mike McManus said clergy members typically did a lousy job preparing couples for marriage and secular therapists were more likely to increase divorce among spouses in crisis.

This threesome was among 20 people who met behind closed doors in Topeka to share marriage program ideas with Brownback and executives at the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services.

…In his follow-up letter to Brownback obtained by The Topeka Capital-Journal, [[Mike]] McManus said Kansas should prohibit no-fault divorce unless there was proof of physical abuse or adultery. A Kansas law ought to be passed, he said, allowing judges to select a “responsible spouse,” which would always be the person opposed to divorce. The statute would allow the responsible adult to receive up to 66 percent of child visitation and 100 percent of family assets in the divorce.

Any idea what this exposes women to?   (read on).  They are already being used as disposable wombs in too many marriages; if the beatings or abuse or virtual slavery (it happens!) can be severe enough that SHE wants out, then in Kansas he doesn’t even have to go through the motions of fighting for most of the kids and ALL of the assets!  This does not protect women or children!

Horn, who resigned from HHS to take a job with Deloitte Consulting, departed the Bush administration amid reports of cronyism in awarding federal grants to the National Fatherhood Initiative he founded.

Helen Alvare, a member of the law faculty at George Mason who also was invited to Topeka, said she admired Sarah Palin’s devotion to family and professional achievement. In 2008, Alvare said Palin was “what a lot of women aspire to be on their best day.”

California writer Christelyn Karazin, who had a child out of wedlock before marrying, believed so strongly in the power of a man and woman to raise children she organized an event called “No Wedding, No Womb.”

This is portrayed as spontaneous blogging “NWNW” — so what was she doing in a secret meeting in Kansas?  Flown in at Kansans’ expense, and in the company of people such as David Blankenhorn and Wade Horn? !!   She saw the light (is now married) and so everyone else must see it the same way?  Listen to some ex-married women, girl!

It was primarily a call to the black community to take action against the birth of children without the “physical, financial and emotional protection” of a father and mother, she said.

Joyce Webb, who works with Catholic Charities’ Kansas Healthy Marriage Institute, recommended SRS divert $1 million from federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to pay for a new marriage program. TANF money is earmarked for families living in poverty.

Syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher, who was included in one published list of participants but didn’t attend, said during a speech about the pro-marriage movement that Catholics and Christians had to be the “visible light” for people failing to grasp intricacies of the institution of marriage.

SRS Secretary Robert Siedlecki, responsible for implementing the governor’s marriage initiative, said thousands of Kansans who divorce each year lacked the skills and knowledge to form sustainable relationships.* Brownback wants SRS to help fill that information gap, he said.

*that “lack the skills” phrase is a buzz word to bring on the marriage educators, which is also a growing HHS trend and probably public law by now.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, a Topeka Democrat who voted against confirmation of Brownback’s choice of SRS secretary, said he was intrigued by the governor’s simultaneous talk about removing government from the lives of the average Kansan and creating a state marriage program drenched in faith-based advocacy.

Siedlecki hired Richard Marks, the Jacksonville, Fla., director of the Marriage for Life, to join SRS and be involved in the initiative

(A little QUICK research on my part here   See the URL above:  He’s Baptist, Regent University, a Minister, adapted the PAIRS (which I think got HHS funding) curriculum for Christians, and just changed the FLorida nonprofit’s name to “CONNECTUS4LIFE, INC.” in 2002 (per Florida corporations search page called “sunbiz.org.”     EIN#562283483.  This is specifically incorporated as a “faith-based organization” and talks about the preachers involved.  This one (I just looked) seems a tidy little income — $60K raised, he gets $16K as head of the nonprofit, and gets to write off $42 of expenses running marriage enrichment seminars.

“Believing that marriage is a covenant relationship ordained by God,

we as pastors and ministers in the Greater Jacksonville area are committed

to ensure that these marriages (WHICH ones?) will endure til death.”

That’s a creed — not an incorporation!

“we are dedicated to strengthening marriages as we seek to”

I attended domestic violence support groups, being a Christian, towards the end of my “cohabitation” (with my spouse).  Getting there was not easy; they were night-times.  Want to know what % of the women there were pastor’s and deacon’s wives?  I can’t name names, but the answer is — PLENTY.  At least one had tried to kill his wife; the deacons knew, and it was a LONG time before he lost that position….

He also had a role in Florida Government:  Served “four years on FLorida’s Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives.”  That commission name was a new one on me, so I just looked up, to find out, from “www.Floridafathers.org” that:

Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives

The 2003 Florida Legislature passed Senate Bill 480, replacing the Florida Commission on Responsible Fatherhood with the Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives as of July 1, 2003.

FamilyThe new commission will take a broader approach to strengthening families by detailing comprehensive statewide strategies for Florida to promote safe, violence-free, substance-abuse-free, respectful, nurturing and responsible parenting; including connection or reconnection of responsible parents, both mothers and fathers, with their children.

From the Kansas article, above, we now know what is meant by “responsible” parent.  It means the one that, if he resists divorce, will get 100% of the assets and (at least) 66% of the children.  Mom can struggle to enforce 34% of her visitation after she’s kicked out of the house with 0% of the assets, which has already been the case when women FLED the home for safety (with or without kids).  So, is this progress?  But the CADVs should’ve been monitoring and reporting on these things — although I know that FL CADV had their hands full with FL-AFCC on “parenting coordination” matters, around this time as I recall.

The Governor, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives will each appoint six members to the commission by August 1, 2003, with at least half of the commissioners representing the private sector

The wording starts like this – and yes indeed, Florida did vote this Commission into existence in 2003:

383.0115 The Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives.

(1) LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND INTENT. The Legislature finds that:

(a) Families in this state deserve respect and support. Children need support and guidance from both mothers and fathers, and families need support and guidance from community systems to help them thrive.

(b) There are many problems facing families.

(and it gets even more brilliantly deductive from there.  I provided the link).

. . .

(e) Assisting states to end dependence of low-income parents by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage and assisting states in encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families are the two of four stated purposes of federal welfare reform enacted in 1996 which have been largely neglected by states and for which states are now urging Congress to designate 10 percent of all welfare funds, specifically for relationship education and skills development, responsible fatherhood programs, and community support as it seeks to reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act in 2002.

. . .

(2) ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.

(a) There is created within the Department of Children and Family Services, for administrative purposes, a commission, as defined in s. 20.03(10), called the Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives. The commission is independent of the head of the department. The commission is authorized to hire an executive director, a researcher, and an administrative assistant. The executive director shall report to, and serve at the pleasure of, the commission.

This “independence within a department” is key to steering grants to cronies.  I’ve seen it in Ohio and we’re (above) witnessing it in Kansas, 2011, as we speak.

To understand some of this subculture — and after I’d been looking at the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative website for a good long while I finally noticed who was pushing the statewide Marriage Initiative, starting with at GRAB of TANF funds, and this was held up to other states as an example . . . .

I noticed “Jerry Regier” — and, for an example, here is the Wikipedia Timeline of his Job Descriptions.  He came from OK in 2002, and by 2003, Florida is voting for a Commission on Marriage and Families within the Children and Family Services.  (Mr. Regier eventually had to quit this post in FL under some scandal about steering grants to his, as I say, cronies — but ended up, for our purposes, in yet a worse place — back at HHS as Assistant Secretary of the ASPE (evaluates things) where he presided over glowing reports about his former work in Oklahoma.  That’s how the Bush-based Babies Cookie-cutter commissions (etc.) generally crumbles.  Scandal, scoot to another state, repeat…  So look at this chart with some care, OK?

Jerry Regier
Florida Secretary of Children and Families
In office
2002–2007
Preceded by Kathleen A. Kearney
Oklahoma Secretary of Health and Human Services
In office
April 6, 1997 – January 16, 2002
Governor Frank Keating
Preceded by Ken Lackey
Succeeded by Howard Hendrick
Executive Director of the Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs
In office
April 6, 1997 – January 16, 2002
Governor Frank Keating
Preceded by Ken Lackey
Succeeded by Robert E. Christian
President of the Family Research Council
In office
1984–1988
Preceded by Post created
Succeeded by Gary Bauer

So, Jim Marks’ “Marriage for Life” organization was formed (I just learned) in 2002 as a “faith-based” organization — i.e., in the wake of GWBush’s open door executive orders for faith-based organizations of 2001.  Many of these groups form to get the grants, spend the money, and then RUN, disbanding, or being dissolved for failure to file with the IRS (or their state).

In Kansas (this is yet another article on the same issue):

SRS says Faith-based initiatives are still around, just not getting as much attention**

Oct. 23, 2011 by Scott Rothschild in “LJworld.com”

**I have 1 or 2 comments on there on these matters.  You’ll recognize which ones (just submitted another).

In a pre-Memorial Day (2011) announcement, Siedlecki reorganized SRS, which included putting Anna Pilato in a new position called Deputy Secretary for Strategic Development and Faith-Based Community Initiatives.

Are you getting a feel for this yet?

Pilato had served for five years in the Bush administration, including as director of the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

But Pilato, who is making $97,500 per year, says that in her job she wears two hats — strategic development and faith-based initiatives — and that the strategic development part of her job, which includes overseeing the design and development of staff for SRS, is by far the larger of the two.

. . .

Recently, SRS applied for a $6.6 million grant to pay for either faith-based or secular counseling that encouraged unwed parents to marry. Under the proposal, if the couple completed counseling, the state would pay the $86.50 marriage license fee.

But the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services rejected the grant.

Kansas Health Initiative published the list of who attended.  Recommend Memorizing.  Coming to your state (or what’s left of it) soon.  What’s kind of funny — Occupy Wichita made an appearance in the middle of a speech by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation.   (Protestors Disrupt Governor’s Poverty Forum (apparently, today 11/16/2011, KHI News service.  I’m starting to like KHI…)):

A Wichita police officer tries to restrain a member of Occupy Wichita who protested at a town hall meeting on poverty Wednesday in Wichita.

Protesters interrupted the second of Gov. Sam Brownback’s town hall meetings on childhood poverty Wednesday, standing up during the keynote speech and reciting some of their objections to Brownback’s policies.

One of the 14 protesters was arrested and another was detained for a short period.

The protest began as Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation fellow invited to give the keynote speech, delivered his remarks advocating marriage as a key way to end poverty. Protesters, most of them members of Occupy Wichita, stood silently with their backs to Rector for about 10 minutes, then began chanting their grievances once he completed his speech.

Organizers stopped the meeting for about 15 minutes, resuming after the protesters had left the downtown hotel where it was held.

That Rector should’ve had the podium at this second town hall, or the first, is a dire sign for Kansas:  (article links to this):

By Jim McLean
KHI News Service
Nov. 14, 2011

KANSAS CITY, Kan. — Reducing the number of children born to single mothers is the most effective way to combat childhood poverty.

That’s according to Robert Rector, the Heritage Foundation fellow picked by Gov. Sam Brownback to keynote the first of his administration’s three planned meetings on childhood poverty this week.

. . .

Strong reaction

Shortly after Rector finished his remarks, Kari Ann Rinker, Kansas coordinator for the National Organization for Women, left the meeting room in anger.

“I was offended in there,” Rinker said. “The things he said, the inferences he made about women and women’s worth were offensive. As I looked around the room, I saw many other people looking to each other in shock and amazement.”

Rinker said the steady increase in births to young, single women was a cause for concern. But she said making available low-cost birth control and improving the women’s self-esteem and education would more effectively address the problem.

“The silver bullet is not wedded bliss,” she said.

Ms Rinker (appears very young, no?) should — with Kansas NOW — have been on top of this situation, should be teaching women about welfare reform and how the fatherhood movement got its two bits in on the situation diverting programs to promote fatherhood and marriage.   (The information has been available on the web since 1993).  For example, Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation (the article says) was instrumental in Welfare Reform.  The Congressional Record debates ON this welfare reform are framed in concern about too many women of color having babies !  (in other words, it has severely racist overtones).   To let him get up there and spout off, the same rhetoric — which is PAID FOR INFORMATION!

The number one factor behind poverty here in the state of Kansas is the death of marriage,” he said, noting that 38 percent of children in Kansas today were born to unmarried women, compared to about 5 percent in the 1960s. “This is the most dramatic social transformation in the 20th century.”

OH?  How about a few world wars (creating untold orphans) and women getting the vote, the creation of the personal income tax, taking currency off the gold standard, and the assassinations of JFK and Martin Luther King, Jr.?   How about the advent of the internet, the decline of public education,  — and how about the 2001 enablements of people like Robert Rector to get up and speak at government functions and expect faith-based organizations to drive the primary institutions around?

Kari Ann Rinker, President of the Kansas Chapter of NOW,

on how the Budget Cuts have Affected the Justice System

Kari Ann Rinker, President of the Kansas Chapter of NOW, on how the Budget Cuts have Affected the Justice System

Kari Ann Rinker is the President of the Kansas chapter of NOW and she joins us to talk about the budget problems in Topeka that led to end of prosecuting domestic violence cases.

Listen or Download Audio MP3

The protests illustrated how serious the issue of poverty is, said Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, D-Wichita.***

“These people are using this as an avenue to voice their opinion and exercise their freedom of speech,” she said.

(***search her name on my blog.  She supported the last round of fatherhood initiatives in Kansas….  I commented on this).

The Heritage Foundation in Kansas is neither surprising, nor to be ignored.  It explains a whole lotta backwards movement when it comes to safety for women and freedom for Americans — both genders, all ages.

I remember this site from a long time ago on the Heritage Foundation.

POWER ELITES: THE MERGER OF RIGHT AND LEFT

A. K. Chesterton once said: “The proper study of political mankind is the study of power elites, without which nothing that happens could be understood.”

He added: “These elites, preferring to work in private, are rarely found posed for photographers, and their influence upon events has therefore to be deduced from what is known of the agencies they employ.”

Chesterton described those agencies: “Their goal was to work through such agencies, and financial support received from one or other or all three big American foundations–Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford — provides an infallible means of recognizing them.”

The Rockefellers made $200,000,000.00 from World War I. Henry Kissinger’s brother Walter heads the Allen Group. The super-wealthy (with the exception of some Du Ponts and the Fords) have long supported the Republican Party — the party of plutocratic oligarchy. “If not kings themselves, they are king-makers.” They have quick access to the White House no matter who is President. Other super-rich, such as the Rockefellers, affiliate with the Democratic Party. Politics in the U.S., no matter what party, is under the control of the super-rich, large corporations and the international bankers.

A 1995 Wall Street Journal observed the formidable influence of the Heritage Foundation on government policies since the Reagan era:

“WASHINGTON — With the Republicans’ rise to control Congress, think-tank power in the nation’s capital has shifted to the right. And no policy shop has more clout than the conservative Heritage Foundation.

“When GOP congressional staffers met in June with conservative leaders to help map current legislative efforts to cut federal funding for left-leaning advocacy groups, the closed-door meeting took place at Heritage headquarters. The group’s involvement wasn’t unusual. ‘Heritage is without question the most far-reaching conservative organization in the country in the war of ideas.’ House Speaker Newt Gingrich said early this year.

“Think tanks have long churned out studies that have wound up in official policy proposals. During Democratic times of power, the more liberal Brookings Institution has been a leading player here. Now, the 21-year-old Heritage Foundation, which rose to prominence in the Reagan years, is taking academic involvement to a new level.

“Over the first 100 days of the current GOP Congress, Heritage scholars testified before lawmakers 40 times–more than any other organization, Hill staffers say. Its scholars are credited by congressional members and staff as key architects of the House-passed welfare-overhaul plan and with inspiring some provisions in the GOP balanced-budget plan. ‘They talk to me sometimes 12 times a week,’ said Heritage budget analyst Scott Hodge earlier this year, explaining his ties to the staff of the House Budget Committee. ‘We–I mean House members–are putting together a final list of cuts.'”(5)

FACIST CONNECTIONS
Paul Weyrich – considered the architect and mainstay of the conservative revolution – calls for “reclaiming the culture” and a “second American Revolution.” A look at the inflammatory, extremist rhetoric with racial and Inquisitorial overtones on the Free Congress Foundation web site should alarm Christians as to Weyrich’s real intent:

(etc.)

I encourage people to read this write-up on The Heritage Foundation from “SourceWatch.org” and understand (as I am beginning to)its relationship both financially and in purpose (ending TANF completely and eliminating the public education system in the United States) follows up on some serious international influence in the 1980s and 1990s.  It took me a while to keep running across the information and understand it — but the Heritage Foundation, The Unification Church and its leaders’ intent to establish  ONE world religion with him at the top (yep!) and the means by which the “faith-based operatives” (as I call them) move in and out of state-level, national-level posts and agencies, restructuring them IMMEDIATELY upon being hired (as happened with the Kansas SRS, above) – these are related.  The fight is on.  Read a segment — but don’t forget to go to the site and consider the international influence in covert wars by the US as well:

HERITAGE FOUNDATION – SOURCEWATCH

The Foundation also leaped to the defense of Ronald Reagan’s description of the former Soviet Union as an “evil empire,” a description that generated wide global rebuke as potentially inviting nuclear conflict and, at the very least, further poisoning East-West relations. But with strong support by Heritage and other influential conservatives, Reagan stood by the statement, refusing to retract it until the Soviet Union began to crumble.

In an attempt to build on its foreign policy influence, the Foundation also engages in domestic and social policy issues, but its effort in these two areas has never quite matched the influence it wielded (in the late 1980s and early 1990s) in altering the debate over American foreign policy. Yet, the Foundation continues to weigh in on these topics with varying levels of success. One of its undeniable successes has been serving as a breeding ground for many of the nation’s leading neo-conservative activists and intellectuals.

The following comments by former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey, published in the summer 1994 issue of the Heritage Foundation’s Policy Review, exemplify the Heritage philosophy:

 (Dick Armey being a Texas Republican during the “Contract with America” years.   Below this quote…**)

Liberation is at hand…. A paradigm-shattering revolution has just taken place. In the signal events of the 1980s – from the collapse of communism to the Reagan economic boom to the rise of the computer – the idea of economic freedom has been overwhelmingly vindicated. The intellectual foundation of statism has turned to dust. This revolution has been so sudden and sweeping that few in Washington have yet grasped its full meaning…. But when the true significance of the 1980s freedom revolution sinks in, politics, culture – indeed, the entire human outlook – will change…. Once this shift takes place – by 1996, I predict – we will be able to advance a true Hayekian agenda, including…. radical spending cuts, the end of the public school monopoly, a free market health-care system, and the elimination of the family-destroying welfare dole. Unlike 1944, history is now on the side of freedom.”

(**Contract with America

In 1994, Armey, then House Republican Conference Chairman, joined Minority Whip Newt Gingrich in drafting the Contract with America. Republican members credited this election platform with the Republican takeover of Congress, rewarding Gingrich with the position of Speaker and Armey with the number two position of House Majority Leader. Gingrich delegated to Armey an unprecedented level of authority over scheduling legislation on the House floor, a power traditionally reserved to the Speaker. Armey has been accused of being involved in a 1997 attempt to oust Gingrich as Speaker,[7] something Armey has strongly denied. In 1995 Armey referred to openly homosexual Congressman Barney Frank, as “Barney Fag“. Armey said it was a slip of the tongue.[8] Armey and his staff, especially spokesman Jim Wilkinson, took the lead in spreading the idea that Al Gore claimed to have “invented the internet.”[9][10][11]

then-President CLINTON had to do something to respond to the Republican “Contract with America”  — and 1996 TANF (Welfare Reform) was what he did — or at least signed.  This 1996 TANF is a major topic of the post and has affected custody situations for years in “Conciliation Court.”  It is also affecting the economy, diverting welfare money to support needy families into more and more brutal and upfront declarations that women should marry their way out of poverty — when many women are poor and single because they fled domestic violence in the home, which might have resulted in their deaths (and sometimes still does, after separation) had they stayed, valuing “marriage” good enough to satisfy these people.    So, important to understand some of the context.  More on Armey from Wikipedia (as the above segment was):

Focus on the Family

According to Armey, he also sparred with Focus on the Family leader James Dobson while in office. Armey wrote, “As Majority Leader, I remember vividly a meeting with the House leadership where Dobson scolded us for having failed to ‘deliver’ for Christian conservatives, that we owed our majority to him, and that he had the power to take our jobs back. This offended me, and I told him so.” Armey states that Focus on the Family targeted him politically after the incident, writing, “Focus on the Family deliberately perpetuates the lie that I am a consultant to the ACLU.”[20]Armey has also said that “Dobson and his gang of thieves are real nasty bullies.“[21]

Yes they are!  Of course, here’s how they describe themselves:

Focus on the Familyhelping families thrive

They are just — and this whole divert welfare into marriage promotion and abstinence education and “responsible fatherhood” etc. — are just “helping families thrive.”

(The individual, especially not the individual female or mother,  does not exist.…)

Whereas the truth is a lot closer to this:

2009-02-2

God’s Batterers: When Religion Subordinates Women, Violence Follows

 The Washington Post | On Faith blog
by Rev. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite

Evangelical Christian ministries such as those run by Rev. Rick Warren at his Saddleback Church or James Dobson of Focus on the Family all stress “submission” as the Christian family role for wives. At the same time, these Christian Evangelical ministries staunchly deny that submission is a cause of violence against wives.

Some Evangelicals strongly disagree and have explicitly charged that it is submission that is responsible for wife battering in the “Christian” home. James and Phyllis Alsdurf, in Battered Into Submission: The Tragedy of Wife Abuse in the Christian Home, have noted that conservative Christian women can’t even get help because of this religious ideology of submission. “When she [the battered wife] musters up the courage to go public with ‘her’ problem (very likely to her pastor or a church member), what little human dignity she has retained can soon be ‘trampled underfoot’ with comments like: ‘What have you done to provoke him?’ ‘Well, you’ve got to understand that your husband is under a lot of pressure right now,’ or ‘How would Jesus want you to act: just submit and it won’t happen again.'”

In fact, Jesus gets invoked a lot to justify wife battering, especially as a model for suffering.

2006 Budget

In calendar year 2006 the Heritage Foundation spent over $40.5 million on its operations. That year the foundation raised over $25 million from individual contributors and $13.1 million from foundations.

While corporations provided only $1.5 million – 4% of Heritage’s contributions in 2006 – they none the less have significant interest in the foundations policy output. There’s defence contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin, finance and insurance companies such as Allstate Insurance, Mortgage Insurance Companies of America, and American International Group (AIG), auto company Honda, tobacco company Altria Group (Philip Morris), drug and medical companies Johnson & Johnson,GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation, oil companies ChevronTexaco and Exxon Mobil, software giantMicrosoft, and chipping in over $100,000 each, Alticor (Amway), Pfizer, PhRMA, and United Parcel Service (UPS). [2]

Historical funding

Between 1985 and 2003, Media Transparency reports that the following funders provided $57,497,537 (unadjusted for inflation) to the Heritage Foundation [4]:

It goes on — but these are foundations that are to be found behind (funding) so many fatherhood and responsible marriage studies, “Fragile-families” “Strengthening Families” etc. type projects.Whether or not these projects produce as they are supposed to, they continue getting funding and supporting Ph.D.s (Sarah McLanahan of Princeton? comes to mind) to justify more of the same.

When Dobson told Dick Armey that Focus on the Family (& friends, no doubt) “Delivered” the Christian conservatives, now they want something in return — he was probably telling the truth:  Look at the amounts:

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN
Focus On The Family CO 2006 $94,999,184 990 45 95-3188150
Focus On The Family CO 2005 $97,414,767 990 59 95-3188150
Focus On The Family CO 2004 $107,423,724 990 38 95-3188150
Focus On The Family CO 2003 $102,442,464 990 35 95-3188150
Focus On The Family CO 2002 $98,175,843 990 37 95-3188150
Focus on the Family CO 2010 $79,825,383 990 53 95-3188150
Focus on the Family CO 2009 $90,996,703 990 61 95-3188150
Focus on the Family CO 2008 $93,072,558 990 45 95-3188150
Focus on the Family CO 2007 $92,427,223 990 43 95-3188150
Focus On The Family Action CO 2008 $3,565,169 990O 23 20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action CO 2007 $2,452,377 990O 20 20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action CO 2006 $3,035,923 990O 21 20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action Inc. CO 2009 $3,953,111 990O 39 20-0960855
Focus On The Family Action Inc. CO 2005 $4,286,071 990O 19 20-0960855 

RIGHTWING WATCH partial bio of James Dobson gives an idea of the scope of influence and pull:

  • Dr. Dobson has been heavily involved with Republican administrations as an expert on the “family.” Dobson was appointed by President Ronald Reagan to the National Advisory Commission to the office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1982-84. From 1984-87 he was regularly invited to the White House to consult with President Reagan and his staff on family matters. He served as co-chairman of the Citizens Advisory Panel for Tax Reform, in consultation with President Reagan, and served as a member and later chairman of the United States Army’s Family Initiative, 1986-88. Dobson served on Attorney General Edwin Meese’s Commission on Pornography, 1985-86.
  • Dobson also consulted with former President George H.W. Bush on family related matters.
  • In December 1994, Dr. Dobson was appointed by Senator Robert Dole to the Commission on Child and Family Welfare, and in October, 1996, by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission.
  • James Dobson also founded and helped establish another successful conservative group, Washington, DC’s Family Research Council. Established in 1981 by Dobson, the group was designed to be a conservative lobbying force on Capital Hill. In the late 1980’s the group officially became a division of FOF, but in 1992, IRS concerns about the group’s lobbying led to an administrative separation.

  • James Dobson has a PhD in child development from the University of Southern California.
  • Read PFAW’s in-depth report on James Dobson.

The Family Research Council (nndb listing of who’s on the board.)

Erik Prince Business 6-Jun-1969   Founder of Blackwater Worldwide

Erik Prince

Military service: US Navy (SEAL Team Officer, 1993-96; Bosnia, Haiti)

Erik Prince is a multi-millionaire fundamentalist Christian, who co-founded the security and mercenary firm Blackwater Worldwide in 1997 with Gary Jackson, a former Navy SEAL. He is a major Republican campaign contributor, who interned in the White House of President George H.W. Bush and for conservative congressman Dana Rohrabacher, campaigned for Pat Buchanan in 1992.

His wealth came from his father, Edgar Prince, who headed Prince Automotive, an auto parts and machinery manufacturer. Prince’s sister Betsy DeVos is a powerful conservative in her own right — married to the son of Richard DeVos(Republican bankroller and co-founder of Amway), she served as chair of Michigan Republican Party in the 1990s.

Father: Edgar Prince (d. 1995, billionaire)

Dobson’s family background (He’s on the board too, obviously) included:

Dobson’s own family was a bit out of the ordinary. His father was a preacher who often told the story that he had tried to pray before he could even talk. His mother routinely beat their son with her shoes, her belt, and once, a 16-pound girdle. His parents somehow instilled so much guilt in young Dobson that he answered his father’s fervent altar-call, weeping at the front of a crowded church service and crying out for God’s forgiveness for all his sins, when he was three years old. “It makes no sense, but I know it happened,” Dobson still says of being born again as a toddler.

Families will fall apart, Dobson argues, if homosexuals have the right to marry, adopt, or raise children. For this reason, Dobson and FOTF support a Constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one women. Dobson and FOTF are also against abortion, against feminism, against pornography, against the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child, against Oregon’s law allowing euthanasia, against Take Our Daughters to Work Day, etc.

(yes, women should stay home, that’s their business, really….)

He has proposed an innovative end run around “liberal” judges. The Republican-controlled Congress should, Dobson suggests, simply stop funding courts where judges make too many “liberal” rulings — stop paying salaries, stop sending security guards, stop paying the electric bills. “Very few people know this, that the Congress can simply disenfranchise a court,” Dobson says. “They don’t have to fire anybody or impeach them or go through that battle. All they have to do is say the 9th Circuit doesn’t exist anymore, and it’s gone.”

Well, he was raised with abuse at home, and bullying, and has grown up  basically the same, as Dick Armey said.

or ….

Kenneth Blackwell Government 28-Feb-1948   Ohio Secretary of State, 1999-2007
Elsa Prince Broekhuizen Relative c. 1932   Conservative financier, mother of Erik Prince
Kenneth Blackwell
Under Blackwell:

  State Treasurer Ohio (1994-98)

  Council on Foreign Relations
Family Research Council Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment
Federalist Society
Freemasonry  (!!!)
The Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow
(etc.)

Well, in case you want to know why I’m becoming more and more activitist — these are the stakes.  The principles of

  • LIFE
  • LIBERTY
  • PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

Bear a slightly different tone when one is dealing with the corporate giants and conservatives complaining that the republican congress and presidency they’d helped deliver weren’t delivering their constituency enough of the “goods” they wanted.  While these people (most of the time) themselves have become unbelievably wealthy through corporations, foundations, or simply being born into it (Erik Prince, for example) — the society they are structuring is how to create “responsible fathers” who are willing (like them) to tweak the judicial AND legislative process, go get jobs — most likely low-paying ones — in (whose???) corporations and make sure they don’t let their females get too uppity.   When legislative restrictions get in the way, they figure out an end-run around them.  I have been seeing this in state after state (thanks to the internet, and networking with others).

I also witnessed this philosophy completely destroy 3 generations of my family line when I fought for the right not to be battered in the home AND the right to work independently to support what was left of this household in a profession of my choosing and for which both my own parents sacrificed to get the college training in.  Throughout the court craziness — that would put any normal business underground within a year, without being propped up artificially — I had situations where a 20 minute hearing, or a short rubberstamping by an official who didn’t know our family, obviously hadn’t read the court record, and didn’t respect the existing laws (or court orders), even ones in his own hand — would completely restructure my, and my children’s lives.

We should be aware that the act of going before a “Conciliation Court” is going to expose people — your family & friends — to this treatment.

We should be aware that the act of taking ANY form of welfare (whether for food, cash aid — or, Moms, child support) is also exposing you to the same thing.  I tried to get out – -and was pulled back in, as are others.  We need forms of living which enable us to fight back against the complete undermining NOT of “Family Values” but of the US Constitution (which is probably in suspension by now, but it should not be so easily forgotten).

The public pays — and I have blogged this, after becoming aware — for public employees to pay membership in private nonprofits designed to help them run the child support business.  At these meetings — in my state it calls itself a “COALITION OF EXPERTS COLLECTING BILLIONS FOR CALIFORNIA’S CHILDREN” — the collaborate and plan how to EXPAND the welfare state, not reduce it.  They look for ways to have more families become “Title IV-D” families, which brings on the programs, brings program funding to the counties, and etc.

It’s a ridiculous state of affairs — and as far as I can tell the groups in this chart below have not been reporting on it or doing anything about it:

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
ALABAMA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  MONTGOMERY AL 36101 MONTGOMERY 004344078 $ 3,793,073
ARIZONA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Phoenix AZ 85012-1263 MARICOPA 867401366 $ 3,204,336
CONNECTICUT COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  EAST HARTFORD CT 06108 HARTFORD 088978429 $ 3,204,334
D.C. COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  WASHINGTON DC 20013 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA $ 35,000
DC COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  WASHINGTON DC 20001 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 942435124 $ 3,204,341
DE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  WILMINGTON DE 19899 NEW CASTLE 025256293 $ 5,391,930
FLORIDA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  TALLAHASSEE FL 32301-2756 LEON 053274101 $ 7,878,370
HAWAII STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  HONOLULU HI 96819-2391 HONOLULU 160292587 $ 3,214,275
ID COALITION AGAINST SEXUAL ABUSE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  BOISE ID 83712 ADA 129850590 $ 4,104,341
ILLINOIS COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  SPRINGFIELD IL 62703-1716 SANGAMON 168547040 $ 3,204,337
INDIANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC  INDIANAPOLIS IN 46202-1002 MARION 024387230 $ 1,184,809
INDIANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC  INDIANAPOLIS IN 46205-2460 MARION 105913375 $ 2,019,532
IOWA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Des Moines IA 50312-5259 POLK 942559469 $ 3,204,336
KANSAS COALITION AGAINST SEXUAL & DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Topeka KS 66603-3706 SHAWNEE 179971957 $ 5,646,199
LOUISIANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  BATON ROUGE LA 70879-7308 EAST BATON ROUGE 837763630 $ 3,204,339
MICHIGAN COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  OKEMOS MI 48864-4209 INGHAM 027986889 $ 7,025,767
MISSISSIPPI COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  JACKSON MS 39296-4703 HINDS 927529420 $ 3,204,340
MISSOURI COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Jefferson City MO 65101-7801 COLE 184477318 $ 2,438,927
MISSOURI COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Jefferson City MO 65101-7801 COLE 868492646 $ 718,239
MONTANA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  HELENA MT 59624 LEWIS AND CLARK 036541035 $ 5,648,340
NEW MEXICO COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Albuquerque NM 87102-3842 BERNALILLO 847508405 $ 3,274,336
NEW YORK STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC  ALBANY NY 12206 ALBANY 009343934 $ 5,453,061
NEW YORK STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC  ALBANY NY 12206 ALBANY 790031702 $ 1,814,609
NH COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE  CONCORD NH 03303 MERRIMACK $ 35,000
NORTH CAROLINA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  DURHAM NC 27701 DURHAM 957020266 $ 5,926,704
Nassau County Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Inc.  HEMPSTEAD NY 11550 NASSAU 947923397 $ 381,000
OREGON COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE  PORTLAND OR 97202 MULTNOMAH 790033500 $ 2,921,826
PENNSYLVANIA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  HARRISBURG PA 17112-2669 DAUPHIN 156527558 $ 39,965,461
PENNSYLVANIA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  HARRISBURG PA 17112-2669 DAUPHIN 166527558 $ 945,000
RHODE ISLAND COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  WARWICK RI 02888-1539 KENT 025869715 $ 5,688,523
SOUTH CAROLINA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  COLUMBIA SC 29202-7776 RICHLAND 035406367 $ 3,204,339
SOUTH DAKOTA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Sioux Falls SD 57103-7029 BROWN 556435980 $ 718,239
SOUTH DAKOTA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  Sioux Falls SD 57103-7029 BROWN 614771058 $ 2,486,098
SOUTH DAKOTA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  PIERRE SD 57501 HUGHES $ 34,271
TENNESSEE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE  NASHVILLE TN 37212-0972 DAVIDSON 787712454 $ 3,204,339
WASHINGTON COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  OLYMPIA WA 98501 THURSTON 059534409 $ 3,254,000
WEST VA COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  CHARLESTON WV 25302 KANAWHA 192491629 $ 3,204,338
WISCONSIN COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE  MADISON WI 53703-3517 DANE 171537392 $ 6,931,703

(this has been rather an exhausting page to put up… but… it may prevent some detours in understanding the FAMILY courts specifically — which, after all, are really conciliation courts.)

Just a few words on the NCADV which is a Denver, Colorado-based nonprofit, and what they are marketing:

http://www.ncadv.org/membership/MembershipBenefits.php




  (http://shop.ncadv.org/)

It is a membership organization (you don’t see it on the above states list, right?).  It has sliding scale membership fees — but the public IS paying its dues, because the state organizations pay by % of their budget or   — well, as it goes:

State Coalitions and National Organizations—0.1% of your annual budget, ($500 minimum) . . .

I think you can deduce at least some things they are selling, along with memberships — and it’s information and conference attendance, plus some other perks:

Programs and Agencies:

Non-Profit DV, SA or Dual Program—0.1% of your annual budget, ($250 minimum)

  • 15% discount on NCADV products and merchandise
  • Special discounted registration rates to NCADV’s national conferences and trainings
  • NCADV electronic newsletters
  • Access to NCADV special publications such as The Voice: The Journal of the Battered Women’s Movement
  • One National Directory of Domestic Violence Programs for $84.95 (reg: $99.95)
  • Savings on Mutual of America’s Hotline Plus Retirement Plans
  • Discounts on ReadyTalk audio and web conferencing rates
  • Discounts and savings on AmCheck payroll processing services
  • Unlimited job and event postings on NCADV’s website

Other Non-Profit* or Government Agency** (includes law enforcement and military)—$250*/$300**

  • 10% discount on NCADV products and merchandise
  • Special discounted registration rates to NCADV’s national conferences and trainings

(etc. etc.)  Great deals — if you’re in the business.  As you can see, they are marketing to DV PRACTITIONERS. .  They also do the conferences, where more speakers can also cross-market to attendees.  Here’s 2012:

NCADV’s 15th National Conference Domestic Violence
and
NOMAS’ 37th National Conference on Men and Masculinity

Preserving Our Roots While Looking to the Future

July 22-25, 2012
Denver, CO

Special Keynote Speaker: Ellen Pence 

The fact that Ellen Pence is speaking (who is a Duluth person) shows the similarity of approaches.

Denver Registration:  NCADV has been around since 1992 in Colorado (as a “foreign” corporation):

Found 1 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1.
# ID Number Document Number Name Click here to sort in ascending order. Event Status Form Formation Date
1 19921036251  19921036251 NATIONAL COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Application for Authority/
Entity Name		 Good Standing FNC 04/07/1992

and in 2008 picked up another trade name (good to check out where one can):

# ID Number Document Number Name Status Form Effective Date Comment
1 20081544805  20081544805 Domestic Violence Protection & Prevention Coalition Effective FNC 10/13/2008 03:53 PM

I found a group called “CFC” which lists (that new name) as “Best of the CFC” and links to an automated payroll deduction for contribution to it.

WHAT I WiSH TO SAY:

Our kids were not your kids to bargain their rights away for supervised visitation, batterers intervention, parent education classes, or for that matter the more recent “Family Justice Centers.” I personally am recommending a boycott of Verizon (which helps fund these) for that very reason, after a season of being unable to even obtain a single cell phone to help replace the last lost job through the “HelpLine” or anywhere locally that promised this.

I am not very hopeful for the USA, but I live here, so this is part of my contribution as a citizen to report, and part of the legacy I could NOT leave my daughters because they were taken overnight, illegally, and with no remedy: primarily to satisfy someone’s too-large ego, and enabled by what law enforcement, in our case, was not. What was the price? They don’t even have all the facts in their own case, yet, or why society wouldn’t let me simply live and let live after throwing out, or why pro bono legal services for women basically won’t touch this with a 10-foot pole; they are focused on the low-income noncustodial males, and their career tracks, while enabling the rich ones to torture insubordinate exes through the courts. (Note: not my situation, but I see the cases).

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

November 17, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Posted in "Til Death Do Us Part" (literally), 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), AFCC, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Bush Influence & Appointees (Cat added 11/2011), Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Child Support, CRC Childrens Rights Council, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011), Lethality Indicators - in News, Mandatory Mediation, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

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

1996-2010: How “Ending welfare as we know it” morphed to [so far…] Statewide Marriage and Relationship Education –for Everyone

with one comment

Some of my friends scold me for showing too much and not just telling.  They’re right.    But as I like to SHOW (and then TELL, too) — posts run to triple-length size,  then I split them up with new — and long — titles.

(Those of you who know me — this is a “Conversational Public Data Dump.”  You are forewarned!)

(see also my comment — it has a major double-pasted section in it, too.  I will printout & purge the duplicates….  The value of this post is in the narrative, plus the links).

This post began as a TANF introduction to another one on a specific Healthy Marriage Grantee.

You may not think this information relevant — but, it has already landed in your back yard; it is restructuring the United States; it is a financial issue with global ramifications.  The story of HOW this happened (and through whom) will help us pay better attention in the future, and should rule out certain distractions — such as choosing which battle to fight, and which diversionary propaganda to ignore.

However, someone has to protest the incremental removal of civil liberties going along with incremental spending down of public dollars, diverted to . . .. for lack of a better word . .. Bush appointees, and Obama cronies.  And when it comes to THIS category, I don’t hear a lot of specific protests.

Want to Occupy Something?  Occupy This — your senators and representatives voted welfare infinite expansion, for private profit actually, into being through public laws.  How could that be?

Well, we have  public school systems that still (apparently) teach U.S. Mythology, not Accounting, that are places for Values & INdoctrination Wars.  Somehow, the importance of the House Ways and Means Appropriations Committee — let alone about how corporations and government actually interact, were not considered pre-requisites for graduation. Meanwhile,  people LIVE in neighborhoods where they can observe this discrepancy, know that the common explanations do not hold water, but may not have a coherent explanation of what does, of what happened (historically).

Moreover, there is a digital divide and closed-doors deliberations.   We are not [certainly anyone ever on welfare is typically not] given or pointed to the best tools to finding out how things work. The cult is of the experts — who teach the uninstructed and presumably not smart enough to “get it.”

The tools available to the unfunded public (like TAGGS) have been also tinkered with, obfuscated and otherwise screwed with, to beyond credibility (accuracy) – although they do reveal traits and patterns to a degree.  TAGGS cannot be reconciled with USASPENDING.gov (and isn’t) even when just looking up HHS grants only on the latter.  I have not made up my mind yet which is more in error, but USASPENDING.gov already has its accuracy critics –and so few people seem to ever USE TAGGS, that leaves me.

Name me ONE other blog or public website that began posting those HHS grantee & project charts before this blog did (earliest, 2009) and recommending their use.  Yet its data goes back to 1995.

Now a point has been made, by the structure AND content of this resource — well read, clearly understood — that this information is NOT reliable; moreover that it’s not reliable — or in really useable form — is no accident.

For example — a big stink since 2001 has been made about laying down the red carpet for (and building capacity for) the faith-based organizations to go help the poor hungry, under-educated slobs get some jobs and visit their sons and daughters, and be taught how to “relate” better to the other parent.

YET — TAGGS has no designation (or classification) for  Faith-based organization.  It’s been 10 years since Bush Executive Order, and the word “faith-based” is all over government (federal state, and nonprofit groups, such as CNCS), other sites — and yet no field has been added to the database to designate “Faith-based” or NOT Faith-based.    The same goes for the fine distinction between “Marriage” grantees and “Fatherhood Grantees.”  yet there is one CFDA (93086) for both — and, moreover, marriage and fatherhood activities could be in, literally, almost any category of federal domestic assistance, such as social welfare research and demonstration, which are NOT under “93086.”  Or in Head Start.  So what’s that about, eh?

Is this really about promoting responsible  “Fatherhood”?  I don’t think so.  Responsible Fathers (note:  this does not include Glenn Sacks or Nicholas Soppa!) like some accountability here and there, and deserve resources to get it, just like others do, and can come to a debate that is not predetermined, and occasionally lose a point or two (i.e. humility).  I don’t know any decent father who’d advocate stealing from the public under false pretenses, and attempting to cover one’s tracks, yet this IS what’s happening.  Or a responsible father helping set up any systems which, after about 53 failures, are still going full force, in the same manner – which many faith-based groups are.  Or which INTENTIONALLY undermines separation of church & state, OR the separation of powers in the federal government — and does so for personal sense of power, fame (or for profit).  Responsible fathers are willing to sacrifice, not specialists in sacrificing others, or what’s right.

this entire responsible fatherhood movement is, essentially (to quote Liz Richards/National Alliance for Family Court Justice, in testimony before the House Ways & Means Committee, Appropriations — in June 2010) – An Expensive Solution looking for a Legitimate Problem:

Protective Mother’s Response to Ways & Means Income Security & Family Support June 17, 2010 hearing for re- reauthorizataion of Responsible Fatherhood program funding.

AN EXPENSIVE REMEDY IN SEARCH OF A LEGITIMATE PROBLEM!

The June 17th 2010 “Responsible Fatherhood” hearing testimony supporting the administration’s reauthorization request for $150,000,000 for a program which has failed to offer any verifiable data on program implementation or specific outcomes, such as the easy to verify job skill training and improved child support compliance factors. Program promoters have become defensive, or hostile, when their operations or intent is questioned. They reject complaints from protective mother advocates who describe serious systemic problems occurring with divorcing and “absent” fathers. In short – the Responsible Fatherhood program advocates have never shown any interest toward the very people who they purport to be helping- divorced or separated mothers of the fathers enrolled in their programs..

Responsible Fatherhood programs have been funded since 1996, but have yet to offer any outcome data or analysis verifying positive impact on mothers and children. Instead they rely on vague claims of involvement of domestic violence specialists to claim [their] activities are not causing mothers any problems. HHS ACF officials confirm they do no requirement for collecting or reporting program enrollment or outcome data.

{Heck, HHS/OIG/OAS can’t even keep track of millions of undistributed child support already collected at the state level, and eschews responsibility for doing so — after all, isn’t it TANF blocks to the states, for flexible use? so long as federal incentives are met for their $2 of ours for $1 of yours, and they get some back, who’s going to rock that boat?  Yet in part it’s from child support enforcement funds that Fatherhood Promotion is done!}

Why should they be getting millions more if they won’t verify the millions already spent are producing positive results, or any other performance or outcome information? Why don’t the fatherhood promoters know anything about the protective mother movement, or show any interest in the concerns of divorcing and separated mothers?

(actually, some of these DO know about this movement and viciously attack it in print and on on-line forums — see Peter Jamison, SFWeekly earlier in 2011)

We believe their data omissions are done deliberately to cover up another agenda – which our members observe and are negatively affected by – which is recruiting dead-beat and abusive men into lucrative high-conflict litigation. I alone have over 2000 victim intake contacts from nearly all US states. NAFCJ has state leaders, in over 15 states collaborate with other protective mother leaders. I have been communicating with fathers’ rights and fatherhood leaders and activist since as early as 1992, have attended their conference and have determined the two movements are one [and] the same.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

LGH Note:   Since last June 2010, I have seem more influences than just the fathers’ rights upon these grant series, but still believe it a valid factor nevertheless at the “street” and HHS etc. level)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I note that this 2010 testimony (filed on-line) also refers to the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005:

The US Senator who sponsored the earlier $150,000,000 Responsible Fatherhood earmark in the 2005 deficit Reduction Act has been a fathers rights supporter since he was a state legislator and has been collaborating with the fathers right leader and founder from his state from state since the start. This fathers’ right founder also has collaborated with Dr Richard Gardner on specific case litigation. Gardner’s writings included heinous remarks – such as ( in paraphrase): “mothers who complain about father’s sex abuse of children should be told to get a vibrator and become more sexually responsive to her husband so he won’t have to seek sex from his daughter.” This and other sick and deviant opinions from Gardner and other publish pro-incest men (e.g Ralph Underwager and Warren Farrell) are the reason why Responsible Fatherhood promoters conceal their relationship with the father rights people.

In order for the Responsible Fatherhood promoter to conceal their history of collaborating with the deviant fathers rights movement, they use domestic violence counselor as a “heat shield” to make themselves look pro-woman. But our movement of litigating protective mothers, many of whom have been in domestic violence shelters, have never observed any officially designated fathers representatives collaborating with domestic violence representative or producing and positive actions or outcomes for them. What we do hear from d.v. victim mothers who have gone from her home into shelter with her children – only to be arrested and put into jail a few days later for “kidnapping” the children. Most not allowed any contact with their children, because they are then deemed to be a flight risk. An ex- parte sole custody order is establish for the father is without any notification or hearing for the mother. The d.v. shelter people refuse to support them or testify for the mother and ignore her concerned about the father’s abuse of the children. Many of these falsely arrested mothers don’t see their children again for months {{or years…}} on grounds she is a flight risk. Unfortunately our movement is very dissatisfied with the d.v. movement and believe they also need reforming. However, some of their leaders are working with us to correct this part of the system failure

If I get the rest of the follow-up post out — there is a demonstration of this “heat shield” phenomena — at the “Domestic Violence Coalition” level, typically.

and she also wrote:

All the evidence I’ve observed indicates the Responsible Fatherhood programs are merely a cover for recruiting bad dads with offers of child support abatements into high-conflict litigation, giving sole custody of the children to the father and getting the mother out of picture and forcing her to pay excessive child support obligations to him

Then there are (I learned through the Kentucky example:  “Turning It Around”) the times fathers in arrears were, literally, extorted into participating in programs such as fatherhood classes, parenting skills, self-esteem, ABSTINENCE education (for a father?), and more — which have their promoters throughout the system, usually with a for-profit organization selling the materials behind any nonprofit group.   These are not so many or varied that they are hard to locate and recognize the presence of, any more…

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _OK, enough of that particular angle . . . . . . .

Personal:

My interests and activism took another “sea change” after documenting (some, at least) of the Sea Changes at for example California Healthy Marriage Coalition, which boasted on outset of its programs of THE largest HHS marriage promotion grant yet ($11 million over 5 years).

Again, at the corporate level (California Secretary of State) a search of the words ‘Healthy Marriage” (singular) produces this chart:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2629035 11/08/2004 SUSPENDED CALIFORNIA STATE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE CHRIS GRIER
C2896098 06/01/2006 ACTIVE FRESNO COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC., A NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION ROBYN L ESRAELIAN
C2271911 03/07/2001 DISSOLVED HEALTHY CHALLENGES MARRIAGE, FAMILY AND CHILD COUNSELING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ELIZABETH LEHRER
C2884897 06/23/2006 SUSPENDED NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER DENNIS J STOICA
C2884898 06/23/2006 SUSPENDED ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION DENNIS J STOICA
C2955473 10/04/2006 SUSPENDED RIVERSIDE HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC. LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
C2650745 05/12/2004 ACTIVE SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT CAROLYN RICH CURTIS
C3210304 05/29/2009 ACTIVE SAINTS HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT REGINA GLASPIE
C2860238 03/02/2006 ACTIVE STANISLAUS COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION JAMES CARLETON STEWARD
C3013354 08/13/2007 ACTIVE YUBA-SUTTER HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT WILLIAM F JENS

and “Healthy Relationship,” this one:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C3073670 01/16/2008 SUSPENDED CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
C2746528 05/13/2005 ACTIVE HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA PATTY HOWELL
C2790720 06/09/2006 ACTIVE OAKLAND BERKELEY INITIATIVE FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS ** RESIGNED ON 06/20/2011
C2494811 01/06/2003 DISSOLVED THE CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. TAMARA ILICH

Meanwhile — as far as the 990 finder (which uses IRS filings) is concerned, the Sacramento Group has indeed changed its name by 2010, and there IS no “California Healthy Marriage” nonprofit around.

Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project Dba Relationship Skills Center CA 2010 $64,938 990 31 13-4280316

Now, on TAGGS, this ONE EIN (13480316) pulls up a slightly smaller set of grants, but two different DUNS# — why? (I put these here for readers to click on)

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  SACRAMENTO CA 95821 SACRAMENTO 147288935 $ 2,446,593
Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  SACRAMENTO CA 95821 SACRAMENTO 827612631 $ 1,148,512

  

Showing: 1 – 2 of 2 Recipients


Searching by Principal Investigator “Curtis” (within California) we see some — not all — of the grants:

Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project NON Other Social Services Organization 90FE0015 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 93086 CAROLYN CURTIS $ 549,256
Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project NON Other Social Services Organization 90FE0015 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 93086 CAROLYN R CURTIS $ 549,256
Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project Other Social Services Organization 90FE0015 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 93086 CAROLYN R CURTIS $ 1,647,768
Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project Other Social Services Organization 90IJ0205 COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – MARRIAGE 93009 CAROLYN CURTIS $ 50,000

and of course the last one, a new award, goes to — “CAROLYN CAROLYN” (i.e., FN FN)

Grantee Name City Recovery Act Indicator Grantee Type Award Number Award Title CFDA Number Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project SACRAMENTO NON Other Social Services Organization 90FM0059 FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM 93086 CAROLYN CAROLYN $ 798,825

SO, this $3 million plus is going to an organization in Sacramento (California State Capitol) that is not maintaining is nonprofit status with the state of California — is this affecting our budget?  Please also note that of these 5 awards, two are “Recovery” (ARRA) awards — totaling $1,647,768.  In another OMB or GAO report, we found that ARRA awards specifically have been tagged as notoriously NOT paying their still-due payroll and other taxes (even were the nonprofit legitimate):

(posted July 14, 2011 at Patton Boggs, LLP, with the alert that this is general information — and not legal advice)

Federal grant award recipients should carefully review their own federal tax compliance and use vigilance when engaging subrecipients and contractors, based on recent Senate testimony from the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

On May 24, 2011, a GAO representative testified before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs that thousands of contract and grant recipients under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) owe hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid federal taxes. The testimony summarized GAO’s April 2011 report of its investigation of 15 entities that had collectively received some $35 million in ARRA funds despite federal tax delinquencies totaling roughly $40 million. GAO referred all 15 entities to the IRS for possible criminal investigation.

ARRA grant award recipients may face risks to their projects stemming from federal tax delinquencies even though, as the GAO acknowledged, federal law does not generally prohibit applicants with unpaid federal tax debts from receiving federal grant awards. With federal debt continuing to climb, and federal spending far outstripping tax revenues, Congress may at least examine changes to the law to impose new restrictions in this area. In addition, in many cases, the tax delinquencies stem from  unpaid payroll taxes, meaning that even entities exempt from federal income taxes may be affected.

The GAO accounts.  It has no teeth.  Congress has to act….  More from the GAO site indicates that groups such as these may be included, i.e., if they don’t includ amounts from groups that have not filed federal tax returns 

At least 3,700 Recovery Act contract and grant recipients–including prime recipients, subrecipients, and vendors–are estimated to owe more than $750 million in known unpaid federal taxes as of September 30, 2009, and received over $24 billion in Recovery Act funds. This represented nearly 5 percent of the approximately 80,000 contractors and grant recipients in the data from Recovery.gov as of July 2010 that we reviewed. The estimated amount of known unpaid federal taxes is likely understated because IRS databases do not include amounts owed by recipients who have not filed tax returns or understated their taxable income and for which IRS has not assessed tax amounts due. 

(Back to TAGGS and our HM grantees)

And the $15 million went to an organization incorporated by Dennis Stoica (in Leucadia) that had its corporate status suspended, as well as the OTHER two organizations he formed, around the same time.   Patty Howell’s nonprofit, who carried on the name — is still associated with the bad behavior (by association) with CHMC’s originals.

Yet the only one of the BUNCH that I can see actually filed (with California, where they are) with the OAG — as required to — was the Sacramento Healthy Marriage (Carolyn Curtis, Ph.D.)

The California Healthy Marriage (Stoica, Suspended) became, somehow “Healthy Relationships California” (Howell) — think Leucadia, San Diego Area.

Meanwhile, the SACRAMENTO HM group (Curtis) — not that its ‘charitable status is, er, current — at least created one with the OAG, which looks like this

(on the actual site, the headings background color would be BLUE).  I am coding it GREEN, to match the PATTY HOWELL group – and indeed, the letter on this site (From the OAG) saying’ hey whassup, is addressed to “Sacramento Healthy Marriage”

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA CT0149740 Charity Delinquent LEUCADIA CA Charity Registration Charity
1

TAGGS grant for This one, EIN# 6806790  (which I believe I’ve gone over before, at some length) shows:

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA CA 92024-2215 SAN DIEGO 003664535 $ 7,883,475
California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA CA 92024-2215 SAN DIEGO 361795151 $ 7,142,080

Or, in the latest ACF announcement (just to make life a little harder for the novice in all this) as:

Healthy Relationships California

Leucadia

CA

$2,500,000

Which is it not called, any more — on the TAGGS  – – – OR, on the website itself, because Patty Howell’s  actual organization “healthy Relationships” apparently subsequently bought (or, at least claimed) the registered name “California Healthy Marrriage Coalition.”

Website — not that this group is current as a charity in California any more, but at least Ms. Howell’s nonprofit founded JUST a bit earlier than Mr. Stoica’s, saved the day and kept the name — it’s still showing up as:  California Healthy Marriages Coalition and (I see) features a “Dads & Kids” relationship education initiative, …

stating that this is funded in part by:  “Partial funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant: 90FE0104. “

ward Number: 90FE0104
Award Title: HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1
OPDIV: ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (ACF)
Organization: OFFICE OF FAMILY ASSISTANCE (OFA)
Award Class: DISCRETIONARY

Award Abstract

Title Healthy Marriage Demonstration, Priority Area 1 
Project Start/End  /
Abstract Healthy Marriage Demonstration, Priority Area 1
PI Name/Title Howell, Patty   Vice President of Operations
Institution

There are 7 award actions (4 of which read “$0”) and the other three (discretionary) $2.3 million & $2.4 + $2.4 million from 2006, 2009 & 2010= $7,142,080.  The grant is labeled “healthy marriage” and “FE” and the use was for Dads & Kids relationship building — which just so happens to be another business Ms. Howell is in.

Quite honestly, I don’t remember now (or feel like checking) whether it was Howell, or Curtis — on both nonprofits, receiving $32K for work on the one, and $7K for work on the other.

HM/FR GRANTEE BEHAVIORS

I am now learning that their behavior is typical — not atypical– for the healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood grantees.  As such, I am starting to comprehend that the entire system wasn’t even nominally set up to promote marriage, but to deconstruct the lines of authority between federal and state, to divert welfare funding SPECIFICALLY from single mothers (who, even when under attack are still a force to be reckoned with) towards fathers, and change language acknowledging us as both mothers and citizens (individuals) with equal rights under the law — which, by the way, we DO have.  But not safely enforceable.

The Child Support monster is just that — and as it feeds gas in to county & state agencies, and (diversionary programs) — it has been spilling, and some of these spills turn into conflagrations where people get hurt.  Men, women and children.   Other than that, it often drains an economy — but DRIVES the bureaucratic economy.  Whatever it may have been, it is now a monster.  It recruits, it solicits — but it does not produce and does not contain viable checks and balances.

WHO VOTED THIS AGENDA IN?  AND WHO PUT THEM IN OFFICE?

I am gradually understanding that it was THE United States Congressmen, and some (not many) women that voted for these laws, from TANF (1996/Clinton), through DRA (2005/Bush) through ARRA (2009/Obama) and through 2010 Claims Resolution Act (also Obama).  It took me a while to realize that these years paralleled the hell extended nightmare of a marriage, followed by what at this point, I’d call worse — because it destroys hope of an off-ramp, EVER, and has definitely altered my family line’s wellbeing — in EVERY measurable category — for the far worse, since we first met the courts.   And people who go through this marginalization tend to listen to others who have; mine is no isolated instance; it’s a systemic situation.

This is relevant history to current history, on its course.   Don’t we want to know who helped set what in motion, and how?  Particularly when history tends to run over the very families (and economy) it is pretending — or purporting — to help?

Normally, this subject matter wouldn’t be on my radar.  It only got there when I demanded a reasonable explanation for a clear double-standard based on gender in what I assumed (wrongly, as it turns out) to be courts of law, i.e., “family courts.”   Of course my opposite gender’s proponents have been saying for decades that these courts are biased against THEIR gender, and must be adjusted to compensate.  They have now (far’s I can tell) been saying this with impunity for FAR too long.

SO — in some detail, and FYI  —

PRWORA 1996, DRA  2005, ARRA 2009 and 2010 Claims Resolution Act.  Slippery slope to evolving definitions of welfare and child support enforcement – incremental tipping of the purposes of TANF from Purpose #1

(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives

towards Purpose #4 — and then expanding the application of Purpose #4 beyond anyone who might have actually needed the resources from Purpose #1.

(4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. . . .

We are in the new millennium, which kicked off (after surviving the Y2K scare) pretty much with a possibly stolen election, and a King in the form of a President.  Kings, as their manner is, like to rewrite laws, restrict civil liberties, protect their cronies, equate their causes with “godly” causes, and protect THEIR, not the People’s Interest.  Such was definitely true the moment G. W. Bush took office in 2001, being sworn in to office under the same oath as previous Presidents.

The way was paved before him with 1996 Welfare Reform, which granted to states, allegedly, some of the co-dependent power it took from them, by allowing them “flexibility” (Block grants to states for TANF / welfare) to better address the needs of their citizens and reduce the welfare caseload.  If you are not “up” on this then research it some.  Center on Budget & Policy Priorities gives a brief recap.  These are good basic readings if you are, say, living and working in the United States.  Even if you are not doing this as a legal resident, or permanently, it may potentially affect situations such as were found in Seal Beach, California, when the father of a little boy, having 56% custody (despite prior violence, threats, and significant issues that would otherwise alert a reasonable person to danger) — being an ex-Marine — walked into a beauty salon with guns (and a bulletproof vest) and “offed” 6 people in the room (starting with a man, then his wife, then everyone else in there — a 73 yr old mother I heard survived serious wounds — and, who knows why, another innocent man sitting in a parked vehicle outside.  The joint custody policy comes from a combination of groups such as AFCC/CRC AND policies such as set in welfare reform.   These are not isolated incidences; they are recurring incidents (with more or less victims depending on circumstances) and their occurrences has not modified either welfare reform, or AFCC/CRC policy and agenda one whit, that I can see.  So, as a US resident, you will at some level be both funding these policies — and paying for clean up.   This is what we get for not paying closer attention to our legislatures, and doing WHATEVER is necessary to make time to do so, where at all possible!

From the “Center on Budget & Policy Priorities” whose board includes a person from the Brookings Institute, the Urban Institute (and Marian Wright Edelman of Children’s Defense Fund).  This nonprofit was founded in 1981, it says, and focuses on policies regarding low-income families, among other things.  I may not agree with all the viewpoints, but this outlines some of the facts:

They are going to detail some points about 1996 PRWORA, 2005 DRA, 2009 ARRA, and (let’s not forget the most recent, although I don’t know if this details), 2010 Claims Resolution Act

Sooner or later, (I hope), the public is going to wake up and ask just WHAT is its Congress authorizing when it comes to promoting marriage and fatherhood, and taking away from the original purpose of “AFDC” (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), or even the original purpose of TANF (aid to needy families), let alone the original purpose of the Child SUpport Enforcement (which was, child support enforcement).  Whatever the original purposes were — it’s clear which direction things are heading — which expansion of purposes, programs, and applications, and undermining of the ORIGINAL concept to a more circuitous, theory-based concept of how to help feed hungry children, and adult caretakers (including, like, parents?!)  in the households where they live, in America.

Policy Basics — an Introduction to TANF

What Is TANF?

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) is a block grant created by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, as part of a federal effort to “end welfare as we know it.” The TANF block grant replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, which had provided cash welfare to poor families with children since 1935.

Under the TANF structure, the federal government provides a block grant to the states, which use these funds to operate their own programs. States can use TANF dollars in ways designed to meet any of the four purposes set out in federal law, which are to: “(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage; (3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and (4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.” . . .

The law that created the TANF block grant initially authorized funding through the end of federal fiscal year 2002. After several short-term extensions, Congress reauthorized TANF in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 and made some modifications to the program;**TANF is now authorized through the end of federal fiscal year 2011 (September 30, 2011).

Who Is Eligible for TANF-Funded Benefits?

States have broad discretion to determine who is eligible for various TANF and MOE-funded benefits and services. In general, states must use the funds to serve families with children, with the only exceptions related to efforts to reduce non-marital childbearing and promote marriage . .

. . .

What Level of Funding Does TANF Provide to the States?

The basic TANF block grant has been set at $16.6 billion since it was established in 1996. As a result, the real value of the block grant has already fallen by about 28 percent.

The 1996 law also created supplemental grants for 17 states with high population growth or low block grant allocations relative to their needy population, as well as a contingency fund to help states weather a recession.** Congress regularly extended these supplemental grants, but the most recent extension covered only three of the four quarters of federal fiscal year 2011, and these grants expired July 1, 2011. This year represents the first time since 1996 that Congress has not fully funded the supplemental grants.

As noted above, states must spend state funds on programs for needy families as a condition of receiving the federal TANF block grant.

(Notice the #1 goal.  However, in Oklahoma, Ohio, other states, the emphasis was on goals 4, 3, 2 & 1, in approximate order, as shown by their policies.  I have blogged on the “OMI” before.

Apparently the DRA (2005) allowed states to categorize “MOE” expenses to NON-needy families (this is a footnote to a 2007 CRS report by the same person, Mr. Gene Falk):

 FN 15 Prior to the enactment of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) MOE funds used to achieve TANF’s family formation goals were restricted to expenditures on “needy” families with children. The DRA had a provision that allows a state’s total expenditure on activities to achieve these goals to be counted without regard to a family’s need. However, HHS regulations issued on February 5, 2008, limit MOE expenditures related to the family formation goals except for activities related to promoting healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood. (See Appendix, “Families Considered “Engaged in Work” (the Numerator of the Participation Rate)” later in this report for a listing of these activities. For a discussion of this regulatory provision, see Federal Register, vol. 73, no. 24, p. 6517-6318.

THIS, friends, is how one can encounter divorce or custody cases in which one side is a millionaire, but still benefitting from the priorities these programs set up in the courtroom, i.e. promoting more noncustodial (meaning father) parenting time by means of — supervised visitation, counseling, mediation, parent education, etc.  Court-referrals..

Using Federal TANF Grants

Federal TANF grants may be used for a wide range of benefits and services for families with children. Grants may be used within a state TANF program or transferred to either the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF, the “child care block grant”) or the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG). Unused TANF funds can also be reserved (saved), without fiscal year limit.12

FN12 Before the enactment of the ARRA, reserved funds could only be used for the purpose of providing “assistance” (often, cash welfare). The ARRA eliminated this restriction to the use of reserve funds, so that reserve funds can be used to provide any allowed TANF benefit or service.

**what Oklahoma did with its contingency fund, and other states (or certain appointees in other states) seem to like this model.  The ACF/HHS site mentions Oklahoma Marriage Initiative  as a model of how to use MOE funds, after first asserting that:

Healthy marriages are vitally important to the long term well-being of children. Beyond the economic advantages important for supporting children, the experiences and examples shown to children being raised by parents who enjoy a loving and long-term commitment yields tremendous developmental benefits for children. Forming and sustaining a happy and healthy marriage requires, in part, good fortune and, in larger part, parents possessing the knowledge and commitment to exercise healthy relationship skills that form the basis of healthy marriages.

(From the Director of HHS’s Office of Family Assistance, year, 2004.)

Certainly inherited wealth, circumstances of birth including where and to whom — have little to do with this; really, it’s about skills moreso.  Therefore, forget those other factors, let’s focus on the “healthy relationship skills” Well said, from an organization that distributes, but apparently doesn’t track too well, the funds!

Since the inception of PRWORA, Oklahoma has capitalized on the flexibility of TANF funds by investing $10 million in the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative (OMI). OMI was established under the third and fourth statutory purposes of TANF. OMI currently delivers marriage and relationship training statewide through social service systems, educational systems and volunteer organizations. Participants access training in diverse settings such as workforce development classes, high schools, military bases, prisons, first time offender programs, churches, universities and many more. In 2003, Oklahoma reported{{who checked??}}  that 938 workshops were conducted, serving 1,250 participants and training 1,200 individuals to provide future workshops. For additional information on Oklahoma’s Marriage Initiative please visit:http://www.okmarriage.org/services/healthyrelationships.asp

As I blogged before, the Governor of Oklahoma pushed this one from the top, with help from “expert speakers” and the head of his HHS, who pointed out there was TANF money sitting around.

The economic researchers found some social indicators that were hurting Oklahoma’s economy. They mentioned the high divorce rate, high rates of out-of-wedlock births and high rates of child deaths because of child abuse. One OSU economist wrote in an editorial, “Oklahoma’s high divorce rate and low per-capita income are interrelated. They hold hands. They push and pull each other. There’s no faster way [in Oklahoma!] for a married woman with children to become poor than to suddenly become a single mom.”

(Child abuse, of course doesn’t happen within marriages, and abuse of one’s kids is not a cause of divorce.) Then “Governor and First Lady’s (day-long) Conference on Marriage” with speaker..

(See, as recounted on a “smartmarriages.com” list-serv in 1999, how Gary Smalley & Wade Horn of the NFI were there…”Marriages must be strengthened for the sake of America’s children”

…

Theodora Ooms with the Family Impact Seminar in Washington
D.C. called the marriage conference historic. "You are pioneers here in
Oklahoma. I have been trying for ten years in Washington D.C. to get this
on the agenda and get some money to work on this issue and no one in
Washington will talk about it.

The Conference also included breakout sessions with attendees discussing
how the various sectors can work together and how government policy can
also impact the success of marriages. Among the items discussed:

Tax laws-possibly eliminating marriage penalty
Possible repeal of no fault divorce
Public education- emphasize the positive aspects of marriage to young people
  • Covenant marriages
  • Emphasis on premarital counseling, possibly even legally requiring it
  • Making laws more “family friendly”
  • e laws
  • The Governor and First Lady¼s Conference on Marriage was facilitated by
  • Jerry Regier, the Governor¼s Cabinet Secretary for Health and Human
  • Services. It was privately funded by several groups and individuals,
including the Burbridge Foundation and the Baptist General Convention.

Good grief.   the Baptist General Convention got with the Governor and helped propose taking welfare funds to promote marriage,

since their own Sunday Sermons weren’t persuasive enough?  That’s “ripe.”

BURBRIDGE INFO (random, from Internet) — PART 1:

Burbridge Foundation, I’m going to look up, obviously.  From “TheLostOgle.com” (apparently some Oklahomans having some fund poking fun at their state, although I note, “*.com”)  This foundation was #93 on the top 100 most embarrassing things about Oklahoma (from 2007, its centenary?):

Top 100 Oklahoma Embarrassments: 100-91

Posted on Monday, July 16th, 2007 under Best of OKC, Dean Blevins, OKC Music,Oklahoma City Alumni, Oklahoma City Media, Oklahoma City Radio, The Sports Animal,Top 100 Oklahoma Embarrassments by Tony

For the eight of you out there who didn’t realize it, 2007 marks the 100th anniversary of the state of Oklahoma. To mark this, various publications around the state have been featuring all sorts of Top 100 lists that have provoked virtually no controversy and have not been talked about at the water cooler. In fact, we’ve heard so little discussion about these lists that we wonder if anyone is actually reading them. We sure don’t.

It does seem, though, that the focus has been on the more positive elements of Oklahoma. While we celebrate those things just like the rest of the world, it seems wrong to ignore the more humiliating aspects of the state of Oklahoma. Naturally, we’re here to fill that void, in this ten-part series that will run every Monday. Today, numbers 91 through 100 of Oklahoma’s Biggest Embarrassments..

. . .

93. Bobbie Burbridge Lane

Those commercials for the Burbridge foundation are possibly the most annoying thing on local radio, which is saying something. When listening to Burbridge Lane lecture us about pornography or religion being taken out of public schools or whatever the pet issue of the day is, we’re convinced that Burbridge Lane wants to return the United States to the 1950′s, which probably sucked really bad. 

There’s usually some truth on the heels of humor, and this one rings true:

BURBRIDGE INFO (random, from Internet) — PART 2:  Could THIS be why The Burbridge Foundation is so big on Marriage (dates to 1974).

(read for comic relief): (from “law.justia.com”)

496 F.2d 326: The Burbridge Foundation, Inc., Appellant,

v. Reinholdt & Gardner et al., Appellees

Robert E. Hornberger, Fort Smith, Ark., for appellant.

G. Alan Wooten, Harper, Young & Smith, Fort Smith, Ark., for appellees.

Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, Senior Circuit Judge, and LAY and ROSS, Circuit judges.

PER CURIAM.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. – 496 F.2d 326

Submitted March 14, 1974.Decided May 15, 1974

. . .(The present suit is basically an action in rem seeking relinquishment of certain stocks held by the stakeholders, Reinholdt & Gardner. The Foundation’s memorandum in the trial court stated that ‘the relief specifically sought is the return and delivery to The Burbridge Foundation of its stock deposited with that defendant (Reinholdt & Gardner). …

Upon registry of a personal judgment arising from a divorce decree, Velma Jean Holloway, formerly Velma Jean Burbridge, obtained a writ of garnishment from the Chancery Court of Sebastian County, Arkansas, against Reinholdt & Gardner, a stock brokerage firm, to attach any stocks belonging to her former husband, R. O. Burbridge. The brokerage firm denied holding any stock in Burbridge’s name, but admitted it had an account in the name of The Burbridge Foundation. The Burbridge Foundation intervened in the state court proceedings. Shortly thereafter, The Foundation brought suit in the federal district court against Reinholdt & Gardner, seeking recovery of the stocks. In its complaint, The Foundation made the same allegations it raised as intervenor in state court, i.e., that the stocks belonged to it and not R. O. Burbridge personally. In addition The Foundation for the first time asserted that the Arkansas garnishment statute was unconstitutional in that it sought to deprive The Foundation of its property without due process of law.1 Reinholdt & Gardner answered that it could not relinquish the stocks until ordered to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. The Holloways2 intervened in the federal action and moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court sustained the motion to dismiss. The Burbridge Foundation appeal.  (and apparently lost).

(SMILE): [2]Russell B. Holloway was the divorce attorney for Velma Jean Burbridge (now Holloway) and was awarded $12,000 in attorney’s fees. He was also a party to the state garnishment suit
So, Velma Jean divorced Mr. Burbridge, eventually married her divorce attorney, and seems to have gotten some of his stock, too, this being 1974;
So in 2000, here is this Burbridge Foundation sponsoring a let’s support marriage (and potentially institute covenant marriage / eliminate no-fault divorce, etc.) in Oklahoma.  Moral:  There is usually a back story to most public policy, somewhere . ..   and more than not, based in someone’s personal issues.  But wealth & power tends to think large (how do we think they got wealthy & powerful in the first place?), and the rest of the world should conform to their  theories…

BURBRIDGE INFO (Random, from internet) PART 3:   Self-description on website:

The Burbridge Foundation is a Christian foundation dedicated to working solutions to problems impacting our families and our culture. We do this by bringing public awareness to these problems, by working alongside other faiths and concerned citizens interested in strengthening the fabric of our community character, and by providing leadership support to organizations of like vision.

Is sponsoring a meeting/conference with the Governor which then results in him intentionally bypassing the Legislator to get this Marriage Promotion Process going — “Christian”??

From OMI site:

  • Governor Keating was aware that his support of a marriage promotion agenda was controversial and would not be immediately popular.
  • As evidence of his serious commitment to this issue, Keating put his Cabinet Secretary for Health and Human Services, Jerry Regier, in charge of developing a plan of action for the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative.  (after committing funds from HHS)  In addition, Public Strategies (PSI), a small public affairs/public relations firm, was awarded a project management bid and, from the beginning, national experts advised various aspects of the Initiative. {{We showed who some of these were, including Wade Horn of National Fatherhood Initiative}} This leadership outlined the main themes and components of the OMI. They deliberately decided not to appoint a Commission to “study” the issues, nor did they propose a legislative package of reforms. 

At the legislative level, they might have faced a fight, and been forced to justify — TO OKLAHOMA RESIDENTS — the diversion of TANF emergency funds to marriage promotion!

I looked up Jerry Regier, and Voice of Freedom (albeit a gay rights publication?) says “Gov. Bush’s Appointment Of Jerry Regier For The Dept Of Children & Families Is More Than A Right-Wing Extremist; He Leaves A Record Of Increased Child Abuse & Neglect” (apparently from OK he was going — courtesy of the brother of then-President George Bush — to FL).  Look at the commentary: (color:  TEAL)

And what we found is not good for the children and families of Florida. Here is what Oklahoma Governor did not tell Jeb:

August 24, 1999: Secretary for Health and Human Services Jerry Regier is violating both the spirit and the letter of a new state law in his zeal to hasten the downsizing of Eastern State Hospital in Vinita

Sept. 20, 2000: Health and Human Services Secretary Jerry Regier is trying to dodge responsibility for recent problems

April 11, 2001: Associate Press: State Office of Juvenile Affairs charged the state and federal government $1.2 million more than it was eligible to receive during a period of 19 months. Jerry Regier, secretary of HHS, said that once a program is in place, an acceptable error rate would probably be 5 percent or less. Last fiscal year, Oklahoma County had an error rate of 59.2 percent. Tulsa County’s error rate was 26 percent

April 12, 2001: Regier Skirts Competitive Bidding Laws – A controversial political consultant was awarded more than $1.2 million in state contracts without having to compete for the business, according to state records.

(this seems to be a hallmark of certain faith-based groups; I’m thinking of the Governor’s Office of Faith-Based (whatnots) in Ohio, re:  Krista Sisterhen.  It’s all over the web; she was there 2003-2006; eliminated otherwise qualified groups to get a contract to a group (formed only in 2000 and not in-state) called “WeCare” which then screwed up.  And — had ties to Bush Administration. )

Oklahoma KIDS COUNT Fact Book 2001:
     Reveals that 2 key benchmarks tracked worsened when compared to data from a dozen years ago:

  • Child abuse & neglect
  • More than fifteen thousand (15,518) are abused or neglected
  • More than two hundred thousand (210,470) Oklahoma children live in poverty an increase since 1998 (Regier took office in 1997)
    This brief synopsis points to an administrator whose track record is not favorable for the task at hand. Although he received honors as a good administrator, the fact that child neglect and abuse increased while he was HHS Director demonstrates a lack for a sense of priorities, in this case the welfare of our children. Florida does not need more scandal; downsizing or political mismanagement in the Department of Children and Families, Regier has got to go! 

By

  • Initial activities were funded with private foundation monies and discretionary state dollars. Howard Hendrick, Department of Human Services (DHS) Director, pointed out that using TANF monies to fund the initiative fit within the intent of the family formation goals of the 1996 federal welfare reform law. {{YES — as I said, of the four purposes, it as purpose #4 only}} The DHS Board set aside $10 million of undedicated TANF funds for OMI activities. The funds were earmarked primarily for developing marriage-related services, and leaders acknowledged that efforts should be made to make them available to low-income populations.

TANF was at this time FOR low-income populations.   FOR helping children be cared for in their own households, as much as possible.  For leaders to say “well TRY to offer them to low-income populations” while targeting the entire state of Oklahoma — NOT the needy populations  (not all of who is poor, but obviously many of who have been divorcing) is OFF-purpose.   $10 million is a LOT of money to set aside, to some families.  How many mouths would’ve been fed, for sacrifice of rhetoric?

  • Thus, the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative was launched and has grown to become the broad-based social service prevention project that it is today.

More on REGIER — guess where he was in December 2006?  Sitting as “US Department of Health and Human Services Washington, DC 20201

Jerry Regier, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation” {{ASPE == a Program Office or OpDiv of HHS }}and writing a glowing recommendation of the OMI.  In this brochure (which has his name on it), it says that Jerry Regier — as Cabinet Head of HHS — prodeed the Governotr to get this started, citing specifically 1996 TANF reform.  The economic studies were secondary…. 

Nearly eight years ago, Oklahoma’s then-Cabinet Secretary for Health and Human Services, Jerry Regier, encouraged then-Governor Frank Keating to take action to strengthen Oklahoma’s families, in response to emerging research and the increased emphasis on two- parent families in the 1996 federal welfare reform legislation.

So the REAL question is — where was Regier before this, and how did he get to be in the Cabinet Position in Oklahoma?

This Brief is a good (short read) showing that when the TANF-Reformers come to town (carrying NFI-ideas), they are going to force system change.  For example, the system change in Oklahoma was definitely focused on pushing MARRIAGE to people from ALL sectors of life — not alleviating poverty and helping poor or needy families.  Moreover, there was a connection somehow, to the Denver Crowd (who produced PREP).

The brief comes right from ACF.HHS.GOV/healthy marriage site. In the flow chart, a central square reads ” PRIORITY 2:”  BUILD DEMAND FOR SERVICES”

and from that, arrows to 3 boxes, the top one of which reads:  “TRAIN AGENCIES (like child support!) TO MAKE REFERRALS”

OK (I think I have it).  First, Jerry Regier was formerly president of the ultraconservative “Family Research Council” prior to Oklahoma

But this report (2004) from Florida — where it seems he went next — is scathing, and — in short — read it.    I can’t say it more emphatically.

  • How could Bush not have seen this mess coming? Regier was a GOP party
    hack in Oklahoma with an undistinguished track record in the family
    services bureaucracy. An ultraconservative Christian, his byline had
    turned up on two published papers that espoused spanking kids, even if
    it caused “welts and bruises.”
A scalding report by the governor’s chief inspector general has
revealed that high-ranking DCF officials handed out fat and dubious
contracts to pals and political cronies, and accepted gifts, favors
and lodging from outside contractors.

As a result, three of Regier’s top administrators have quit, and
Regier himself has been reduced to defending his own outrageous
socializing with a DCF contractor.

It’s much more than the mere “appearance of impropriety.” It is the
greedy, rotten essence of impropriety — profiteering at the expense of
Florida’s neediest and most vulnerable children.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars that could have been spent hiring
more caseworkers and investigators were instead doled out to
well-connected firms as part of Regier’s rush to “privatize”
child-welfare services.

In recent weeks, the Miami Herald’s Carol Marbin Miller has documented
the DCF gravy train in infuriating detail. A few of the lowlights:

  • —A $21 million contract to fix DCF’s computer system was awarded to
  • American Management Services, although another company had been ranked
  • first after the initial screening process.
  • The lobbyist for American Management happened to be Greg Coler, a
  • former chief of the state child-welfare agency and a close friend of
  • Regier. Sitting on American Management’s board of directors was former
  • Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating — the man who recommended Regier for the
  • DCF job in Florida.

—DCF Deputy Secretary Ben Harris gave out a $500,000 no-bid contract,
split between two of his friends, for computer ‘‘kiosks’’ that
dispense food stamps.

ACTUALLY — WIKIPEDIA pretty much lays it out.  Jerry Regier worked for the elder Bush administration.  Best read in sequence:  (and I now have a 20,000 word post, too….)

Includes this section:

Family Research Council

Regier, in cooperation with Dr. James Dobson, founded the Family Research Council, a conservative, Christian right group and lobbying organization, in 1983. Regier served as that organization’s first President from 1984 until 1988. Gary Bauer, a domestic policy advisor under President Ronald Reagan, succeeded Regier as President.

Federal government career

President Ronald Reagan appointed Regier in 1988 to the National Commission on Children, an advisory body in the United States Department of Health and Human Services on children’s issues. Reagan’s successor,George H.W. Bush, reappointed Regier in 1991. Regier continued to serve on the Commission until 1993.

(SIGH — I looked up “Family Research Council” and found among its board members, the mother of the man tied to Blackwater, and a board member of

The Council on National Policy among other things — here it goes, a 2008 “Muckety Site” (visual diagram of relationships).  This relates to tracking down a single person influential in starting

the “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative” (Jerry Regier), learning of his former Bush & FRC connections, and looking up FRC.  WHich just goes to show, when is it time to stop!?)

Story by Laura Bennett, Oct. 2008, posted at “Muckety” under “Erik Prince’s Mom gives $450,000 to stop same-sex marriage in California“

I’m less concerned about that than the Blackwater connection, who else this woman is funding.  See Diagram:

Focus on the Family (one of the followers) figured in my life personally, exacerbating already virulent abuse, to the point that I ended up quitting a FT night job, that had been supporting our family.  I’m talking WHILE I was married.  My husband loved James Dobson, and listened to his stuff also

Speaking as a heterosexual Christian — I don’t know WHO these guys are — they do not do a resemblance of what I see in the Bible; and in person, and in influence are virtually terroristic to women.  If I’d NOT been a Christian, I’d probably have bailed out of the marriage much faster — and this might (not sure, but MIGHT) have been better for our kids.  When I hear WHO is behind some of these groups (years later) it somewhat validates the personal experiences (not mine only) that they are essentially domestic terrorists — unless one submits willingly.

Two Voices from a while back warn us on this movement:  Patricia Ireland, (NOW) and Rev. Jesse Jackson, Jr. Both are responding to the Promise Keepers’ “Stand in the Gap” rally on the Washington Mall.  Listen to them!  ”

We are talking, 1997!….(I don’t have the date of Rev. Jesse Jackson’s speech).

Recently, hundreds of thousands of religious American males were on display at the Promise Keepers‘ “Stand In The Gap” rally in the nation’s capitol. What could possibly be wrong with men bonding, praying and pledging to be better Christians, with the goal of becoming better and more responsible husbands and fathers, and active in their local church? Nothing that I can see.

There is certainly nothing wrong with men exercising their First Amendment rights to peaceably assemble and to enjoy the freedoms of speech and religion. There is absolutely nothing wrong with acknowledging that we have done wrong, we recognize our weaknesses,confess our sins before God and the public and vow, with God’s help, to change our ways, to do better and to be better men in the future. The genuineness and validity of the religious experience for any of the participants, and any long-range good that comes from it, must be affirmed and respected.

There is nothing wrong with any of that, if that’s all there is to it.

(and he goes to accurately characterize the group):

Women now want to be priests, pastors and preach in pulpits. These demands come from a feminist and womanist theology and biblical interpretation born of experiences of denial and oppression from conservative and non-liberating Christian men.

As Christians, we all read the same Bible, but our biblical interpretations are born of our varied life experiences. It was Martin Luther’s experiences with Roman Catholicism that led to a critique (95 Theses) that began the Protestant Reformation. Similar experiences have led to modern critiques and new interpretive contributions of scripture and theology that run all the way from the birth of our nation — a theology that gave us a liberal democratic and constitutionally-based government to replace a traditional, conservative and God-based Monarchy— to a Latin American-oriented liberation theology; to an African American-originated “Black” theology; to a female-led feminist and womanist theology; to a gay and lesbian theology; all of which respect all religions, advocate for human rights and equal protection under the law for all regardless of race, national origin, sex or sexual orientation, and all of which are liberation theologies reflecting a God of the oppressed.

The Promise Keepers deny the legitimacy of most, if not all, of these theological and biblical interpretations that have grown out of experiences of oppression, and resent our commitment to not go back –theologically, biblically, socially, politically or culturally.

QUITE FRANKLY — this is where a lot of “Christian Domestic Violence” (contradiction in terms – the false term there is “Christian”) comes from — it is an outraged insistence on previously inherent male dominance.  Enforced physically and all other kinds of ways, and acknowledged by the male bonding in surrounding institutions, and well-tamed females in them also.  This is why I no longer frequent — or even darken the door of — churches, if I can help it.  Maybe for a music event — not for worship, not for socializing, and not for any form of support.  Life is too short.

That which, in the past, has been identified as “religious” and “Christian” has not always been liberating and quite often has been oppressive. In South Africa it was the Dutch Reformed Christian Church that provided the religious foundation for apartheid. In the United States’ South it was the Southern Baptists and other mainline churches that practiced and theologically justified slavery and Jim Crow. The Ku Klux Klan identifies itself as a Christian organization. It was white Christian ministers who attacked Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Birmingham, Alabama for fighting racism that brought forth his “Letter From A Birmingham Jail.” At our foundation, good Christian men owned slaves and defined African Americans as three-fifths human in our Constitution, they committed genocide against Native Americans and stole their land, and they denied women the right to vote. In Congress today,many who call themselves religious and Christian, vote against laws to provide food, health care, housing, jobs, education and an equalopportunity to millions of Americans. There’s an old Negro Spiritual that speaks to this point. It says, “Everybody talkin’ ’bout heaven ain’t goin’ there.”

The Promise Keepers’ answer to that very real problem is not to look to the future with hope and confidence, confronting the changes needed and reinterpreting male identity in terms of gender equality. Instead, Promise Keepers try to give men identity and, therefore, security, by returning to a familiar past. Their preaching and teaching, mostly subliminal, though not exclusively so, was to reveal a fear of that future. The Promise Keeper answer is to retreat and recapture this biblical past.

SO NOW HERE COMES THIS REVELATION — OF THE CONNECTION BETWEEN FOCUS ON THE FAMILY (Types) and BLACKWATER.  I  can’t say I’m really surprised.

And I do believe — especially seeing the Bush/Regier/OMI/FRC (etc.) connections that when we are looking at any Healthy Marriage / Responsible Fatherhood grant, program, or initiative — even though there may be innocent and sincere participants — this is the essence of what we are seeing — which is the intent to dominate, control, force to submit, and (this being a necessary means to dominate in a country with a Bill of Rights — to force institutions to line up, removing the due process and civil rights, permanently.

(to be continued)

(ELSA PRINCE) Broekhuizen is the mother of Erik D. Prince, founder of Blackwater Worldwide, the controversial operation that provides security services to federal officials in Iraq and other countries. Her daughter, Betsy DeVos, is a former Michigan GOP chair and wife of failed gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos.

Broekhuizen’s first husband, Edgar, founded an auto parts company that was sold after his death for $1.4 billion. She later married her pastor, Ren Broekhuizen.

An assistant told the Grand Rapids Press that Broekhuizen gave to the campaign because the issue is “very important to her. It’s near and dear to her heart. She likes to give from her heart and not for public recognition.”

Broekhuizen heads the Edgar and Elsa Prince Foundation, which had assets of more than $42 million in 2006 (the last year for which tax returns are publicly available). The foundation and Broekhuizen personally are longtime supporters of religious organizations and conservative political groups such as the Haggai Institute, Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council.

BURBRIDGE FOUNDATION — A CHRISTIAN FOUNDATION — helped this happen, then.  Make a note of it, because this was wrong!

We continue to work across the country with individuals and organizations combating the scourge of pornography – a deadly and often underestimated cancer assaulting the family. For information on the “WRAP Campaign” and other information on fighting porn go to www.moralityinmedia.org.

Our current effort focuses on Christian leadership development. In 2007, we reached out to several Oklahoma City Christian lay leaders with a vision for the creation of “salt and light leadership training” to leaders of this and other cities. This has now become the “SALLT Fellowship” which can be found at www.saltandlightleadership.com.

Soli Deo Gloria  (Latin: to God only be Glory; JS Bach used to sign his manuscripts with this, hear tell)

“We are not a direct grant-giving organization.”
Also at the same street address is “Character First”

Our Approach

Character First is a professional development and character education program that is delivered many ways—training seminars, books, magazines, curriculum, email—that focus on real-life issues at work, school, home, and the community.

Gee, then why might they NOT sponsor such a conference with the Governor on curriculum-based ways to strengthen marriages?

Communities & Character Councils

Character First works with government leaders and community organizations around the world who want to promote character on a local basis.

[[website says “Character First” began in 1992 at an Oil & Gas-servicing company called “Kimray”]]

To do this, many communities form a “Character Council” (often a non-profit, non-religious charitable organization) to promote character in all sectors of a community—including business, government, education, law enforcement, media, the faith community, and families.

The following communities have taken various steps toward promoting character, such as passing resolutions, forming character councils, implementing Character First, and organizing special events.

AND also at this address (3rd organization):
Strata Leadership, LLC is a small consulting firm located in Edmond, Oklahoma focused on helping individuals and organizations succeed.

Strata Leadership, LLC.

And here is where we see some Dispute Resolution background, familiar in the anti-divorce courtrooms around AFCC personnel as well:

hrough Strata’s partnerships with other organizations such as Character First!, our team consists of nearly 15 full-time employees.  Strata is led by our executive leadership team of Strata President, Dr. Nathan Mellor and Executive Vice-President, Wayne Whitesell.

[Photo of young-looking Caucasian guy]

Dr. Nathan Mellor is a co-owner and president of Strata.  He is a popular speaker who makes 125-175 presentations per year across America and around the globe.  He has spoken in over  states and in countries such as: Australia, Belize, Guyana, Jordan, Mexico, Russia and Rwanda.

Dr. Mellor holds the Bachelor of Arts (BA) and the Master of Science in Education (MSE) degrees fromHarding University. He earned the Master of Dispute Resolution (MDR) degree from the Pepperdine University School of Law – Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution and the Doctor of Education (EDD) in Organizational Leadership degree from Pepperdine University.

STrata’s Partners (at least 2 at the same address):

Strata is proud to partner with and promote the work of the following friends:

Copyright © 2009 Strata Leadership, L.L.C. All rights reserved.

Products — pricey!

The “other” sponsors of the Governor and First Lady’s year 2000 Conference are not mentioned, but I think we get the general idea…

Choice quote:

Even with a lack of comprehensive data about why the problem exists, the research information clearly demonstrates that something must be done. (: (:
OK -- just DO something -- and afterwards, maybe, look for actual cause & effect connections....  "Lack of Comprehensive Data"
* According to data provided by the CDC, Oklahoma has the 2nd highest
divorce rate in the nation, by state of residence.
   Only Arkansas has a worse divorce rate.
- Only 14% of white women who married in the early 1940's eventually
divorced, whereas almost half of white women who married in the late
1960's and early 1970's have already become divorced. For African-American
women, the figures are 18% and nearly 60%
Presumably some men, then, also divorced.  Any stats about them??  Go figures -- a NFI participatory event is going to
talk about the women! (behind their backs, too).

It’s Oklahoma!  Notice, the emphasis on divorce rate, by race.   …   Here, amazingly, is the 2002 Testimony of that Director of HHS for OK:

United State Senate Finance Committee Thursday, May 16, 2002 10:00 A.M.

Room 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Issues in TANF Reauthorization: Building Stronger Families

Testimony of Howard H. Hendrick Oklahoma Cabinet Secretary of Health and Human Services and Director, Oklahoma Deparment of Human Services

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the privilege of appearing today to share the genesis and status of Oklahoma’s strategy to strengthen marriages and reduce divorce. In Oklahoma, we are spending TANF funds for this purpose because the research clearly shows that child well-being is enhanced when children are reared in two parent families where the parents have a low conflict marriage. …

(Governor Keating):   He hosted the nation’’s first ““Governor and First Lady’’s Conference on Marriage”” in March, of 1999. Based on the information learned there, Oklahoma’’s Marriage Initiative was launched. The Governor took key steps to ensure that the goal of reducing divorce and strengthening marriage was more than simply a political statement. Specifically the governor:

␣ Took the bold step of setting a specific, measurable goal – to reduce divorce in Oklahoma by 1/3 by the year 2010.

Question:  What right does any Governor have to even TRY and do this?  (Notice, by this time both houses of US Congress had already voted National Resolutions to Support Fatherhood:  1998, 1999).  By 2002, they had already chosen a curriculum, “PREP(r).”  This curriculum, well — as 2002 testimony says:

We selected PREP® (the Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program) as the state’’s curriculum because of its research basis and its evaluation record. It is a curriculum that has been used in the military for many years. PREP can be tailored to a variety of constituencies and the long-term efficacy of the twelve hours of education has been validated in a variety of research settings.

We are presently in the training stage of implementing the service delivery system. These skills are beginning to be offered in workshops throughout Oklahoma. The training includes identifying substance abuse risks and presentations by the Oklahoma Coalition against Domestic Violence. . .

(Concluding statement):

Based on what we’’ve learned so far, we continue to support the use of TANF funds to fund activities that strengthen families by growing healthy marriages.

GROWING HEALTHY MARRIAGES?  Then, literally, they are farming their populace — which is objectionable!

The input of “Theodore Ooms” of “Family Impact Seminars” was noted.  Here is the “Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars (PINFIS).  “Surprisingly” it is funded by many of the responsible fatherhood grantees I have come to recognize over the years, such as the Annie E. Casey Foundation:

The Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars aims to strengthen family policy by connecting state policymakers with research knowledge and researchers with policy knowledge. The Institute provides nonpartisan, solution-oriented research and a family impact perspective on issues being debated in state legislatures. We provide technical assistance to and facilitate dialogue among professionals conducting Family Impact Seminars in 28 sites across the country. If you are a PINFIS Affiliate, please click here to login.

The Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars is currently funded by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation and the William T. Grant Foundation. Past supporters include the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Copyright © 1993-2011. Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy.

26 States + D.C. get seminars from this Wisconsin-based (presumably nonprofit) group based at UW-Madison/Extension.  “The Seminars target state policymakers, including legislators, legislative aides, governor’s office staff, legislative service agency staff, and agency representatives. The traditional format of the 2-hour seminars consists of three 20-minute presentations given by a panel of premier researchers, program directors, and policy analysts. For each seminar, discussion sessions are held and a background briefing report summarizes high-quality research on the issue in a succinct, easy-to-understand format.”

UMichigan reveals they’ve had 16 Family Impact Seminars since 2000— and that the Kellogg Foundation is helping them receive this also.  This 2000 report, on one page sites a survey of “9 barriers to employment that single mothers face” and doesn’t mention — domestic violence at all.  However, on page 17, in a page dedicated to Domestic Violence, the two authors note:

Background Data and Research

Families who experience domestic violence are often also victims of poverty. Studies examining the association between domestic violence and poverty have found:

• Of current welfare recipients in Michigan, 63% have experienced physical abuse and 51% have experienced severe physical abuse during their lifetimes[12].

• Physical abuse/being afraid of someone was cited as the primary cause of homelessness (in a survey of homeless adults in Michigan) [7].

• Half of homeless women and children report being victims of domestic violence [5,7].

AND,. . . . well, here is the rest of the page:

These barriers consist of:

• Psychological effects of domestic violence (Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, depression, or anxiety)

• Sabotage by the abuser (destroying homework assignments, disabling cars and alarm clocks, interference with child care efforts, or harassment at work)

• Manipulation by the abuser (leaving marks and/or bruises that prevent the woman from attending work or an interview, or undermining self-confidence

These employment barriers can lead to tardiness, absenteeism and lack of productivity. Research shows that between 23% and 42% affected by domestic violence report that the abuse had an impact on their work performance [4,5,12].

A study conducted by the University of Michigan suggests that domestic violence by itself is not a barrier to employment,** but that the more barriers one has, the more difficult it is to leave welfare for work [2]. Further research is needed on multiple barriers to employment resulting from domestic violence.

**personal.  True, it’s possible to work — at times, and as allowed by an abuser — with domestic violence.  I have done many things competently immediately after and immediately preceding devastating attacks, some physical, some threats, some involving threats to our children, and once even after they were removed illegally, overnight, and despite law enforcement having been alerted to the threat shortly (same season) before.  Yes it is possible, depending on the person and the relationship, to hold down a job or series of jobs and simply take the abuse at home going or coming.  But, over long-term, the violence does escalate, and a person has to take action on it.  And it DOES cut down on productivity.   It is also possible to work, and in a relationship, not be able to spend the proceeds from one’s own work on one’s kids’ welfare.  Also because work tends to empower women, with men threatened with that independence, it is sometimes a time of increased harm, as he’s torn between wanting the money from that work, but realizing that “his” woman is going to have some work relationships he may not be able to utterly control.

A recent study found that approximately 70% of domestic violence victims did not disclose the abuse to their TANF caseworkers [10]. The same study found that 75% of those that did reveal information about the violence did not receive the appropriate support or services. These results imply that without the proper services, many victims of domestic violence and their children are forced to return home to their abuser.

(from page “Domestic Violence and Poverty Deborah Satyanathan and Anna Pollack”)

In a climate (see Oklahoma Marriage Initiative) where the powers that be believe — or say they do — that it’s lack of marriage (and not really, violence in marriages or other forms of abuse impacting work & home life) causing poverty, the only alternative individuals have, who are caught up in that — is to request the state to honor its laws against such abuse.  If the state, based on ITS own decisions made with help from The National Fatherhood Initiative and others, based on their theories — chooses to overstep Executive Authority, as Governor Keating of OK specifically intended to, and did, do — then he just weakened the very state (as a member of states under the US Constitution — at least at some time in the past century or two, we were) in the name of “strengthening families.”

This Study quotes the “Center for Budget & Policy Priorities” I cite also for a TANF summary (above).  They cite 4 barriers to work, NONE of which applied to many of the women I knew in DV support groups in the 1990s and have known since (to this day) in custody battles for their children, in the 2000s, where judicial discretion wins the day, and judges sit on the boards of nonprofits taking business from access visitation and other TANF-funded activities!   This study from a group named in influencing the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, relates:

Four of the major barriers identified by analysts at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities include [2]:

1. Little or no employment skills or education

2. Little or no prior work experience

3. Substandard housing conditions or lack of affordable housing

4. Having a child with special needs

I am sure these are relevant areas — but NOT for all families that are being driven ONTO (not helped OFF) TANF!  None of these applied to my case, nor many women I network with.  They are women (at least one, homeless), some have done jail time over failure to pay allotted child support (after being stay at home mothers, then forced to fight for custody), others have had to drop out of school; whatever it was they were doing in life — had to STOP to accommodate the machinery of the courts, and with activists and attorneys — neither of them — telling which end was up, until common sense said, those were poor answers (to the circumstances) and some began looking other places for rational explanations of the behavior of those making critical decisions about our lives and our kids.

It makes zero sense to at least acknowledge the role of DV in work sabotage, sometimes long-term, and not continue to insist that to receive help, someone absolutely needs coaching.  I had work experience AND degrees, and as it happens, many educated and/or professional women leaving abusive relationships, where part of this abuse was economic control under duress, did not need more “job skills.”  What we needed was quite different, namely a SAFETY ZONE with which to rebuild.   However, thanks to dynamics, and Governors like Governor Keating in OK, or any other Governor who is enabling some administrative or executive agency to undermine legal rights of the states’ citizens (regardless of race, gender but with regard to marital status), women like us, mothers innocent of child abuse or any criminal wrongdoing — have been literally destroyed and taken out of the work force, while the concept that somehow faith-based organizations give a damn, and deserve special-status red carpet in order to grab those grants and ram marriage & relationship education down peoples throats — and from a VERY narrow range of potential marketeers, several of who already receive federal funding to run demonstration studies on citizens in the military, in prison, on welfare, paying child support (or not, as case may be), in schools — and even in Head Start — to fine-tune how to produce THEIR desired result in society!

Public Strategies Inc. of Oklahoma continues to get its share — $2.5 million, this last round — of GRANTS (not just contracts) to do more of the same and expand it — as the situations in which TANF funds may be applied to form two-parent families continues to expand.  The OMI knew — from the start (Testimony in 2002 shows) that the curriculum of choice, PREP(r) was going to be used.

Notice who paid for that first “Governor and First Lady’s Conference.”

The phrase “low conflict” is typically an AFCC one.  Wonder what there input was here.

More — this is not a half-bad summary:

The amount states must spend is set at 80 percent of their 1994 contribution to AFDC-related programs. (In some cases this “maintenance of effort” (MOE) requirement can be reduced to 75 percent.) In 2009 states spent roughly $15 billion in state MOE funds. The amount states are required to spend (at the 80 percent level) in 2009 is about 45 percent below the amount they spent on AFDC-related programs in 1994, after adjusting for inflation.

* * *The Deficit Reduction Act also provided $100 million per year to support programs designed to promote healthy marriages.

When TANF was created in 1996, Congress provided $2 billion in a contingency fund; this fund was not used much until the current recession but a number of states have received contingency funds for one or more years between 2008 and 2011. The fund is now depleted and states only received partial allocations for 2010 and 2011. In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act {{ARRA}} (sometimes referred to as the “stimulus” bill), Congress created a new and temporary Emergency Funddesigned to provide aid to states that see increases in assistance caseloads or certain program costs as they address the needs of families during the economic downturn. Congress appropriated $5 billion to this new Emergency Fund for 2009 and 2010 — by the time the fund expired in September 2010, the $5 billion had been fully used.

Another Summary, from CRS (Congressional Research Service), prepared in 2007 — this is an outline

However, money taken from the public, collected in the U.S. Treasury, and reallocated out from there, usually has strings attached.  The strings attached to the restructuring of the child support system (Title IV-D) were significant; i.e., states needed to centralize their child support distribution system, and they were blessed with access visitation grants from a $10 million/year pool, proportionate to some stipulations based on their population, by Congress somehow, and this could be maintained IF the states were GOOD boys and complied.

The states have NOT been complying, but they are still getting the money, so I am presuming that there is some mutual benefit involved between state and local government stakeholders.  By the way, the word “Stakeholder” never usually applies to the people most drastically affected by policies set by stakeholders — which is those not at the table when policies are set, and likely in need of the services being restructured, recirculated, reframed, and redirected.

We are in the new millennium, which kicked off (after surviving the Y2K scare) pretty much with a possibly stolen election, and a King in the form of a President.  Kings, as their manner is, like to rewrite laws, restrict civil liberties, protect their cronies, equate their causes with “godly” causes, and protect THEIR, not the People’s Interest.  Such was definitely true the moment G. W. Bush took office in 2001, being sworn in to office under the same oath as previous Presidents.

The way was paved before him with 1996 Welfare Reform, which granted to states, allegedly, some of the co-dependent power it took from them, by allowing them “flexibility” (Block grants to states for TANF / welfare) to better address the needs of their citizens and reduce the welfare caseload.  If you are not “up” on this then research it some.  Center on Budget & Policy Priorities gives a brief recap.  These are good basic readings if you are, say, living and working in the United States.  Even if you are not doing this as a legal resident, or permanently, it may potentially affect situations such as were found in Seal Beach, California, when the father of a little boy, having 56% custody (despite prior violence, threats, and significant issues that would otherwise alert a reasonable person to danger) — being an ex-Marine — walked into a beauty salon with guns (and a bulletproof vest) and “offed” 6 people in the room (starting with a man, then his wife, then everyone else in there — a 73 yr old mother I heard survived serious wounds — and, who knows why, another innocent man sitting in a parked vehicle outside.  The joint custody policy comes from a combination of groups such as AFCC/CRC AND policies such as set in welfare reform.   These are not isolated incidences; they are recurring incidents (with more or less victims depending on circumstances) and their occurrences has not modified either welfare reform, or AFCC/CRC policy and agenda one whit, that I can see.  So, as a US resident, you will at some level be both funding these policies — and paying for clean up.   This is what we get for not paying closer attention to our legislatures, and doing WHATEVER is necessary to make time to do so, where at all possible!

From the “Center on Budget & Policy Priorities” whose board includes a person from the Brookings Institute, the Urban Institute (and Marian Wright Edelman of Children’s Defense Fund).  This nonprofit was founded in 1981, it says, and focuses on policies regarding low-income families, among other things.  I may not agree with all the viewpoints, but this outlines some of the facts:

They are going to detail some points about 1996 PRWORA, 2005 DRA, 2009 ARRA, and (let’s not forget the most recent, although I don’t know if this details), 2010 Claims Resolution Act

Sooner or later, (I hope), the public is going to wake up and ask just WHAT is its Congress authorizing when it comes to promoting marriage and fatherhood, and taking away from the original purpose of “AFDC” (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), or even the original purpose of TANF (aid to needy families), let alone the original purpose of the Child SUpport Enforcement (which was, child support enforcement).  Whatever the original purposes were — it’s clear which direction things are heading — which expansion of purposes, programs, and applications, and undermining of the ORIGINAL concept to a more circuitous, theory-based concept of how to help feed hungry children, and adult caretakers (including, like, parents?!)  in the households where they live, in America.

Policy Basics — an Introduction to TANF

What Is TANF?

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) is a block grant created by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, as part of a federal effort to “end welfare as we know it.” The TANF block grant replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, which had provided cash welfare to poor families with children since 1935.

Under the TANF structure, the federal government provides a block grant to the states, which use these funds to operate their own programs. States can use TANF dollars in ways designed to meet any of the four purposes set out in federal law, which are to: “(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage; (3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and (4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.” . . .

The law that created the TANF block grant initially authorized funding through the end of federal fiscal year 2002. After several short-term extensions, Congress reauthorized TANF in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 and made some modifications to the program;**TANF is now authorized through the end of federal fiscal year 2011 (September 30, 2011).

Who Is Eligible for TANF-Funded Benefits?

States have broad discretion to determine who is eligible for various TANF and MOE-funded benefits and services. In general, states must use the funds to serve families with children, with the only exceptions related to efforts to reduce non-marital childbearing and promote marriage . .

. . .

What Level of Funding Does TANF Provide to the States?

The basic TANF block grant has been set at $16.6 billion since it was established in 1996. As a result, the real value of the block grant has already fallen by about 28 percent.

The 1996 law also created supplemental grants for 17 states with high population growth or low block grant allocations relative to their needy population, as well as a contingency fund to help states weather a recession.** Congress regularly extended these supplemental grants, but the most recent extension covered only three of the four quarters of federal fiscal year 2011, and these grants expired July 1, 2011. This year represents the first time since 1996 that Congress has not fully funded the supplemental grants.

As noted above, states must spend state funds on programs for needy families as a condition of receiving the federal TANF block grant.

(Notice the #1 goal.  However, in Oklahoma, Ohio, other states, the emphasis was on goals 4, 3, 2 & 1, in approximate order, as shown by their policies.  I have blogged on the “OMI” before.

Apparently the DRA (2005) allowed states to categorize “MOE” expenses to NON-needy families (this is a footnote to a 2007 CRS [Congressional Research Service — you see their bill summaries also at Thomas.loc.gov) report by the same person, Mr. Gene Falk, Social Policy Specialist):

 FN 15 Prior to the enactment of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) MOE funds used to achieve TANF’s family formation goals were restricted to expenditures on “needy” families with children. The DRA had a provision that allows a state’s total expenditure on activities to achieve these goals to be counted without regard to a family’s need. However, HHS regulations issued on February 5, 2008, limit MOE expenditures related to the family formation goals except for activities related to promoting healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood. (See Appendix, “Families Considered “Engaged in Work” (the Numerator of the Participation Rate)” later in this report for a listing of these activities. For a discussion of this regulatory provision, see Federal Register, vol. 73, no. 24, p. 6517-6318.

THIS, friends, is how one can encounter divorce or custody cases in which one side is a millionaire, but still benefitting from the priorities these programs set up in the courtroom, i.e. promoting more noncustodial (meaning father) parenting time by means of — supervised visitation, counseling, mediation, parent education, etc.  Court-referrals..

Using Federal TANF Grants

Federal TANF grants may be used for a wide range of benefits and services for families with children. Grants may be used within a state TANF program or transferred to either the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF, the “child care block grant”) or the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG). Unused TANF funds can also be reserved (saved), without fiscal year limit.12

FN12 Before the enactment of the ARRA, reserved funds could only be used for the purpose of providing “assistance” (often, cash welfare). The ARRA eliminated this restriction to the use of reserve funds, so that reserve funds can be used to provide any allowed TANF benefit or service.

**what Oklahoma did with its contingency fund, and other states (or certain appointees in other states) seem to like this model.  The ACF/HHS site mentions Oklahoma Marriage Initiative  as a model of how to use MOE funds, after first asserting that:

Healthy marriages are vitally important to the long term well-being of children. Beyond the economic advantages important for supporting children, the experiences and examples shown to children being raised by parents who enjoy a loving and long-term commitment yields tremendous developmental benefits for children. Forming and sustaining a happy and healthy marriage requires, in part, good fortune and, in larger part, parents possessing the knowledge and commitment to exercise healthy relationship skills that form the basis of healthy marriages.

(From the Director of HHS’s Office of Family Assistance, year, 2004.)

Certainly inherited wealth, circumstances of birth including where and to whom — have little to do with this; really, it’s about skills moreso.  Therefore, forget those other factors, let’s focus on the “healthy relationship skills” Well said, from an organization that distributes, but apparently doesn’t track too well, the funds!

Since the inception of PRWORA, Oklahoma has capitalized on the flexibility of TANF funds by investing $10 million in the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative (OMI). OMI was established under the third and fourth statutory purposes of TANF. OMI currently delivers marriage and relationship training statewide through social service systems, educational systems and volunteer organizations. Participants access training in diverse settings such as workforce development classes, high schools, military bases, prisons, first time offender programs, churches, universities and many more. In 2003, Oklahoma reported{{who checked??}}  that 938 workshops were conducted, serving 1,250 participants and training 1,200 individuals to provide future workshops. For additional information on Oklahoma’s Marriage Initiative please visit:http://www.okmarriage.org/services/healthyrelationships.asp

As I blogged before, the Governor of Oklahoma pushed this one from the top, with help from “expert speakers” and the head of his HHS, who pointed out there was TANF money sitting around.

The economic researchers found some social indicators that were hurting Oklahoma’s economy. They mentioned the high divorce rate, high rates of out-of-wedlock births and high rates of child deaths because of child abuse. One OSU economist wrote in an editorial, “Oklahoma’s high divorce rate and low per-capita income are interrelated. They hold hands. They push and pull each other. There’s no faster way [in Oklahoma!] for a married woman with children to become poor than to suddenly become a single mom.”

(Child abuse, of course doesn’t happen within marriages, and abuse of one’s kids is not a cause of divorce.) Then “Governor and First Lady’s (day-long) Conference on Marriage” with speaker..

(See, as recounted on a “smartmarriages.com” list-serv in 1999, how Gary Smalley & Wade Horn of the NFI were there…”Marriages must be strengthened for the sake of America’s children”

…

Theodora Ooms with the Family Impact Seminar in Washington
D.C. called the marriage conference historic. "You are pioneers here in
Oklahoma. I have been trying for ten years in Washington D.C. to get this
on the agenda and get some money to work on this issue and no one in
Washington will talk about it.
The Conference also included breakout sessions with attendees discussing
how the various sectors can work together and how government policy can
also impact the success of marriages. Among the items discussed: 

Public education- emphasize the positive aspects of marriage to young
people
Covenant marriages
Emphasis on premarital counseling, possibly even legally requiring it
Making laws more "family friendly"
Tax laws-possibly eliminating marriage penalty
Possible repeal of no fault divorce laws 

The Governor and First Lady¼s Conference on Marriage was facilitated by
Jerry Regier, the Governor¼s Cabinet Secretary for Health and Human
Services. It was privately funded by several groups and individuals,
including the Burbridge Foundation and the Baptist General Convention.

Good grief.   the Baptist General Convention got with the Governor and helped propose taking welfare funds to promote marriage,

since their own Sunday Sermons weren’t persuasive enough?  That’s “ripe.”

BURBRIDGE INFO (random, from Internet) — PART 1:

Burbridge Foundation, I’m going to look up, obviously.  From “TheLostOgle.com” (apparently some Oklahomans having some fund poking fun at their state, although I note, “*.com”)  This foundation was #93 on the top 100 most embarrassing things about Oklahoma (from 2007, its centenary?):

Top 100 Oklahoma Embarrassments: 100-91

Posted on Monday, July 16th, 2007 under Best of OKC, Dean Blevins, OKC Music,Oklahoma City Alumni, Oklahoma City Media, Oklahoma City Radio, The Sports Animal,Top 100 Oklahoma Embarrassments by Tony

For the eight of you out there who didn’t realize it, 2007 marks the 100th anniversary of the state of Oklahoma. To mark this, various publications around the state have been featuring all sorts of Top 100 lists that have provoked virtually no controversy and have not been talked about at the water cooler. In fact, we’ve heard so little discussion about these lists that we wonder if anyone is actually reading them. We sure don’t.

It does seem, though, that the focus has been on the more positive elements of Oklahoma. While we celebrate those things just like the rest of the world, it seems wrong to ignore the more humiliating aspects of the state of Oklahoma. Naturally, we’re here to fill that void, in this ten-part series that will run every Monday. Today, numbers 91 through 100 of Oklahoma’s Biggest Embarrassments..

. . .

93. Bobbie Burbridge Lane

Those commercials for the Burbridge foundation are possibly the most annoying thing on local radio, which is saying something. When listening to Burbridge Lane lecture us about pornography or religion being taken out of public schools or whatever the pet issue of the day is, we’re convinced that Burbridge Lane wants to return the United States to the 1950′s, which probably sucked really bad. 

There’s usually some truth on the heels of humor, and this one rings true:

BURBRIDGE INFO (random, from Internet) — PART 2:  Could THIS be why The Burbridge Foundation is so big on Marriage (dates to 1974).

(read for comic relief): (from “law.justia.com”)

496 F.2d 326: The Burbridge Foundation, Inc., Appellant,

v. Reinholdt & Gardner et al., Appellees

Robert E. Hornberger, Fort Smith, Ark., for appellant.

G. Alan Wooten, Harper, Young & Smith, Fort Smith, Ark., for appellees.

Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, Senior Circuit Judge, and LAY and ROSS, Circuit judges.

PER CURIAM.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. – 496 F.2d 326

Submitted March 14, 1974.Decided May 15, 1974

. . .(The present suit is basically an action in rem seeking relinquishment of certain stocks held by the stakeholders, Reinholdt & Gardner. The Foundation’s memorandum in the trial court stated that ‘the relief specifically sought is the return and delivery to The Burbridge Foundation of its stock deposited with that defendant (Reinholdt & Gardner). …Upon registry of a personal judgment arising from a divorce decree, Velma Jean Holloway, formerly Velma Jean Burbridge, obtained a writ of garnishment from the Chancery Court of Sebastian County, Arkansas, against Reinholdt & Gardner, a stock brokerage firm, to attach any stocks belonging to her former husband, R. O. Burbridge. The brokerage firm denied holding any stock in Burbridge’s name, but admitted it had an account in the name of The Burbridge Foundation. The Burbridge Foundation intervened in the state court proceedings. Shortly thereafter, The Foundation brought suit in the federal district court against Reinholdt & Gardner, seeking recovery of the stocks. In its complaint, The Foundation made the same allegations it raised as intervenor in state court, i.e., that the stocks belonged to it and not R. O. Burbridge personally. In addition The Foundation for the first time asserted that the Arkansas garnishment statute was unconstitutional in that it sought to deprive The Foundation of its property without due process of law.1 Reinholdt & Gardner answered that it could not relinquish the stocks until ordered to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. The Holloways2 intervened in the federal action and moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court sustained the motion to dismiss. The Burbridge Foundation appeal[ed].

(and apparently lost).

(SMILE): [2]”Russell B. Holloway was the divorce attorney for Velma Jean Burbridge (now Holloway) and was awarded $12,000 in attorney’s fees. He was also a party to the state garnishment suit”
So, Velma Jean divorced Mr. Burbridge, eventually married her divorce attorney, and seems to have gotten some of his stock, too.  This being 1974; so in 2000, here is this Burbridge Foundation sponsoring a let’s support marriage (and potentially institute covenant marriage / eliminate no-fault divorce, etc.) in Oklahoma.  Moral:  There is usually a back story to most public policy, somewhere . ..   and more than not, based in someone’s personal issues, but wealth & power tends to think large (how do we think they got wealthy & powerful in the first place?), and the rest of the world should conform to their  theories…
(Is this the same Burbridge Foundation as in Oklahoma, or that sponsored that Governor’s Leadership Conference?  Possibly.  I’m not going to stress over this today.)

BURBRIDGE INFO (Random, from internet) PART 3:   Self-description on website:

The Burbridge Foundation is a Christian foundation dedicated to working solutions to problems impacting our families and our culture. We do this by bringing public awareness to these problems, by working alongside other faiths {{REALLY?  I’d like to see that — because the  “SALT & LIGHT LEADERSHIP TRAINING” below indicates non-Christians need not apply, and the carefully balanced photo on there  (with middle-aged Caucasian an at the front of the pyramid) doesn’t even contain a single African-American woman — does Oklahoma not have any?  There is an African-American male, at the back of the triangle, too….}} and concerned citizens interested in strengthening the fabric of our community character, and by providing leadership support to organizations of like vision.

We continue to work across the country with individuals and organizations combating the scourge of pornography – a deadly and often underestimated cancer assaulting the family. For information on the “WRAP Campaign” and other information on fighting porn go to www.moralityinmedia.org.

Our current effort focuses on Christian leadership development. In 2007, we reached out to several Oklahoma City Christian lay leaders with a vision for the creation of “salt and light leadership training” to leaders of this and other cities. This has now become the “SALLT Fellowship” which can be found at www.saltandlightleadership.com.

Soli Deo Gloria  (Latin: to God only be Glory; JS Bach used to sign his manuscripts with this, hear tell)

“We are not a direct grant-giving organization.”
Also at the same street address is “Character First”

Our Approach

Character First is a professional development and character education program that is delivered many ways—training seminars, books, magazines, curriculum, email—that focus on real-life issues at work, school, home, and the community.

Gee, then why might they NOT sponsor such a conference with the Governor on curriculum-based ways to strengthen marriages?

Communities & Character Councils

Character First works with government leaders and community organizations around the world who want to promote character on a local basis.

[[website says “Character First” began in 1992 at an Oil & Gas-servicing company called “Kimray”]]

To do this, many communities form a “Character Council” (often a non-profit, non-religious charitable organization) to promote character in all sectors of a community—including business, government, education, law enforcement, media, the faith community, and families.

The following communities have taken various steps toward promoting character, such as passing resolutions, forming character councils, implementing Character First, and organizing special events.

AND also at this address (3rd organization):
Strata Leadership, LLC is a small consulting firm located in Edmond, Oklahoma focused on helping individuals and organizations succeed.

Strata Leadership, LLC.

And here is where we see some Dispute Resolution background, familiar in the anti-divorce courtrooms around AFCC personnel as well:

hrough Strata’s partnerships with other organizations such as Character First!, our team consists of nearly 15 full-time employees.  Strata is led by our executive leadership team of Strata President, Dr. Nathan Mellor and Executive Vice-President, Wayne Whitesell.

[Photo of young-looking Caucasian guy]

Dr. Nathan Mellor is a co-owner and president of Strata.  He is a popular speaker who makes 125-175 presentations per year across America and around the globe.  He has spoken in over  states and in countries such as: Australia, Belize, Guyana, Jordan, Mexico, Russia and Rwanda.

Dr. Mellor holds the Bachelor of Arts (BA) and the Master of Science in Education (MSE) degrees fromHarding University. He earned the Master of Dispute Resolution (MDR) degree from the Pepperdine University School of Law – Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution and the Doctor of Education (EDD) in Organizational Leadership degree from Pepperdine University.

STrata’s Partners (at least 2 at the same address):

Strata is proud to partner with and promote the work of the following friends:

Copyright © 2009 Strata Leadership, L.L.C. All rights reserved.

Products — pricey!

The “other” sponsors of the Governor and First Lady’s year 2000 Conference are not mentioned, but I think we get the general idea…

Choice quote:

Even with a lack of comprehensive data about why the problem exists, the research information clearly demonstrates that something must be done. (: (:
OK -- just DO something -- and afterwards, maybe, look for actual cause & effect connections....  "Lack of Comprehensive Data"
* According to data provided by the CDC, Oklahoma has the 2nd highest
divorce rate in the nation, by state of residence.
   Only Arkansas has a worse divorce rate.
- Only 14% of white women who married in the early 1940's eventually
divorced, whereas almost half of white women who married in the late
1960's and early 1970's have already become divorced. For African-American
women, the figures are 18% and nearly 60%
Presumably some men, then, also divorced.  Any stats about them??  Go figures -- a NFI participatory event is going to
talk about the women! (behind their backs, too).

It’s Oklahoma!  Notice, the emphasis on divorce rate, by race.   …   Here, amazingly, is the 2002 Testimony of that Director of HHS for OK:

United State Senate Finance Committee Thursday, May 16, 2002 10:00 A.M.

Room 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Issues in TANF Reauthorization: Building Stronger Families

Testimony of Howard H. Hendrick Oklahoma Cabinet Secretary of Health and Human Services and Director, Oklahoma Deparment of Human Services

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the privilege of appearing today to share the genesis and status of Oklahoma’s strategy to strengthen marriages and reduce divorce. In Oklahoma, we are spending TANF funds for this purpose because the research clearly shows that child well-being is enhanced when children are reared in two parent families where the parents have a low conflict marriage. …

(Governor Keating):   He hosted the nation’’s first ““Governor and First Lady’’s Conference on Marriage”” in March, of 1999. Based on the information learned there, Oklahoma’’s Marriage Initiative was launched. The Governor took key steps to ensure that the goal of reducing divorce and strengthening marriage was more than simply a political statement. Specifically the governor:

␣ Took the bold step of setting a specific, measurable goal – to reduce divorce in Oklahoma by 1/3 by the year 2010.

Question:  What right does any Governor have to even TRY and do this?  (Notice, by this time both houses of US Congress had already voted National Resolutions to Support Fatherhood:  1998, 1999).  By 2002, they had already chosen a curriculum, “PREP(r).”  This curriculum, well — as 2002 testimony says:

We selected PREP® (the Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program) as the state’’s curriculum because of its research basis and its evaluation record. It is a curriculum that has been used in the military for many years. PREP can be tailored to a variety of constituencies and the long-term efficacy of the twelve hours of education has been validated in a variety of research settings.

We are presently in the training stage of implementing the service delivery system. These skills are beginning to be offered in workshops throughout Oklahoma. The training includes identifying substance abuse risks and presentations by the Oklahoma Coalition against Domestic Violence. . .

(Concluding statement):

Based on what we’’ve learned so far, we continue to support the use of TANF funds to fund activities that strengthen families by growing healthy marriages.

GROWING HEALTHY MARRIAGES?  Then, literally, they are farming their populace — which is objectionable!

The input of “Theodore Ooms” of “Family Impact Seminars” was noted.  Here is the “Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars (PINFIS).  “Surprisingly” it is funded by many of the responsible fatherhood grantees I have come to recognize over the years, such as the Annie E. Casey Foundation:

The Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars aims to strengthen family policy by connecting state policymakers with research knowledge and researchers with policy knowledge. The Institute provides nonpartisan, solution-oriented research and a family impact perspective on issues being debated in state legislatures. We provide technical assistance to and facilitate dialogue among professionals conducting Family Impact Seminars in 28 sites across the country. If you are a PINFIS Affiliate, please click here to login.

The Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars is currently funded by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation and the William T. Grant Foundation. Past supporters include the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Copyright © 1993-2011. Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy.

26 States + D.C. get seminars from this Wisconsin-based (presumably nonprofit) group based at UW-Madison/Extension.  “The Seminars target state policymakers, including legislators, legislative aides, governor’s office staff, legislative service agency staff, and agency representatives. The traditional format of the 2-hour seminars consists of three 20-minute presentations given by a panel of premier researchers, program directors, and policy analysts. For each seminar, discussion sessions are held and a background briefing report summarizes high-quality research on the issue in a succinct, easy-to-understand format.”

UMichigan reveals they’ve had 16 Family Impact Seminars since 2000— and that the Kellogg Foundation is helping them receive this also.  This 2000 report, on one page sites a survey of “9 barriers to employment that single mothers face” and doesn’t mention — domestic violence at all.  However, on page 17, in a page dedicated to Domestic Violence, the two authors note:

Background Data and Research

Families who experience domestic violence are often also victims of poverty. Studies examining the association between domestic violence and poverty have found:

• Of current welfare recipients in Michigan, 63% have experienced physical abuse and 51% have experienced severe physical abuse during their lifetimes[12].

• Physical abuse/being afraid of someone was cited as the primary cause of homelessness (in a survey of homeless adults in Michigan) [7].

• Half of homeless women and children report being victims of domestic violence [5,7].

AND,. . . . well, here is the rest of the page:

These barriers consist of:

• Psychological effects of domestic violence (Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, depression, or anxiety)

• Sabotage by the abuser (destroying homework assignments, disabling cars and alarm clocks, interference with child care efforts, or harassment at work)

• Manipulation by the abuser (leaving marks and/or bruises that prevent the woman from attending work or an interview, or undermining self-confidence

These employment barriers can lead to tardiness, absenteeism and lack of productivity. Research shows that between 23% and 42% affected by domestic violence report that the abuse had an impact on their work performance [4,5,12].

A study conducted by the University of Michigan suggests that domestic violence by itself is not a barrier to employment,** but that the more barriers one has, the more difficult it is to leave welfare for work [2]. Further research is needed on multiple barriers to employment resulting from domestic violence.

**personal.  True, it’s possible to work — at times, and as allowed by an abuser — with domestic violence.  I have done many things competently immediately after and immediately preceding devastating attacks, some physical, some threats, some involving threats to our children, and once even after they were removed illegally, overnight, and despite law enforcement having been alerted to the threat shortly (same season) before.  Yes it is possible, depending on the person and the relationship, to hold down a job or series of jobs and simply take the abuse at home going or coming.  But, over long-term, the violence does escalate, and a person has to take action on it.  And it DOES cut down on productivity.   It is also possible to work, and in a relationship, not be able to spend the proceeds from one’s own work on one’s kids’ welfare.  Also because work tends to empower women, with men threatened with that independence, it is sometimes a time of increased harm, as he’s torn between wanting the money from that work, but realizing that “his” woman is going to have some work relationships he may not be able to utterly control.

A recent study found that approximately 70% of domestic violence victims did not disclose the abuse to their TANF caseworkers [10]. The same study found that 75% of those that did reveal information about the violence did not receive the appropriate support or services. These results imply that without the proper services, many victims of domestic violence and their children are forced to return home to their abuser.

(from page “Domestic Violence and Poverty Deborah Satyanathan and Anna Pollack”)

In a climate (see Oklahoma Marriage Initiative) where the powers that be believe — or say they do — that it’s lack of marriage (and not really, violence in marriages or other forms of abuse impacting work & home life) causing poverty, the only alternative individuals have, who are caught up in that — is to request the state to honor its laws against such abuse.  If the state, based on ITS own decisions made with help from The National Fatherhood Initiative and others, based on their theories — chooses to overstep Executive Authority, as Governor Keating of OK specifically intended to, and did, do — then he just weakened the very state (as a member of states under the US Constitution — at least at some time in the past century or two, we were) in the name of “strengthening families.”

This Study quotes the “Center for Budget & Policy Priorities” I cite also for a TANF summary (above).  They cite 4 barriers to work, NONE of which applied to many of the women I knew in DV support groups in the 1990s and have known since (to this day) in custody battles for their children, in the 2000s, where judicial discretion wins the day, and judges sit on the boards of nonprofits taking business from access visitation and other TANF-funded activities!   This study from a group named in influencing the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, relates:

Four of the major barriers identified by analysts at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities include [2]:

1. Little or no employment skills or education

2. Little or no prior work experience

3. Substandard housing conditions or lack of affordable housing

4. Having a child with special needs

I am sure these are relevant areas — but NOT for all families that are being driven ONTO (not helped OFF) TANF!  None of these applied to my case, nor many women I network with.  They are women (at least one, homeless), some have done jail time over failure to pay allotted child support (after being stay at home mothers, then forced to fight for custody), others have had to drop out of school; whatever it was they were doing in life — had to STOP to accommodate the machinery of the courts, and with activists and attorneys — neither of them — telling which end was up, until common sense said, those were poor answers (to the circumstances) and some began looking other places for rational explanations of the behavior of those making critical decisions about our lives and our kids.

It makes zero sense to at least acknowledge the role of DV in work sabotage, sometimes long-term, and not continue to insist that to receive help, someone absolutely needs coaching.  I had work experience AND degrees, and as it happens, many educated and/or professional women leaving abusive relationships, where part of this abuse was economic control under duress, did not need more “job skills.”  What we needed was quite different, namely a SAFETY ZONE with which to rebuild.   However, thanks to dynamics, and Governors like Governor Keating in OK, or any other Governor who is enabling some administrative or executive agency to undermine legal rights of the states’ citizens (regardless of race, gender but with regard to marital status), women like us, mothers innocent of child abuse or any criminal wrongdoing — have been literally destroyed and taken out of the work force, while the concept that somehow faith-based organizations give a damn, and deserve special-status red carpet in order to grab those grants and ram marriage & relationship education down peoples throats — and from a VERY narrow range of potential marketeers, several of who already receive federal funding to run demonstration studies on citizens in the military, in prison, on welfare, paying child support (or not, as case may be), in schools — and even in Head Start — to fine-tune how to produce THEIR desired result in society!

Public Strategies Inc. of Oklahoma continues to get its share — $2.5 million, this last round — of GRANTS (not just contracts) to do more of the same and expand it — as the situations in which TANF funds may be applied to form two-parent families continues to expand.  The OMI knew — from the start (Testimony in 2002 shows) that the curriculum of choice, PREP(r) was going to be used.

Notice who paid for that first “Governor and First Lady’s Conference.”

The phrase “low conflict” is typically an AFCC one.  Wonder what there input was here.

More — this is not a half-bad summary:

The amount states must spend is set at 80 percent of their 1994 contribution to AFDC-related programs. (In some cases this “maintenance of effort” (MOE) requirement can be reduced to 75 percent.) In 2009 states spent roughly $15 billion in state MOE funds. The amount states are required to spend (at the 80 percent level) in 2009 is about 45 percent below the amount they spent on AFDC-related programs in 1994, after adjusting for inflation.

* * *The Deficit Reduction Act also provided $100 million per year to support programs designed to promote healthy marriages.

When TANF was created in 1996, Congress provided $2 billion in a contingency fund; this fund was not used much until the current recession but a number of states have received contingency funds for one or more years between 2008 and 2011. The fund is now depleted and states only received partial allocations for 2010 and 2011. In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act {{ARRA}} (sometimes referred to as the “stimulus” bill), Congress created a new and temporary Emergency Funddesigned to provide aid to states that see increases in assistance caseloads or certain program costs as they address the needs of families during the economic downturn. Congress appropriated $5 billion to this new Emergency Fund for 2009 and 2010 — by the time the fund expired in September 2010, the $5 billion had been fully used.

Another Summary, from CRS (Congressional Research Service), prepared in 2007 — this is an outline

However, money taken from the public, collected in the U.S. Treasury, and reallocated out from there, usually has strings attached.  The strings attached to the restructuring of the child support system (Title IV-D) were significant; i.e., states needed to centralize their child support distribution system, and they were blessed with access visitation grants from a $10 million/year pool, proportionate to some stipulations based on their population, by Congress somehow, and this could be maintained IF the states were GOOD boys and complied.

The states have NOT been complying, but they are still getting the money, so I am presuming that there is some mutual benefit involved between state and local government stakeholders.  By the way, the word “Stakeholder” never usually applies to the people most drastically affected by policies set by stakeholders — which is those not at the table when policies are set, and likely in need of the services being restructured, recirculated, reframed, and redirected.

Here’s a 2010 (June 24, 2010, to be specific) Heritage Foundation article complaining about increasing entitlements Obama’s escalation of welfare roles (true) and how the “success” of TANF should be applied to other federal programs.

Confronting the Unsustainable Growth of Welfare Entitlements:

Principles of Reform and the Next Steps

June 24, 2010

  • Do you know who the Heritage Foundation is?
  • Do you know who funds them? or where to find out?
  • Do you know who they fund, or where to find out?
  • Could you participate pro or con in this argument, supporting it with any facts?
  • Do you agree or not?
  • Can you put those arguments in a different context than they do?

They proclaimed:

Abstract: The growth of welfare spending is unsustainable and will drive the United States into bankruptcy if allowed to continue. President Barack Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget request would increase total welfare spending to $953 billion—a 42 percent increase over welfare spending in FY 2008, the last full year of the Bush Administration. To bring welfare spending under control, Congress should reduce welfare spending to pre-recession levels after the recession ends and then limit future growth to the rate of inflation. Congress should also restore work requirements in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program and apply them to other federal welfare programs.

They also said of TANF that it was a success.  Yet — in reality — it is the means by which expansion of the welfare state — particularly after faith-based organizations were invited in — was assured.   The track record is that MANY of these are not just incompetent — but chronically dishonest, and when caught (as I tend to stay) in one state, simply hop over to another.  I can name names and organizations and dates, sometimes States, of the “hops.”   They obtain web resources through HHS “compassion capital” or other grants, and this last season, our government just gave over $1 million GRANT to ICF International, LLC (or whatever it’s proper current name is) a group currently doing $1 BILLION business with the Feds, and with an agenda to transform communities through (basically, media domination).

Listen to this:

Reform should be based on five principles:

  1. Slowing the growth of the welfare state. Unending government deficits are pushing the United States toward bankruptcy. The U.S. simply cannot afford the massive increases in welfare spending planned by President Barack Obama. Welfare spending is projected to cost taxpayers $10.3 trillion over the next 10 years.[1] Congress needs to establish reasonable fiscal constraints within the welfare system. Once the current recession ends, aggregate welfare spending should be rolled back to pre-recession levels. After this rollback has been completed, the growth of welfare spending should be capped at the rate of inflation.
  2. Promoting personal responsibility and work. Able-bodied welfare recipients should be required to work or to prepare for work as a condition of receiving aid. Food stamps and housing assistance, two of the largest programs for the needy, should be aligned with the TANF program to require able-bodied adults to work or to prepare for work for a minimum of 30 hours per week.  (see ## my footnote)
  3. Providing a portion of welfare assistance as loans rather than as grants. Welfare to able-bodied adults creates a potential moral hazard because providing assistance to those in need can lead to an increase in the behaviors that generate the need for aid in the first place. If welfare assistance rewards behaviors that lead to future dependence, costs can spiral out of control. A reformed welfare policy can provide temporary assistance to those in need while reducing the moral hazard associated with welfare by treating a portion of welfare aid as a loan to be repaid by able-bodied recipients rather than as an outright grant from the taxpayer.
  4. Ending the welfare marriage penalty and encouraging marriage in low-income communities. The collapse of marriage is the major cause of child poverty in the U.S. today. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of children in the U.S. were born out of wedlock; today, the figure is over 40 percent.[2] Most alarmingly, the out-of-wedlock birthrate among African–Americans is 72 percent. The outcomes for children raised in single, never-married homes are greatly diminished.Current means-tested welfare programs penalize low-income recipients who get married; these anti-marriage penalties should be reduced or eliminated. In addition, government should provide information on the importance of marriage to individuals in poor communities who have a high risk of having children out of wedlock. Particular emphasis should be placed on the benefits to children of a married two-parent family.***
  5. Limit low-skill immigration. Around 15 percent ($100 billion per year) of total means-tested welfare spending goes to households headed by immigrants with high school degrees or less.[3] One-third of all immigrants lack a high school degree.[4] Over the next 10 years, America will spend $1.5 trillion on welfare benefits for lower-skill immigrants. Government policy should limit future immigration to those who will be net fiscal contributors, paying more in taxes than they receive in benefits. The legal immigration system should not encourage immigration of low-skill immigrants who would increase poverty in the nation and impose vast new costs on already overburdened taxpayers.

**Never mind that this has been done now — for years — and at statewide level.  Can we reasonably assume that no one at the Heritage Foundation knows this?

##FN2 — how about requiring recipients of diversionary programs from child support and TANF to document that THEY worked at least 30 hours a week?  And have incorporated, and that their incorporations have actually been proper, are current, and if required to, filed a 990?  I’ve seen dropped loose ends of $50K a pop (SolidSource in Van Wert, OH comes to mind) or others have found dropped loose ends of $227,000.  MOreover, we have child support privatized to outside organizations, such as MAXIMUS — themselves caught in fraud and overbilling — and THEY continue to receive government benefits from the US in the form of renewed contracts, even after paying, for example $30 million in settlement fees over these matters.

So I say, let’s put the focus on the MACRO-ECONOMIC trends — namely allowing corporations and HHS / DOJ /DOE to get in bed with them to determine whether future employees of these corporations eat, have safe drinking water, and have access to decent educations (not just skills training for globally noncompetitive jobs in the same corporations!)

POINT 4, above:

. . .encouraging marriage in low-income families.   The Collapse of Marriage is the Major Factor in Child Poverty Today.

No it’s not.  That’s a single-source, single-interpretation of the causes of poverty.

Now, I could debate that at least logically, following the words “Sez who?” and “Who Sez those are the only experts?” and then poke some holes in the rhetoric.

Could You? Should You?  Or don’t you care about the use of taxes and public policy any more?

Go to the actual laws:

THE LAWS IN QUESTION:

PRWORA link:

PUBLIC LAW 104 – 193 – PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND WORK OPPORTUNITY RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1996

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA,Pub.L. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105, enacted August 22, 1996) is a United States federal law considered to be a fundamental shift in both the method and goal of federal cash assistance to the poor. The bill added a workforce development component to welfare legislation, encouraging employment among the poor. The bill was a cornerstone of the Republican Contract With Americaand was introduced by Rep. E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL-22) who believed welfare was partly responsible for bringing immigrants to the United States.[1] Bill Clinton signed PRWORA into law on August 22, 1996, fulfilling his 1992 campaign promise to “end welfare as we have come to know it”.[2]

H. REPT. 109-276  – DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 2005

Back to search results
(Wikipedia note — TANF Reauthorization was contained in this);  
 The reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program was also contained in the bill, as was the provision for the Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005. Part of the TANF reauthorization reduces the threshold for passport denial for child support arrearages under 42 USC 652(k)to $2,500.
 
 

Senate bill S. 1932 passed the Senate, with a tie-breaking vote cast by Vice PresidentDick Cheney, and House bill H.R. 4241 passed the House 217-215. The Senate bill was signed by PresidentGeorge W. Bush on February 8, 2006.[2]

[Dispute over legal status

A dispute arose over whether both houses of Congress had approved the same bill. Those contending that the bill is not a law argue there were different versions of the same bill, neither of which was approved by both the House and the Senate. They argue that the document signed by the President would not have the force of law, on the ground that the enacting process bypassed the Bicameral Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  (For what wikipedia is worth, find this interesting….)

 

P.L. 109–171, Approved February 8, 2006 (120 Stat. 4)

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005

*    *    *    *    *    *    *

SECTION 1. [42 U.S.C. 1305 note]  SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Deficit Reduction Act of 2005”.

Has sections on TANF & Child Support.

SEC. 7101. TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES AND RELATED PROGRAMS FUNDING THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2010.

(a) [None Assigned]  In General.—Activities authorized by part A of title IV and section 1108(b) of the Social Security Act (adjusted, as applicable, by or under this subtitle, the amendments made by this subtitle, and the TANF Emergency Response and Recovery Act of 2005[275]) shall continue through September 30, 2010, in the manner authorized for fiscal year 2004, and out of any money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise appropriated, there are hereby appropriated such sums as may be necessary for such purpose. Grants and payments may be made pursuant to this authority on a quarterly basis through fiscal year 2010 at the level provided for such activities for the corresponding quarter of fiscal year 2004 (or, as applicable, at such greater level as may result from the application of this subtitle, the amendments made by this subtitle, and the TANF Emergency Response and Recovery Act of 2005), except that in the case of section 403(a)(3) of the Social Security Act, grants and payments may be made pursuant to this authority only through fiscal year 2010[276] and in the case of section 403(a)(4) of the Social Security Act, no grants shall be made for any fiscal year occurring after fiscal year 2005.

*    *    *    *    *    *    *

SEC. 7301. ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT.

 (etc.)

The Deficit Reduction Act also reauthorizes welfare reform for another 5 years. Welfare reform has proved a tremendous success over the past decade. By insisting on programs that require work and self-sufficiency in return for Federal aid, we’ve helped cut welfare cases by more than half since 1996. Now we’re building on that progress by renewing welfare reform with a billion-dollar increase in child care funding and new grants to support healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood programs.

One of the reasons for the success of welfare reform is a policy called charitable choice which allows faith-based groups that provide social services to receive Federal funding without changing the way they hire. Ten years ago, Congress made welfare the first Federal program to include charitable choice. The bill I sign today will extend charitable choice for another 5 years and expand it to the new healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood programs. Appreciate the hard work of all who supported the extension

of charitable choice—including the good- hearted men and women of the faith-based community who are here today. By reauthor- izing welfare reform with charitable choice, we will help millions more Americans move from welfare to work and find independence and dignity and hope.

The message of the bill I sign today is straightforward: By setting priorities and making sure tax dollars are spent wisely, America can be compassionate and respon- sible at the same time. Spending restraint de- mands difficult choices, yet making those choices is what the American people sent us to Washington to do. One of our most impor- tant responsibilities is to keep this economy strong and vibrant and secure for our chil- dren and our grandchildren. We can be proud that we’re helping to meet that respon- sibility today.

Now I ask the Members of the Congress to join me as I sign the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.

NOTE: The President spoke at 3:31 p.m. in the East Room at the White House. S. 1932, approved February 8, was assigned Public Law No. 109– 171.

{{He also began by distinguishing between DISCRETIONARY and MANDATORY spending:

At the same time, my budget tightens the belt on Government spending. Every American family has to set priorities and live within a budget, and the American people expect us to do the same right here in Washington, DC.

The Federal budget has two types of spending, discretionary spending and manda- tory spending. Discretionary spending is the kind of spending Congress votes on every year. Last year, Congress met my request and passed bills that cut discretionary spending not related to defense or homeland security. And this year, my budget again proposes to cut this spending. My budget also proposes again to keep the growth in overall discre- tionary spending below the rate of inflation

AND ARRA:
Wikipedia:

 (Pub.L. 111-5) and commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, is an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009 and signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Barack Obama.

To respond to the late-2000s recession, the primary objective for ARRA was to save and create jobs almost immediately. Secondary objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and ‘green’ energy. The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was estimated to be $787 billion at the time of passage. The Act included direct spending in infrastructure, education, health, and energy, federal tax incentives, and expansion ofunemployment benefits and other social welfare provisions. The Act also included many items not directly related to economic recovery such as long-term spending projects (e.g., a study of the effectiveness of medical treatments) and other items specifically included by Congress (e.g., a limitation on executive compensation in federally aided banks added by Senator Dodd and Rep. Frank).

The rationale for ARRA was from Keynesian macroeconomic theory which argues that, during recessions, the government should offset the decrease in private spending with an increase in public spending in order to save jobs and stop further economic deterioration.

TEXT of the LAW:

(thomas.gov)

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 – (Sec. 5) Designates each amount in this Act as: (1) an emergency requirement, necessary to meet certain emergency needs in accordance with the FY2008-FY2009 congressional budget resolutions; and (2) an emergency for Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) principles.

TITLE II (Commerce, Justice, ….)

Makes supplemental appropriations for FY2009 to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for: (1) the Office of Inspector General; (2) state and local law enforcement activities; (2) the Office on Violence Against Women; (3) the Office of Justice Programs; (4) state and local law enforcement assistance; and (5) community oriented policing services (COPS).

. . .

Subtitle B: Assistance for Vulnerable Individuals – (Sec. 2101) Amends part A of title IV (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) (TANF) of the Social Security Act (SSA) to establish in the Treasury an Emergency Contingency Fund for State Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Programs (Emergency Fund). Makes appropriations to such Fund.

Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make a grant from the Emergency Fund to each requesting state for any quarter of FY2009-FY2010 if the state’s average monthly assistance caseload for the quarter exceeds its average monthly assistance caseload for the corresponding quarter in the state’s emergency fund base year. Requires the amount of any such grant to be 80% of the excess of total state expenditures for basic assistance over total state expenditures for such assistance for the corresponding quarter in the state’s emergency fund base year.

. . . .

(Sec. 2102) Extends TANF supplemental grants through FY2010.

(Sec. 2103) Makes technical amendments to the authority of a state or Indian tribe to use a block grant for TANF for any fiscal year to provide, without fiscal year limitation, (carry over) any benefit or service that may be provided under the program funded under the block grant, including future contingencies.

(Sec. 2104) Amends SSA title IV part D (Child Support and Establishment of Paternity) to suspend for FY2008-FY2010 the prohibition against payments to states with respect to their plans for child and spousal support collection on account of amounts expended by a state from support collection performance incentive payments received from the Secretary of HHS (thus allowing such additional payments during such period).

(just pointing out, from the CRS summary, that certain parts affect TANF & Child Support, I.e., TITLE IV-A, IV-D of Social Security Act. 
 
CLAIMS RESOLUTION ACT OF 2010 (passed one year ago — 11/19/2010!)(you may need to re/search from Thomas.loc.gov)  111th Congress, H.R. 4783
Title VIII: General Provisions (AND YOU”LL SEE WHY FATHERHOOD ORGANIZATIONS, PLUS MARRIAGE EDUCATORS, WERE REJOICING OVER THIS ONE):

Sec. 802) Amends part D (Child Support and Establishment of Paternity) of title IV of the Social Security Act to require an employer to report to the state Directory of New Hires, in addition to other information, the date services for remuneration were first performed by a newly hired employee.

Subtitle B: TANF – (Sec. 811) Amends part A (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [TANF]) of title IV of the Social Security Act to continue grants to states for temporary assistance for needy families programs through September 30, 2011.

(WONDER WHERE WE’RE AT ON THIS NOW …..)

Requires preference for healthy marriage promotion and responsible fatherhood grants to be given to entities that have previously: (1) been awarded funds; and (2) demonstrated the ability to carry out specified programs successfully.

WHAT ARE THE CHANCES, DO YOU THINK, THAT (2) WILL BE MONITORED?

Directs an entity seeking funding for both healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood promotion to submit a combined application assuring that it will carry out such activities: (1) under separate programs; and (2) without combining funds awarded to carry out either such activities.

Revises the definition of “healthy marriage promotion activities” to include marriage education and other specified programs for individuals in addition to nonmarried pregnant women and nonmarried expectant fathers.

THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN MARRIAGE AND FATHERHOOD ACTIVITIES DOES NOT REALLY EXIST.  FOR EXAMPLE, HEALTHY MARRIAGE GRANTEE (I THINK IT WAS ORIGINALLY “SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION” (Carolyn Curtis, Ph.D.) was characterized in a recent AZFFC.org publication as the “Sacramento affiliate” of this fathers and families coalition — although the title then said “Healthy Marriage” and recently reads something like (last I heard) “Relationship Education Institute” or such.

Appropriates (out of money not otherwise appropriated) for FY2011: (1) $75 million for healthy marriage promotion activities; and (2) $75 million for promotion of responsible fatherhood activities. (Current law authorized $150 million, combined, for both programs in specified fiscal years.) Limits appropriated funds awarded to states, territories, Indian tribes and tribal organizations, and public and nonprofit community entities, including religious organizations, for activities promoting responsible fatherhood to $75 million (current law has a $50 million limit). Requires amounts awarded to fund demonstration projects testing the effectiveness of tribal governments in coordinating the provision to tribal families at risk of child abuse or neglect of child welfare services, and other tribal programs, to be taken in equal proportion from such separate appropriations for healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood activities.

Appropriates (out of money not otherwise appropriated) to the Contingency Fund for State Welfare Programs such sums as necessary for payment to the Fund in a total not to exceed: (1) for FY2011, such sums as are necessary for amounts obligated on or after October 1, 2010, and before enactment of the this Act; and (2) for FY2012, $612 million. (Current law reduces such appropriations by specified amounts.)

Well, I may regret hitting “PUBLISH” on this one, but here goes. . . . .

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

November 9, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), Bush Influence & Appointees (Cat added 11/2011), Business Enterprise, Child Support, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood (cat added 11/2011), OCSE - Child Support, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion

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

“TAGG” you’re It: CFDA 93.086 Grantees– Let Me Count The Ways (to distribute $121,077,648 on the same old theme, re-shrinkwrapped)…

with one comment

Reader Warning:

Format of these posts — I am simply researching (looking up) as I go, and posting what I find, with commentary.  There is a narrative.  If you want the list of the grants in question, scroll down to the bottom.

Topics in this post include:

  • Criticism of TAGGS database & data entry of these grants.  (misspelling of project names, in particular)
  • Simple instructions, however, on how to run basic reports from it.
  • Proof that USASpending.gov & TAGGS do not match, USASPending either omits real grants, or HHS fabricates (over-reports).   Any thorough look would require using both of them, checking the nonprofit registrations (on a nationwide databse if possible), checking state corporate & nonprofit registration, and comparing with what their websites say, particularly about the history of the company.  Lastly, who is on the board of directors (and what else have those people been up to / associations), and if you actually look at the 990, this tells where they are reporting the money flow.  In a very real sense, unless we have looked at a nonprofit’s 990 form, we really don’t know them.
  • I looked up one particular “Fatherpood” grant, and the umbrella D.C. organization that goes with it.
  • Extensive section discussing some leading personalities in the socialization of America:  Organizations  Children’s Defense Fund (Marian Wright Edelman), “Stand For Children Leadership Center” (DC nonprofit) including its leader Jonah Edelson, background of one corporation (Bright Horizons) and one or tow individuals (Jill Iscol) on the board, and Geoffrey Canada/Ron Mincy (who have worked on similar projects).
  • The background organization, really, behind HEAD START (Bank Street College of Education, basically).   This came up when looking at Jill Iscol’s background.
  • I point out, as the history shows, that if one is going to promote theories about how children learn and “early childhood education,” one needs children to test them on — this is one reason it’s so common to find a child care center near a “family studies institute” or (Cornell) “Family Development Center” — at the university level.
  • Historic figures behind this include Patty Smith Hall (unmarried, not a parent, and apparently not heterosexual); Lucy Sprague Mitchell, Harriet Johnston (I may be misspelling names  — they are below), and others characterized as a “bunch of intellectuals” out of Greenwich Village.
  • What I saw — and have been seeing for months/years in this process – is that the desire to control the training of young children, is indeed the desire to control and reform the world, and should be dealt with accordingly by people with enough humility and perspective to understand, this is not appropriate for anyone.  Particularly in the U.S..
  • What I would call some very unique, if very questionable, studies being done (now, through HHS system) on children in attempts to stop child abuse — and/or predict their “socio/emotional outcomes.”  Quite frankly, I’ve had enough of this; it’s not all it’s cracked up to be.

    •  

    And finally, at the bottom, is another printout of a Grant Series.  The post is raggedy and scraggledy (with long incomplete expressive sentences, sometimes missing a predicate) — but I am going to post it anyhow.  I believe the information is interesting enough for someone of similar interests to grab part of it, and do his/her own lookups.

    Personally, I believe that untold numbers of the HHS grantees are simply front operations, that enable money laundering.  I say this because they cannot maintain a corporate name very long, have multiple people, for example, on a central (umbrella or founding) organization board — and then these people form splitoff nonprofits (sometimes also getting HHS grants) — under their names, and the various groups refer to each other (as if independence existed) to further boost their image.  That, FYI, is an AFCC pattern through and through.  One of the chief groups that led me to come right out and say this was the “California Healthy Marriage Coalition” (CHMC) — which hails to San Diego County, Southern California  + Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project?” – -hailing to Sacramento, Northern California.   These guys are absolutely unbelievable.  Check the street addresses and personnel.  San Diego & Sacramento (State Capitol).  Watch out!

    Over time, the chronological development of the groups — and their ever-changing rhetoric (exhibiting planning, as one phrase gets discredited, another is in the wings and in the works.  Right now, it’s “relationship skills” near the forefront, but Parenting Coordination appears to have been legislated in many states, which is bad news for good Moms, for sure.

     

    OK, HERE WE GO:

    The structure & contents of site “TAGGS” is a real window into what US policymakers think of the commoners, i.e., those who work for hourly wages with taxes deducted upfront to fund social science research — much of it “discretionary” “demonstration” and allegedly “new” grants.   Another commentary on what someone thinks of the “commoners” is how careless, incomplete, and inaccurate — that’s not including the intentionally obscure and deceptive facets also.   It is an appearance only of “transparency.”

    The 2011 Total of CFDA 93.086 (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood) grants, per this site (run just now) is:

    CFDA Prog. No. OPDIV Popular Title Number of Award theses Number of Award Actions CAN Award Amount
    93.086 ACF Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants 164 178 $121,087,642

    I have been running searches (of all types) on this website for most of the time I’ve blogged here.  It should be telling details of how public money, allocated to the Health and Human Services Department, is being spent, and on whom.  So many of the marriage, fatherhood, AND “domestic violence prevention” organizations, when closely examined, are not even legitimate — their incorporation status is lost in one state, and they simply head off to another, networking through the usual court-related associations set up years ago.

    I believe a general overview of specific grant series  paint  a picture, even if one doesn’t study all the details (although groups local to you, I’d want to!).   For example, look at the project name of this first sample (the rest, below):

    (would display with the navy-blue header row, except I pasted, rather than “dragged” the info onto the blog.  Same source as above).

    Recipient: *FAMILY SERVICE OF WESTCHESTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10606-3003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0050 FATHERS COURT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 543,906 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 543,906

    WTHell is a “Fathers Court”?   Is there a Corresponding Mothers’ Court?   Should we then eliminate the concept of “Children’s Court”?   (that won’t happen — the word “children” in almost any combo is a huge grants draw….).   Can we separate  childless couples into a “Marriage Court”?   And, if so, why should all the unmarried and childless, (or they raised kids without going through family court hell, and are continuing to contribute to society, while this system allows, almost indiscriminately, group after religious or simply elitist group, to skim the profits, collected via the IRS and supplemented by large corporations or foundations (Ford, Annie E. Casey, etc.)?

    FK sounds like a new series.  For the record, here’s the nationwide total of the “FK” series a quick TAGGS run for 2011 only:  to run this (takes seconds, only) is easy:

    • Go to http:///TAGGS.hhs.gov
    • Click on the DropDown menu tab, “Search by AWARD keyword or  number.”   It should look about like this, or at least have these 3 fields:
    Fiscal Year:

    Select one or all from Fiscal Year. The current calendar year will be searched by default.

                       ALL               2012           2011           2010           2009           2008           2007           2006           2005           2004           2003           2002           2001           2000           1999           1998           1997           1996           1995
    Award Keyword:

    Enter a keyword in the Award Title. If left blank, all award titles will be searched. Special characters are not permitted.
    Award Number:

    Enter an Award Number. If left blank, all award numbers will be searched. Special characters and spaces are not permitted.
    • Select year – -and FYI, you can also type in a partial “Award#” — I do this all the time to get a feel what that grant series is.  In this case, I chose Award # “90FK” and year 2011, then hit “search.”  Searching by Award “keyword,” even if you typed in simply “Fatherhood” would miss  a number of $1 million+ grants, simply because (this seems an ingrained TAGGS data entry “tic” it’s so commonplace…..) the word “fatherhood” is often misspelled on this database!
    SEE?
    Recipient: Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis
    Recipient ZIP Code: 63158
    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0052 FATHERS’ SUPPORT CENTERS’ PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FAHTERGOOD  1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,530,190 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,530,190
    Recipient: Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20001-4330
    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0054 DC FATHERHPOOD EDUCATION, EMPOWERMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,533,518 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,533,518

    Notice, both of those are $1.5 million grants, and from groups that have been around for a while.  Whoever, the 2nd one above (DC zip code) is, this is their total grants since 2006:

    Total of all award actions: $ 4,033,518


    Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions

    They got $500K per year (2006,7,8,9,10) on a “90FR” grant, and this year, switched to receiving a “90FK,” with triple the amount and a fancier project name — misspelled.   Let’s hope that whoever is entering these names isn’t also entering information that involves a decimal point on accounts receivable or payable for our government.  More likely, someone is being pressured (too much) to help cover up the abuse & mis-use of these funds, by making them harder to track by names.  (recall that the last series of 90FM names had ALL the Principal Investigator last names omitted (the “FN” field was doubled).   Either this or there is NO proofreading or fact-checking in the Taggs submission process whatsoever — not too encouraging, considering the amount of money they are reporting on.

    I’ve done data entry (and AR/AP before) and had I messed up that many words (and obviously failed to spellcheck, or had spellcheck function consistently set to “off”), I’d lose my job.  As you can see, I haven’t been working in government.   (Disclaimer:  this blog is volunteer, and I do not spellcheck, or copyedit and have a post explaining this, and why).

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou  Washington DC 20001-4330 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 012901240 $ 1,533,518

    If I took this number over to USASPENDING.gov, no doubt we’d get a different total, even if selecting grants only & HHS only.  I do not know what result would com if (this would be another step) I went to Washington DC and checked their incorporation, or NCCSDataweb.org and looked for a nonprofit filing.  (not today…)

    Oh well — since you insisted — here’s the data:

    http://dccollaboratives.org/

    Read the description:  This is a 501(c)3 of 501(c)3’s. . .

    Our Mission

    The Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council (HFTCCC) brings together community leaders to create and sustain a District-wide network that empowers families and communities to improve their quality of life.

    Perhaps it would be wiser to figure out what “disempowered” families, including mothers, — confront it, and stop it.  As Washington, D.C. is one of the most powerful places on the planet (not including the centers of Finance…), in one of the formerly? most powerful countries in the world, one wonders how, when, and why it became filled with such disempowered families.  Apparently there was a power grab somewhere along the way.  Address that — and families will be more empowered.

    {{Judging by the HHS funding, the word “families” means “fathers” which is common usage among grantees.]]

    We are a 501(c) (3), organization that provides leadership, advocacy, resource development, technical assistance, and training to the six Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaboratives. The six Collaboratives are independent nonprofit organizations that operate across the District of Columbia in communities facing intergenerational economic, social and safety challenges. Since the mid 1990s, the Collaboratives supported by the Collaborative Council, have joined with community members – residents and institutions alike – to re-weave the social fabric. Each community solution is tailored to the needs of the community with Collaboratives and their partners offering a range of unique services and supports to children and families.

    If they are being trained — and the purpose of most HM/FR grantees can be summarized in one word:  TRAINING — then they are not independent, but just have the appearance of it, any more than your local county child support agency is independent of the others, rather than connected also at the HHS/ACF/OCSE level and by welfare law….

    [[After describing a forum to report results, based on surveys…]]

    Attending the forum to respond to the data presented were Beatriz “BB” Otero, deputy mayor for Health and Human services; Deborah-Portia Usher, interim director,Child and Family Services Agency; HyeSook Chung, executive director, DC Action for Children; and Elizabeth Black, senior associate, Center for the Study of Social Policy.

    Deputy Mayor Otero said that city agencies and community-based organizations must do more to support at-risk families.

    The street address exactly matches the “DC Children’s Trust,” and, for example, a Parent Training center for adoptive & foster parents.  

    1112 11th Street, NW
    Suite B
    Washington, DC 20001

    The DC Children’s Trust’s mission is (per its Facebook summary).

    he mission of the D.C. Children’s Trust Fund is to foster the well-being of the District’s children and their families by leading the way toward the prevention of child abuse and neglect. The Trust serves as a catalyst for prevention efforts by leveraging private and governmental resources, providing resources and technical assistance to community-based organizations, schools, and churches to strengthen families and thereby reduce the risk of child abuse. A major objective of the Trust is to define and develop standards for primary prevention for the D.C. community at-large.

    Clearly, the standards emphasize getting promoting responsible fatherhood grants in order to teach groups how to prevent child abuse (cf.  Footloose in Tuscaloosa post).  This, FYI, is national policy, OCSE /Welfare policy and at some level, could be called HHS policy.  In order to prevent abuse of children by fathers & mothers, train fathers and get them back in the homes.  Period.  Children’s Trusts help direct funding, they are often public/private partnerships.  Under “products” ( a long list) I see “Parents Anonymous Grant,” which I recently blogged, right?  (cf.  “Circle of Parents” is basically a NFI mouthpiece; the work together).

    At the same address is:

    NOTICE — 1996 = established right after welfare reform made father-promotion grants available, block grants to the states (and presumably DC) to enable diversionary programs as a long-term solution to end poverty and child abuse.  

    History

    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative, Inc. (ERFSC) was established in 1996 and is one of seven neighborhood based collaboratives in the District of Columbia participating in the Healthy Families Thriving Communities Collaborative Council. This program, spearheaded by the DC Child and Family Services Agency, received its planning grant in April 1996 and its implementation grant in August 1997.

    ERFSC is also an expansion of the Child Welfare Working Group of the Rebuilding Communities Initiative (RCI) spearheaded by Marshall Heights Community Development Organization. RCI embodies a system reform agenda for which the central goal is the improved and sustained well being of children and families.

    . . . as defined by the same groups….

    ERFSC has operated as an independent stand-alone organization since October 2000. This organization evolved out of a seven (7) year old Child Welfare Initiative funded by the District of Columbia’s Child and Family Services Agency and the Annie E. Casey Foundation in 1996. For the first five (5) years of its inception, the Marshall Heights Community Development Organization, Inc. (MHCDO) provided fiscal agency responsibilities. In October 2000, ERFSC received its 501©3 to serve as an independent non-profit agency.

    Where are the tax returns for the years 2002, 2003-4-5-6 & 7?

    Your query: ( Organization Name: east river family strengthening collaborative , State:“DC” , Zip: None Chosen , EIN: None Chosen , Fiscal Year: None Chosen ) 
    4 matching documents retrieved (4 displayed) 

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative DC 2010 $572,817 990 22 52-2277915
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative DC 2009 $354,508 990 31 52-2277915
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative DC 2008 $435,198 990 25 52-2277915
    East River Family Strengthening Collaborative Inc. DC 2001 $208,439 990 14 52-2277915

    {There are many directors, and about 3 of them (per 2009 Tax Return) are working 40 hours a week — for nothing.  Only Mae H. Best is paid ($115K), so here is her bio — notice the Youngstown, OH connection:

    Contact ERFSC’s LEAD STAFF:

    Mae H. Best, LICSW (Executive Director) 

    Mae H. Best has served as the Executive Director of ERFSC since June 2001. 

    (Website says they became a separate 501(c)3 in 2000.  Looks like one of the first things that happened thereafter (or the Foundation 990 Finder is wrong) was to not file tax returns for several years.  I will check another source, and retract statement if they show such returns).

    Under her leadership the organization has grown from a budget of a little
    over $700,000 to $4,000,000 which includes contracts with city government agencies 
    as well as foundations. Mae’s previous work has included stints with Child and Family 
    Services Agency as Director of Resource Development and Director of Adoptions; 
    Director of Homes for Black Children at Family and Child Services Agency and Project 
    Coordinator with the National Council on Adoptable Children. Prior to relocating to Washington DC,
    she worked for the Mahoning County Children Services Board in Youngstown, Ohio.
    Mae received her Master’s in Social Work from the University of Illinois and her Bachelor’s
    in Social Services from North Carolina A&T State University. Mae has one son who is
    a Special Education Teacher in the District of Columbia and an R&B artist.

    This article (scroll down) has a paragraph identifying this neighborhood nonprofit as having grabbed some of the “Promise Neighborhoods” funding, which is described, and modeled ? after Geoffrey Canada’s “The Harlem Zone.”

    January 9, 2011 (published in ‘Circle of Philanthropy,’ by By Suzanne Perry)

    Against Tough Odds, a ‘Promise Neighborhood’ in D.C. Gears Up

    The Parkside-Kenilworth neighborhood is just a few miles from Capitol Hill, though it’s unlikely that many members of Congress have ever visited there.

    The neighborhood, tucked away in a far eastern corner of Washington, bears all of the hallmarks of poverty: high rates of crime, teenage pregnancy,single mothers, and unemployment—and low-performing schools.

    To be consistent, this should have been labeled “father absence” which is a cause of poverty, right.  SIngle mothers in different context might not be so poor; however when stuck in a poor enclave right next to Congressional Districts, than something ain’t right, obviously.   The only gender mentioned in association with this list of bad things is female, but I’m sure residents are both female and male….

    But community leaders have embarked on an ambitious project to turn the area around—with help from money that members of Congress approved last year.  Led by Irasema Salcido, an educator who was dismayed at the obstacles that hindered her students from learning, the project snatched one of 21 grants offered by a new federal program called Promise Neighborhoods.

    . . .

    The grants, totaling $10-million, went to communities that outlined plans for providing an array of academic, medical, and social services for children in troubled neighborhoods from “cradle to college”­—a model that was pioneered by Geoffrey Canada, founder of Harlem Children’s Zone, in New York.

    Mr. Canada’s approach has won widespread acclaim, most recently in the documentary film “Waiting for Superman,” and strong support from President Obama, who proposed the Promise Neighborhoods program while still on the campaign trail.

    This should be a separate post.  Mr. Canada — clearly an astounding person —

    Geoffrey Canada (born January 13, 1952) is an African American social activist and educator. Since 1990, Canada has been president and CEO of the Harlem Children’s Zone inHarlem, New York, an organization which states its goal is to increase high school and college graduation rates among students in Harlem.[1] He is a member of the Board of Directors of The After-School Corporation, a nonprofit organization which describes its aim as to expand educational opportunities for all students.

    His parents divorced when he was about 4, with 2 older and 1 younger sibling, and apparently didn’t support the family.  Nevertheless, being sent away to live with his Long Island grandparents in his teens, he went on to be recruited by (win an award from) the Fraternal Order of Masons, and get degrees in Psychology, Sociology, and finally Education, the last from Harvard.  Thank you Mom — I guess you did well! should be a comment, but this is not heard in the publications, is it?

    Born and raised by a divorced mother in the South Bronx, he is the third of four sons of McAlister and Mary Canada. His parents’ marriage ended in 1956, after which his father played little part in the children’s life and did not contribute financial support.[2] Canada was raised among the “abandoned houses, crime, violence and an all-encompassing sense of chaos and disorder,” and understood his life’s calling at an early age. His mother sent him to live with her parents in Freeport, Long Island, when Canada was in his mid-teens.[2] He attended Wyandanch Memorial High School, and won a scholarship from the Fraternal Order of Masons during his senior year of high school.[2] He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology and sociology from Bowdoin College, where he graduated in 1974, and a Master’s degree in education  from the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Canada has an honorary degree from Princeton University.[3]

    Role with the Harlem Children’s Zone

    Starting as president in 1990, Canada started working with the Rheedlen Centers for Children and Families which evolved into the Harlem Children’s Zone. Unsatisfied with the scope of Rheedlen, Canada transformed the organization’s makeup in the late 1990s into a center that would actively follow the academic careers of youths {{both genders??..}} in a 24-block area of Harlem. Due to the success of the new model, the area has grown to 97 blocks.

    (There’s a reason I took time to mention Geoffrey Canada, The Harlem Zone, which relates to another major nonprofit run by the son of Marian Wright Edelman of the Children’s Defense Fund, and which (one can see the trend here) is promoting charter schools hard, and has begun to take some serious flack in a few states by program personnel ramrodding their agenda through, over the voices of local, state-based parents and volunteer workers. ).   Like Ronald D. Mincy (also of Harvard, but in Economics) here is another prominent African-American male leader whose mother MIGHT have done something right (judging by the degrees, and their current position) — and yet their work — which is helping change society — shows an emotional obsession with the absent father, and an inability to properly credit a mother, or recognize that THEIR OWN SUCCESS comes through struggles but with a single mother.  In effect, their work — supported by major foundations which I’ll hazard a guess are not run by any minority whatsoever — (like the Ford Foundation) — has now scapegoated single mothers across the country, and made it not only almost impossible, but also socially unacceptable — and politicially incorrect — to succeed.  Children are being REMOVED from such mothers apparently by the thousands, even when after removal, disaster (death in foster care, or in a court-ordered exchange with the noncustodial parent) often happens.

    Mixing truths, but framing them according to their personal childhood experience, and buoyed up by federal funding and corporate funding — society is indeed being transformed — and what i see is the continued buoying up of the public education which has failed students according to their color, caste, and neighborhoods (which the unequal system will continue to do, although it also fails those in prosperous suburban enclaves in different ways).  We have become (not are becoming) a federally centralized country with a parallel set of government-by-administrative-agency.  This is essentially socialism and foreign to the purpose of the country and the Constitution, to which Presidents must swear an oath to uphold and defend, but don’t.   Any “Cradle to grave” solution focusing on TRAINING — is indeed socialism, and contrary to LIFE (which has more variety, and also a greater variety of personal goals), LIBERTY (consider the economic angle) and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.   People fork this over when they fail to protest, or even investigate where their own money is being spent.  I did this also — while working FT, raising children, and seeking to keep all of us alive from the imminent danger of, their father.   It took YEARS to get out (after deciding to get out) and then only to face systems putting us back in — and come to find they are based on childhood longing for the father, positioned in Harvard, MIT (see next) and other high places.

    Geoffrey Canada, father-absent resounding success & Harvard (Education) grad, created and expanded The Harlem Zone, and Ronald D. Mincy, father-absent, father-obsessed, Ph.D.’d Harvard (economics) Grad, and director of — well, Logo Below —  of whom this naturally reminded me– apparently conducted a vertical study of the Harlem Zone:

    Dr. Mincy is an advisory board member for the National Poverty Center; the African American Healthy Marriage Initiative; Transition to Fatherhood; the National Fatherhood Leadership Group; the Longitudinal Evaluation of the Harlem Children’s Zone; The Economic Mobility Project, Pew Charitable Trusts; the Mac Arthur Network on Family and the Economy, and Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Juvenile Justice

    Dr. Mincy’s undergraduate and graduate training in economics were at Harvard and M.I.T. He and his wife, Flona Mincy, have been married for more than thirty years and live in Harlem, New York. They have two sons.  (Thank God.  Can you imagine daughters growing up around all that fatherhood policymaking?)

    “The Center for Research on Fathers, Children and Family Well-Being’s mission is to expand the knowledge base on the role of fathers (and father figures) in the lives of disadvantaged children and the processes by which nonresident fathers (and father figures) affect child development and family well-being.”

    “Many people ask us about our logo. They wonder why we don’t portray a happy family. We would rather showcase the problem we are trying to solve.

    We wanted to show a strong mother, who believes she is capable of taking care of herself and her family. Whatever her beliefs, she often has no other option. Despite her best efforts, the literature shows that children who grow up in two-parent families are less likely than children in mother-only families to do poorly in school, engage in risky behavior, and exhibit anxiety, depression, and aggressive and withdrawn behavior problems. 

    We wanted to portray a father who is interested in his family but who is ill-prepared to help, unsure if his help is welcome, and unsure about he can be involved.** Although conventional wisdom holds that non-resident fathers are not involved in their children’s lives, the literature shows that at least half of non-resident fathers are involved with their children up to five years of age.

    Are there ways of helping these parents work together to meet their children’s needs?

    That is our question. That is our mission.”

    ** (portion in red) — was this Dr. Mincy’s father?  Is this is hope — that his Dad really wanted to be involved, but there were just too many obstacles to father-involvement?  Is all this really about certain men who ascended to (or were selected & placed, not that they didn’t earn every single degree, but are we allowed to mention the Fraternal Order of Masons (for Mr Canada), are we allowed to mention just how many foundations supported Dr. Mincy?) in VERY influential positions, as the figurehead of the successful black man, who is now — rather than confronting the system-concept which separated families to start with (FYI, it’s called slavery) — and is instead, working for the same TYPE of masters (if not some corporations that went back nearly as far) and doing the same thing to other famlies who share none of their Ph.D. characteristics, and may not even know this has been done to them, and by transforming the welfare system further and further to minimize and curtail “mother-involvement,” ensure that the child support system can be utilized by even mutli-millionaire fathers to separate children from their biological mothers, as well as diverting cash aid to single-mother households by defining success by the number of adult biologically related males in the home?

    Why are we allowing groups like Columbia School of Social Policy, or corporations & foundations — to change the forms of government to figure out HOW to produce desired social results?  This is nothing other than “Wealth-Makes-Right” and those on the top of society got their because God wanted them to, from which the position of “God” can be fulfilled through social design and planning how others will — or will not– live, bypassing the legal systems, for example, in particular, the criminal code.

    Fraternal Order of Masons – interesting…

    Freemasonry refers to the principles, institutions, and practices of the fraternal order of the Free and Accepted Masons. The largest worldwide society, Freemasonry is an organization of men based on the “fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man,” using builders’ tools as symbols to teach basic moral truths generally accepted by persons of good will. Their motto is “morality in which all men agree, that is, to be good men and true.” It is religious in that a belief in a Supreme Being and in the immortality of the soul are the two prime requirements for membership, but it is nonsectarian in that no religious test is used.1 The purpose of Freemasonry is to enable men to meet in harmony, to promote friendship, and to be charitable. Its basic ideals are that all persons are the children of one God, that all persons are related to each other, and that the best way to worship God is to be of service to people.  Masons have no national headquarters as such, but the largest regional is the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction (35 Southern states), which is headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia.

    Although only men (of at least 21 years of age) can be Masons, related organizations are available for their relatives — there is the Order of the Eastern Star for Master Masons and their wives; the Order of De Molay for boys; and the Order of Job’s Daughters and the Order of Rainbow for young girls. The Masonic Lodge has more than a hundred such fraternal organizations, including Daughters of the Nile, The Tall Cedars of Lebanon, The Mystic Order of Veiled Prophets Of The Enchanted Realm, The Knights Of The Red Cross Of Constantine, and The Blue Lodge.

    There’s more . . . .

    Many allegories and symbols are used in Masonry. The old English Constitution refers to an ancient definition of the ancient craft: “Freemasonry is a system of morality, veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbol,” [Freemason’ symbols can be made to mean almost anything a person chooses to make them; Master Masons take an oath, “Ever to conceal, never to reveal.”2] It seeks to make good men better through the form of belief in “the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, and the    immortality of the soul.”

    Masonry was originally a means by which people in the occult could practice their “craft” and still remain respectable citizens. The official publication of “The Supreme Council 33” of Scottish Rite Freemasonry is titled New Age. Some church denominations are also led by avowed Masons. For example, a 1991 survey by the Southern Baptist Convention Sunday School Board found that 14% of SBC pastors and 18% of SBC deacon board chairs were Masons; it is also estimated that SBC members comprise 37% of total U.S. lodge membership. (A 2000 updated SBC report found that over 1,000 SBC pastors are Masons.)

    Hardly surprising — we do remember, right, that former U.S. President severed ties with the Southern Baptist Convention over their treatment — and view– of women.  While I may not agree with what he’s doing instead (joined a worldwide “Council of Elders” — give me a break!), this part is true:

    Jimmy Carter Severs Ties With Southern Baptist Convention: “Many Male Religious Leaders Help Subjugate Women“

    Carter: Sexism exhibited by male leaders conflicts “with my belief — confirmed in the holy scriptures — that we are all equal in the eyes of God.”  Please read — because this is happening in the U.S. today.  (article concludes):

    The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in Britain and the United States. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for everyone in society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.

    It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and out-dated attitudes and practices — as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.

    Other commentary on the authoritarian (or you going to hell) manner of the SBC’s in re: the Carter’s decision.
    More on “The Elders,” first ref. from the article I quoted>

    • Jimmy Carter was US president from 1977-81. The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity.

    Meet the Elders’: Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Muhammad Yunus and Many More  (Kate Snow, Johannesburg, July 18, 2007)

     Guess they’ll have to contend sooner or later with Sun Myung Moon, the True Parent, who I don’t think was on the list — probably he’s not reall good at sharing leadership .   This one was conceived by “British billionaire Richard Branson and Rock Star Peter Gabriel”  and talks about how, without such piddling matters as “political (i.e., laws), economic (i.e., costs) and geographic (national sovereignty, etc.) constraints” surely this assembly of starpower can fix the world:

    The structures we have to deal with these problems are often tied down by political, economic and geographic constraints,” Mandela said. The Elders, he argued, will face no such constraints. . . .Using their collective experience, their moral courage and their ability to rise above the parochial concerns of nations ? they can help make our planet a more peaceful, healthy and equitable place to live, ” Branson said. ” Let us call them ‘global elders,’ not because of their age but because of individual and collective wisdom.” Calling it “the most extraordinary day” of his life, Gabriel said, “The dream was there might still be a body of people in whom the world could place their trust.”

    Well, the world is fully of nutcase Messiahs, they are found amongst the homeless, and among the ultrarich.  Guess which group probably has done more harm, and been responsible for more human misery, wars, poverty, and genocides, in the long-term?

    A little more detail on Mr. Canda’s life, from “blackpast.org” an on-line encyclopedia.  His mother was a counselor.   He had no sisters…..

    Canada was born on January 13, 1952 to McAlister and Mary Canada in the South Bronx, New York City.  His mother was a substance abuse counselor and his father suffered from chronic alcoholism.  His mother raised him and his three brothers in the South Bronx after she divorced his father in 1956.

    Canada grew up in poverty yet his mother strongly instilled the value of education in him at an early age.  In his teens, Canada was sent to live with his grandparents, both ordained Baptist ministers, in Long Island, New York.  While living with his grandparents, Canada attended Wyandanch Memorial High School where he received the Fraternal Order of Masons scholarship his senior year.   {{SEE above}}

    Canada then enrolled in Bowdoin College in 1970, graduating with a Bachelor’s degree in psychology and sociology in 1974.  A year later he graduated with an M.A. in Education from Harvard Graduate School of Education.  His mother eventually earned her own Master’s degree from Harvard some years later.    

    In addition, Canada has published two books: Fist, Stick, Knife, Gun: A Personal History of Violence in America(1995) and Reaching Up for Manhood: Transforming the Lives of Boys in America (1998).In 1972, Canada married Joyce Henderson and had two children, Melina and Jerry.  They divorced and Canada married Yvonne Grant.  They also have two children, Bruce and Geoffrey, Jr.    [Contributor(s): Jackson, Joelle
    University of Washington, Seattle]
    Are the children from the first wife now fatherless and at risk?

    (VERY) BRIEFLY:  The EDELMANS & CHILDREn’s DEFENSE FUND (1992 interview with Marian Wright Edelman) speaks about her parent’s Baptist past
    ….”her childhood home in Bennettsville, S.C. That was the starting point for the self-assured black girl who would emerge from the segregated South to go to Yale University Law School, create the Children’s Defense Fund and propel herself onto the national scene as an impassioned and relentless champion of needy children and families…. It was in that spirit, to promote continuity, that Mrs. Edelman wrote a little book, a “spiritual and family dowry,” for her sons, Joshua, Jonah and Ezra. She has been married for 24 years to Peter Edelman, a law professor at Georgetown University.

    The family values talk is just talk,” Mrs. Edelman said, her voice rising, her words accelerating. “People understand what is real and what is hypocritical. Family and moral values are so central to everything that I am.”

    The daughter of a Baptist minister, Mrs. Edelman writes in her book that “many of the seeds I am still struggling mightily to harvest for children and the poor were planted during my childhood.” Her father gave sermons, she said, “decrying the breakdown of family and community” and “insisting that poverty of things is no excuse for poverty of will and spirit.”

    Being a Baptist still plays an important role in her life. “If I don’t go Sunday morning, I’m not grounded for the week,” she said.

    I don’t know how much readership understands the role of the Children’s Defense Fund in policies around today, or how one of her 3 sons’ work intersects with Mr. Canada’s, at the nonprofit, charterschoolpromotion level.  I am wondering whether she would be OK with the impact of these social programs on real mothers, today:

    Mrs. Edelman met her husband in Mississippi, where she was the first black woman admitted to the bar. She was working as a civil rights lawyer, and Mr. Edelman was researching poverty and hunger for Senator Robert F. Kennedy. Mrs. Edelman and her husband, who is Jewish, raised their sons in the religious traditions of both sides of the family.

    In his introduction to his mother’s book, Jonah, who graduated from Yale last spring (1992) and is now a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, refers to himself as “a cultural mulatto . . . the sheltered bar mitzvah boy who has struggled with his blackness.” … The Edelmans’ eldest son, 23-year-old Joshua, is a Harvard University graduate who teaches history at the Milton Academy in Milton, Mass. Ezra, 18, is a freshman a Yale.

    . . .

    here have been rumors that Mrs. Edelman, who has worked for years with Hillary Clinton, the past chairwoman of the Children’s Defense Fund, might join the Cabinet if Gov. Bill Clinton becomes President. “I would not,” Mrs. Edelman said, adding that her black friends were urging her to go into Government to increase her power and influence.

    “That is not who I am,” she said. “I need to work outside Government, on my own. I love what I do, and I think I am making a difference.”

    The nonprofit Children’s Defense Fund, which will celebrate its 20th anniversary next year, is widely respected for its lobbying efforts. Its aim is to bring the needs of children to public attention and to encourage preventive efforts in areas like health care and teen-age pregnancy. The fund played an important role in the formulation of the child-care legislation that Congress passed in 1990

    OK — now I will link Jonah Edelman to Geoffrey Canada (finally), through Mr. Edelman’s Wikipedia — and hopefully you will see the connection with these inexorable training grants from HHS — there is an HHS connection in the family line:

    Jonah Martin Edelman (born 9 October 1970) is an Americanadvocate for public education.[1] He is the co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Stand for Children, a national American education advocacy organization based in Portland, Oregon andWaltham, Massachusetts, with affiliates in nine states. He is the first Oregon resident to be awarded an Ashoka: Innovators for the Public fellowship.[2]

    STAND FOR CHILDREN is no ordinary nonprofit — it was set up to be nationwide from the very beginning and to force social transformation.  It is also very well endowed.  Currently, this group is facing off with teachers’ unions, (see “Illinois”) and Mr. Edelman was caught boasting about how he got these unions to give away their rights — although the cause is, “improving public schools” – — right? . . .

    Jonah Edelman is the second son of Marian Wright Edelman, former civil rights leader and aide to Martin Luther King, jr. and founder and president of the Children’s Defense Fund, and Peter Edelman, former aide to Senator Robert F. Kennedy, former Assistant Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and professor at Georgetown University Law Center.

    Edelman was born and raised in Washington, D.C, and received his B.A. in History with a concentration on African-American studies from Yale University in 1992. Edelman attended Oxford University on a Rhodes Scholarship, earning his Master of Philosophy and Doctor of Philosophy degrees in Politics in 1994 and 1995, respectively.

    He is, essentially, a blueblood acting like a blueblood, i.e., arrogant — taking charge — and rescuing poor people  by redesigning government policy— and insisting it be done “his way” or the highway.  When I say blueblood, we know Marian Wright Edelson’s personal background and commitment, discipline, and values.  Her husband/Jonah’s father qualifies as blueblood (See “Georgetown” and working for RFK), and former assistant Secretary to the DHHS — –    where the fatherhood programs now life — and it appears these were instrumental in some of their beginnings.  And may give a better clue to their actual purposes.

    Edelman cites tutoring a six-year-old bilingual child named Daniel Zayas in reading while volunteering at Dwight Elementary School during his first year at Yale as a turning point.[3] While still an undergraduate, he ran a teen pregnancy prevention speakers’ bureau, co-founded a mentorship program for African American middle school students, and served as an administrator of an enrichment program for children living in public housing-Leadership Education and Athletics in Partnership (LEAP).

    Stand for Children

    Edelman was a key organizer of Stand for Children Day, a June 1, 1996 rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. attended by 300,000 people.[4]   {{KEEP THE LINK…}} Among the speakers at this rally, the largest for children in U.S. history, were Geoffrey Canada, who later became Stand for Children’s first Board of Directors Chair, the editor of Parade Magazine, Walter Anderson, who came up with the name “Stand for Children Day,” and Marian Wright Edelman.

    On June 2, 1996, Edelman and Eliza Leighton founded Stand for Children as an ongoing advocacy organization to support rally participants when they returned home. Hundreds of follow up Stand for Children events and rallies took place across the country on June 1, 1997 and then June 1, 1998.

    Yes, about that rally:

    Education plus politics (about “stand for children’s” role in Denver School Board race) 

    Edelman, the son of Children’s Defense Fund founder Marian Wright Edelman, began Stand in an effort to marry child advocacy and grassroots organizing. “Stand didn’t start off working on public education at all,” he said, noting the 1996 Stand for Children rally from which it grew encompassed many issues.

    The rally, which Edelman worked on at his mother’s request, drew 300,000 people to D.C. for what was the largest rally for children in U.S. history. Stand’s first chapter was founded in Oregon in 1999.

    “It’s really evolved organizationally toward public education based on the fact public education is the most salient and fundamentally important issue of so many issues facing kids,” he said.  Stand’s grassroots approach is similar to those of two other parent groups in Denver, Padres Unidos and Metropolitan Organizations for People or MOP.  But Stand differs in that its members get directly involved in politics – something Padres and MOP, which are non-profit 501(c)3 organizations, can’t do – and it works at the local and statewide levels.

    “We don’t choose cities,” Edelman said when asked about coming to Denver, “we choose states.”

    WE’RE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE MOVEMENTS NOW GOING ON  IN HHS, where “CHILDREN & FAMILIES” precludes speech of individuals, and where leadership is to be followed, not questioned, when it comes to policy.   The intent is to transform the public schools, and if necessary, take on teacher’s unions.  I see an article boasting about how their legislators all one, and several “status quo” legislators lost.  Grassroots advocacy, organization, and funding, right?   Next, there is this one showing alliance / alignment with Mr. Canada.  As I have explained, that also = alignment with the fatherhood prominence, and getting more children into state care than Mom’s care, by combining early childhood education + public school (regular or charter) education, both federal projects, while endorsing — apparently — welfare-diversions (like the HTTC above) to transform certain communities:

    1.  Post-Election Message from Stand’s CEO, Jonah Edelman  (nov. 8, 2010)

    Friends and Colleagues:

    Tuesday’s election saw the emergence of Stand for Children as a multi-state electoral force for students.

    By reaching more than 55,000 targeted voters through grassroots volunteer outreach (five times more than in 2008) and strategically investing more than $1 million (15 times more than in 2008) in Colorado, Washington, Illinois, and Oregon, Stand helped protect an overwhelming majority of the legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, who stood tall for students earlier this year.

    And here’s something else that’s striking: while none of the legislators we backed lost because of their vote to improve educator effectiveness, Stand helped unseat several legislators who voted for the status quo.

    2.  Note from CEO, Jonah Edelman – Inpired by Geoffrey Canada

    November 24, 2010

    Last Thursday, some of you [Stand staff, Board members, Advisory Board members]  were able to join in a conference call where we received a mega-dose of inspiration from Geoffrey Canada, Stand’s first Board chair, founder and CEO of the Harlem Children’s Zone, and one of America’s most prominent education advocates.

    On the call, Geoff generously affirmed Stand’s incredible recent progress and he challenged us to seize this unique moment in time and work with even greater resolve, perspective, and discipline to save all of those “perfectly normal children,” as he described them, who are falling hopelessly behind in school.

    This is grassroots organizing from the top-down, not the bottom-up, and if anything, this organization is ORGANized and visionary; that also apparently runs in the family line, plus (see educations). . . . .   (did they attend local public schools, K-12?) . . . . .  Checking my Nonprofit status — and actually reading a tax return (great way to learn about a group — read their tax returns if possible) — there is a:

    • Stand for Children (oregon nonprofit)
    • Stand for Children Leadership Center, Inc. (Washington, D.C. nonprofit),

    and apparently (per that tax return) a 

    • Stand for Children, Inc. — for profit.

    The (2002) board of SFCLC (DC group) was:

    Stand for Children Leadership Center Board of Directors (from tax return)

    • Who We Are

      Founded in 1986, Bright Horizons Family Solutions is the world’s leading provider of employer-sponsored child care, early education, and work/life solutions. Conducting business in the United States, Europe, and Canada, we have created employer-sponsored child care and early education programs for more than 700 clients, including more than 90 of the Fortune 500.

       

    • CNN description (Money.cnn.com, 2008):  Average pay:  Directors, $54K, teachers, $25K…

    • Headquarters: Watertown, MA
      2006 revenue ($ millions): 698
      Website: www.brighthorizons.com

      Employees
      U.S. employees 14,660
      Employees outside U.S. 1,972

      This corporation (investing in its stock) helped make Tennessee Senator, Lamar Alexander, one of the Top 10 (richest) in 2007.  Below this list, I’ll show (I recognized this name.  Lamar Alexander also known because of Corrections Corporation of America (CCA, private prison corporation)’s lobbying, and a move to privatize the entire state’s prisons, connected with this legislator.

    • Geoffrey Canada President, Harlem Children’s Zone
    • Sam Daley-Harris’ President, Results Educational Fund
    • Gun Denhart “s Founder & Chair, Hanna Andersson Corporation
    • MarianWright Edelman` Founder & President, Children’s Defense Fund
    • Daniel Grossman’ Founder & CEO, Wild Planet Toys
    • Jill Iscol” President , Jill Iscol & Associates  
    • Reverend/Dr. Eileen Lindner, Deputy General Secretary for Research & Planning, National Council of Churches, {{Excu UUse me???}}
    • Fred Senn Partner/GroupDirector, Fallon
    • Dorothy Stoneman Founder & President, YouthBuildUSA

    Every one of those corporations / organizations the board of directors sit on has a story, and most likely an interest in education reform.  Who are these people, and why have they taken on (with private, not public funding — on this tax return at least) organization to restructure the US Educational system according to their particular vision?   For example, because it’s simplest to illustrate, “BRIGHT HORIZONS FAMILY SOLUTIONS” is top dog in employer-provided daycare.

    From the site:   INSIDERTRADING.PROCON.ORG
    Mr. Alexander was 10th richest, right after the 9th richest US Senator in 2007, namely, “9.  Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)  Avg. Net worth of household in 2006:   $30,691,003 — and I just love the description of her “Spouse Name and Title:”  Bill Clinton, 42nd US President.
    #10 – Lamar Alexander, Jr. Avg. Net Worth of Household in 2006:  $27,800,155.  Spouse name and title:   “Leslee “Honey” Alexander, Bord of Trustees, WETA; Member and Vice Chairman, Corporation for Public Broadcasting Board of Directors,” 
    5 TOP STOCKS OWNED @ 12/31/2007– TOP STOCK:  “BRIGHT HORIZONS FAMILY SOLUTION” — $500,001 – $1,000,000.
    Senator Lamar Alexander Co-founded “Corporate Child Care Management, Inc.” (now “Bright Horizons Family Solutions).   His wife owns more than $1,000,000 stock in it. …  Committees he sits on that may present conflict of interest:  Health, Education, Labor, Pensions.
    For our leaders:  Investment income from holdings.  For those they set policy for:  Jobs, hopefully, child support – -possibly, welfare — likely at this pace — and parenting classes, and public schools.  Some design, others support (like, the workers at these various corporations) and if there is not too much civil discontent, all is well in the world. ….  While I am here, from the same site, on The (then-Senator) Obama’s household, notes a very lean portfolio, but investment in two speculative stocks he probably wouldn’t have known of except as a legislator — one dealing with mobile communications (and a satellite), i.e., SkyTerra (see also Wikipedia)– and the other AVI BioPharma.(“Advanced RNA-Based Therapeutic Platform)”    The commentary, here:   The second company has “strategic alliances” with the DoD, and includes biodefense in its projects; the first, apparently Boeing just helped put a satellite in space .
    We are in a Post-9/11 society, and throughout these TAGGS (marriage/Fatherhood) corporations, major grants involving telecommunications companies with roots in the Defense Industry keep showing up (Example:  ICF International Incorporated, LLC got a 2011 grant; it went public & international in 2006).   Here’s the “wiki” on AVI Biopharma — note they were going under til got a defense contract (during Obama presidency):

    History  (Wiki article)

    AVI BioPharma opened their own production laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon, in February 2002.[2] The company made headlines in 2003 when it announced work on treatments for SARS and the West Nile Virus.[2][3] In July 2009, the company announced they would move their headquarters from Portland, Oregon, north to Bothell, Washington, near Seattle.[4] At that time the company led by president and CEO Leslie Hudson had 83 employees and quarterly revenues of $3.2 million.[4] AVI had yet to turn a profit nor developed any commercial products as of July 2009.[4] The company lost $19.7 million in the second quarter of 2009,[5] and then won a $11.5 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense‘s Defense Threat Reduction Agency in October 2009.[6] The company had completed its move to Bothell by this time, but retained their Corvallis facility.[4][6]

    SkyTerra is now “LightSquared” —
    SkyTerra - SkyTerra Communications

    “A new nationwide 4G wireless broadband network provider that will use a unique combination of satellite and terrestrial technology to revolutionize wireless communications in the United States.”  ”

    SkyTerra is North America’s leading developer and supplier of mobile satellite communications services (MSS). Since 1996 SkyTerra has been providing reliable wireless voice, two-way radio and data services for a wide range of customers across North America, northern South America, Central America, the Caribbean and Hawaii via its two existing MSAT satellites.   Satellite service is the perfect communications solution for remote locations lacking terrestrial coverage and when man made or natural disasters strike. Current customers cover a broad spectrum including public safety, security, broadcasting, natural resources, fleet management and asset tracking.   {{AND/Or SPYING….}}

    LIGHTSQUARED:  The idea behind this is providing (4G at least) “Wholesale broadband access” to the entire country.  In Nov. 2010, they launched a satellite from Kazakhstan, and the site mentions:

     ““The U.S. stimulus plan announced by President Obama has acknowledged the need for the federal government to step in to ensure that the digital divide is filled, thereby ending the denial of broadband access due to where people live… 2010 will be the year that many governments will recognize that broadband connectivity is essential for economic competitiveness, the delivery of public services, and an inclusive society, and they will step up to the plate to close the digital divide.”

    It is waiting? for FCC approval of its service; there’s claims it would jam GPS.  Fascinating reading — and here’s an article on the debate between FCC (Congressional favorite) this new one — only slightly technical.   Recommended read– it plays into the job market, digital divide.

    SkyTerra Wikipedia

    The new company has operations in both America and Canada, providing service to both countries and the Caribbean. MSV changed its name to SkyTerra in December 2008. The company was traded Over-the-Counter and was listed on the OTCBB: SKYT. SkyTerra (formerly ‘Mobile Satellite Ventures’) [4] was the first company to receive a Federal Communications Commission license to deploy Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) technology.[5]

    In 2005, SkyTerra purchased 50% of Hughes Network Solutions, a subsidiary of the News Corp.-owned DirecTV Group, for $157.4 million, which SkyTerra held under its subsidiary Hughes Communications.[6][7] In January 2006, DirecTV sold its remaining 50% share in Hughes Network Solutions to SkyTerra for $100 million.[8] Hughes Communications was spun off as a separate company in February 2006, with SkyTerra divesting its entire stake in the company to its shareholders.[9]

    TerreStar Corporation, formerly Motient Corporation, was the controlling shareholder of TerreStar Networks Inc. and TerreStar Global Ltd., and a shareholder of SkyTerra Communications.[10]

    SkyTerra was acquired by Harbinger Capital Partners in March 2010 and became part of LightSquared in July 2010.[11  

    MSV satellite telephony

    Most of current products and services are aimed at emergency services, law enforcement, and companies that specialize in transportation. However, MSV and Boeing are developing a satellite telephony network for consumers.

    The use of Boeing’s GeoMobile platform will allow for coverage of the entire United States with a single satellite. This new approach to satellite telephony has already been validated with the Thuraya network. MSV’s satellite will use an even bigger antenna than the Thuraya spacecraft (at 22 meters in diameter, it will be the largest commercial reflector dish ever used in space)[12], allowing it to communicate with phones no larger than modern cell phones thanks to the fact that the large antenna gain allows the handset to operate at a power output comparable to regular cell phones. This is now possible since the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) allowed satellite operators to create terrestrial cellular networks using spectrum previously restricted to satellite use.[13][14][15]

    The Satellite road aboard a Russian Satellite, launched last November, per the Nasa article:   !!!

    LIVE: ILS Proton-M launches with SkyTerra 1 satellite

    November 14th, 2010 by Chris BerginInternational Launch Services (ILS) have launched the SkyTerra 1 telecommunications satellite via their veteran Proton-M launch vehicle and Breeze-M upper stage on Sunday. Lift-off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan was on schedule at 17:29 GMT, ahead of over nine hours of flight until the spacecraft was placed into orbit.

     . . .The 5,400 kg Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems built 702HP satellite is designed for geomobile services, which will be a “major step in LightSquared’s creation of its next-generation, nationwide network that will be among the world’s first to combine satellite and terrestrial technologies,” according to the customer.“The Light-Squared network will enable the company to offer 4G speed, value, and reliability which enables universal wireless connectivity throughout the United States.

    “The company’s next-generation satellite system allows users within the United States to use standard handsets or other devices, equipped with the LightSquared chipset, to access the satellite system with high link availability and long battery lifetimes, with devices that have the same form-factor and functionality as conventional handsets and devices.

    “Further, the combination of the LightSquared satellite system and the LightSquared 4G terrestrial network provides an unprecedented level of coverage throughout the United States.”

    Proton Launch:

    (Somehow this isn’t as comforting as it is probably supposed to be….)

    The Iscol Family (apparently husband made his money in mobile communications…)

    <>STAND FOR CHILDREN LEADERSHIP, JILL ISCOL

    It’s hard to know where, on the web, to start.  Cornell, Yale, New York City?  The portion of Cornell University this husband/wife pair is currently funding / running?    Their connections with Hillary Rodham Clinton?  Well, while we’re on the topic, how about article from “CENTER FOR A NEW AMERICAN SECURITY.”

    Jill Iscol

    In this summary (it’s the entire web page) you can see the policy-making influence with Gores, Family Strengthening projects, and the ability to somehow raise incredible finances for whatever project her heart desires.  This is what Yale Graduates do, and the Columbia background also includes a penchant the teaching.  Does this look like someone who would be taking input from the lower ranks of society, or dishing it out, according to the personal vision determined with the social & political set she runs in, and they do?    Or taking feedback on the impact of these programs on the working class, (or, welfare recipients) which might be at odds from program purposes?

    President, IF Hummingbird Foundation

    Jill W Iscol, Ed.D, is a social activist, an educator, and a philanthropist.

    She serves on the Board of Advisors of City Year New York of which she was a Founding Co-Chair (2002-2009).  She is a Trustee of Vital Voices Global Partnership and is currently chairing its newly launched New York Leadership Council. She is on the Board of the Acumen Fund, a global philanthropic organization. She was recently appointed to the New York State Commission on National and Community Service, is a Trustee of Horizons National, and on the Advisory Board of the Center for New American Security in Washington, DC.

    She serves on the President’s Council of Teachers College (from 1974-1977, she was Co-Director of its Preservice Program in Childhood Education), and on the Advisory Boards of the Iscol Family Program for Leadership Development  {{that’s Cornell, and link tells more about Jill & Ken, after profusely thanking them for generous funding…}} and the Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art at Cornell University. Until 2009 she served on the Boards of Facing History and Ourselves, and Bank Street College of Education (where she was a faculty member from 1973-1974).

    Sorry — I have to point this out  Bank Street College of Education began with a single person’s idea in 1916, and a humanist (as oppose to, say, Deist) idea to study children and figure out what produces the best results, according to humanist definitions and in the process of creating a better world.  This intense obsession — and it IS an obsession — with getting children away from their natural parents (while preaching marriage and family throughout) — didn’t start yesterday.   Particularly one sees the institutes throughout the country wishing to “study” children in order to do a better job than previous generations.  This is reflected to date in Obama Administration’s expansion of Head Start, Early Head Start, and push to get mothers out of the home and back to work, and kids into daycare centers where HHS will pay for “Child Development Scholars” to take notes, etc. etc.     Consider — this was before women got the vote!

    • Bank Street: A Brief History

    In 1916, educator Lucy Sprague Mitchell and her colleagues, influenced by revolutionary educator John Dewey and other humanists, concluded that building a new kind of educational system was essential to building a better, more rational, humane world.

    Beginnings: The Bureau Years

    1916: The Bureau of Educational Experiments (BEE) is founded in New York City by Lucy Sprague Mitchell, together with her husband Wesley Mitchell and colleague Harriet Johnson. Their purpose is to combine expanding psychological awareness with democratic conceptions of education. With a staff of researchers and teachers, the Bureau sets out to study children–to find out what kind of environment is best suited to their learning and growth, to create that environment, and to train adults to maintain it.

    1919: The Bureau of Educational Experiments establishes a Nursery School.

    (The next three bullets, quotes from a “Harvard Educational Review” very laborious review of a book on the development of Preschool in America)

    • “Patty Smith Hill, progressive kindergartner of Louisville, Kentucky, studied the works of John Dewey and Francis W. Parker and then challenged the strict kindergarten pedagogy based on Froebel’s theories.  {{German, childless??, Pedagogue, 1782-1852!}} Hill taught at Columbia Teachers College and co-founded the Institute of Child Welfare Research there in 1924.5 Caroline Pratt, who founded the innovative Play School in Greenwich Village, and her life partner, Helen Marot, were a part of a Greenwich Village group of intellectuals.6 Pratt collaborated with Lucy Sprague Mitchell and Harriet Johnson in New York City in the 1910s, “where they developed a radical preschool pedagogy designed to counteract what they saw as the psychologically and politically oppressive environment of the private family” (p. 135). “
    •  A stark contrast to kindergartners’ encouragement of parental involvement is the practice of early-twentieth-century progressive educator Caroline Pratt, who “saw parents as obstacles to their children’s education, not as partners“ (p. 139). Though Pratt may have been an anomaly among early childhood educators, her stance represents one of the many ways parents were treated and perceived by educators who often were not parents themselves.
    • Her history is a chronicle of preschool-aged children’s access to education in the United States since the early nineteenth century, starting with the advent of infant schools, schools designed for lower-class children whose parents were considered unfit to teach them at home.

    Your basic “Children as lab rats” concept, but of course for a noble purpose.  A Tulane University “Child Development Center” history page describes the Patty Smith Hill Influence, in fact, mentioning the 1969 Chicago University “Lab School.”:

    Newcomb Children’s Center originally started as a nursery school for Tulane faculty and staff when Edith Rosenwald Stern, a young parent and community activist, spearheaded a group of six mothers in the endeavor to establish the preschool in 1926, a time when these were not commonplace in the United States. She was the daughter of Julius Rosenwald, founder of Sears Roebuck and Company, and had attended the University of Chicago Lab School, where a preschool had been initiated in 1916.  (daughter of successful businessman….)

    Stern became acquainted with Patty Smith Hill, a leader of the American Kindergarten and Nursery School Movement, during a visit to Columbia University’s Institute for Child Welfare in New York.  This relationship led to a broad scope of beneficial effects on Stern in terms of its philosophy and methods of teaching.  From its inception, the School has encouraged hands-on learning by the children with guidance from a caring staff of teachers and active parents.

    newcombstrip

    Lucy Sprague Mitchell (from a 2006 “Education Update” site), in short, another blueblood (Radcliffe, UCBerkeley Dean of Women) gets together with others to change the world, starting with studying how to produce a better child:

    Lucy Sprague Mitchell came of age at a time of great changes in the United States. The country was becoming increasingly industrialized and urbanized; waves of immigrants were arriving, and poverty—especially urban poverty—was on the rise. These changing conditions inspired an intense period of social and educational reform between 1890 and 1920, led by pioneers, many of them women, who believed that the world could be changed. An age of often appalling social conditions was also an age of great optimism for people who wanted to remake the society America had built.

    A graduate of Radcliffe, and the first Dean of Women at the University of California at Berkeley, Lucy Sprague Mitchell knew that she wanted to be a force for change, and shared the optimism of the reformers that change was possible. She herself saw in education the best possibility for a more just and humane world.

    With several like-minded women, she established the Bureau of Educational Experiments to determine how children grow and learn by carefully studying and recording their behavior, their language, and their interactions with each other and with their environment.

    (I continued looking — got that “childlike curiosity” still, I guess) — this person who never had a formal education til she was 16, was into early education for the purposes of studying how children learn . . .  she had a domineering father . . . . this Bureau of Educational Systems was subsidized by a cousin’s inheritance . . . and the methods included:

    Lucy Sprague Mitchell’s impact on the educational system in America is all the more surprising considering that she herself did not receive a formal education at school until she was sixteen years old. Lucy’s progressive-some might even say radical-approach to reforming education might be less surprising. Although she grew up with a domineering father in a repressive atmosphere, she also benefited greatly from her father’s own interest in education reform. As a result, young Lucy was not only exposed to the reformist ideas of such philosophical heavyweights as John Dewey and Jane Addams, she actually met them! . . .

    . . .what was radical then is now thought “essential to knowing how to teach” children. The interdisciplinary approach to classroom management, the study of student behavior, psychological profiles recorded and updated, family background and environment checks: all of these were incorporated by Sprague Mitchell into how educating children was conducted at the Bureau.

    Wikipedia on Bank Street College of Education directly ties this group to Head Start.  (Bank Street was simply the Greenwich Village location of the Bureau of Educational Experiments when it started):

    Bank Street was founded in 1916 by Lucy Sprague Mitchell as the “Bureau of Educational Experiments”. (Mitchell was the first Dean of Women at the University of California, Berkeley). Its original focus was the study of child development and education, but, after two years, it was clear that actual living subjects, i.e. children, were needed, so in 1918 a nursery school was opened. This nursery school is the direct predecessor of today’s School for Children. It wasn’t until the 1930s that Bank Street began to formally train teachers, the start of today’s Bank Street College of Education.

    The little kids are brought in to test theory on, but the place started with theory.  Of course, little kids in nursery schools is something of a controlled situation, and in fact, studying a young child in isolation from its parents makes next to no sense to me.  See my post “monkeying with mothers.”  Same mentality!

    In 1965, Bank Street developed the “Bank Street Readers” line of books, which were unique due to their featuring of racial diversity and urban people of contemporary culture. Also in the 1960s, the Bank Street faculty played an important role in the creation of the federal Head Start program.

    Some things never change.  I found a grant (from another organization currently, I think, associated with a group attempting to eradicate no-fault divorce in Ohio, National Council of Family Relations, in cooperation with Utah State University.  Or, at least in the same grant series.  Some ideas just refuse to die, including that the best people to change society are those at the top — although typically it’s those who are starting wars, and sending the masses of lower class youth to go die in them, not to mention locking them up the disproportionately to the white-collar criminals…. and then (Lamar Alexander) getting rich by buying stock in the private prisons that oppress them — which they do, resulting in lawsuits for sexual assault and more. (CCA).

     

    Fiscal Year Program Office Grantee Name State Award Number Award Title CFDA Number CFDA Program Name Award Class Award Activity Type Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    2011 OPRE UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY UT 90YR0035 DADS’ PARENTING INTERACTIONS WITH CHILDREN-CHECKLIST OF OBSERVATIONS LINKED TO OUTCOMES (PICCOLO-D): DEVELOPING A MEASUR 93600 Head Start DISCRETIONARY SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS LORI ROGGMAN $ 0

     

    Notice the nature of this grant, that it’s at a University, and that it’s funded under “Head Start.”   This year, 2011, there were 26 “90YR” projects — ALL at Universities, across the country — and $4.78 million worth — testing, measuring, responding, and attempting to predict human behavior according to certain variables.  I really should post them.   For example, UCLA Board of Regents wants to get better at predicting children’s behavior (good luck with that one!):

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES, BOARD OF REGENTS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90095

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90YR0062 PREDICTING INFANT/TODDLER SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL OUTCOMES FROM INTRAPERSONAL CAREGIVER CHARACTERISTICS AND CHILD CARE PROCESS 1 93.600 ACF 09-13-2011   $ 25,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 25,000

     

    And Utah State has its

    Early Intervention Research Institute

    And Ms. Roggman’s Background:

    Lori Roggman

    Picture of Lori RoggmanLori Roggman
    Staff Biography  Education

    Ph.D., 1988, University of Texas (Developmental Psychology)
    M.S., 1981, Utah State University (Family & Human Development)
    B.S., 1972, Utah State University (Psychology) 
    Teaching
    Undergraduate: Parenting/ChildGuidance, Infancy/Early Childhood
    Graduate: Human Development Theories (6060), Frontiers of Human Development (7060), Topical Seminars on Language Development, Attachment, Play, Fathers.

    – – – – Ah Well  . . . . .

    Since its creation in 1989, Ms. Iscol has been President of IF Hummingbird Foundation, a family foundation which supports efforts to strengthen democracy and to reduce the social injustice, economic and educational inequities that would threaten it.

    From 1997-2001, Jill served as the Chairperson of the Annual Family Re-Union Conference, moderated by then-Vice President Gore and Mrs. Gore, for which she planned and coordinated three annual conferences and raised significant funding for ongoing policy development process aimed at formulating better ways to strengthen family life.

    Jill planned and participated in the White House Conference on Partnerships and Philanthropy in 2000. She was Co-Chair for Hillary Rodham Clinton for Senate’s New York Finance Committee, which raised a record 29 million dollars.  She was Vice-Chair of Senator Clinton’s New York and National Finance Committees in 2006 and a National Vice-Chair of Hillary Rodham Clinton for President’s 2008 Finance Committee.

    Ms. Iscol received a Bachelor of Arts, magna cum laude, from University of Pittsburgh (1967), a doctorate from Teachers College, Columbia University (1976), and a Master of Philosophy in Sociology from Yale (1990).

    This is part of the “FAMILY LIFE DEVELOPMENT CENTER” at Cornell….  (NOTE:  the “HTTC” far above — the DC-based Collaborative I found on the TAGGS list — has a curious link to “Family Development Institute” and is taking personal information for anyone wanting to get credentialed as one:   Guess you can learn how to raise (“develop”) a family, if you get credentialed for it here; wonder who pays how much for the training.   SAME CONCEPT AT CORNELL — in fact overall, this is the concept.  I call it “Designer Families,” although what often seems to result is family breakup, for a better, state-approved “design,” from my experience (and I’m well networked with similar cases….)  (I also did a search on ‘Fatherhood” then “motherhood” at the School of Human Ecology with the usual results: fatherhood 15 to motherhood 8.  Several of the faculty appear to have come from Fragile Families studies, and some prior HHS connection.  The last reference to “fatherhood” was an article by (AFCC professional?) Robert E. Emery, and discussing Custody Evaluations.  Others of course discussed child support….)

    Welcome

    Since 2001, the College of Human Ecology {{at Cornell…}} has been very pleased to be the home of the Iscol Family Program for Leadership Development in Public Service. Established with the generosity and foresight of Jill and Ken Iscol, this program is intended to give undergraduate students inspiration and direction in translating their knowledge, idealism, and optimism into concrete action to build better communities for families and children.

    . . .The Iscol Family Program serves the entire university and for the last 3 years has collaborated with the Entrepreneurship at Cornell program.

    THIS is now, East River Family Strengthening Collaborative Executive Director, as quoted in the “promising neighborhoods” article at “Circle of Philanthropy”

    When we get the little ones in pre-kindergarten, they come to us not even knowing how to hold a pencil or pen.”

    And even when the children are getting the proper instruction in school, the neighborhood’s poverty affects their ability to learn, says Mae H. Best, executive director of the East River Family Strengthening Collaborative, a social-services group in the neighborhood that is participating in the Promise Neighborhood project. Poverty steals children’s attention from the classroom, she says. They may not be eating at home, they may be worried that they are going to be evicted, they may hear their parents complaining about lack of work. * * *

    **omitted — they may hear or witness their parents fighting, or one being assaulted….

    “Everything is generally related to financial resources­—the lack thereof,” she says.

    {Annie E. Casey Foundation is one of the major funders of fatherhood studies; I have been studying this for over 2 eyars.  They show up EVERYwhere, including in groups allegedly preventing family violence, and providing “resource centers,” (Websites, and the paid-for studies that can be downloaded there, and training opportunities), such as “Family Violence Prevention Fund.”  Excuse me, I forgot their recent federally-assisted web facelift, physical move (to the SF Praesidio) AND name change.  How, instead of the grandiose promise of preventing Family VIolence (which I see no evidence they are), they are expanding the scope:  “Futures Without Violence.”  AS I recall (you can check), Annie E. Casey funds this, and probably the “fragile families” study as well.

    I like that they state their timeline and incorporation history.  That’s good.  Notice the “letter to the community” starts with “father absence.”

    Letter to The Community

    Help Us Make Ward 7 Stronger.

    Dear Friend of ERFSC:Imagine a family situation where the father is absent, the mother is unemployed and the children are barely making it in school due to lack of attention and necessary resources. Now consider the stress and embarrassment of not having the “right clothes” to wear to school, a healthy lunch to edify the children’s minds, and a single parent who is so busy trying to make ends meet, that she involuntarily neglects her children. Surely you can see how a family situation like this can negatively affect the mother’s mental health and the children’s self esteem and impact their ability to learn. Surely you can envision how this situation can get worse and result in children who fall into the juvenile system or worse!

    I imagine there is not a single person on this board, or among the families served, who is completely and totally unaware that:

    • Some fathers are absent because of domestic violence, and might have done some jail time for this.
    • African-Americans are over-represented in the jail populations across the U.S., and probably here, too.  

    To rephrase Daddy’s in jail as putting him back with his family (without addressing the “why” of incarceration, which could range from violent criminal activity not a good role model for kids, to drug-related criminal activity not a good role model for kids, to racism, to the fact that there’s a huge corporate lobbying industry behind expanding the prison system (search CCA on my site, “Corrections Corporation of America” – -to possibly even child support arrearages, if combined with other things . . .at what point is it NOT good to reunite that family, and instead allow the female-headed household to be strengthened without letting an abuser back in?

    “With your generous donation, we can open up many windows of opportunity and give our residents a life beyond their limited boundaries along with the tools, the hope and the desire to strive for empowerment. By making a donation, you will not only be contributing directly to the success of these families, but will also be playing an active role in the overall sustainability of ERFSC.

    You may donate right here on our Web site or send your donation check to our office”

    Look who is funding the individual agency, and the umbrella agency here — and below, it’s clear the money (a) comes from welfare that might otherwise actually REACH the household in question, instead of being DIVERTED to fund non-taxpaying entities which set up  slick and donations-collecting websites so they can take credit for any social services provided. . . .   Moreover, between TAGGS & HHS — it’s clear one is under-reporting or the other is OVER-reporting.  Think about that before you donate, because this is common practice in the field:

    USASPENDING has reported (per this DUNS# — which is not always specific only to one organization, i understand — but at least an identifier) only 3 of the 6 grants, or about half of their total.  No data pre-dating 2009 exists.   We can also see that this money is most DEFINITELy coming out of TANF, or “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families”

    I.e., someone’s food and cash aid.   It is more important to have healthy, stable marriages — or try to — than for children to eat and be clothed if not living with their biological Daddies. . . ..

    • Total Dollars:$2,533,518
    • Transactions:1 – 3 of 3


    Transaction Number # 1

    Federal Award ID: 90FK0054: 00 (Grants)
    Recipient: HEALTHY FAMILIES / THRIVING COMMUNITIES COLLABO
    1112 11th St NW Ste B 0 , Washington, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    Reason for Modification:
    Program Source: 75-1552:Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Administration for Children and Families
    CFDA Program : 93.086 : Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants
    Description:
    DC FATHERHPOOD EDUCATION EMPOWERMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
    		Date Signed:
    September 28 , 2011 

    Obligation Amount: 
    $1,533,518

    to search D.C. corporations, apparently you have to create a user account.  I don’t want to do this, so let’s check out just the umbrella nonprofit, and this one:

    HTTC:  Unlike most households, their assets are steadily increasing.  View a tax return, and subtract $500K per year (minimum) from the “government grants” and see if it is a well-run organization that could stand on its own, and note the ration of grants to program service income, and the executive pay, etc.  That’s what I do when viewing tax returns.   Notice — they got $500K in 2006.  Where is the 2006 tax return?

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN
    Healthy Families Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2007 $972,730 990 23 52-2250839
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2010 $634,384 990 23 52-2250839
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2009 $830,758 990 21 52-2250839
    Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council DC 2008 $1,209,182 990 23 52-2250839

    TOTAL of “90FK” awards for 2011:

    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 51,125,462
    Total of 55 Award Actions for 55 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 54,151,962

      

    TOTAL of “90FM” awards for 2011:

     

    Why Think when you can Hyperlink?

    The heart of the “Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood” grantee system is an attempt to get the entire nation (at its expense) in front of trainers and facilitators to — for the sake of our country — submit to indoctrination in what, and how, to speak (i.e., think) about themselves, their children, their neighbors, poverty, work, and their place in this world.

    The “CIRCLE OF IDEAS” circulating through this system is getting smaller and smaller, while the ripples from having thrown this stone into the pond of plurality are still spreading. Ig pushed in t is intentional domination and restriction of a nation’s vocabulary — for profit — to subdue and restrict its thinking about cause & effect, particularly so as NOT to connect this type of corruption with incidents of murder/suicide, kidnapping, child molestation, threats, stalking, or ongoing, chronic stress and work attrition — even when the connection is open, upfront, and obviously in the custody context.

    In Liberia, women of different faiths united (risking their lives) to “Pray the Devil Back to Hell” and changed the course of the country’s history.  They did not want any more excuses for terrorism and attempted genocide.  I do believe that in the USA we are going to have to do this too, ladies and men of conscience.  Not through Occupying Wall Street — but through sitting one’s behind down on some paperwork (or accounting) of this travesty — and THEN boycott something that is profiting from this enterprise at our children’s futures’ expense.

    Recent events in California include:  a little girl not returned on visitation;  Daddy kills herself and himself.  This mother had her child at age approximately 44?  (Samaan/Fay).   8 people killed in Seal Beach, California hair salon, one man in the salon, and one outside it, who was sitting in a car — the rest were women.  And recently in Richmond, California, a brawl broke out in City Hall, surrounding the “Office of Neighborhood Safety.”  Gang members were being paid to attend classes.

    I have not blogged this yet, but as I am networked with “Parents” (mothers and grandmothers) across the country who are tired of THIS war, I became aware of an incident in Trumbull County Ohio which totally baffles the mind — until one explores the funding stream, and the organizaing element of “Fatherhood” at the state level.  Yes, you danged well bet there is a connection!   And I am tired of this propaganda, and excuse-making.  I am tired of, when the closer I look, the more questions come up — WHERE is this entity incorporated?  Why, when the web page is so fancy, and obviously well-funded — can one so many times not find the nonprofit’s EIN# and tax return — and why when those ARE found, they tend to fall into two categories:

    1.   The organization would not exist without HHS (and/or DOJ) funding, and is being propped up by them.

    2.   The organization disappeared (took the money and ran) and no one has caught up with it after an initial, small grant.

    3.   The organization is itself a FOR-PROFIT and HHS has chosen its (fatherhood promoting, family-strengthening) curriculum as one of about a dozen favored solutions to produce world peace (stop abuse, elmiinate poverty, or make irresponsible men responsible through bribes, or a system of bribes/extortion, etc. — i.e., “training” — and the HHS has helped this organization get all set up, create its private market niche or brand, and then certify or license “train the trainer” seminars (tax deductible) to spread it all over the place. . . . .  And is doing this through the already present systems of social welfare, such as TANF, Child Support, Child Abuse Prevention, you name it.  For example “Boot Camp for New Dads” is pushed to hospitals where children are being born.  And the PR firm “Public Strategies, Inc.” in Oklahoma – which as basically “made” by the Healthy Marriage Initiative (it seems to have almost no other clients) actually got another GRANT?

    This, friends, is not what government is for — this is a “Metastasized” government which is eating away the substance of the people that are sustaining it in money, in time, and in labor — and by consuming products it declares we need, when we don’t.  Has anyone ever calculated the huge profits made simply to detox people from chronic stress, and the illnesses that that state produces in a human body?

    Those who buy into this program will likely have income, including potential retirement income; those who do not will be subjected to it, with the exception of those who designed the curricula, who are probably laughing their way between an offshore bank to the next product idea, or (like ICF International Inc., LLC) buying out lesser companies and figuring out how to expand from their Billion-$$ Business with the US Government, one of the largest spenders (and debtors) in the world.

    HERE IS THE SYSTEM:

    Middle class pays for it, and if entangled in it, pays (for example, in the courts).  Many of the middle class have jobs working in the institutions that market these trainings and are used to SELL curricula to fix poverty (etc — create utopia, basically).

    People who have slipped out of or were never out of the lower economic sector — who cannot directly pay for classes — will be forced to take them anyhow, and the implicit “bargain” with the middle classes (from policymakers) is that by forcing the poor rabble into them (through extortion) they will be therefore off the streets and not on YOUR doorstep, so continue to produce wages and taxes that will be distributed to the fatherhood and marriage promoters nationwide, i.e., those who step to our tune.

    The HHS GRANTS PROVIDES THE HYPERLINK ADVANTAGE, AND PRE-FAB ASSOCIATIONS:

    Most resource centers, examined, are primarily on-line database storage.

    The Hyperlink advantage — Federal Help to set up Resources, Visually Engaging Websites, with Official-sounding LInks to the “upline,” and cute new Acronyms for the latest way to market the same material, for example, “FRIENDS” (see last post or so) with the radical concept that Parents might actually know something about their own families.  This fact sheet from a Florida group cites Fatherhood grantees “Circle of Parents”(tr) and “Parents Anonymous(tr)” and declares that we are all in this together, and those who have taken control of our families, and are paid to do so, now wish to “collaborate” and “Share leadership” with the actual parents.  This being a totally foreign concept to social workers and social scientists in general, SOMEONE had to copyright the concept and run trainings on how to let parents back into the decisionmaking process about their kids and their lives.  Get this, from “Factsheet #13” (address to whom?)

    Principles of Shared Leadership

    ␣ Parents and staff members are equal partners

    ␣ No one person has all of the solutions; it depends on how people act together to make sense of the situations that face them

    ␣ Mutual respect, trust and open-mindedness ␣ Collectiveactionbaseduponsharedvision,ownership

    and accountability ␣ Consensus building instead of a democratic process

    Or, here is a “PARENT LEADERSHIP AMBASSADOR FACILITATOR GUIDE” by Circle of Parents & “Friends” — actually by YOU (i.e, USA working citizens), as it cites an HHS grant.  Or names a month after its copyrighted concept self:   Did you know that

    “February was designated as National Parent Leadership Month® by Parents Anonymous®, Inc.”

    (which I found out on a site from an organization that my colleagues, family, and friends’ taxes paid to set up and propagate, also trademarked:  “Circle of Parents(tr)”  Get the picture yet?  Here’s the portion of what was taken away from Parents which this proclamation (modeled after the Declaration of Independence, but entirely foreign to it in purpose and process):

    Preamble:

    National Parent Leadership Month® – 2011

    Parents across the nation are working in partnership with practitioners and policymakers to create positive changes in their lives, the lives of their children and the lives of other families. They are doing this quietly and effectively and it is important to honor these parents.

    How sweet — PPP — Parents, Practitioners and Policymakers.  Maybe you can register the trademark “P3” (get a triangle, to imply that we are somehow equal participants, and this is not, instead a basic pyramid scheme run with IRS help….).   No thank you — give me back the wasted HHS funds, and keep your gold stars; we are not in gradeschool any more.    

    I notice, despite all the “fatherhood” words flying around (although not in this PR piece), there’s still no mention of “mother” on it.  And as I believe I HAVE established, “Circle of Parents” has been bought out by HHS/NFI-elements, and is walking, talking, and publicizing like them:

    About Circle of Parents: Fatherhoodphoto of dad and baby

    FATHERHOOD.GOV
    Checkout the new Fatherhood Newsletters
    Webinar: Father Factor in Children’s Health
    August 2011; Time: 1:19:29

    In 2006 Circle of Parents received a grant from the Office of Family Assistance to implement a comprehensive training, technical assistance and community access project to aid local home visiting programs in the provision of support and education to new and expectant fathers. Parents as Teachers, Nurse-Family Partnership, Healthy Families America, Early Head Start and/or Healthy Start homed visiting programs in the states of Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin received $50,000 each to begin services to expecting and new fathers. The project is being implemented in partnership with the Circle of Parents National Network, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Conscious Fathering Program™ of Parent Trust for Washington Children, PACT Law Center, Prevent Child Abuse America and Leslie Starsoneck, a domestic violence expert.

    Through March 2011, 2,280 expecting or fathers of infants, 1,546 fathers of children between 1 and 5 years, 1,057 mothers and 153 other caregivers were served through 710 Conscious Fathering classes and 1,103 Circle of Parents’ groups for fathers.

    Funding for this project was made possible through a 5-year Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Program grant received by the Circle of Parents national office in 2006. This grant is funded through the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Families Assistance – Grant No. 90FR0098, CFDA #93.086.

    PACT I believe stands for PARENTS (meaning Dads) & CHILDREN TOGETHER — PACT.  I could be wrong, but check this out:

    (this link leads right to the Hawai’i DHS)
    Hawai‘i State Commission on Fatherhood
    (etc., etc.)

    The last several posts, I attempted to correlate the ACF announcement with actual grantees, and find out WTF (the “W” standing for ‘WHO’) they were. As it turned out, most of the grants were the “90FM” series.  I found that most of the top half of the ACF Press Release correlated to the 90FM grant series.  That “find” was the result of familiarity with the TAGGS database combined with hunch.  Then I compared my printout with the ACF press release.  The printout was alpha by grantee institution and the ACF Press Release alpha by state.  Complicating it was the name changes of the grantee institutions, but I did check them off, one by one.

    There are, however, in 2011 (as of today) $121,077,648 of distributions on the TAGGS database, under a single “CFDA” — 93.086.

    There’s been major talk between HHS and, say, the Fathers and Families Coalition of America, or even in the recent 2010 law, about making things more fair to fathers (i.e., pleasing the FR movement leadership) by altering the “FATHER”-related portion of money stolen from TANF & OCSE from one-third to one-half.  Accordingly, the HHS/ACF Press announcement of october 3 makes it look well balanced between two themes:  Top half, MARRIAGE ($59-odd million) and bottom half, FATHERHOOD ($59-odd million).

    In practice, the top half having gone primarily to “FM” which sure looks like faith-based groups, is in effect giving it to fatherhood-propagation anyhow; that’s pretty much what faith-based groups do.  IF they weren’t so inclined, they would be just secular social service groups, and as such deal with their difficulties with feminism, women having the vote, women controlling reproduction or contraception, married women having a say in household finances, married women actually reporting what their (likewise married, obviously) spouses were doing to them, or their children in the home, and in general opting out of marriage because of that.  They also would line up with the rest of the United States that is NOT “faith-based” or practicing a private cult that disagrees with basic laws (such as cultlike beliefs as, you cannot–really- divorce, or beating up someone to dominate the relationship is normal behavior if it’s done to preserve the “father-leader/mother-breeder” status quo).

    Yet this next printout shows an increasing variety of grant streams:  FM, FR, FK, FN, & FO are among the new ones. FE (Fatherhood Education) is getting “old,” obviously. From what I can tell, FN is for Native American; FK seems to deal with incarcerated populations, and I haven’t figured out FO yet. Notice not a single of these begins with the word “M” for “Marriage.”  Perhaps that letter might be mistakenly associated with “MOTHERS” about which this movement has little to do, except in making sure they are not going to be sole physical custodians, and certainly not sole physical and legal ones, for long, if HHS has anything to do with it.

    In this listing, you will also see a number of organizations with grants listed as $0, which I gather means either they’re not getting one this year, or they haven’t yet.  CIRCLE OF PARENTS, that I landed pretty hard on last post (today’s revision) is among the $0 ones.

    THESE CHARTS ARE FOR SCROLLING, BUT THE LINKS ARE ACTIVE — CLICK TO LEARN MORE ABOUT ANY GROUP OR GRANT.  TAKE A LOOK AT THE TITLES — of the PROJECTS and of the GRANTEES.  Compare with the $$.  Ask:  WTF are they doing? and perhaps look locally, and demand some explanation, or trace the funding in your area.

    AGAIN — for comparison — here’s the official announcement:

    Administration for Children and Families

    Healthy Marriage / Responsible Fatherhood 2011 Grantees = $59,997,077 + $59,396,652 = $119,393,729.

    As of October 22, 2011 evening, I searched the code “93.086” which represents this category of grants — and got $121,077,648.

    A difference of $1,643,919 in just a few weeks (could be legit) — but take a look.

    At the bottom I talk some about a Community Action Group in Ohio (WSOS).  Research is incomplete on this, and I may not have all the facts straight, but readers can fact-check themselves as well.  I am trying to answer the larger question about the relationship between “Community Action Programs” in this state and their fundings.

    In general, perhaps without my narrative of any guidance, readers might get a general idea of what titles programs are getting how much money, and where.  This listing is not by state, but alpha by Grantee — which gets interesting as we already know Grantees have creative name-changing habits already, plus TAGGS has opted some creative spellings of existing names.  I figure this is just part of the game.  Here we go:

    This report ran “AWARD SEARCH” “YEAR 2011″ CFDA 93086” from dropdown list and comes out in 4 segments:   50 entries per page, plus the last few:

    Showing: 1 – 50 of 178 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »



    Recipient: *FAMILY SERVICE OF WESTCHESTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10606-3003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0050 FATHERS COURT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 543,906 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 543,906

    Recipient: ADVOCAP, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 54936-1108

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0056 FATHER AND FAMILY STABILITY PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 776,994 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 776,994

    Recipient: AL ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36104

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0042 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD ALABAMA 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: ASSOCIATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS (ONAP)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99559-0219

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0011 TANF HEALTHY FAMILIES PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: AUBURN UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36849

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0006 ALABAMA HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION INITIATIVE (AHMREI) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,489,548 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,489,548

    Recipient: AVANCE, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77092

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0041 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages
    Recipient ZIP Code: 75246-1754

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0018 ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE MARRIAGES, DBA ANTHEM STRONG FAMILIES WILL IMPLEMENT A 3-TIERED PROJECT THAT PROVIDES HEALTHY MARRIAGE SERVICES, ECONOMIC STABILITY AND JOB PLACEMENT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,514,359 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,514,359

    Recipient: Archuleta County Department of Human Services
    Recipient ZIP Code: 81147

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0046 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD IN ARCHULETA COUNTY, COLORADO 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 442,291 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 442,291

    Recipient: Arizona Youth Partnership
    Recipient ZIP Code: 85741-2259

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0030 BUILDING FUTURES FOR FAMILIES-HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT IN PIMA, PINAL AND GILA COUNTIES OF ARIZONA. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 634,536 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 634,536

    Recipient: BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45230-2907

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0029 BUILDING STRONG MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 49501-0294

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0011 BE REAL PROGRAM (“BUILDING AND ENHANCING RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT, AND LIFE SKILLS”) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,996 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,996

    Recipient: Brighter Beginnings
    Recipient ZIP Code: 94601

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0099 PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM 3 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0099 PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM 4 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90806-2708

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0034 MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 570,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 570,000

    Recipient: CANGLESKA, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 57752-0638

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0074 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 2 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 67214-3504

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0042 PROVIDING MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS SKILLS AS WELL AS JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WILL PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,445,587 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,445,587

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES INC ARCHDIOCESE OF HARTFORD
    Recipient ZIP Code: 06105-1901

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0044 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 800,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 800,000

    Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON
    Recipient ZIP Code: 08618-5705

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0016 EL CENTRO HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 555,300 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 555,300

    Recipient: CENTERFORCE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 94901-5516

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0004 HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CHAUTAUQUA OPPORTUNITIES, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 14048-2754

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0024 CHAUTAUQUA RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 618,031 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 618,031

    Recipient: CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60604

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0009 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $- 175,000 
    2011 90FR0009 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 2 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $- 68,402 
    2011 90FR0009 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 01-09-2011   $- 117,496 
    Award Actions Count: 3 Award Actions Subtotal: $- 360,898

    Recipient: CHILDREN’S FRIEND AND SERVICE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 02903-4011

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0008 DADS MAKING A DIFFERENCE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 735,527 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 735,527

    Recipient: CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES-SCH OF PHYSICAL THER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90027

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0034 RESPONSIBLE YOUNG FATHERS PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 784,521 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 784,521

    Recipient: CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 16830-3323

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0118 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 5 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 8 
    2011 90FM0003 HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP PROJECT IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA WITH A FOCUS ON CLEARFIELD COUNTY AND 8 ADJACENT COUNTIES INCLUDING AA (II)(III)(IV) AND (V) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 354,714 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 354,722

    Recipient: CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90005

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0028 PROJECT FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    2011 90FR0076 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 4 93.086 ACF 12-01-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 59521

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0013 CHIPPEWA CREE TANF AND CHILD WELFARE COORDINATION INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: CIRCLE OF PARENTS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60611-3777

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0098 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM 5 93.086 ACF 06-21-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 80203

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0085 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM 4 93.086 ACF 06-21-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: COEUR DALENE TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 83851-0408

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0014 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR COORDINATION OF TRIBAL TANF AND CHILD WELFARE SERVICES TO TRIBAL FAMILIES AT RISK OF CHILD ABU 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 19601-3303

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0044 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 787,665 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 787,665

    Recipient: CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 59855-0278

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0003 PASSAGES FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,440,131 
    2011 90FN0015 CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES FAMILIES FIRST PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    2011 90FR0006 PASSAGES 5 93.086 ACF 06-21-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 3 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,590,131

    Recipient: CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF SILETZ
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97380

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0016 SILETZ ADVOCATES FOR HEALING PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99503

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0006 FATHER’S JOURNEY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 800,000 
    2011 90FN0017 LUQU KENU – EVERYONE IS FAMILY 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 175,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 975,000

    Recipient: COUNCIL ON PREVENTION & EDUCATION SUBSTANCES, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40204-1743

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0009 JEFFERSON COUNTY REENTRY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 549,673 
    2011 90FR0015 JEFFERSON COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE PRIORITY 4 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0015 JEFFERSON COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE PRIORITY 4 5 93.086 ACF 06-23-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0015 JEFFERSON COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE PRIORITY 4 5 93.086 ACF 09-20-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 4 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 549,673

    Recipient: CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 85004

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0021 TODO ES POSIBLE (EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE) – A MARRIAGE PROGRAM FOR HISPANIC FAMILIES IN PHOENIX, AZ 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 359,796 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 359,796

    Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92024-2215

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0104 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1 4 93.086 ACF 11-22-2010   $ 0 
    2011 90FM0019 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 53211

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0043 CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY HEALTH MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROJECT NOW TO SUCCEED 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,779,393 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,779,393

    Recipient: Child family Services of Eastern Virginia
    Recipient ZIP Code: 23517

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0039 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 471,156 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 471,156

    Recipient: Community Marriage Builders, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 47714-1863

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0005 SOUTH WESTERN INDIANA HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVEMARRIAGE EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIP, PARENTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT, DIVORCE REDUCTION SKILLS FOR COUPLES AND INDIVIDUALS. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 30,667,231
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    NEXT!  – PAGE 2 of 4

    Recipient: Connections To Success
    Recipient ZIP Code: 633012634

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0015 PROVIDE RESPONSIBLE PARENTING, HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND ECONOMIC STABILITY TO LOW-INCOME ADULTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 702,553 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 702,553

    Recipient: County of Montrose
    Recipient ZIP Code: 81401

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0030 MONTROSE COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES–RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 574,524 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 574,524

    Recipient: DC DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20032

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0087 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 5 93.086 ACF 09-20-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: DOUGLAS CHEROKEE ECONOMIC AUTHORITY, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37816-1218

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0004 JOBS FOR DADS: PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD FOR LOW-INCOME FATHERS IN RURAL SOUTHEASTERN APPALACHIA 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 416,063 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 416,063

    Recipient: EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90022-5147

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0056 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 2 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 222 
    2011 90FK0019 FUTURO NOW FAMILY STRENGTHENING INITIATIVE: FATHERHOOD PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 800,221

    Recipient: EDUCATION ASSISTANCE CENTER OF LONG ISLAND, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 11550

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0031 PARENTS FIRST IS A PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM DESIGNED TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY, HEALTHY MARRIAGES AND RESPONSIBLE PARENTING ON LONG ISLAND, NY. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 533,040 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 533,040

    Recipient: EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 79930

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0045 HEALTHY OPPORTUNITIES FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,945 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,945

    Recipient: ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45405

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0046 MARRIAGE WORKS! OHIO COLLABORATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Employment Opportunity & Training Center of Northeaster
    Recipient ZIP Code: 18503

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0018 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, MARKETED IN LACKAWANNA COUNTY, PA AS “EOTC’S HEALTHY FATHERS AND FAMILIES INITIATIVE.” 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 379,755 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 379,755

    Recipient: FAMILY & CHILDREN’S SERVICE, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 74120-4429

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0007 F&CS PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0007 F&CS PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: FIRST A M E CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98122

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0032 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0032 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: FIRST THINGS FIRST
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37403-3433

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0048 CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN-HAMILTON COUNTY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,070,834 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,070,834

    Recipient: FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 54520-0396

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0018 THE FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY’S COORDINATION OF FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER WITH TRIBAL TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: FORTUNE SOCIETY, INC (THE)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10031-7116

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0021 FORTUNE SOCIETY PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 725,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 725,000

    Recipient: FRESNO COUNTY ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 93721

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0027 PROVING OUR PARENTING SKILLS PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 782,002 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 782,002

    Recipient: Family Guidance, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 15143-9554

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0047 TWOGETHER PITTSBURGH PROVIDING SIX TYPES OF “ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES” TO THE COMMUNITY: AA (II) EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS; AA (IV) MARRIAGE PREPARATION 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,163,684 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,163,684

    Recipient: Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 27601-1947

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0009 COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 725,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 725,000

    Recipient: Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77006

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0017 HOUSTON MARRIAGE PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 698,102 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 698,102

    Recipient: Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center
    Recipient ZIP Code: 46208-4705

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0027 STRENGTHENING FAMILIES: LINKING HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND STRONG FATHERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,780,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,780,000

    Recipient: Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis
    Recipient ZIP Code: 63158

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0052 FATHERS’ SUPPORT CENTERS’ PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FAHTERGOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,530,190 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,530,190

    Recipient: Friends Outside in Los Angeles County, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 91101-1632

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0053 “DADS BACK!” IS A COMPREHENSIVE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM WHICH WILL SERVICE THE REENTRY POPULATION AND THEIR FAMILIES THROUGH CO-LOCATED SERVICES AT 3 FAMIL 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 518,067 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 518,067

    Recipient: Future Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 30344-4137

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0013 REALTALK – A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH AND PARENTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 685,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 685,000

    Recipient: GATEWAY COMMUNITY SERVICE ORGANIZATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 41472

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0014 GATEWAY COMMUNITY SERVICE ORGANIZATION PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 55104-1708

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0016 G/ESM FATHER PROJECT’S PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 1,772,546 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,772,546

    Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF AUSTIN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78703

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0005 THE FATHERHOOD WORKS PROGRAM OFFERS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 623,965 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 623,965

    Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF PITTSBURGH
    Recipient ZIP Code: 15203-2102

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0011 THE AFFECT PROJECT (ADVANCING FATHERS AND FAMILY ENRICHMENT COLLABORATIVE) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,952 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,952

    Recipient: GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 22182

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0024 FIT RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,599 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,599

    Recipient: HAYMARKET CENTER
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60607

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0041 MCDERMOTT CENTER DBA HAYMARKET CENTER RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM FOR LOW INCOME FATHERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 796,393 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 796,393

    Recipient: HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 95546

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0019 PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILY SUCCESS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20001-4330

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0054 DC FATHERHPOOD EDUCATION, EMPOWERMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,533,518 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,533,518

    Recipient: Healthy You, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 363031997

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0020 JUST THE FACTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 681,956 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 681,956

    Recipient: High Country Consulting LLC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 82001-2758

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0049 STRENGTHENING WYOMING TEEN AND LOW INCOME TANF FAMILIES THROUGH SKILL BASED RELATIONSHIP TRAINING AND ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 535,082 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 535,082

    Recipient: Horizon Outreach
    Recipient ZIP Code: 77386

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0045 THE HORIZON EAGLE PROGRAM PROVIDES MALE COMBAT VETERAN FATHERS SUFFERING FROM PTSD WITH STRATEGIES TO REDUCE THE EFFECTS OF PTSD ON THEIR RELATIONSHIPS, PARENTING ABILITIES AND EMPLOYABILITY. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 480,732 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 480,732

    Recipient: I C F, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 22031-6050

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FH0002 NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,500,000

    Recipient: IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97220

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0015 REFUGEE AND IMMIGRANT FAMILY EMPOWERMENT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 492,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 492,000

    Recipient: Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92243-2943

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0001 PROJECT PADRES 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 798,928 
    2011 90FM0061 PROJECT JUNTOS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,597,928

    Recipient: JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 72761

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0023 HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 724,428 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 724,428

    Recipient: Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee,
    Recipient ZIP Code: 34237-5223

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0057 HEALTHY FATHERS/HEALTHY FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,984 
    2011 90FM0060 HEALTHY FAMILIES/HEALTHY CHILDREN 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,993 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,599,977

    Recipient: KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 96819

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0012 KOKA CARES – KEIKI O KA AINA CAREER AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION SERVICES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,752 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,752

    Recipient: Kanawha Institute for Social Research & Action, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 25064-1433

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0029 WEST VIRGINIA PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 2,351,675 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,351,675

    Recipient: Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40475-2457

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0050 KRFDC COMMUNITY CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: LIGHTHOUSE YOUTH SERVICES, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45206-1780

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0005 LIGHTHOUSE SKILLS FOR YOUNG FATHERS PROGRAM 5 93.086 ACF 11-16-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF SOUTH DAKOTA
    Recipient ZIP Code: 57105-6048

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FO0002 FATHERHOOD AND FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,229,141 
    2011 90FR0097 FATHERHOOD AND FAMILIES: INSIDE & OUT 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,229,141

    Recipient: Lexington Leadership Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40504-3154

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0017 FAYETTE COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 449,113 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 449,113
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 37,025,735
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    NEXT! — PAGE 3 of 4

    Recipient: MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 45503-4175

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0004 THE COMMITMENT PROJECT-INSPIRING COMMITMENT TO HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS,RESPONSIBLE PARENTING AND ECONOMIC STABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 798,380 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,380

    Recipient: MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 21201

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0091 STRONG FATHERS STRONG FAMILIES PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0092 WINNING FATHERS PROJECT 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: MEMPHIS & SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
    Recipient ZIP Code: 38105-5041

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0037 PROJECT MOTIVATED OFFENDERS SUCCEEDING TOMORROW (MOST) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 797,809 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 797,809

    Recipient: MID-IOWA COMMUNITY ACTION, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 50158

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0022 MICA’S STRONG PARENTS – STRONG CHILDREN PROJECT WILL SERVE LOW-INCOME FAMILIES, PRIMARILY NON-CUSTODIAL FATHERS IN THE COUNTIES OF MARSHALL, POWESHIEK, AND TAMA IN CENTRAL IOWA. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 765,433 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 765,433

    Recipient: MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 53226

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0049 MILWAUKEE COUNTY PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,806,892 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,806,892

    Recipient: MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 40066

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0036 MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 344,904 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 344,904

    Recipient: Meier Clinics Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60187-4579

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0051 MEIER CLINICS, FAMILY BRIDGES, HEALTY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92116-4557

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0016 SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0016 SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: Minnesota Council on Crime and Justice
    Recipient ZIP Code: 55415-1200

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0028 FAMILY STRENGTHENING PROJECT 4 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: Mission West Virginia, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 25526

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0052 N/A 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 683,935 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 683,935

    Recipient: More Than Conquerors Inc
    Recipient ZIP Code: 300835318

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0053 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 798,798 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,798

    Recipient: NASHVILLE METROPOLITIAN BORDEAUX HOSPITAL
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37218

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0035 THE NEW LIFE PROJECT IS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE LIFE OF HIGH RISK CHILDREN BY PROVIDING THE SKILLS, EDUCATION AND RESOURCES MEN NEED TO EFFECTIVELY PARENT THEIR CHILDREN. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,589,107 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,589,107

    Recipient: NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 90746

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0055 NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHOP) HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 685,308 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 685,308

    Recipient: NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF CONCERNED BLACK MEN, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 20009-4422

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0043 CONCERNED BLACK MEN FATHERHOOD PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 88003

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0037 NEW MEXICO BORDER REGION HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: NJ ST DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 08625

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FO0004 ENGAGING THE FAMILY IN THE RECOVERY PROCESS FOR THE MAX-OUT OFFENDER: A COMMUNITY-CENTERED APPROACH 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,039,049 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,039,049

    Recipient: NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98244-0157

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0020 NOOKSACK HEALTHY FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 125,000 
    2011 90FN0020 NOOKSACK HEALTHY FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 97213-2933

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 1,395,000 
    2011 90FM0002 GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,395,000

    Recipient: NW Marriage Institute
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98682-2328

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0051 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 747,281 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 747,281

    Recipient: New York Youth At Risk, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10038

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0093 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 02-02-2011   $ 0 
    2011 90FR0093 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 05-25-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: OAKLAND/LIVINGSTON HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 48056

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0036 THE FATHER FACTOR PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 432,251 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 432,251

    Recipient: OH St Governor`s Office of Faith Based & Comm Initiativ
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43215

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0109 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 (TURNING THE TIDE FOR OHIO’S BLACK MARRIAGES) 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73125

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0032 THRIVING MARRIAGES: RETREATS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 776,304 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 776,304

    Recipient: OPERATION KEEPSAKE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 44087-1654

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0056 MARRIAGE IS FOR KEEPS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,054 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,054

    Recipient: PARENTS PLUS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 54952-0452

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0113 WISCONSIN ALLIANCE FOR HEALTHY MARRIAGE 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 89 
    2011 90FE0113 WISCONSIN ALLIANCE FOR HEALTHY MARRIAGE 5 93.086 ACF 11-16-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 89

    Recipient: PEANUT BUTTER & JELLY PRESCHOOL
    Recipient ZIP Code: 87105

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FO0003 IMPACT! NEW MEXICO’S PARENT REENTRY PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,476,500 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,476,500

    Recipient: PEOPLE FOR PEOPLE, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 19130-2202

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0025 PROJECT DEVELOPING ACTIVE DADS (DAD) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 648,273 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 648,273

    Recipient: PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10023

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0025 PHOENIX HOUSE CONNECTIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 618,768 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 618,768

    Recipient: PROJECT S.O.S., INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 32216-6241

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0033 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE ANDRELATIONSHIP GRANTS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 672,703 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 672,703

    Recipient: PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73116-7909

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0026 FAMILY EXPECTATIONS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Parenting Center (The)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 76107

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0031 EMPOWERING FAMILIES PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 797,093 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 797,093

    Recipient: QUILEUTE INDIAN TRIBE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98350

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0022 YOUTH AND FAMILY INTERVENTION PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 33157-5372

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0028 RECAPTURING THE VISION INTERNATIONAL: THE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP PROJECT TARGETING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND YOUNG ADULTS 18-25. 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 799,230 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,230

    Recipient: RIDGE Project, Inc
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43512-2575

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0026 KEEPING FAITH (FAMILIES AND INMATES TOGETHER IN HARMONY) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    2011 90FO0005 KEEPING FAITH – KEEPING FAMILIES AND INMATES TOGETHER IN HARMONY 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 1,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 4,000,000

    Recipient: Retreat, Inc.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 11937

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0047 SUFFOLK COUNTY FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 786,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 786,000

    Recipient: SOCIAL ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH (SAY), SAN DIEGO, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 92123

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0020 PROJECT COMPASS (CREATING OPTIONS FOR MEN TO PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY, SAFELY, AND SUPPORTIVELY) 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 790,927 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 790,927

    Recipient: SOUTH PUGET INTERTRIBAL PLANNING AGENCY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98584

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0023 SPIPA TANF ICW WRAP-AROUND COLLABORATIONS PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: SOUTHWEST KEY PROGRAMS, INC.
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78704

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0033 RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM IN SAN ANTONIO AND BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS: PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTSHHS-2011-ACF-OFA-FK-0194 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,594 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,594

    Recipient: SPRINGFIELD URBAN LEAGUE, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 62703-1002

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0038 PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD IN MACON, MORGAN, AND SANGAMON COUNTIES, ILLINOIS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,387,327 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,387,327

    Recipient: STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT
    Recipient ZIP Code: 39759-2803

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0035 BUILDING STRONG FAMILIES 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 699,874 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 699,874

    Recipient: SUQUAMISH & KLALLAM HEALTH PLAN
    Recipient ZIP Code: 98346

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0021 PORT GAMBLE S’KLALLAM TRIBE ADVOCATING FOR STRONG KIDS (ASK) PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-23-2011   $ 125,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 125,000

    Recipient: Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project
    Recipient ZIP Code: 95821

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0059 FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 798,825 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 798,825

    Recipient: Scholarship and Guidance Association
    Recipient ZIP Code: 60609-4231

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0038 FAMILY LIFE SKILLS PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 794,180 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 794,180
    Page Award Actions Count: 50 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 35,677,886
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    And FINALLY:

    Fiscal Year = 2011

    Showing: 151 – 178 of 178 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »

    Recipient: Shalom Task Force
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10274-0137

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0008 COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION IN THE ORTHODOX JEWISH COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN NYC AREA 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 541,633 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 541,633

    Recipient: St. Louis Healthy Marriage Coalition
    Recipient ZIP Code: 63108-3302

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0133 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 2 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 37 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 37

    Recipient: Structured Employment Econ Dev Corp (SEEDCO)
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10010

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0040 SEEDCO’S PATHWAYS TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,500,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,500,000

    Recipient: Supportive Integrated Services
    Recipient ZIP Code: 71101

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0023 FAITH IN FATHERS CADDO PARISH 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 537,537 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 537,537

    Recipient: TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99701-4871

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0024 ATHABASCAN FAMILY SUPPORT PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: TARRANT COUNTY WORKFORCE BOARD
    Recipient ZIP Code: 76103

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0032 PROJECT, “FATHERS AND CHILDREN TOGETHER.”: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO PROMOTE AND FOSTER RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, ECONOMIC STABILITY, AND HEALTHY MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS IN TARRANT COUNTY. 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 2,106,804 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,106,804

    Recipient: TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY-SAN MARCOS
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78666

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0007 STRENGTHENING RELATIONSHIPS/STRENGTHENING FAMILIES (SR/SF) 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 617,280 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 617,280

    Recipient: THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 94707-0881

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0010 BUILDING BRIGHTER FUTURES 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 794,846 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 794,846

    Recipient: THE HIVE CREATIVE GROUP
    Recipient ZIP Code: 36303-1997

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0093 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION PRIORITY AREA 3 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 0 
    2011 90FE0093 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION PRIORITY AREA 3 2 93.086 ACF 02-08-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: TLINGIT & HAIDA TRIBES CENTRAL COUNCIL
    Recipient ZIP Code: 99801

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FN0012 ICW TANF COLLABORATIVE CASE MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 150,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 150,000

    Recipient: TOLEDO AREA MINISTRIES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 436201735

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0040 KEEPING IT TOGETHER 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 24001-2868

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0010 TAP-TVW’S FATHERS FIRST 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 766,515 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 766,515

    Recipient: The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families
    Recipient ZIP Code: 29204-2413

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0021 STRENGTHENING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS FOR LOW-INCOME, NON-CUSTODIAL FATHERS 5 93.086 ACF 09-15-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: UNITED WAY OF JACKSON COUNTY, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 49201-1223

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0138 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 2 4 93.086 ACF 11-16-2010   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 10467-2401

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0057 UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES MARRIAGE & RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 799,999 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 799,999

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES
    Recipient ZIP Code: 72205-7101

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FR0041 PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD 5 93.086 ACF 09-20-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 0

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
    Recipient ZIP Code: 32826

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0039 PROJECT TOGETHER 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 2,184,508 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 2,184,508

    Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 37916

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0022 RELATIONSHIP RX: INTEGRATING A COUPLES INTERVENTION PROGRAM INTO A PRIMARY CARE SETTING 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 723,508 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 723,508

    Recipient: UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
    Recipient ZIP Code: 84322

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH 1 93.086 ACF 09-27-2011   $ 785,612 
    2011 90FM0001 SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH 1 93.086 ACF 09-28-2011   $ 0 
    Award Actions Count: 2 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 785,612

    Recipient: Urban Ventures Leadership Foundation
    Recipient ZIP Code: 55408-2410

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0007 MINNEAPOLIS PROJECT PROMOTING FATHERHOOD 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 709,385 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 709,385

    Recipient: VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION
    Recipient ZIP Code: 05405-3401

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0013 DAPPPER DADS — DADS AS PARENTS, PARTNERS AND PROVIDERS 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 390,600 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 390,600

    Recipient: WAIT Training
    Recipient ZIP Code: 80237

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0054 THE COLORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 1,605,705 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 1,605,705

    Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43420-3021

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0012 “FATHER CONNECTIONS” PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 560,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 560,000

    Recipient: YOUTH & FAMILY ALLAIANCE
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78704-7046

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0002 LIFEWORKS YOUNG FATHER’S PROGRAM 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 600,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 600,000

    Recipient: YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES OF CANADIAN COUNTY, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 73036

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0058 SAFE AND LOVING RELATIONSHIPS FOR AT-RISK YOUTH 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 338,367 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 338,367

    Recipient: YWCA OF SAN ANTONIO
    Recipient ZIP Code: 78240-1480

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FE0127 HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 5 93.086 ACF 10-18-2010   $ 54,455 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 54,455
    Page Award Actions Count: 28 Award Actions Amount for this Page: $ 17,716,790
    Total of 178 Award Actions for 164 Awards Total Amount for all Award Actions: $ 121,087,642

    Showing: 151 – 178 of 178 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »


    Comment re:

    Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
    Recipient ZIP Code: 43420-3021

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support CFDA Number Agency Action Issue Date Amount This Action
    2011 90FK0012 “FATHER CONNECTIONS” PATHWAY TO RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANT 1 93.086 ACF 09-26-2011   $ 560,000 
    Award Actions Count: 1 Award Actions Subtotal: $ 560,000

    This is the ONLY agency where an HHS grant (apparently) goes directly to a certain OHIO County where a recent child-rape in a supervised visitation center has been making headline news.  In exploring the situation — and the institution — it turns out that the institution where it happens was 75% government funded, with HALF the funding being a special “Children’s Levy” to the state, and the other 22% “Federal Funding.”

    OHIO — like a few states — has an actual “FATHERHOOD COMMISSION” which does what Fatherhood Commissions do, primarily directing grants towards saving families by keeping Dads involved.  Part of the streamlined funding (or, “Flexible Funding” as it’s called), enabling them to get the money FAST to serve children and families — like this 13 month old girl that was raped and molested by her biological mother and father, who got access too her (despite Daddy already being a registered juvenile sex offender) by taking “parenting classes,” and like her older sister — removed from Mom the day she was born, put in foster care, and there bludgeoned to death by a foster care mother, now in prison I gather, before she turned two.  In addition to the funding to provide supervised visitation access centers where by abusers can REALLY bond with their offspring, the state of Ohio now has to pay for jail space for mother and father, and public defenders, as the outrage is normally wanting the couple to go to jail for life.

    I looked at the docket for the father and mother, and find out that while the father’s attorney has been REAL pro-active (insanity plea, etc.) — and that it’s $27.00 per action — the mother’s, if any, appears to be doing nothing.  I have YET to locate a single tax return for the outfit that failed to supervise here, but we hear (so far) that the citizens attempting to get into the Board meeting for the public-funded organization were turned away at the door.  To date, in looking at the “FCFC” setup (hard to understand unless you explore Ohio’s “FAMILIES AND CHILDREN FIRST” site), there are precious few FCFC’s (out of 88 counties in the state) which actually filed — with the state of ohio — as one, resulting in a public-access tax return stating how much money they got, WHAT THEIR BOARDS OF DIRECTORS ARE PAID — and where it went.

    This organization’s primary business is HEAD START — HANDICAPPED TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FULL AND HALF DAY, with occasional RURAL FACILITIES and just a tad of ‘PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.”

    Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
    Address: 109 SOUTH FRONT ST, PO BOX 590
    FREMONT, OH 43420-3021
    Country Name: United States of America
    County Name: SANDUSKY
    HHS Region: 5
    Type: Community Action Organization
    Class: Non-Profit Public Non-Government Organizations
    {{SINCE 1995  – NOW}} Total of award actions for this page: $ 7,104,079
    Total of all award actions: $ 95,486,805

      

    This group must’ve given money to some non-TRumbull County recipients, judging by the results searching awards by LOCATION, and choosing Trumbull County.  Be patient, I’ll explain.  This is selecting no year:  I already know all awards to this county (directly from HHS) were ACF awards, from the same basic Location Search / Group by Agency:

    County = TRUMBULL
    State = OHIO
    Summary = Recipient

    Showing: 1 – 7 of 7 Recipients

    Recipient Number of
    Award Actions    		 Number of
    Awards    		 Amount
    COUNTY OF TRUMBULL LIFELINES 9 2 $ 691,593
    Children`s Rehabilitation Center 1 1 $ 124,000
    City of Warren, Ohio 1 1 $ 248,690
    Forum Health Trumbull Memorial Hospital 1 1 $ 169,290
    Hopewell Inn/DBA Hopewell 2 1 $ 383,822
    NORTHEAST OHIO ADOPTION SERVICE 26 5 $ 4,006,797
    TRUMBULL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM 64 2 $ 69,574,990
    Report Total: 104 13 $ 75,199,182


    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    TRUMBULL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM  WARREN OH 44485-3730 TRUMBULL 044729874 $ 69,574,990

      

    S

    These awards (if you click on it) are in the exact same category and project name as the WSOS ones, above:

    Trumbull Community Action program is labeled as a nonprofit PRIVATE org. under TAGGS, for what it’s worth (WSOS as nonprofit PUBLIC,e tc.)

    Recipient: TRUMBULL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM
    Address: 1230 PALMYRA ROAD, SW
    WARREN, OH 44485-3730
    Country Name: United States of America
    County Name: TRUMBULL
    HHS Region: 5
    Type: Other Social Services Organization
    Class: Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations

    AWARD ACTIONS

    Showing: 1 – 50 of 64 Award Actions

    Page: « Previous 1 2 Next »

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2012 05CH4005  HEAD START: FULL YEAR PART DAY HANDICAPPED TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 46 0 ACF 10-14-2011 044729874 $ 2,323,475 
    Fiscal Year 2012 Total: $ 2,323,475
    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC  FREMONT OH 43420-3021 SANDUSKY 077573533 $ 95,486,805

    Their website explains Community Action Programs as part of the 1960s War on Poverty, generally; explains that in 2002, they got Head STart funding, and in essence, they are a middle-man contracting with the government to provide services.  the WSOS apparently represents 4 Ohio Counties (out of 88 available). I”m not quite sure how ‘TRUMBULL” county fits in there, but WSOS grants are apparently going there.

    The program under which “HELP ME GROW” classes appear to take place includes the place where the child was raped during a scheduled visitation.  (Cell phone images were found, so whether or not it took place is not in question).

    2002  
    • Literacy – PRC Ottawa County
    • Skills for Life Ottawa County
    • Help Me Grow

    2003  
    • Help Me Grow Ottawa County
    • WSOS secures funding for Early Head Start program

    WSOS Logo

    Billboard

    Apparently the WSOS stands for 4 different Ohio Counties:   Odd there is no “T” in that acronym, seeing as Trumbull is getting the bulk of their HHS monies:
    Heading - Our History

    1965

    		 Officers of the Seneca, Sandusky, and Ottawa County Community Action committees meet in Fremont and draft a joint constitution that created SOS Community Action Commission.

    2002
    • Literacy – PRC Ottawa County
    • Skills for Life Ottawa County
    • Help Me Grow

    2003
    • Help Me Grow Ottawa County
    • WSOS secures funding for Early Head Start program

    Funding sought to help unemployed fathers in nine Ohio counties 

     If a $560,000 proposal to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance is funded, 200 families in Wood, Sandusky, Ottawa, Seneca, Hancock, Crawford, Marion, Richland and Morrow counties will receive assistance to help them achieve economic stability during the next three years.

    The Board of Directors of the WSOS Community Action granted approval to submit the proposal along with four other new proposals.

    The grant, called the Responsible Fatherhood grant, will provide access to employment, education, training, intensive family-centered case management as well as a range of other support services customized to each family – all with the goal of helping the family achieve economic stability.

    WSOS will also apply on behalf of the Sandusky County Homeless Coalition for $2,550 from the Sandusky County Community Foundation. The funds will be used to provide 60 needy county residents to secure driver’s licenses, birth certificates, and state identification cards necessary for them to obtain or retain employment.

    The two other proposals will be made by the Community Development Department to assist Ohio communities. One proposal will seek $105,000 from the Governor’s Office of Appalachia that will be used to provide leadership training to small community water and sewer personnel for one year. The Ohio Water District Association (OWDA) will provide matching funds up to $45,000. Another proposal for $250,000 to the same office will provide technical assistance to small communities for GPS data collection and GIS mapping. OWDA will again provide matching funds of $38,000 while the participating communities will contribute another $247,194.

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

    October 27, 2011 at 1:26 PM

    Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, compulsory schooling, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

    Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

    Child Support-TANF “The Emperor Has No Clothes.” Part 1: Rise and Expansion (“Spinning”)

    leave a comment »

    SOME OF THIS MATERIAL & MORE DETAILS ALSO AN EARLIER POST

    Someone sent homeless through child support garnishments after custody switch sent me the following.  This person was not merely working “poor” but for a long time working FT middle class CS-garnished wages homeless.

    This person is a mother, and having trouble getting “Access Visitation” services from organization whose names say “Father,” while the supporting legislation, however, says “parents,” which she is.  By “having trouble” I mean, there has been no help whatsoever, and there is no mother-child contact at all.  the case is typical.  As far as I know this person is not a welfare caseload, though probably would qualify easily.  If the purpose of these funds is to reduce poverty, it has backfired.  However, that’s not my main argument.  That homelessness was a direct result of the supporting legislation for putting welfare funding to groups like this:

    10/03/11 – ACF announces over $119 million in Grant Awards for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood

    What grandiose and beneficial sounding words:  “Healthy Marriage & Responsible Fatherhood.”  What makes us think this can be purchased, and that by increasing centralization, then distributing without oversight, poverty and “unhealth” will somehow result?   Unfortunately the thinking is more like this:   I work, my wages are taxable, I don’t want to go to jail, don’t rock the boat too much.  Too much radical change is too much social unrest. ….    We don’t want riots, so I will continue to be obedient to the powers that be, rather than run up against them and risk losing even more..

    But the closer I look at these grant awards, and the grantees themselves, the more shocked I am at the Take the Money & Run element.  And at another disturbing one.  Not including funds LOST in the system (through grantees that don’t file, states that don’t distributed funds they’ve collected, etc.), the profits are increasingly going simply to very much FOR-profit organizations that are good with PR and Media.  Three examples that come to mind are:

    • PREP, from two professors at UDenver, withlongstanding relationships with grants-funded investigations.  They incorporated to form “PREP, Inc.” which your tax dollars are helping market, and I can show how and where.  These professors are both also Advisory to  the huge “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative”
    • BOOT Camp for New Dads (Originating from a California professional, being marketed to hospitals, who must pay a “licensing” fee, around $3,000)
    • TWOGether corporate affiliations (I’ve found so far in TX & PA, but probably all over by now)
    • Dibble Marriage Institute Curricula (The Dibble Marriage Institute basically IS an off-loadable set of curricula & toolkits.
    These groups take the Kids’ Turn model one step farther– it’s more automated curricula, and it’s being distributed through more federally (usually HHS) supported avenues.  Businesses contracting with the federal government (and states) is nothing new — but we are talking about what has to be immoral — businesses using the theme of protecting children, and saving America, eliminating poverty (etc.) — and using that to form new businesses along the MLM or Direct Marketing Model, dispensing trademarked boilerplate material — and doing it through nonprofits.
    The organization and collaboration of the marketing plan is definitely with HHS involvement.  Here’s an example on a “CHILD WELFARE INFORMATION GATEWAY.”  Keep in mind that to this administration, child welfare and father involvement are synonymous, due to federal policy. EXAMPLE:

    The Importance of Fathers in the Healthy Development of Children

    Child Welfare Information Gateway
    Author(s): Office on Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S. Children’s Bureau Rosenberg, Jeffrey., Wilcox, W. Bradford.
    Year Published: 2006

    Section II
    8. Fatherhood Programs

    Nationally and locally, there are numerous fatherhood programs that strive to meet the various needs of the many different fathers and families. These programs fill the gaps left by social service agencies, which have limited funding, suffer from case overloads, and are unable to offer activities beyond the scope of their responsibilities.

    8.5 Examples of Fatherhood Programs

    As the manual has shown throughout, there are numerous needs and reasons to strengthen the roles of fathers. A wide range of programs exists to meet many of the needs of fathers and their children. The following were selected as examples of programs that span the fatherhood initiative spectrum.

    “The Fatherhood Initiative Spectrum,” I love it….

    • {{LGH note:  My post “Footloose in Tuscaloosa” needed followup, which points to this Trust Fund}}
  • The Dads 101 Program and Male Involvement Campaign
    Working to prevent shaken baby syndrome
    • This, if anything, would seem to be a vital program.  Even so, my last post (before this one) shows how a black father spent a year in jail improperly, on accusation of in part having shook his baby.  Turns out a Shaken Baby Syndrome type group had just been funded; within one month or so from formation of the Child Safety Program at Penn State, they had two children in foster care and Dad in jail, and what looks like suppression of contrary witnesses (i.e, there was another cause of the symptoms) from the same Child Safety Program team! The couple sued.  See also “Courthouse news” which reported on this one.
  • Dads Make a Difference Program
    A school-based program led by teens
  • Family and Community Violence and Prevention Project and 50/50 Parenting
    Working to prevent family violence and to improve couples’ relationships
  • Fathers and Children Together (FACT)
    Working with incarcerated fathers
  • The Fathers Network
    Working with fathers of children with special needs
  • First Things First
    Strengthening families through public education campaigns
  • Golden Dads
    A national campaign to promote responsible fatherhood
  • Great Beginnings Start Before Birth
    Working with fathers-to-be and their partners
  • Leading by Example
    A faith-based fatherhood initiative and mentoring program
  • Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP)
    Enhancing and supporting healthy marriages
  • Project Fatherhood
    Helping at-risk fathers learn how to parent effectively
  • Project MECCA and Another Choice for Black Children
    Supporting children and families during and after adoption
  • Shalom Baby – Bootcamp for New Jewish Dads
    Working with fathers prior to and immediately after birth
  • Stay-At-Home Dads
    How to start a playgroup or local dad-to-dad chapter
    • BootCamp for New Dads is a trademark, goes back to this corp. & person.
    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2004518 02/14/1997 ACTIVE DADS ADVENTURE, INC. GREG S BISHOP
    Gregory Bishop wrote a 1994 article praising Optima, which oversees 5% of Orange County’s $10 Billion health care system.  He has a connection to the hospital system, and markets BootCamp for New Dads.  As described on “Dads Adventure” site:
    Dads Adventure, Inc. Provides Major Funding & Outreach
    Formed to reach more new fathers and help fund Boot Camp for New Dads, Dads Adventure, Inc. publishes Hit the Ground Crawling: Lessons from 150,000 New Fathers. Crash Course for New Dads: Tools, Checklists and Cheat Sheets and Dads Adventure magazine, and operates DadsAdventure.com. Together, they take full advantage of emerging media technologies to meet the various learning styles of the younger generation of men. Dads Adventure, Inc. also financed the development of Boot Camp for New Dads, and provides major funding for ongoing operations through sponsorship fees and royalties.
    Maybe it’s a great product. However, this is definitely a “emerging media technology” with some of these funders — as they fund the expansion of “Boot Camp for New Dads.”

    In addition to our partners Boot Camp for New Dads is fortunate to have a strong network of local supporters who share our mission and goals. They include:

    • Boot Camp Coaches who month after month lead our workshops and prepare men to be fathers.
    • Program Coordinators who champion Boot Camp within their sponsoring organizations and work to obtain the resources each program needs.
    • Veterans dads who return to Boot Camp with their baby to pass on what they have learned to the next group of rookie fathers.
    • New moms who encourage their spouses to participate in Boot Camp and appreciate the critical role they have in raising their child together.

    Funding Support
    Funding for the expansion of Boot Camp for New Dads has been generously supplied by the following organizations

    • Annie E. Casey Foundation  {{funds other marriage/fatherhood projects, in a big way}}
    • Irvine Health Foundation
    • Johnson & Johnson Foundation
    • Orange County Commission on Families and Children
    • Pacific Life Foundation
    • Windgate Charitable Foundation

    In addition, Revolution Studios has supplied substantial funding to BCND for movie rights to Greg Bishop’s life and Boot Camp for New Dads.
    I’d heard of “BootCamp for New Dads” before, but actually tracked who it belonged to and where it came from (California) in the process of trying to locate the actual corporate status (if not income) of someone on another group, “Ohio Practitioners Network for Fathers & Families” and correlate its self-description with the State of Ohio record.  As often happens, the records do not tell the same story, with the website typically claiming a longer corporate history than it has.
    Below, I also took a quick review of the DIBBLE INSTITUTE (which is ALSO not filing its charitable registry in California, where it resides)

    It’s time to say NO! to the off-roading of public expenses into private profits based on, we’ve always done it this way, at least since the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, which is when the child support system (principal funding & enabling institution got underway).   Mainstream Media discussion of these awards is nearly ZERO, although interagency, association-specific, and conference-based discussion of these awards is how to get more of them and justify getting more.boiI looked at some of the grantees, and recognized several.  Top Group:  “HEALTHY MARRIAGE”:

    Healthy Marriage Grantees

    Legal Name Organization City
    State
    Award Amount
    Auburn University Auburn
    AL
    $2,489,548
    Healthy You, Inc. Dothan
    AL
    $681,956
    John Brown University Siloam Springs
    AR
    $724,428
    Arizona Youth Partnerships Tucson
    AZ
    $634,536
    Creciendo Unidos Phoenix
    AZ
    $359,796
    Cambodian Association of America Long Beach
    CA
    $570,000
    The Dibble Institute for Marriage Education Kensington
    CA
    $794,846
    Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project Sacramento
    CA
    $798,825

    “Kensington, CA” is a wealthy part of Berkeley.  Dibble is a Distributor (as I understand it) and many of the other grantees are dabbling with their materials.

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    THE DIBBLE INSTITUTE FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION 114381 Charity Current BERKELEY CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    The pattern they follow is similar to many grantees.  Big Talk, Big Claims on Website, Major co-collaboration, and short shrift when it comes to complying with local LAWS that charitable organizations (in CA) have to actually register ANNUALLY as charities, and as corporations.   Why is our government continuing to give major funding to groups that don’t?  Is there more than meets to the eye, is it more than just “we’re understaffed and overwhelmed,” that the Office of Attorney General never seems to catch up with these groups who don’t file — at ALL??

    Dibble address is a PO Box in Berkeley, they began in 2002 (says this record) and rapidly increased both assets and income (probably through HHS and foundation grants).  NO founding documents are available on-site, no tax returns (at least in California) and unless their returns are sitting at the OAG, and there’s a shortage of data entry clerks, they are doing so illegally, from what I can see (note disclaimer).  I think I see just fine — because other groups in the similar situation, and with less “failure-to-file” history DO get scolding letters from the OAG:  “Where’s our $75 fee for registration?”

    iscal Begin: 01-OCT-09
    Fiscal End: 30-SEP-10
    Total Assets: $758,255.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $1,337,654.00
    RRF Received: 19-MAY-11
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted
    Related Documents
    No Related Documents
    Prerequisite Information
    No Prerequisite Information
    IRS Return Data

    See that “No Related Docuents”?    That ought to be full, so public can look at where that $1,337,654 allegedly came from and (in the process) seeing Program Accomplishments (and costs), and how much the Board of Directors are getting paid.  Now, because this income shows, we CAN go look it up with the comforting knowledge that they probably paid federal (and probably not state/local) taxes.  If thats comforting…  And that the institutions receiving privileges and pay, charged with fixing the unhealthy marriages that (allegedly) cause poverty and trouble the public at large, because of the noble cause they are in, don’t have to play by the rules, or obey normal laws regulating corporations (for public safety from scams), although if an individual behaved like this, s/he would be at risk of jail promptly.

    So, WHAT I WILL DO, on individual organizations (and you might consider doing):

    Check the 990 finder:

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN
    Dibble Fund CA 2009 $537,324 990 23 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund CA 2008 $874,877 990 18 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund CA 2007 $696,077 990 18 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2006 $161,204 990 16 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2005 $94,274 990 14 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2004 $78,488 990 16 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2003 $92,429 990 18 68-0435573
    Dibble Institute for Marriage Education CA 2007 $721,321 990 18 68-0435573

    TAGGS LISTING, meaning how much HHS grants have they gotten. Does not include contracts, just grants:

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  BERKELEY CA 94707-0881 ALAMEDA 948592779 $ 3,679,498


    At least $1 million has been Healthy Marriage// an ongoing one (above) is reaching Teens, and another 2011 grant, “Building Brighter Futures,” use “Discretionary”

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0010  BUILDING BRIGHTER FUTURES 1 00 ACF 09-27-2011 948592779 $ 794,846 
    Fiscal Year 2011 Total: $ 794,846

     

    WELL, WELL, WELL — another Grant Series includes grants to several of the I-failed-to-file/we changed our name/ OOPS! category of grants recipients, nationwide – – the “90FM” series.     There are 70 grants including $2,500,000 to “California Healthy Marriages Coalition,”  which does not exist as a corporation (or nonprofit) any more.

    Before this (Probably leading up to the renamed “Building Brighter Futures” is the 20065-2010 grant award 90FE0024, a total of $1.7 million.  Shouldn’t this group have to send off an RRF from time to time (like ever?).  ALthough we, the public, cannot view this, it’s my understanding they have to tell the OAG their Schedule B of donors (or donors over $1K) so someone is keeping track of any improprieties, i.e. donations correlating to legislation being pushed, or to at least PRETEND to avoid conflicts of interest when, for example, someone running the local grants allocation in the county determines who gets the contract.  Or when there’s a judge on a board — or a custody evaluator — and a judge is driving business to the nonprofit, or contributes to it as well.

     

    Interesting, The Dibble Operation has two different 990 filings with two different revenues for 2007 (Plus a few different names entered):

    address 728 Coventry Road, Kensington, CA a modest (for these parts) single-family residence.  Nearby streets are named Stanford, Oberlin, Beverly, etc.   Coventry possibly named after a Cathedral in England.

    What they are doing with this grant described here — teaching that cohabitation is bad to Los Angeles Teens, and other skills.  http://www.dibbleinstitute.org/

    The Dibble Institute has been awarded a $794,000 grant for up to three years to teach youth and young adults in the Los Angeles Unified School District healthy relationship skills. The grant is from the Administration for Children and Families. …

     

    THIS IS HOW IT WORKS:  Become a Nonprofit.  Get a grant, hire a curriculum designer, get more grants, and market it, helped with gov’t funding, in gov’t funded institutions.  This need not be necessarily limited to the divorce arena — why not go for the public schools, too?

    The website has a store, plus some free resources, and a log-in for “Grant Instructors” (only) to access their materials:

    Grant Instructor Login

    Welcome! Thank you for participating in The Dibble Institute’s Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant.  Access resources to help you

    • Teach the relationship skills program you selected — or —
    • Report back to us on how well you did and get your benchmark payment

    Login Here:Password:  Are you interested in changing the world and getting paid to do so? Then, The Dibble Institute wants to talk with you! We are looking for qualified instructors or youth workers who will teach healthy relationship skills to teens. Our program provides FREE curriculum, student materials, and a benchmark payment to you upon successful completion of the teaching and reporting. To learn how to apply and participate, please contact Natalie Middleton by phone 877-435-8033 or email:Natalie.Middleton@publicstrategies.com. Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant Number: 90-FE-0024/03.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.

     

    Notice that PUBLIC STRATEGIES is a *.com, not a *.org — it’s a FOR-profit, and I’ll bet a very good profit, too.  The grant series “FE” is pretty evidently “Fatherhood Education.”  Not exactly gender-neutral, eh?  “PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC.” is Oklahoma-based, and if you use my “search” field on this blog, I have elaborated upon who they are. Or google “Mary Myrick.”  The HHS appears to have “made” this PR firm, very few of their clients are NOT somehow related to the major Oklahoma Marriage Institute. (OMI) and the originators of some of the product above (for example, “PREP”) are Advisory to, as I recall, OMI.

     

    ABOUT US:  The Dibble Institute:

    The Dibble Institute for Marriage Education, a nonprofit organization, helps young people learn how to create healthy romantic relationships now and in the future.
    It is indeed a nonprofit organization, and even has an EIN#.  However, according to the OAG website it CERTAINLY is not in compliance as to filing, and doesn’t seem likely to any time soon.  Too busy moving product and finding new markets, I guess, to fill out a one or two-page form and send it the registration fee.

    We offer tools for teaching the practical skills essential for enhancing friendships, dating and love.  Just as important, we assist teens in creating the personal vision that keeps them on a positive path.

     

    It’s an unreporting to the state of California nonprofit organization, and as such has to be I believe operating OUTSIDE the confines of the law, while marketing materials to Los Angeles schoolchildren, as enabled by this grants system.  Charles Dibble (itself) was an aircraft engineer.  Now his Institute is designing web pages and curriculum, lots of them — perhaps young people can be taught to operate like aircraft engines, predictably, fail-safe, and perhaps all the parts of them can be organized, coordinated, and fine-tuned with attitude adjustments.  Is that desirable?  Look at the panorama of programs from this one group.  I sincerely doubt the founder was hurting for a retirement income (more likely something to do with his retirement), but certainly it’s got to be a good one.  PARTICULARLY IF NOT PAYING STATE TAXES AND ACCOUNTING PROPERLY FOR MONIES RECEIVED.

    The Dibble Fund itself appears to be a curriculum which other grantees, such as TWOGether in Pittsburgh, PA, utilize:

    Curriculum & Program Credibility: The TWOgether Pittsburgh High School Education Module for Healthy Relationships meets the requirement for the Pennsylvania Department of Education Academic Standards for Family and Consumer Sciences. The selected curriculum is The Dibble Fund for Marriage Education, which includes two components: Connections: Dating & Emotions and Connections: Relationships & Marriage.

    (I was aware of a TWOGether in Texas, and gather they have now expanded):

    TWOgether Pittsburgh is a coalition of like-minded agencies and individuals who believe in the strengthening of marriages. The coalition includes Family Guidance, Inc., as the lead agency, the Center for Urban Biblical Ministry, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Women’s Center and Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh, Smith Brothers Advertising, and a team of Evaluators led by Dr. Stanley Denton.

    TWOgether Pittsburgh is the most intensive marriage support initiative ever in the greater Pittsburgh area. It is a five-year, $8.35 million federally funded project to strengthen marriages and families in the region. (Healthy Marriage Initiative Websitehttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage )

    Apparently this is a baby corporation — only 2 years old.
    Twogether GP, LLC 3916468 Limited Liability Company Active 11/10/2009
    Twogether, L.P. 3916633 Limited Partnership Active 11/12/2009
    Rec

    Based out of a 3-bedroom, 3-bath home in Allentown, PA, whose (or which area’s) market values took a nosedive in Nov. 2011
    FAMILY GUIDANCE, INC. 399002 Non-Profit (Non Stock) Active 2/13/1964
    Re

    FAMILY GUIDANCE, INC. is overtly evangelistic Christian, and hooked into the HHS/ACF terminology and grants system.

    This about us page is unusually detailed and admits that in 2005, it was very much involved in ACF funding.

    STATEMENT OF MISSION

    Family Guidance, Inc. exists to bring hope and a future in Jesus Christ to vulnerable children and families of all cultures throughout western Pennsylvania. 

    . . .  (Note federal funding, religious influence, and Fatherhood Emphasis throughout — although both men and women pay taxes that help support this, not to mention, and atheists and people of non-evangelistic-Christian religions)

    In October 2000, the Manhood Mentoring program was launched to reach high-risk fatherless teenage boys, and  DADDs (Dedicated and Devoted Dads), was born in 2001. Dr. Leckie retired on December 31, 2001, and became Founder and Retired Chairman.

    In 2004, Family Guidance embarked on a dramatic initiative to expand and improve the quality of the ministry’s camping program.  Check out the progress of our Camp Capital Campaign.

    In 2005, Family Guidance embarked on a exciting initiative called the Learning and Mentoring Program (LAMP.)   In conjunction with the Gang Free Schools Project run by the Pittsburgh Board of Education, Family Guidance is helping to reach and mentor kids who are at risk for Gang-related activity.

    In the Fall of 2005, The Marriage Works was introduced.  This is a program funded through the Administration for Children and Families which is a partnership between Family Guidance, the Center for Urban Biblical Ministry and the National Fatherhood Initiative. The program provides marriage enrichment, couple mentoring, and fatherhood and parenting classes to couples who reside in the East End of Pittsburgh.  This became a springboard for the TWOgether Pittsburgh Initiative, launched the next year.

    This is a narration, step by step, of how federally-supported (faith-based) organizations collaborate and form new little babies.  As it says in Genesis, “Be fruitful, and multiply, replenish the earth.”  Only they are doing corporations & curricula, not babies.


    In the Fall of 2006 TWOgether Pittsburgh was introduced.  This is a coalition comprised of Family Guidance, the Center for Urban Biblical Ministry, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Women’s Center and Shelter of Pittsburgh, Smith Brothers Advertising and project evaluator, Stanley Denton.  This initiative, unprecedented in scope in the Pittsburgh area, seeks to partner with 30 local congregations to provide marriage enrichment, pre-marriage preparation, couple-to-couple mentoring, and divorce prevention. TWOgether Pittsburgh will also provide education on marriage and families in high schools and a media campaign regarding the benefits of marriage. The program is funded through a five-year grant from the Administration for Children and Families.

    TWOGether Pittsburgh contains a name that sounds familiar to me, but notice the phrase:  “Parents, Fathers, or Blended Families.”  Talk about “the invisible mother….

    Ken MacLeod
    Program Director, Marriage Preperation for Couples and
    Marriage Enrichment for Parents, Fathers, or Blended Families

    California Secretary of State search on “DIBBLE” Corporations.  Two pagers

    HOW DID WE GET TO THIS POINT?  OF SUPPORTING PR COMPANIES AND OTHER WEALTHY FIRMS AS A WAY TO REDUCE THE WELFARE CASELOAD, ABUSE, ETC.?  HOW DID WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE MONEY GETS COLLECTED, THEN LOST, BUT WHAT IS DISTRIBUTED, GETS DISTRIBUTED FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT, LIKE STREETWALKERS, LINE UP THEMSELVES AND SOLICIT BUSINESS WITH THE HHS/ACF, LOOKING FOR A “JOHN”?

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT:  RISE & EXPANSION.

    I think I have evidence we need an overhaul of the HHS — not just the OCSE part of it.  Collectively, it is behaving like this, and the figure at the front of the pack does not represent a present or former President.  But it does represent some REALLY bad executive orders, and eventually, laws.  My evidence is not in this post, which is simply reminding us of some of the HOW of the expansion of the welfare state — through the child support system expansion to include non-welfare cases.  ALL of these reforms appear to have come after the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) finally was (forced?) to register with its own EIN# and incorporate, well over a decade after it apparently began operating (illegally, tax-dodgingly) in the Los Angeles County Courthouse at 111 Hill Street.   (Beware AFCC post summarizes some of this)

    Everybody cheer and look to our leaders…..

    On October 17, 2003, a U.S. Senator Robert Byrd  used this fairy tale for an analogy.  He is indignant and saying it’s time to stop — referring to a different topic.  I am not nearly so eloquent, so here is his, as posted the next day at “commondreams.org”:
    by US Senator Robert Byrd
    Senate Floor Remarks
    October 17, 2003

    In 1837, Danish author, Hans Christian Andersen, wrote a wonderful fairy tale which he titledTheEmperor’sNewClothes.  It may be the very first example of the power of political correctness.  It is the story of the Ruler of a distant land who was so enamored of his appearance and his clothing that he had a different suit for every hour of the day.

    One day two rogues arrived in town, claiming to be gifted weavers.  They convinced the Emperor that they could weave the most wonderful cloth, which had a magical property.  The clothes were only visible to those who were completely pure in heart and spirit.

    The Emperor was impressed and ordered the weavers to begin work immediately.  The rogues, who had a deep understanding of human nature, began to feign work on empty looms.

    Minister after minister went to view the new clothes and all came back exhorting the beauty of the cloth on the looms even though none of them could see a thing.

    Finally a grand procession was planned for the Emperor to display his new finery.  The Emperor went to view his clothes and was shocked to see absolutely nothing, but he pretended to admire the fabulous cloth, inspect the clothes with awe, and, after disrobing, go through the motions of carefully putting on a suit of the new garments.

    Under a royal canopy the Emperor appeared to the admiring throng of his people – – all of whom cheered and clapped because they all knew the rogue weavers’ tale and did not want to be seen as less than pure of heart.

    But, the bubble burst when an innocent child loudly exclaimed, for the whole kingdom to hear, that the Emperor had nothing on at all.  He had no clothes.

    Always make sure to have some children without tact (or Ph.D.) or conflict of interest, or fear — in your life.  Fear or public embarrassment makes for stupid behavior, and ignorance of what is a more realistic danger, to be handled.   . .. .   Is that a beautiful analogy or not?  The rogues completely understood the social order — but they forgot the kids.

    Senator Byrd was talking about the war in Iraq, and how it was rushed through the Senate; I will shortly compare it to another “rushed through” legislation that has cost us dearly also, over time.  His next statement:

    That tale seems to me very like the way this nation was led to war. . . .

    We were told that we were threatened by weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but they have not been seen.

    We were told that the throngs of Iraqi’s would welcome our troops with flowers, but no throngs or flowers appeared.

    We were led to believe that Saddam Hussein was connected to the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, but no evidence has ever been produced.

    We were told in 16 words that Saddam Hussein tried to buy “yellow cake” from Africa for production of nuclear weapons, but the story has turned into empty air.

    We were frightened with visions of mushroom clouds, but they turned out to be only vapors of the mind.

    There have been some so-called, in fact self-called, “prominent thinkers” many years ago, but they have turned out to be “vapid thinkers”  — or rogues.  I believe, rogues.  What I’m about to show is too outrageous for mistake, and certain characteristics show a similarity with the weavers in the fairy tale.   Like a recent Harry Potter movie, a swish of the hand, a little vapor, and a protesting dwarf gladly let the imposter into the vault.   Eventually, looking daft and with a silly smile on his face, he was vaporized by the resident dragon, having forgotten how to cow the beast with noise.  …. In addition to weaving wonderful tales, there was a strong-arm rushing through of the legislation:

    Those who have dared to expose the nakedness of the Administration’s policies in Iraq have been subjected to scorn. Those who have noticed the elephant in the room — that is, the fact that this war was based on falsehoods � have had our patriotism questioned.   Those who have spoken aloud the thought shared by hundreds of thousands of military families across this country, that our troops should return quickly and safely from the dangers half a world away, have been accused of cowardice.  We have then seen the untruths, the dissembling, the fabrication, the misleading inferences surrounding this rush to war in Iraq wrapped quickly in the flag.

    The right to ask questions, debate, and dissent is under attack.  The drums of war are beaten ever louder in an attempt to drown out those who speak of our predicament in stark terms.

    Even in the Senate, our history and tradition of being the world’s greatest deliberative body is being snubbed.  This huge spending bill has been rushed through this chamber in just one month.  There were just three open hearings by the Senate Appropriations Committee on $87 billion, without a single outside witness called to challenge the Administration’s line. ***

    Ambassador Bremer went so far as to refuse to return to the Appropriations Committee to answer additional questions because, and I quote: “I don’t have time.  I’m completely booked, and I have to get back to Baghdad to my duties.”

     

    ** that is EXACTLY how some of the marriage/fatherhood legislation, and in particular the access/visitation portion of welfare reform, got passed.

    In 1996, as part of welfare reform, some legislation was rushed through (this is hearsay, but credible given how accurate the rest of her work has been, from Liz Richards of National Alliance for Family Court Justice) at the 9th hour by (none other than) Ron Haskins, creating the “access visitation” loophole to welfare reform.  I do not think even those of his party knew about it.   This legislation expanded the purpose and intent of the 1975 Child Support Law — TItle IV-D of welfare – based on a theory which has yet to be proven true.  A quick summary, I don’t want to be too pedantic, just to review the expansion:

    Excerpted from the 2000 House Ways and Means Green Book, “Child Support Enforcement Program“

    In 1950, when only a small minority of children were in female-headed families, the Federal Government took its first steps into the child support arena. Congress amended the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) law by requiring State welfare agencies to notify law enforcement officials when benefits were being furnished to a child who had been abandoned by one of her {{interesting….}} parents. Presumably, local officials would then undertake to locate nonresident parents and make them pay child support. From 1950 to 1975, the Federal Government confined its child support efforts to these welfare children. With this exception, most Americans thought that child support establishment and collection was a domestic relations issue that should be dealt with at the State level by the courts.

    Note:  “Dealt with at the State level by the courts….”

    By the early 1970s, however, Congress recognized that the composition of the AFDC caseload had changed drastically. In earlier yearsthe majority of children needed financial assistance because their fathers had died; by the 1970s, the majority needed aid because their parents were separated, divorced, or never married. The Child Support Enforcement and Paternity Establishment Program (CSE), enacted in 1975, was a response by Congress to reduce public expenditures on welfare by obtaining support from noncustodial parents on an ongoing basis, to help non-AFDC families get support so they could stay off public assistance, and to establish paternity for children born outside marriage so child support could be obtained for them.

    Well, like most institutions, why limit a good thing to the original purpose?

    The 1975 legislation (Public Law 93-647) added a new part D to title IV of the Social Security Act. This statute, as amended, authorizes Federal matching funds to be used for enforcing support obligations by locating nonresident parents, establishing paternity, establishing child support awards, and collecting child support payments. Since 1981, child support agencies have also been permitted to collect spousal support on behalf of custodial parents, and in 1984 they were required to petition for medical support as part of most child support orders.

    So here begins the Federal INCENTIVE influence . . . Federal AFDC already existed….     Now read the next paragraph carefully, and if you remember any of my former posts about missing in action “Undistributable Child Support” (already collected), and/or the outsourcing to private companies which then sometimes end up defrauding the public, being sued for the fraud, and paying multi-millions in settlement, then going on to get more contracts where they can do it again — then listen to this (2000) description:

    Basic responsibility {{translation:  If parents ask, your screwups ain’t our fault}} for administering the program is left to States, but the Federal Government plays a major role in: dictating the major design features of State programs; funding, monitoring and evaluating State programs; providing technical assistance; and giving assistance to States in locating absent parents and obtaining support payments.

    So, when the Government began to give matching funds, it also began to demand more of a role in designing the systems – – removing the center of control further from the states:  “Federalism” — but for a good cause, to reduce welfare and make the world a better place by reducing poverty .  . .  except for ONE thing:  the addition of clientele — I’ll bold the wording:

    The program requires the provision of child support enforcement services for both welfare and nonwelfare familiesand requires States to publicize frequently, through public service announcements, the availability of child support enforcement services, together with information about the application fee and a telephone number or address to obtain additional information. Local family and domestic courts and administrative agencies handle the actual establishment and enforcement of child support obligations according to Federal, State, and local laws.

    Actually, by 2000, the process had been removed from the courts and required (by the Federal Emperor Government) to be handled in a statewide distribution unit.  In short, it wanted more CONTROL.  I can see some sense to the idea that a parent who flees to another state to avoid supporting his offspring might require some federal coordination — BUT — that’s not what was written into the 1996 Welfare Reform law…

    Alternately, the states could forfeit the federal funds to help collect. . . .The child support program generally does not provide services aimed at other issues between parents, such as property settlement, custody, and access to children.

    As of the year 2000, that statement was false.  The Child Support program as a net to haul in individuals perhaps behind on it, or to help them abate arrears, also encourages (fathers) to take advantage of some new improved programming:

    In 1996, Public Law 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, abolished AFDC and related programs and replaced them with a block grant program of TANF. Under the new law, each State must operate a CSE Program meeting Federal requirements in order to be eligible for TANF funds.

    The states did not have the option of the former AFDC programs, which were abolished.  THey have populations needing help — and they could either line up (see graphic above) and toot the horn, soliciting more clients for the child support program — including NON-welfare parents — or they could personally deal with hungry people, including single parents — themselves, after they had gotten used to federal help.

    In addition to abolishing AFDC, Public Law 104-193 made about 50 changes to the CSE Program, many of them major. These changes include requiring States to increase the percentage of fathers identified, establishing an integrated, automated network linking all States to information about the location and assets of parents, requiring States to implement more enforcement techniques, and revising the rules governing the distribution of past due (arrearage) child support payments to former recipients of public assistance.

    Note:   locating the assets of parents.  If one is going to have a good court case, finding out where the assets are is real important.    Anyhow, “many of them major” is an understatement.

    In 1998, almost $3.6 billion was spent by State child support programs to collect $14.3 billion in child support. The combined Federal-State program had 55,300 employees.  (HIRING 55,300 people– including attorneys and no doubt computer specialists — to reduce the public expense of welfare…..)

    REMOVING CHILD SUPPORT PROGRAM DESIGN FROM THE COURTS, AND GIVING IT TO AN APPOINTEE BY THE HEAD OF HHS, WHO IS A PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTEE.  As it says, government By, Of, and For the People, as dictated by ONE person in authority.  Note:  Formerly it had been in the courts.

    THE FEDERAL ROLE

    The Federal statute requires the national child support program to be administered by a separate organizational unit under the control of a person designated by and reporting directly to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Presently, this office is known as the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE).The Family Support Act of 1988 required the appointment of an Assistant Secretary for Family Support within DHHS to administer a number of programs, including the Child Support Enforcement Program.  {Wonder what other programs . . .. .}

    Currently, this position is entitled the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Tell your grandchildren how we got the OCSE.  They should know.

    As of 1996, this article shows up, Child SUpport Enforcement (CSE) officially got into custody matters –but those are matters at a state level, right?  NO matter, the centralized system had a better idea — and $ 10 million was allotted to it.

    Child Support Enforcement and Visitation — Should There Be a Federal Connection?  (WIKILEAKS, “CRS REport for Congress” updated June 20, 2000)  (read at least the gray inset at the top).

    In recent years, Congress has moderated its position against using federal CSE funds to promote enforcement of visitation rights. In 1988, it authorized CSE funding for child access demonstration projects in six states, and in 1996 it (1) permitted the Federal Parent Locator Service, which is under the direction of the Administrator of the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, to provide information on the location of custodial parents and children to noncustodial parents and (2) authorized an annual $10 million entitlement of CSE funds to states to establish and operate access and visitation programs. Some view these recent steps as too intrusive on state and domestic court authority, while others contend they are long overdue and do not go far enough.

    OBVIOUSLY not — these are now heading up towards $1.7 billion, thanks to those profiting from the $10 million and programs set up and enabled by this.

    The same author, and type of report, in 2007 (spanning the years 2002-2005) has a lot to say, but I’m reporting the “OTHER” factor, which crops up only on page 9 — interesting, becasue the intent of child support enforcement is allegedly to get it to the children.  This talks about where it wasn’t happening:

    Child Support Provisions COnsidered but not Enacted

    Congressional Research Service Report RL33881

    Child Support Provisions Considered But Not Enacted During the 2002-2005 Welfare Reauthorization Debate Carmen Solomon-Fears, Domestic Social Policy Division February 15, 2007

    Abstract. This report provides a brief discussion of 12 child support provisions that were considered during 2002-2005 within the context of welfare reauthorization but not enacted in P.L. 109-171 or any other federal law. To the extent that some of these provisions had broad support, they may be considered again in the 110th Congress. The Administration has included several of the provisions in its FY2008 Budget.

    (NOTE:  This was only Wikileaked in 2/2009 – not being I supposed broadcast too widely).  From page 9:

    In recognition that custodial parents rely heavily on child support to meet their children’s basic needs, both House and Senate bills over the last several Congresses have included a provision that would have required the Secretary of HHS to submit to the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee a report on the procedures states use to locate custodial parents for whom child support has been collected but not yet distributed.

    At least our Congressmen seemed to understand that sometimes money is collected, but not distributed, in any business, and possibly was being in this system also.  The thought that that Secretary of HHS ought to show some accountability for the huge amount of control given him/her.  Obviously the measures didn’t actually PASS though, to do this.

    According to the proposal, the report must include an estimate of the total amount of undistributed child support and the average length of time it takes undistributed child support to be distributed. Also, to the extent the Secretary deems appropriate, the report must include recommendations as to whether additional procedures should be established at the state or federal level to expedite the payment of undistributed child support.

    Although data are available from FY1999-FY2005 on undistributed child support collections, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has stated that during much of that period the amounts may not have been accurate because state CSE agencies had different interpretations of what constituted undistributed collections.22

    Possibly because the system was too complex, possibly through CSE obfuscation or poor communications.

    In 2002, a former Commissioner of the Office of Child Support Enforcement, Sherri Heller, said that the problem of undistributed collections has always existed. However, the Commissioner stated, “automation is helping us to quantify the problem that has always been there. I don’t think that automation or state disbursement units created the problem of undistributed collections. I think it’s shone a spotlight on it.”23

    Undistributed child support collections increased from $545 million in FY1999 to a record $738 million in 2001, and dropped to $479 million in 2004. In FY2005, nearly $497 million in child support was collected but was not distributed to custodial parents; 60% of that amount was in the process of being distributed24 and 40% ($201 million) was considered unresolved,25 and thereby had a lower probability of being distributed to custodial parents.

    Because I’ve picked up this image, let me quote the article too, Posted on September 26, 2011 by Bryan Thomas in “NOMIZO.com”

    (posting it doesn’t mean I’ve analyzed the author’s position and agree with it — it means that, in addition to the illustration, a few choice phrases suited my purpose today…)

    The emperor has no clothes, cash, credit, or credibility

    Emperor is being used here as a synecdoche, a figure of speech in which a part is used to represent the whole. In reality, the entire U.S. government is in danger of losing the confidence of the American people and the world. In all of the debt ceiling news coverage during the past few months, one major element seems to be missing. It is the simple conclusion that our government has forgotten what leadership is and what leadership does.

    Well, too many of us have adopted a “we need an emperor” mentality, forgetting who helped create the many problems that supposedly such a strong leader might rescue us from.  We also have DEFINITELY forgotten that this country came out of revolutionary thinking in the history of the world — the concept that religion should be put under restraint, and monarchs, and that certain unalienable rights — the right to live, to have liberty, and to pursue happiness, was granted to the people not by monarchs, but by a “Creator”   And that their purpose in existence is not to furnish someone else’s wealth, gotten by treachery, deceit, or force, OR abusive taxation without representation.

    Fourthly, our government leaders are operating by a “Double Standard” and are not following the financial principles that all American citizens and businesses are expected to obey.  . . . Somehow, our government has developed a spirit of entitlement that enables them to operate above and beyond these financial laws and principles. In the process, they have forgotten that the money they are spending is not theirs, but it belongs to the American people. . . .

    Does it?   Well, for one our leaders have put us in permanent and impossible to get out of hock to the Federal Reserve Board, and then pretend that if (the rest of us — not the leaders) tighten our belts, we might just be OK — which is called lying.    We bought our currency at interest, then took it off the gold standard, then made sure that in the local schools, most people are taught values, not math, history, literacy, or how to become financially independent in the way that people who are running the place did.  That old trend to replace law with monarchy is always there — it’s human nature when power is handed over. 

    Fathers, Mothers, Nonparents, Taxpayers :  WHO are you working for?  And if you pay taxes where are they going?  What’s happening to the grants distributed, largess to the largest and smallest companies who dance to the tune set long ago from Washington, D.C.?   

    I’ll tell you who cannot tell you where your taxes went, as the dollar declines in value hurting the most people who have nothing BUT dollars (no land, no assets, no offshore bank accounts, and in fact, little grasp of the economic system, just of how to last til the next paycheck and try to make sure there is one.)

    My ridiculous title reflects some states a single trail led me to, these past two days, when I learned about the October 3, 2011 announcement of $119 million more in Healthy Marriage and Fatherhood Grants went.  Here’s the list:

    News and Media Releases:

    2011

    Oct-Dec

    10/05/11 – ACF awards $28 million to improve well-being for children in child welfare

    Let us not forget that this version of improving well-being = putting more fathers back with the babies, and selling programs like “Boot Camp For New Dads,” or “PREP,” plus of course abstinence education material through “faith-based community organizations.”

    10/04/11 – ACF announces $2 million in grant awards for Tribal TANF – Child Welfare Coordination

    10/03/11 – ACF announces over $119 million in Grant Awards for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood

     

    I am under 8,000 words, and not finished with this topic yet.  “To Be Continued . . . . .  ”

    I am going to post the 70 recipients of the new grant series starting “90FM” (but it’s still CFDA 93.086, which is Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood category).  I am angry about the dishonesty in a number of grantees previously researched, in particular the chameleon “California Healthy Marriages Coalition.”  I sense money laundering — otherwise, they could pick an incorporation, FILE, and stick with it.

     

    Also reprehensible is the amount and style of self-referrals; it’s basically the country-club atmosphere feeding off welfare funding, while the public at large figures someone is actually doing something about welfare, or that this money is going to help feed, clothe, house, or provide health care to needy children and families.  It ain’t.  It’s getting diverted & lost in the system, and NOT being tracked from those distributing it, or another arm of government, either!!!  If you’re not angry enough to act after some of this, you’re probably either numb from some other cause, or on drugs in order to think about it.

    The AFCC recently has on their site a pretentious declaration styled after the Declaration of Independence, rather than a straight religious creed (which it, in effect, is).  They state “WHEREAS” (yada yada yada), emphasizing that there is a “CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER” from lack of resources to the courts.

     

    This group is not unionized and doesn’t need to be — they are running the judicial system nationwide, and get activist judges in high places, and help pass legislation favorable to their particular groups.  I have caught them repeatedly at this (SB 557, Family Justice Center Alliance, or an attempt to actually write “Kids’ Turn” into the California Law — (Gov. Gray Davis vetoed it).  In Ohio, a similar action was able to write the spinoff group, “Kids First” into the Procedures and get its name on to the court from for ANY custody modification.  Citizens of Pennsylvania are onto this and have been reporting it, but I believe it’s still there.  How is this not a form of racketeering, with the exception that this group has enabled to get their activity (along with domestic violence and child abuse, kidnapping, stalking, etc.) DE-criminalized by  lobbying for laws to legitimize professional niches they have created  (Parent Coordination, and pushing Parent Education, Counseling, Supervised Visitation, etc.).

    MANY of these groups including the one I just showed above, are not just “faith-based” but outright evangelistic.  What they want is your money and access to your children, for mentoring purposes.  I have dealt extensively with religious circles, and know how this works.  It comes from the conviction that a theocracy is certainly better than limiting religion to the restraints that Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, and others realized it HAD to be if the republic, and the country would stand.

     

    BUT — and don’t forget this — NOT all the Marriage/Fatherhood grantees are in it for evangelization.  Money, itself (and access to young children without their parents around for “transformative” group therapies) are equally potent motivators.  And I have to acknowledge that this must be so; if they were as values-driven as they claim to be, we would see more corporate status-maintained, charitable-registrations-kept-up-to-date grantees.  WE aren’t.

    Does the HHS care?  I don’t see that it does — they are still doling out the largess, as is the Ways & Means Committee and whoever rubberstamps this legislation — away from the public radar — year after year.

    (GRrrrr!   !!)

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

    October 9, 2011 at 3:26 PM

    Posted in History of Family Court

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

    Double-Dipping into Public Finances: OK because “Republicans are doing it too,” and other same-old/news…

    leave a comment »

    Let’s talk about money, who has no idea where it’s gone, where the federal government gets its receipts from, and what happens when you leave politicians in charge of it.

     

     

    This post is a miscellany — but this Change.org link explains why you should tell your legislator NOW to cut the (crap) funding of federal incentives to increase the welfare load, while claiming to be reducing it.

    Cut TANF  / Title IV-D Programs which represent $4 billion of waste

    TANF = “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.”  Its funds are helping propagate and expand needless programs in the family law arena that hurt both fathers & mothers and definitely don’t produce what they promise, nor are they properly monitored.

    Child Support nonprofits then run state, regional, and at least one national conferences on how to turn normal cases into Title IV-D (welfare) cases; then money goes into problems designed from top-down, not bottom-up.

    Meanwhile (and parallel), associations comprised of Family Law professionals, themselves sometimes tax-dodging &/or not properly incorporated/registered nonprofits  hold conferences on how to profit from Title IV expansion, and force parents (and kids) into classes and programs they neither want, nor need, sometimes billing them for it.  Interest maintained in child support undistributed is lost, or retained improperly (which has been acknowledged at federal level, although you won’t find it on the evening news), leaving an incentive to NOT distribute funds.

    Overall, it’s producing public blight and undermining due process.

    A friend of mine put this Change.org information out, and NOW is the time to talk to legislators about this in common sense terms.   She summarizes:

    Why this is Important

    This letter is to request that you take action to cut spending on pork barrel spending on certain TANF [&]  IV-D programs which represent $4 billion untraceable dollars that no one keeps track of. These funds meant for needy children were diverted and wasted by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to non needs based programs available to all fathers engaged in the family court litigation industry—no matter how wealthy they are. These parents now ask Congress to take a stand to hold ACF’s defective leadership and the programs destroying families accountable by demanding the following budget cuts:

    1. TANF Contingency Fund authorized under 403(b) Social Security Act for payment to States and other non-federal entities under Titles I, IV-D, X, XI, and XIV “to remain available until expended.” (p. 474)

    (the “Contingency Fund” is Federal provision of money to states in years of economic downturn; it’s receipt is provisional depending on the states behavior & spending).

    2. ID Code 75-1552-0-1-609, lines 0005 and 0009 [$990 million] (p. 473)

    3. ID Code 75-1501-0-1-609 lines 0002, 0003 [Access and Visitation] [$1.7 billion] (p. 474)

    Access and Visitation historically has been $10 million (not $1.7 billion) per year, and has even at that level been a source of protracted custody litigation, and a gender-specific (fathers emphasis) attempt to change the judicial process into an “out-come” based process, which is establishing another form of government, essentially.  Because doing this is illegal at the state level, the federal grants say they just “facilitate” programs to increase access and visitation of noncustodial parents.    The organization “Kids’ Turn” which I’ve highlighted (SF and San Diego, CA nonprofits) benefits from these grants, which fund “parent education” among other things.  It’s my understanding that most judges and family court lawyers are not really hurting for cash flow.  There are states trying to make “access visitation” programs mandatory for every custody modification, as I recall, and it was one of Obama’s promises (through HHS) to a fathers and families group to do this.  I’ve written plenty of this topic, search it on the blog….)

    4. Discretionary “Child Support Incentives” to States [$305 million] (p. 475)

    This is talking about the 66% Federal incentive to states for child support enforcement (which could also include such activities as fatherhood programs, marriage education, parenting classes, etc., as I understand it:)   This particular link refers to ARRA (I’m just providing general glossary of the concepts)

    BACKGROUND:

    A Federal match of 66 percent is available for State administrative costs of carrying out child support enforcement program activities under title IV-D of the Social Security Act (Act). ARRA temporarily changes the child support authorization language to allow States to use Federal incentive payments provided to States in accordance with Section 458 of the Act as their State share of expenditures eligible for Federal match. This change is effective October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010. The requirements of Section 458(f) of the Social Security Act and 45 CFR 305.35 regarding “reinvestment” of incentive funds remain in effect.

    This change is in effect for any incentive funds expended during FY 2009 and FY 2010, including incentives earned and not expended in prior years (i.e., prior to October 1, 2008). Incentive payments expended during FY 2008 (October 1, 2007-September 30, 2008) are not eligible for additional Federal funds.

    5. ID Code 75–1512–0–1–506 “Healthy Families” [$1.7 billion] (p.476)

    A family with its civil and legal rights intact is likely to be a healthy family.  What, really, are those being used for?

    6. ID Code 75–1512–0–1–506 “Abstinence Education” [$1.7 billion] (p. 477)

    Yes, former President George Bush lives:  Abstinence Education.

    You know what that is?  Obviously it doesn’t apply to our Congressional Leaders (see previous US Presidents, Governors, and other legislators, or Rep. Weiner. Federal Grantswire says that entities “soliciting” to teach teenagers (and I kid you not, some parents caught in custody battles!) how not to have sex can get formula grants to do this:

     

    Authorization (040):
    Title V, Section 510 of the Social Security Act.
    Objectives (050):
    To enable States to provide abstinence education, and at the option of the State, where appropriate, mentoring, counseling, and adult supervision to promote abstinence from sexual activity, with a focus on those groups which are most likely to bear children out-of-wedlock. The Affordable Health Care Act (ACA) appropriated funding for this program through FY 2014.
    Types of Assistance (060):
    FORMULA GRANTS
    Uses and Use Restrictions (070):
    Pursuant to Section 510(b)(2) of Title V of the Social Security Act, the term “abstinence education” means an educational or motivational program that:
    (A) has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
    (B) teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
    (C) teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
    (D) teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity

    Turn off that recent movie, “What Number Are You?” in which a woman runs up sex with 20 men and believes that her odds of finding the right one are going to decrease if she goes over this….  Also turn off “Crazy Stupid Love” in which one ladies’ man teaches a monogamous jilted husband how to pick up women, which of course he does easily with a makeover and more domineering attitude.   Also pay no need to the endless procession of married Congressional leaders caught in the act, or trying to get some action going (Rep. Weiner using Congressional gym as backdrop for lewd photos of himself; LA Times, “New Half-naked Photos:  Rep. Weiner calls for press conference” June 6, 2011, just in time for Fathers’ Day…; some tweet’s of a man’s crotch were reported; he represents portions of Brooklyn & Quuens, and this was his 7th term…)

    No, Abstinence education isn’t aimed at everyone.  And it’s not because those pushing it  as a group really do believe in abstinence for themselves:   It’s aimed at poor people who might have children that become welfare recipients, and while I won’t mention color, I’ll relate that the Congressional Record in passing welfare reform certainly did.  It’s not that we really disapprove of sex outside marriage, or promoting promiscuity as desirable, if not the ideal — but really, what this is about (besides the business angle of getting the grants — which probably aren’t tracked any better than the A/V grants or collected child support is) is allegedly the  public debt load, and as a friend of mine put it, the ruling elite which — face it (or look at Congress), still are white males, not wanting to lose their place in society by greater fertility among people of color.  By sharing the characteristics, poor white men, and with their participation in fatherhood ego-bolstering activity, can share in some of the trickle-down glory & control by programs that restore control over women and children who dismissed or left them, sometimes for very valid reasons…

    (But I’m getting off from the budget angle here, sorry).

     

    Seriously:

    7. Line 0129 “Faith Based Initiatives” [$1 million] (p.479)

    Struggling parents want things like jobs, housing, education, childcare, and access to medical care to help them weather the current economic crisis. Instead, these hard working families are forced to invest $4 Billion in irresponsible, extortion based, Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) programs that promote widespread Medicaid and child support fraud, protracted high conflict litigation, and bogus therapy programs.

    Child support agencies deliberately withhold and mismanage billions of paid collected support, which starves children onto TANF and causes parents to be falsely prosecuted for nonpayment.

    Good parents are being exploited, bankrupted, and emotionally destroyed while their kids are needlessly placed on the welfare, Medicaid, and foster care system rolls. Billions of dollars of child support remains unaccounted for nationwide.

    These frivolous programs spend without restraint and direct money to places HHS cannot identify (as noted by the OIG and GOA reports on the second page.) There is no oversight. DHHS’s position is that once the money goes to the states, they are not responsible for oversight. Fraud is rampant, yet the OIG does nothing to enforce the laws to protect families.

    90% of the parents paying child support are fathers. Using child support enforcement programs as a vehicle, these extortion based programs force fathers to elect between criminal penalties and inciting “high conflict” family court litigation to create a “need” for their own publicly funded services. These irresponsible programs cash in on the “incentives” by placing children in unstable homes, and then starve the entire family onto some sort of public assistance. We can identify no legitimate purpose for these programs and request that Congress take the following actions:

    (for more, click on the link):

     

     

     

    . . . .   Below here is me collecting various articles and thinking aloud about this whole mess.  Quite honestly, I’m tired!

    You might be too if you lived in California!!

    “Almost” comical, if I don’t think about it too hard:

    Some Gov. Jerry Brown appointees get pension and paycheck

    Gov. Jerry Brown had vowed to rein in pension costs. But some of his appointees are receiving double payments totaling more than $200,000 a year.

    • Ann Ravel, the chairwoman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission, said she rightfully earned her pension after working as an attorney for Santa Clara County, whose retirement benefits come from CalPERS, from 1976 until her retirement in 2009.
    Ann Ravel, the chairwoman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission,… (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)
    September 29, 2011|By Shane Goldmacher and Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times

    Reporting from Sacramento — Every month, Ann Ravel gets a paycheck from her salary as chairwoman of California’s ethics watchdog agency and a second, bigger check from her public pension as a retiree.

    The double payments, which total more than $305,000 a year, represent the kind of costly pension perk that Gov. Jerry Brown has vowed to rein in.

    . . .

    But since he assumed office nine months ago, Brown has appointed numerous officials like Ravel to state jobs in which they can simultaneously collect a full salary and a public pension.

    One is earning $234,000 in combined wages and pension to serve on California’s state’s unemployment board, which the governor wants to eliminate. Six Brown appointees to the state’s parole board are layering wages atop pensions.

    “That should be against the law,” said Marcia Fritz, a certified public accountant and president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, which seeks to end what she called “double dipping.”

    “It violates the whole premise of having a retirement program,” she said.

    California law forbids rank-and-file state employees to draw full-time government wages and state-administered retirement benefits at the same time. But an exemption exists for political appointees to more than a dozen powerful boards and commissions, where members can legally earn both.

    Taxpayers are footing the bill. The state treasury must cover $3.51 billion this year for California’s beleaguered pension system, known as CalPERs, though payments to active state employees account for a fraction of that sum.

    As a candidate, Brown pledged to stop pension abuses. In March, he rolled out a 12-point plan for reducing pension costs that included “limits on post-retirement public employment.”

    But only six weeks earlier, the governor had appointed Ravel, 62, to chair the Fair Political Practices Commission

    HEY, Isn’t that the group that ruled against county benefits going to California Judges, who by law were to be paid by the state?  Richard Fine, etc.?

    ANyhow, it must be OK because Republicans do it too.

    “The Republicans were doing it too,” said Ravel, a Democrat.

    The same day Brown appointed Ravel, he also tapped Robert Dresser as the $132,179-a-year chairman of the state’s Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board.  Dresser, 70, defended taking the salary while receiving $102,955 in annual pension payments after decades as a state attorney.

    “What I am doing is consistent with state policy and law,” he said.

    “It is unclear from state records how often such appointments occur….”

    It is unclear from state records how often such appointments occur, but previous governors also made them.

    . . .

    A group of GOP legislators sought to ban the double earnings in budget negotiations with Brown earlier this year.

    When those talks collapsed, Republicans introduced their own measure, but it never received a hearing in the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

    Now, taxpayers are stuck “paying for double dipping at the expense of real programs such as education and public safety,” said Sen. Tom Harman (R-Huntington Beach), one of the Republicans who had been in discussions with the governor.

    The issue has come before the Legislature before. In 2009, state senators grilled Anthony Kane, a Schwarzenegger appointee to the parole board, about his retirement as a deputy prison warden and his subsequent collection of a pension and board salary.

    “That was not my goal, to retire and come back and be a commissioner. That wasn’t the plan,” Kane said, according to a hearing transcript.

    The state Senate declined to confirm Kane then. Senate leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), one of Kane’s questioners, pledged new legislation to end the exemption for political appointees.

    He never introduced such a bill.

    NO — He introduced a bill to retroactively immunize California Judiciary for taking county-paid bribes in cases before them where the County was a party — that’s the SBX-211 that got rammed through right around the time, these guys were getting REAL fed up with Mr. Fine’s whistleblowing…..I blogged it.

    WHILE WE’re HERE — about those Judicial Disclosures (Form 700s):

    Fair Political Practices Commission Described (Chairman is salaried, the other 4 are paid $100/day).  THe Political Reform Act was passed by a ballot measure in 1974, to:

    The Political Reform Act is designed to assure that:

    • State and local government serve all citizens equally, without regard to status or wealth
    • Public officials perform their duties impartially, without bias because of personal financial interests or the interests of financial supporters
    • Public officials disclose income and assets that could be affected by official actions and disqualify themselves from participating in decisions when they have conflicts of interest
    • Election campaign receipts and expenditures are fully and truthfully disclosed so voters are informed and improper practices are inhibited
    • Elections are fair
    • No laws or practices favor incumbents
    • The state ballot pamphlet gives useful information about state measures so voters can be less dependent on paid advertising for information
    • The activity of those who lobby the state legislature is regulated and finances disclosed to prevent improper influence on public officials

    (etc.).

    Link to Info on “Statement of Economic INterests (form 700) forms.”

    A statement of Economic Interest (FORM 700) is a state form on which state and local government officials publicly disclose their personal assets andincome that may be materially affected by their official acts. Agency employees, including some public officials who are designated in a conflict of interest code are required to disclose certain financial interests according to the disclosure categories assigned to that position in their agency’s conflict of interest code.

    Certain public officials, including public officials who manage public investments, are required to disclose all financial interest. These officials make full economic disclosure in accordance with state law, rather than their agency’s conflict of interest code.

    Download Form 700 from the Fair Political Practices Commission.

    Judges file with the clerk of their court; retired judges are to file directly with the FPPC (in California).  Now we know where to get those forms from, too.   2010 RonKayinLA Article  summarizes the California Judicial Scandal in taking county benefits payments while ruling over cases involving the count(ies)  “No man is permitted to try a case where he has an interest in the outcome.”

    Here’s a Fair Political Practices Commission article (also in the LA Times) reporting on how a well-known campaign manager witha  modest lifestyle was engaging in some very illegal practices for major politicians, including Senator Dianne Feinstein, whose daughter, the Hon. Katherine Feinstein, presides over the SF Unified Court system, which was recently closing all those courtrooms for lack of cash, and arguing with the AOC / Judicial Council about how to keep some of them open…

    Dubious Durkee Doings?  (my title):

    ARticle 1 — Sept. 23, 2011:

    Dianne Feinstein’s campaign sues bank and Kinde Durkee, alleging fraud [Updated]

    September 23, 2011 | 12:59 pm

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein is suing her former treasurer and her campaign’s bank for fraud and breach of contract, alleging that the bank was complicit in a massive fraud case that has rocked the political world.

    The suit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Friday against First California Bank, Feinstein’s former treasurer Kinde Durkee and her company, Durkee & Associates.

    Feinstein complaintDurkee was arrested Sept. 2 on a federal fraud charge after allegedly embezzling possibly millions of dollars from her clients, who include Feinstein and many other prominent California Democrats.

    The complaint alleges that First California Bank was “at the heart of the illegal transfer out of plaintiffs’ accounts.” It quotes a letter from the bank to clients acknowledging that it appears Durkee had commingled funds and made transfers between accounts and that the balances credited to any given account may not accurately reflect the funds belonging to the associated campaigns.

    “Despite knowledge of this pervasive pattern of misconduct, First California Bank continued to provide banking services to Durkee and Durkee & Associates, LLC, for many years, happy to collect the fees and interest generated by the scores of accounts Durkee maintained at the bank,” the complaint stated, going on to suggest that other banks and professionals may also have been complicit.

    The complaint cites multiple instances of checks written without authorization and misreported fund balances, including a balance summary dated July 2 that reported Feinstein’s Senate account had a balance of $2.3 million when, in fact, its balance was about $266,000. Bill Carrick, Feinstein’s longtime campaign consultant, said the full extent of the funds taken from Feinstein’s account is still unknown because the bank has not handed over records.

    ARTICLE TWO

    The politicians and consultants who trusted the Long Beach resident with millions of dollars saw little to hint that she might become vilified as the ‘Bernie Madoff of campaign finance treasurers.

    (after descriptions of what a modest and low-profile lifestyle she and her husband led….)

    …As the treasurer considered the “platinum standard” in California, Durkee oversaw at least 360 bank accounts for almost 100 candidates, six dozen political action committees, about 60 Democratic clubs and committees and a handful of nonprofits. The ongoing federal investigation has triggered turmoil in state Democratic circles, with politicians, including members of the Los Angeles City Council and Congress, locked out of their accounts and worried that millions of dollars may be lost. U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein had $5.2 million, according to Durkee’s last report, but the bank can find just $662,101.

    “I never saw her driving a Ferrari. She lived a very non-pretentious life,” said state Sen. Louis Correa (D-Santa Ana), who met her when he first ran for office 17 years ago. “You see a persona and then you see this, and the picture doesn’t fit.”

    The image that emerges from Durkee’s political world is of an intentionally low-profile player who rarely discussed her personal life. She had a sweet voice and a pedigree that inspired trust. She was the protege of a Los Angeles accountant {{Glazer}} who had a national reputation for his ethical standards and the daughter of a beloved Lutheran minister memorialized as “gracious, warm, caring and ever-present.”

    Ya gotta watch out for the religious ones, I keep telling us!

    Durkee registered Durkee & Associates as a limited liability corporation four years after Glazer’s death. She lists herself as the owner and her husband and her two sisters as members. The firm’s website said it had been in business since 1972. Her rates were cheap and politicians found her responsive.

    The top one here? (which shows a Burbank address):

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    200327910101 09/22/2003 ACTIVE DURKEE AND ASSOCIATES, LLC LAURENCE ZAKSON
    199928710057 10/12/1999 ACTIVE DURKEE PROPERTIES, LLC DONALD L. JONES

    “Everybody knew Kinde Durkee was the person to go to,” said state Sen. Gloria Negrete McLeod (D-Chino). “She was just the nicest person you could ever talk to.”

    Federal investigators say Durkee admitted she had misappropriated money for years and filed false campaign finance reports. A Times review of those campaign records for about 180 state and federal committees found that she reported they had $9.8 million in cash on June 30. But First California Bank put the value of all Durkee-controlled accounts it could identify on Sept. 21 at $2.5 million. Durkee also had at least one account at City National Bank.

    Durkee’s arrest on suspicion of mail fraud stemmed from the allegation that she drained $677,181 from an assemblyman’s account and, making about 30 complicated transfers, used it to pay business and personal expenses.

    …

    Durkee has been accused of covering up for an employee who embezzled. Two years ago, state Sen.Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego) learned from state auditors that a Durkee employee had embezzled $57,166 from her campaign. She called for a criminal investigation in a six-page letter that detailed how Durkee failed to tell her of the theft and filed reports that did not disclose it. A state audit concluded that the same employee siphoned $8,244 from state Board of Equalization member Jerome Horton, but again Durkee’s firm did not report it. Durkee paid at least some of the money back.

    The treasurer rarely drew much media attention. But in 2007, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that Durkee was the treasurer of Californians for Obama, which raised more than $10,000 but spent much of it on expenses, including payments to Durkee’s firm. Asked to explain her involvement, a Durkee representative said: “She does not talk to reporters.” In 2009, the news broke that Kehoe had fired Durkee.

    Durkee did have a public record that her loyal clients simply brushed aside. Since 2002, the state Fair Political Practices Commission has assessed fines 11 times against committees that used Durkee as treasurer. Durkee typically cooperated with these investigations, sometimes accepting blame and paying the fine. Earlier this year, she did just that, agreeing to pay $13,000. But that case became her firm’s undoing.

    A commission investigator noticed that Durkee appeared to shift money from client accounts to her firm’s without permission and shuttle some back when needed to cover checks. The FBI was alerted.

    john.hoeffel@latimes.com
    patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com
    jean.merl@latimes.com
    Times staff writers Abby Sewell and Richard Simon contributed to this report.  Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

    November 16, 2010 (Can’t wait to read the November, 2011 version of this letter):

    from the Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Services, courtesy David A. Lebryk, Commissioner

    “Dear Citizens of the United States” —

    [Summarized annual report].  

    In accordance with the provisions of Section 114(a) of the Act of September 12, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 3513(a)), I am transmitting herewith the Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010.

    This statement presents budget results and the cash-related assets and liabilities of the Federal Government with supporting details.

    • We have receipts of  $2,161.7 billion, which is $57.4 billion more than 2009
    • We have outlays of   $3,456.0 billion,  which is $64.1 billion less than 2009 outlays
    • Obviously, the “outlay” number is bigger than the “intake” — by $1,294.3 billion, but that was less than last year.

    (for those of you who had a public school education, but somehow made it to this page anyhow, I note that there was no decimal given on the $3,456 billion.  By supplying one, I get $1,294.3 (not .2) billion, but after a while, billion, trillion, it tends to blur, right?…  0.1 Bill is only $100 million, that ain’t a whole lot overall.

    Where this money comes from, “RECEIPTS BY SOURCE” shown in a nice pie chart.  — 42% is INCOME tax, 40% is “Social insurance and retirement receipts” (i.e., payments into SS & retirement accounts, nationwide?) – and a whopping 9% “Corporate Income Tax,” 3% Excise (sales) taxes, and 6% “other” OUTLAYS BY FUNCTION (4% for Education and Training, 20% for Social Security, and TANF comes under “income security — 18%)

    WHOSE MONEY IS IT?  WHERE DOES IT COME FROM?    42% INCOME TAX (on individual wage-earning persons), 9% CORPORATE TAXES

    WHO DECIDES HOW THIS MONEY IS SPENT, REALLY?

    Foundations & Corporations that influence political campaigns, politicians, and “craft” legislation to favor their interests.  

    Have you heard of ‘ALEC”  – American Legislative Exchange Council” ??

    Preview

    In their terms:

    Our Mission

    The mission of the American Legislative Exchange Council is…

    …to advance the Jeffersonian principles of free markets, limited government, federalism, and individual liberty, through a nonpartisan public-private partnership of America’s state legislators, members of the private sector, the federal government, and general public.

    …to promote these principles by developing policies that ensure the powers of government are derived from, and assigned to, first the People, then the States, and finally, the Federal Government.

    …to enlist state legislators from all parties and members of the private sector who share ALEC’s mission.

    …to conduct a policy making program that unites members of the public and private sectors in a dynamic partnership to support research, policy development, and dissemination activities.

    …to prepare the next generation of political leadership through educational programs that promote the principles of Jeffersonian democracy, which are necessary for a free society.

    History . . . . if you can spell Neo-Con, very Big Business:

    Former ALEC chairmen (a roster of legislators….)

    More than 30 years ago, a small group of state legislators and conservative policy advocates met in Chicago to implement a vision: A nonpartisan membership association for conservative state lawmakers who shared a common belief in limited government, free markets, federalism, and individual liberty. Their vision and initiative resulted in the creation of a voluntary membership association for people who believed that government closest to the people was fundamentally more effective, more just, and a better guarantor of freedom than the distant, bloated federal government in Washington, D.C.
    At that meeting, in September 1973, state legislators, including then Illinois State Rep. Henry Hyde, conservative activist Paul Weyrich, and Lou Barnett, a veteran of then Gov. Ronald Reagan’s 1968 presidential campaign, together with a handful of others, launched the American Legislative Exchange Council. Among those who were involved with ALEC in its formative years were: Robert Kasten and Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin; John Engler of Michigan; Terry Branstad of Iowa, and John Kasich of Ohio, all of whom moved on to become governors or members of Congress. Congressional members who were active during this same period included Senators John Buckley of New York and Jesse Helms of North Carolina, and Congressmen Phil Crane of Illinois and Jack Kemp of New York.

    Let’s talk JUST a little bit about Paul Weyrich.  Here’s a nice photo from Wikipedia, and some data:

    Paul M. Weyrich (October 7, 1942 – December 18, 2008[1][2][3][4]) was an American conservative political activist and commentator, most notable as a figurehead of the New Right. He co-founded the Heritage Foundation,[5] a conservative think tank and the Free Congress Foundation, another conservative think tank. He switched from the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church to that of Melkite Greek Catholic Church and was ordained protodeacon.  (Protodeacon is an honorific rank given to certain married deacons in Eastern Christian churches. )

    In 1966,[5] he became press secretary[citation needed] to RepublicanU.S. SenatorGordon L. Allott of Colorado.[5] While serving in this capacity, he met Jack Wilson, an aide of Joseph Coors, patriarch of the Coors brewing family. Frustrated with the state of public policy research, they founded Analysis and Research Inc., in 1971, but this organization failed to gain traction.

    (Weyrich)….Founding the Heritage Foundation

    Can you spell, Unification Church monies, National Parenting Day and Sun Myung Moon?  ???

    Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a New Rightthink tank. Its stated mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of “free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.” It is widely considered one of the world’s most influential public policy research institutes.

    History

    The Foundation wields considerable influence in Washington, and enjoyed particular prominence during the Reagan administration. Its initial funding was provided by Joseph Coors, of the Coors beer empire, and Richard Mellon Scaife, heir of the Mellon industrial and banking fortune. The Foundation maintains strong ties with the London Institute of Economic Affairsand the Mont Pelerin Society.

    With a long history of receiving large donations from overseas, Heritage continues to rake in a minimum of several hundred thousand dollars from Taiwan and South Korea each year.

    In autumn of 1988, the South Korean National Assembly uncovered a document revealing that Korean intelligence gave $2.2 million to the Heritage Foundation on the sly during the early 1980s. Heritage officials “categorically deny” the accusation.

    Heritage’s latest annual report does acknowledge a $400,000 grant from the Korean conglomerate Samsung. Another donor, the Korea Foundation – which conduits money from the South Korean government – has given Heritage almost $1 million in the past three years.

    . . .

    Meanwhile, there was also a connection between Heritage and the Rev Sun Myung Moon (founder of the Moonies). This first appeared in a 1975 congressional investigation on the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA) activities in the US.

    The report noted, “In 1975, Ed Feulner … was introduced to KCIA station chief Kim Yung Hwan by Neil Salonen and Dan Feffernan of the Freedom Leadership foundation”.

    Salonen was head of Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church in the United States. The Freedom Leadership Foundation (FLF), a political arm of Moon’s Unification network, was linked to the World Anti- Communist League.

    In the early 1980s, the KCIA began making donations to Heritage Foundation. In turn, Heritage established an Asian Studies Center.

    And

    AND I want to point out (again) along with the ultra-conservative influence and agenda, the same funders and policy-influencers at this 501(c)3 are often — VERY often — found also behind fatherhood and fathers’ rights institutes at universities, projects to demonstrate how fatherhood will reduce welfare roles, “Fragile Families” studies, etc., etc.

    Another set of factoids, these are from “Sourcewatch” on the Heritage Foundation:  I posting a LARGE section for effect.  Remember, above, the 9% corporate tax (and that this group is a NONProfit….)

    Funding

    The Heritage Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organisation. In its annual report it states that “we rely on the financial contributions of the gemeral public: individuals, foundations and corporations. We accept no government funds and perform no contract work.”

    2006 Budget

    In calendar year 2006 the Heritage Foundation spent over $40.5 million on its operations. That year the foundation raised over $25 million from individual contributors and $13.1 million from foundations.

    While corporations provided only $1.5 million – 4% of Heritage’s contributions in 2006 – they none the less have significant interest in the foundations policy output. There’s defense contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin, finance and insurance companies such as Allstate Insurance, Mortgage Insurance Companies of America, and American International Group (AIG), auto company Honda, tobacco company Altria Group (Philip Morris), drug and medical companies Johnson & Johnson,GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation, oil companies ChevronTexaco and Exxon Mobil, software giant Microsoft, and chipping in over $100,000 each, Alticor (Amway), Pfizer, PhRMA, and United Parcel Service (UPS). [2]

    Historical funding

    Between 1985 and 2003, Media Transparency reports that the following funders provided $57,497,537 (unadjusted for inflation) to the Heritage Foundation [4]:

    Right Web says of the Heritage Foundation:

    “The foundation received $2. 2 million from the Federation of Korean Industries in the early 1980s. Initially it was believed this donation came from the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (which would make the Heritage Foundation a foreign agent of Korea), but the Federation later stated that the donation came at the encouragement of the KCIA.”
    “The Heritage Foundation’s income has increased every year since 1981. The progression has been: 1981–$7. 1 million; 1982-$8. 6 million; 1983–$10. 6 million; 1984–$10. 7 million; 1985-$11. 6 million; 1986–$14. 0 million; 1987–$14. 3 million; and 1988–$14. 6 million. In 1988, foundations provided 38 percent of Heritage’s income, individuals provided 34 percent, and corporations gave 17 percent; the remainder came from investments and sales of materials.”[5]

    That information came from “ALEC EXPOSED” …..

    ALEC Corporations

    ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, behind closed doors, corporations hand state legislators the changes to the law they desire that directly benefit their bottom line. Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on all nine ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve “model” bills. They have their own corporate governing board which meets jointly with the legislative board. (ALEC says that corporations do not vote on the board.) They fund almost all of ALEC’s operations. Participating legislators, overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, then bring those proposals home and introduce them in statehouses across the land as their own brilliant ideas and important public policy innovations—without disclosing that corporations crafted and voted on the bills. ALEC boasts that it has over 1,000 of these bills introduced by legislative members every year, with one in every five of them enacted into law. ALEC describes itself as a “unique,” “unparalleled” and “unmatched” organization. It might be right. It is as if a state legislature had been reconstituted, yet corporations had pushed the people out the door. Learn more at ALECexposed.org.

    So here comes Paul Weyrich:

    In 1973, persuading Joseph Coors to put the money in, Weyrich and Edwin Feulner founded the Heritage Foundation as a think tank[5] to counter liberal views on taxation and regulation, which they considered to be anti-business. While the organization was at first only minimally influential, it has grown into one of the world’s largest public policy research institutes and has been hugely influential in advancing conservative policies. The following year, again with support from Coors, Weyrich founded the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress (CSFC),[5] an organization that trained and mobilized conservative activists, recruited conservative candidates, and raised funds for conservative causes.

    Under Weyrich, the CSFC proved highly innovative. It was among the first grassroots organizations to raise funds extensively through direct mailcampaigns. It also was one of the first organizations to tap into evangelical Christian churches as places to recruit and cultivate activists and support for social conservative causes. In 1977, Weyrich co-founded Christian Voice with Robert Grant. Two years later, with Jerry Falwell, he founded the Moral Majority. Weyrich coined the phrase “Moral Majority”.[8]

    Over the next two decades, Weyrich founded, co-founded, or held prominent roles in a number of other notable conservative organizations. Among them, he was founder of the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization of state legislators; a co-founder of the Council for National Policy, a strategy-formulating organization for social conservatives; co-publisher of the magazineConservative Digest; and national chairman of Coalitions for America, an association of conservative activist organizations. The CSFC, reorganized into the Free Congress Foundation, also remained active.

    Under the auspices of the FCF, he founded the Washington, D.C.–based satellitetelevision stationNational Empowerment Television (NET), later relaunched as the for-profit channel, “America’s Voice”, in 1997. That same year, Weyrich was forced out of the network he had founded when the network’s head persuaded its board to force out Weyrich in a hostile takeover. Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates says this was “apparently for his divisive behavior in attacking GOP pragmatists”.[9]

    From 1989 to 1996, he was also president of the Krieble Institute, a unit of the FCF that trained activists to support democracy movements and establish small businesses in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.[citation needed]

    Frustrated with public indifference to the Lewinsky scandal, Weyrich wrote a letter in February 1999 stating that he believed conservatives had lost the culture war, urging a separatist strategy where conservatives ought to live apart from corrupted mainstream society and form their own parallel institutions:

    More from the ALEC website “History” page….

    From Clearinghouses to Think Tanks

    Following the end of the Reagan Administration, the Task Forces, under the leadership of Delaware State Senator Jim Neal, gradually began to shift from clearinghouses of ideas submitted by ALEC members into freestanding think tanks and model bill movers. They began to actively solicit more input from private sector members, seizing upon ALEC’s long-time philosophy that the private sector should be an ally rather than an adversary in developing sound public policy.

    To date, ALEC’s Task Forces have considered, written and approved hundreds of model bills on a wide range of issues, model legislation that will frame the debate today and far into the future. Each year, close to 1,000 bills, based at least in part on ALEC Model Legislation, are introduced in the states. Of these, an average of 20 percent become law.

    http://notseeamerica.com/ALEC-Alumni.html 

    Here’s an article on Wisconsin’s historic (progressive) opposition to “for-profit bail bonding” (criminalized in other countries) and ALEC — which is funded in part by for-profit prison operator, “CCA” (Corrections Corporation of America) — is trying to get that very practice into Wisconsin:

    Wisconsin’s history and public policy reflects the red/blue divide. It is the state that gave birth to the Republican Party, which supported slavery abolition, and the John Birch Society, which opposed the civil rights movement. In the first half of the 20th Century, the state elected both progressive hero Robert “Fighting Bob” LaFollette and right-wing extremist Joe McCarthy. It is the state that elected both former Senator Russ Feingold (D) and Representative Paul Ryan (R).

    Wisconsin also produced Paul Weyrich, who in 1973 co-founded both the Heritage Foundation and ALEC (and in subsequent years, Free Congress and Moral Majority). Weyrich’s ALEC, it seems, has been a factory for many of the state’s most recent right-wing policy initiatives.

    Wisconsin’s Progressive Traditions Resist For-Profit Prisons and Bail-Bonds

    Elements of Wisconsin’s criminal justice system reflect Wisconsin’s progressive traditions. Since 1979, Wisconsin has been ahead of most U.S. states in banning commercial bail-bonding (46 states still use it), joining the rest of the world in recognizing the practice as unacceptable (it is criminalized in countries like England and Canada). Posting another person’s bail for profit has a record of corrupting the sentencing process, and puts the decision of whether an accused person goes free in the hands of a profit-oriented business.

    …Both the for-profit prison industry and the for-profit bail-bond industries have done so through ALEC, the national organization that facilitates corporate-sponsored “model bills” for legislators to introduce in their states.

    ALEC and For-Profit Criminal Justice

    The American Bail Coalition (ABC), the for-profit bail bond industry’s national organization and lobbying wing, calls ALEC the industry’s “life preserver”. ABC pays for ALEC membership, and a representative sits on the ALEC corporate board (the “Private Enterprise Board”) as well as ALEC’sExecutive Committee. The trade group boasts that “during its two decade involvement with ALEC, ABC has written 12 model bills fortifying the commercial bail industry.”

    The nation’s largest private prison operator CCA is also an ALEC member and funder, and pays for a seat on the “Public Safety Task Force” that approves ALEC model legislation dealing with crime and penalties. Since the late 1980s and 1990s, ALEC has created model bills that lengthen sentences, which have dramatically increased incarceration rates, and bills that privatize prisons, putting more of those inmates under the control of for-profit corporations.

    Wisconsin politicians have long ties to ALEC. Former Governor Tommy Thompson was involved in ALEC’s early years. Milwaukee’s groundbreaking “school choice” program was based on ALEC model legislation. ALEC alum Scott Walker’s first act upon becoming governor was to introduce an omnibus “tort reform” bill mirroring many ALEC bills. But, the state’s progressive traditions have thus far trumped efforts by ALEC’s Wisconsin legislators to open the state to commercial bail-bonding and private prison industries. But they are still trying.

    http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/07/10902/alec-profit-criminal-justice-and-wisconsin
    Many of the problems with ALEC are mirrored (probably on a smaller scale) in the practices of the AFCC conferences, surrounding the family law field.  Conferences are held out of state, policies set, new fields discussed and invented, and without scrutiny by the average taxpayer or litigant.  The practice undermines the concept of justice, and full information available to the person going in front of a judge for a decision in their case.   ANyhow, here’s the description of ALEC:

    ALEC Exposed

    Almost always drafted outside of the state with little or no input from state residents (but significant input from corporate interests), ALEC bills have made substantial changes to laws in all 50 states and in some ways determined how state taxpayer dollars are allocated. The full list of legislative membership in ALEC is not public, and legislators introduce ALEC bills in the legislator’s own name. ALEC conferences allow elected officials to hobnob with some of the wealthiest corporations in the world, often behind closed doors and without public scrutiny. This secrecy has prevented state residents from holding their elected leaders accountable for passing laws that serve out-of-state corporate interests at the expense of the individuals that live, work, and vote in the state.

    This practice is good for the corporations, and bad for the public in general.  THey do not have a seat at the policymaking table, and are misled into thinking their legislators are simply legislators.   ALL of this is enabled in part by the class distinctions made possible by the income tax (competition of nonprofit with for-profit corporations), changes ot the tax laws in the 1980s, and the increasing restriction of options the non-wealthy have to live their lives privately, and as they please so long as its not hurting or cheating somewhere else.
    I recommend reading this article — although I am new to awareness about ALEC, the effects are tangible.   A Wisconsin Professor Conlon began to out them, and the GOP
    A visit to the “About” menu on ALEC’s website will give you a sense of the organization’s history, its current members, and its funders. But to get to the true depths of collusive corruption, you need to visit the site’s “model legislation” page, the gateway to all the bills ALEC has drafted. Unsurprisingly, you can’t view that legislation unless you’re a member.Alas, becoming a member of ALEC isn’t so easy. You have to be an elected Republican legislator (PDF) who pays roughly $100 per biennium to join after being thoroughly vetted, or you can become a “private sector” member (PDF) by paying a few thousand dollars minimum depending on which legislative domains are of the most interest to you.You can’t find out which Wisconsin Republican politicians are members of ALEC unless you’re a member because ALEC won’t provide it. You could ask Wisconsin representatives, but you won’t get an honest answer. Loopholes in Wisconsin’s strict open meetings laws (PDF) were created by Democrats and Republicans alike to allow them to push their own party’s agendas. Because of these loopholes, Wisconsin Republicans are able to hold secret meetings with ALEC to plan their lopsided legislative strategies whenever they want with no public knowledge or intervention.

    ALEC’s partners play an important role in Wisconsin and other states in pushing their dreamt up legislation aimed at enriching them while destroying everyone else. The State Policy Network (SPN) is important to ALEC because they coordinate the activities of a wide variety of conservative “think tanks” at the state level throughout the U.S. Many publications from these “think tanks” can be accessed and downloaded from the SPN website.

    For Wisconsinites, two important SPN members to note include the MacIver Institute for Public Policy, and the Wisconsin Policy R

    Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/305144#ixzz1ZfX2Veb6

    OUR U.S. Receipts, by Source, (2010) PIE CHART AGAIN:   42% from taxpayers, 40% from contributions to Social Retirement, insurance, and 9% from corporations, who are writing the laws we live by, funding universities, and influencing politicians.

    Income security— Income security benefits are paid to the aged, the disabled, the unemployed and low-income families. Included within this classification are programs such as general retirement and disability, public assistance [TANF, right?] and unemployment compensation. Outlays for these benefits were $624 billion in fiscal 2010—an increase of 16.9 percent or $90.1 billion over the fiscal 2009 level.

    United States Central Summary General Accounts Ledger
    I would like to post this link just as an overview (for the non-accountants among us) of just how many different places assets can be held, and in how many different forms.   Scroll (down) to where it shows “Miscellaneous accounts” 1012, 1016, 1053, 1054 — which are

    Miscellaneous Asset Accounts:

    1012 U.S. Treasury Miscellaneous Assets  $20,685,324.88  twenty-point-six million

    1016 Federal Reserve Banks, Deferred Items  $1,375,803.06  (I dont know meaning of the term “Deferred Items.”)

    1053 U.S. Treasury – Owned Gold  $11,041,058,821.09  eleven-point-oh-four-one million

    1054 Gold Certificate Fund, Board Of Governors Of The Federal Reserve System2  $-11,036,836,601.1 negative eleven-point-oh-three-six million

    1423 U.S. Currency With The International Monetary Fund  $143,609,533.65

    (and etc.. such as …..)  1670 Receivable For Forged, Or Incorrect Payment Of All U.S. Government Checks 1840 Deposits In Transit To The Treasury Account 1869 Deposit In Suspense, Electronic Funds Transfer 1870 E-Commerce Collections 1875 Undistributed Disbursing Transactions

    (Agencies Reporting On Statement Of Transactions, FMS-224 – Revised)

    Total Miscellaneous Asset Accounts  $-483,509,607.91  (ie, in the hole just under $500 million)

    Total Asset Accounts  (including other than “Misc.”) – $1,135,885,827,712.54

    Footnotes 1, 2:   “1/ Major sources of information used to determine Treasury’s operating cash include Federal Reserve Banks, the Treasury Regional Finance Centers, The Internal Revenue Service Centers, the Bureau of Public Debt and various electronic systems. Deposits are reflected as received andWithdrawals are reflected as processed.

    2/ The difference between Gold and Gold Certificates represents 100,000 fine troy ounces of unmonetized gold held by the U.S. Mint as assurance that Gold Certificates are fully backed by Reserve Gold.

    Thank you, another Republican President for ending the gold standard and making the U.S. dollar a total “fiat currency”;  (Wikipedia) ”

    Fiat money is money that has value only because of government regulation or law. The term derives from the Latin fiat, meaning “let it be done”, as such money is established by government decree. Where fiat money is used as currency, the term fiat currency is used.

    Fiat money originated in 11th century China,[1] and its use became widespread during the Yuan and Ming dynasties.[2] The Nixon Shock of 1971 ended the direct convertibility of the United States dollarto gold. Since then all reserve currencies have been fiat currencies, including the dollar and the euro.[3]

    (from the same general site, I am looking at the HHS ANnual report 2010 balance sheet):

    Administration For Children And Families General Fund Accounts

    . .Family Support Payments To States, Administration For Children And Families, Health And Human Services

    Fund Resources: Undisbursed Funds  (Dept. 75, Account 1501) Beginning of Year Balance:    $887,346,371.55

    Appropriations, and other Obligational Authority:    $4,665,683,723.63  (THIS IS THE “$ 4 BILLION” figure we keep squawking about)

    Outlays (what actually got paid out)       .. . . . . . . . . .  $4,422,869,054.30  (somewhere around $243 million still waiting, earning interest?)

    End of year balance, undisbursed funds under this category — $1,130,161,040.88

    PART TWO, or is it FIVE?

    If the average citizen did what some court-affiliated corporations and political appointees regularly do, they’d be in jail.

    Here’s a link to some that are, courtesy the IRS:

    The IRS Reports some Recent Trophies

    “Examples of General Fraud Investigations — Fiscal Year 2011“

    For those of us whose minds don’t naturally run towards, how can I get away with it, the fine distinctions between:  tax evasion, money laundering, embezzlement, a Ponzi scheme, and obstruction of IRS investigation of income tax evasions, mail fraud, straightfoward stealing through forging signatures (being in position such as bookkeeper or accountant, and able to do so), or simply flat-out “stealing state funds” this roster of recent IRS deadbeats is sort of a primer.

    Many of these closely resemble some behaviors that appear (got to clear myself on this one!) to characterize the initial start-up behavior of the main court organization Association of Family & Conciliation Courts, in Los Angeles.

    I’m putting this “primer” up because the approach “but they just don’t understand my case” has not been working for most parents.  Put yourself in the judge’s shoes, a little more, by understanding court operations.  It is the parents’ turn to start understanding how the courts actually work, meaning, who’s running them, and how they are financed. And get over the idea that one can be guaranteed whoever is wearing the black robes and manning a gavel, is per se of noble character, though I’m sure many ARE.   Respect the position, but make sure those in it — and the administrative agencies surrounding them — are held accountable!

    “Class is in session — pay attention!”

    In this example, a Minnesota State Auditor abused her position to enrich herself, some relatives, and a check-cashing company that helped with the conspiracy.  This auditor got audited, and has to pay it back:

    Former Minnesota Department of Revenue Employee Sentenced For Stealing $1.9 Million in State Funds

    On September 7, 2011, in Minneapolis, Minn., Pamela Marie Dellis, of Lindstrom, was sentenced to 60 months in prison for conspiracy to commit mail fraud and money laundering. Dellis was charged along with two co-defendants on January 7, 2011, and pleaded guilty on March 7, 2011. On August 9, 2011, Dellis’s niece, Laurie R. Sondrall, of Minneapolis, was sentenced to 27 months on one count of conspiracy. Dellis’s sister, Nancy T. Sondrall, of Brooklyn Center, awaits sentencing. All three defendants will be required to pay back more than $1.9 million in restitution.

    In their plea agreements, the defendants admitted that from January 12, 2005, through September 17, 2010, they conspired to defraud the State of Minnesota by embezzling funds by creating false tax refund checks. According to court documents, as an auditor with the Minnesota Department of Revenue, Dellis’s job, in part, was to process tax overpayments. In numerous instances, however, she falsified records to create the impression that a taxpayer was owed a refund due to an overpayment when, in fact, that was not the case. Then, she drafted a refund check or a “transfer of funds,” made payable to her sister or niece, for the false refund amount. Dellis admitted using variations of her co-conspirators’ names on the checks and transfers to make it more difficult to detect that the refunds were not legitimate.*** To cash the checks, Dellis and her co-conspirators sometimes sought the services of a check-cashing business and then divided the check proceeds. On other occasions, the checks were deposited into an account, in an effort to conceal the source of the funds, and then withdrawn and shared by the co-conspirators. In all, Dellis was responsible for more than 200 fraudulent tax refund payments, totaling approximately $1.9 million.

    *** parallel from the family court system in Los Angeles, as investigated by Kelly O’Meara.  I admire this woman’s work, whose credits include:

    For her work, The National Foundation for Women Legislators named O’Meara Investigative Reporter of the Year in 2001 and the following year, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights gave her their International Human Rights Award.

    Other major investigative reports that O’Meara filed while at Insight include a 12-part series entitled How the Money Works, that probed Federal agency financial reporting. Her examinations of annual updates of department and agency audits focusing on missing money showed that trillions go unaccounted for at agencies such as the Department of Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

    In another series, U.S. Money Laundering, O’Meara looked at Enron, the Bank of New York and an estimated $500 billion of annual money laundering in the U.S. financial system. She also explored the relationship between Washington and capital markets.

    In her series, Local Government Corruption, O’Meara investigated corruption in county governments and the judiciary, specifically the County of Los Angeles court system. She was the first reporter to break the story of the Los Angeles judges’ slush fund account and trigger an independent audit of that account, which has since been transferred to the county. **She received the 1999 Friend of the Child Award from the California Protective Parents Association for her articles on the Los Angeles family courts.

    (**where it is STILL unaccounted for….)   Another investigative story might be WHY so many so-called children’s advocates chose to ignore this information in building their reform movements.  Don’t get me started….  The same groups also by and large ignored Mr. Fine while he was sitting improperly jailed for reporting it!

    Here’s another one:

    California Man Sentenced on Tax Charges

    On July 29, 2011, in Sacramento, Calif., Owen Charles, of Pleasant Hill, was sentenced to 51 months in prison. Charles was convicted on January 14, 2011, of tax evasion, fraudulent use of a social security number and false statements to a federal agency. According to testimony presented at trial, Charles claimed to believe that the law only required him to pay income tax on his federal retirement.  An IRS audit determined that between 2001 and 2003, he had failed to pay more than $1.2 million in taxes, interest, and penalties on income from, among other things, real estate sales and rental properties. 

    A person who can sell real estate and function as a landlord is smart enough to understand that income is taxable….  If $1.2 million was the taxes, interest, and penalties, what was the actual income?

    Upon learning that he was being audited, Charles took measures to frustrate IRS collection efforts.  He did three “cash out” refinances of his million-dollar Benicia home; he moved money into nominee accounts; and he disguised his control of those accounts by using a false social security number, shell corporate names, and another person’s name.  In 2001, Charles wired more than $900,000 to a bank account in the Turks and Caicos Islands. Charles also claimed to have been living under a vow of poverty while driving luxury vehicles and controlling more than $1 million in assets.       

    Unbelievable.   The fraudulent use of a social security number has been cited in child support cases as well; see “How To Destroy a Nuclear Physicist” and Maximus recycling an old child support case (after his kids were emancipated) and going after him, again:

    In 1998, two years after Tony’s youngest child was emancipated, Maximus/Child Support Enforcement created a case in which Mary Ann was alleged to have had a male child two (2) months before that she claimed was Tony’s. At this point Tony had had no contact with Mary Ann for 20 years.

    Notice of this action by Maximus/Child Support Enforcement appeared to be a “recycling” of the original 1991 case without providing justification for the action. Tony requested a DNA paternity test but that was immediately denied by Maximus/Child Support Enforcement in Tennessee on the basis that the “mother” would not allow a paternity test to be done.

    Eventually, Tony was able to avoid this obligation by proving to the Missouri Court that he could not have been anywhere near Mary Ann at the time of the conception and the case was dismissed. In addition, in 2004 he learned that the alleged child never existed. The last child that Mary Ann had was in 1991, after which she had her Fallopian tubes ligated. This information surfaced in conversations between Mary Ann, Tony, and Amanda in 2004.

    As is common in cases such as Tony’s, child support enforcement never gives up. According to Maximus/Child Support Enforcement, a “Final Administrative Order” was filed in the St. Louis County Circuit Court in July 1999 claiming an “arrearage” of $11,000. A Tennessee case number was assigned in violation of federal law (one state cannot amend another state’s original court order for child support and make a new case out of it) and this practice is illegal per decree of the U. S.. Supreme Court.

    Here are a few involving attorneys — such as, a former district attorney:

    Former District Attorney Sentenced for Tax Evasion

    On June 1, 2011, in Lafayette, La., Joseph Floyd Johnson was sentenced to 18 months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release and ordered to pay $179,661 in restitution. Johnson was employed as an assistant district attorney with the Lafayette Parish District Attorney’s Office from 1995 until at least July 2010 and he was also engaged in the private practice of law beginning around 1989 until at least July 2010.  Based on the taxable income Johnson earned, he owed federal income tax.

    According to his plea agreement, in November 2010, Johnson admitted that he willfully attempted to evade federal income tax by failing to prepare and submit a tax return for the tax year 2003 on or before April 15, 2004, as required by law. He also admitted to committing other acts such as concealing the nature, extent and location of his assets to the IRS, making false statements to IRS agents, placing funds and property in the names of nominees to attempt to hide the true ownership of the assets, making checks payable to others to conceal assets from the IRS, paying creditors instead of the government and depositing checks into a client trust account to conceal the nature of the funds and give the appearance that the funds were neither income nor assets.  According to the bill of information, as of July 2010, Johnson failed to file federal income tax returns for 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 despite the fact that he was required to do so by law.

    The guys’ a public employee, an attorney and just figured he didn’t have to file income tax? ???

    Minnesota Attorney Sentenced For Tax Evasion

    On May 26, 2011, in Minneapolis, Minn., Samuel Alfred McCloud was sentenced to 18 months in prison and two years of supervised release on one count of tax evasion. McCloud was also ordered to cooperate with the Internal Revenue Service and the Minneapolis Department of Revenue in the assessment and collection of taxes, interest, and penalties owed by him.

    McCloud pleaded guilty on December 9, 2010. In his plea agreement, he admitted concealing $595,000 from both the IRS and the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Between 2004 and 2006, McCloud worked at two law firms, but he instructed clients to write checks to him directly rather than making them payable to the law firms. McCloud admitted depositing or instructing others to deposit those checks in bank accounts held in the name of another person as well as in the name of several sham corporations. In addition to failing to report the income, McCloud failed to pay state or federal taxes on it.    

      

    Cute.     Seems like no one wants to pay taxes.   Some form nonprofits, and others work and just attempt to flat-out hide their income.  Others think “large” in schemes to defraud the innocent . . . . . 

    Do Not try to evade Income Taxes or any other kind of taxes illegally  For PEte’s sake don’t copy the AFCC folk and start forming all kinds of corporations to give an appearance of actually being more than (basically) one association with an agenda — getting as many mental health practitioners as possible a great retirement plan, and tax-deductible air fare and hotel accommodations in fun places to think up the next set of schemes to be forced on the parents and their children.

    But there is nothing wrong with taking a hard look at who is paying the taxes, and asking WHY the conversation all over the TVs, and the Child Support Enforcement Agencies, and the Think Tanks is about “creating” and/or finding jobs, jobs, jobs — [which would produce income tax, income tax, income tax for the 42% of government receipts for its operations, which we can safely say are mostly run by corporations, corporations, corporations influencing legislators….] when the fact is, the wealthiest people don’t even work that many jobs — instead, they create family and other foundations (including in other countries), tax shelters, they start, develop, go public with and sometimes buy & sell corporations; they invest in stocks, trade commodities or currencies markets, and in the resulting spare time because their income is NOT tied to a 9 to 5 (or 7 to 7pm) jobs, can meet with each other to figure out what legislation will best suit their business interests — not yours, THEIRS.  And/or they have adequate technology to market their businesses and conduct videoconferences, etc.

    They possess and work in an entirely different field of ideas, attitudes and expectations, one of which is to manage people and run business, or at times, countries…..

    The U.S. Public Education system exists, in part, to make sure that not too many youngsters learn these skills, and to groom them for their appointed future as employEES — not business owners or day traders, or investors.  Heck, literacy and math, history and economics are hardly taught.  There iS, however, a values war being run through the schools, and the metal detectors, lack of privacy and civil rights, and herd-mentality-treatment and such communicate to the average student what his or her future just might be if that student does not color within the lines.    Scant mention is made of how much is paid to politicians campaigns to keep this system going.

    I’ll bet THIS article is a good one (podcast, though).  Note:  “CCHR” appears to be a Scientology outfit, but neither Blumentield nor O’Meara are, that I’m aware of.

    CCHR Int
    Jun 19, 2:42 AM
    Watchdog Radio with guest Samuel Blumenfeld

    Read more…

    Where, Oh Where, has Los Angeles County’s Money gone?

    This is good reading (and a decade old) in O’Meara’s / Insight’s follow-up on whether, say, is anyone at Los Angeles going to, er, pay some of those 30 years of back taxes?  And trying to get a few more answers about WHO knows how much cash is being collected.  Remember, this is “OLD” news, yet who even bothers to talk about it any more , and what (if anything) was resolved?

    Found on a Yahoo Groups discussion: posted July 21, 2001:

           and at
    http://www.insightmag.com/archive/200107304.shtml (but “insightmag.com” appears to be a defunct domain….)
    A Financial Fiasco Is in the Making
    By Kelly Patricia O’Meara  (July 30, 2001)

    komeara@…

    An alleged slush fund for the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association may be the tip of an iceberg of misappropriation of government money in Los Angeles County.

    “Put your concerns in writing and mail them to me.” Click; the line goes dead. The voice on the phone was that of Los Angeles Superior Court Presiding Judge James Basque* as Insight pressed him to explain whether the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association (LASCJA), of which he is the chairman, has made any attempt to pay 30 years of back taxes to county, state and federal authorities.  

    (CHART inserts, mine, from the CA OAG site): Notice, it has no EIN#!

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION EX550137 Charity Exempt – Active LOS ANGELES CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
    You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.    Registrant Information

    Full Name: LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION FEIN:
    Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2062529
    Registration Number: EX550137
    Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
    Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/1991
    Registration Status: Exempt – Active Date This Status:
    Date of Last Renewal:

    Address Information

    Address Line 1: 111 N HILL ST RM 204 Phone:
    Address Line 2:
    Address Line 3:
    Address Line 4: LOS ANGELES CA 90012

    Annual Renewal InformationRelated Documents

    No Related Documents

    Prerequisite Information

    No Prerequisite Information

    IRS Return Data

    And the Secretary of Site record for the corporation shows 1997.  OK . . . . .

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2062529 12/10/1997 ACTIVE LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION FREDERICK R BENNETT

    (and a different room….)

    Entity Name: LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION
    Entity Number: C2062529
    Date Filed: 12/10/1997
    Status: ACTIVE
    Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
    Entity Address: 111 N. HILL ST RM 546
    Entity City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90012
    Agent for Service of Process: FREDERICK R BENNETT
    Agent Address: 111 N HILL ST RM 546
    Agent City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90012

    Which is most definitely the courthouse itself:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Courthouse
    Central District
    Stanley Mosk Courthouse on Hill St.
    111 North Hill St.
    Los Angeles, CA 90012

     It has been more than two years since Insight broke the story of the Los Angeles Superior Court judges earning money off the books by providing minimum continuing legal education (MCLE) classes to attorneys in the courtrooms. The fees collected were deposited into a private bank account that has come to be known as the $100,000 “coffee and flowers” fund (see “Is Justice for Sale in L.A.?,” May 3, 1999). 
           The problem with this arrangement is that, apparently to cover for the fact that the judges weren’t paying taxes on this income, whether earned or extorted, the LASCJA illegally used the employer-identification number (EIN) of the County of Los Angeles. In time the county politely asked the learned jurists to stop using that number. But no criminal charges were filed against the judges and no one raised the issue of making good on back taxes. So when Basque abruptly ended that telephone conversation, Insight decided to take another look at the status of that private bank account and to revisit the Los Angeles County Superior Court Finance Office. 


    Insight put its “concerns” about those back taxes in writing, as requested by the presiding judge, and hand-delivered the formal request to his chambers. Basque neither responded to the questions nor agreed to a meeting, instead deferring to the county’s counsel, Frederick Bennett.** 

    (notice, also the registered agent of this corporation / alleged nonprofit with no EIN#) (yet!)


    Although Bennett says that he “has some background information concerning the [judges] association,” not once in his three-page response did he discuss whether the judges have made any attempt to pay what could amount to 30 years of back taxes and penalties. Instead, he obfuscates, rambling on that he is “informed and believes the association has used its own taxpayer’s identification number since approximately 1997, when the county auditor [J. Tyler McCauley] indicated that would be the better practice.” 

    Which number is …. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ?  


    For the LASCJA to use its own identification number, as required by law, is a “better practice?” What about it being illegal for the judges to have enjoyed their private income for so many years under the county’s EIN? Not a word. But Bennett continues to defend the judges by explaining that “the association does not pay taxes,” as he is “informed and believes that it is an organization exempt from taxes.”  


    Bennett provided a copy of the LASCJA’s year 2000 federal IRS 990 Form indicating the organization’s tax-exempt status but advised that the information he was providing should be verified with the LASCJA’s attorney, John J. Collins of the Pasadena law firm of Collins, Muir and Traver.   


    Collins had less information than Bennett. It appears that Collins can only speak about the LASCJA back to the winter of 1997, when he first began representing the association. Asked if he is aware of any efforts by the judges to pay taxes on these large sums of money earned during the 30-year period, Collins tells Insight: “I can’t speak about that because I don’t know they made any money.”   

    (NOTE:  appears to be when it registered as a separate corporation, possibly because of prompting from some of these investigators….)


    That assuredly is a lawyerly response, given that Collins admitted to having read Insight’s earlier article about the LASCJA which contained details about checks being deposited into the judges’ private Bank of America account. It at that time contained a little more than $100,000.
           Neither Collins nor the judges have addressed the issue that, based on the bank records, large sums of money may be owed in back taxes. Furthermore, based on correspondence from Collins, it is clear that the association’s counsel is much more informed about the status of the account than he lets on. 
    Since Insight began looking into the “slush fund” of the Superior Court judges and their finance office, requests for information have been submitted by private citizens, including Marvin Bryer, a retired computer analyst in La Crescenta, Calif. He became involved in the Superior Court’s financial matters because of problems his daughter was having in a child-custody case. In February 1998, Bryer made a statutory request through Collins to inspect the LASCJA’s records. Collins refused, saying LASCJA “is not a public entity nor an exempt organization as defined under this statute.” He stated that “the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association is a private organization and its documents, including financial records and tax information, are confidential and not subject to disclosure.” 


    While Collins says the LASCJA is a “private” organization, according to California Secretary of State Bill Jones, the association filed for tax-exempt status in December 1997 — well within the time frame of Bryer’s request for inspection of the records. When Insight reminded Collins about this correspondence, the lawyer once more stonewalled, saying: “I’m not giving you any opinion on that. That’s not part of my function. I’m not telling you what their legal status is. Everything that’s out there is a matter of public record. You’ve got the filings, the informational returns and that’s enough for you to come to your conclusions.” 


    Meanwhile, the LASCJA continues to use the county courthouse for its private business. According to documents filed with the California secretary of state, the LASCJA lists the courthouse at 111 North Hill Street as its business address. Then there is a letter from Collins dated November 2000 stating that “the tax returns for 1998 and 1999 have been deposited in Room 119 [the Superior Court Finance Office] of the Central District Court. … you should ask for Mr. Alf Schonbach, who is the court administrator–finance and accounting.” Despite assurances from county auditor McCauley that the judges no longer were conducting their private business from the court premises, Collins continues to direct inquiries about the LASCJA to the court’s finance office.  


    Schonbach long has been a key player in the oversight of the LASCJA account. And it is Schonbach who was in command of the Superior Court Finance Office when one of his underlings, Gregory Pentoney, and an attorney friend, Robert Fenton, cooked up a scheme to collect $5 million in unclaimed sums deposited — and long forgotten — in the county’s Condemnation and Interpleader [C&I] trust fund. Pentoney and Fenton pleaded guilty to one felony count of taking a bribe and receiving a bribe. Pentoney was sentenced to two years in state prison; Fenton received 16 months.

    USlegal definition”  “Condemnation”

    Condemnation suit is a judicial proceeding for the purpose of taking property by eminent domain for public use upon the payment of just compensation for such taking. It is also known as condemnation proceeding. Such a proceeding adjudicates all rights, including ownership and just compensation, as well as the right to take the property.

    and “Interpleader”

    Interpleader is the procedure when two parties are involved in a lawsuit over the right to collect a debt from a third party, who admits the money is owed but does not know which person to pay. The debtor deposits the funds with the court (“interpleads”), asks the court to dismiss him/her/it from the lawsuit and lets the claimants settle their dispute in court.

    Interesting . . . .

    so, here is a Fenton Appeal on the case:

    1. [PDF]

      IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA …

      caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/B152057.PDF

      File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
      Jul 1, 2002 – against Fenton and Pentoney. Fenton and Pentoney subsequently pled “no contest” to violating Penal Code sections 67.5 (bribing a ministerial …


    And, moreover, here is Marv Byers (?)  Johnnypumphandle’s  commentary on the fact that the City of Glendale omitted a “Statement of Economic Interest” (for Fenton, while he was working as its City Attorney?); gets kind of like a mystery here, I understand!:

    BEGIN of PUMPHANDLE QUOTE:

    ”

    enton / Pentoney – arrested August 28, 1998

    Latest News

    January 25, 2001 – The case has been moved to Dept Q, Judge Wolf, and will now be heard on February 9 at 8:30 am. We understand that Judge Wolf has previously ruled favorably for Fenton.

    January 11, 2001 – In a related case, LC043853, which is to be heard in the Van Nuys Court, Dept. C24 on January 25, 2001, Robert Fenton had sued the City of Glendale to recover his ‘costs’ in scamming money from the County of LA which was routed to the City of Glendale. The suit was tabled until the criminal case was resolved. As we all know, Fenton went to jail for his part in the bribery scheme. When he was working for the City of Glendale as their City Attorney (so he could act for Glendale in getting LA County funds), Glendale was required by law to have a Statement of Economic Interest on file for all public officials that represent the City. Guess what? Glendale took part in the scheme by ‘overlooking’ this requirement. The City of Glendale has no Statement of Economic Interest. If it were not for the crime committed while Fenton was in office, Glendale should only be sanctioned. But now, it looks like Glendale was in on the scheme an tried to hide Fenton’s connections. This is criminal activity that needs investigation by the State Attorney General’s office.

    Older News

    August 11, 2000. Robert Fenton was sentenced today to 16 months in the State Prison System. However, Judge Waldrip specified that Fenton was to be processed through the LA County Restitution Center (???) in order to earn back the fines that were placed on him. Sentencing for Gregory Pentoney was continued to September 8th at 1:30 pm in Judge Waldrip’s court. (8th floor, 700 Civic Center Drive, Santa Ana,CA).

    4 Cases of Restitution came before Judge Waldrip. He denied restitution for Marvin Bryer, Rose Jensen, and the City of Glendale (Glendale has a suit pending against Fenton that would also address the restitution.). The Judge met with counsel for almost an hour prior to the sentencing to work out the details – Restitution was granted to the LA Superior Court in the amount of $24,000. Although, an estimate of $61,000 (for the interest on the stolen money) was claimed by the Superior Court, the figure of $24,000 was approved by the Judge – pending acceptance by the LA Superior Court which was not present at this hearing. $16,000 to be paid by Fenton – $8000 to be paid by Pentoney. Because of this seemingly high amount, the judge reduced Fenton’s fine from $10,000 to $5,000.

    We believe that there are hundreds of cases that Fenton and Pentoney used to defraud LA County out of much more money than has been uncovered in this case. (Although there were many counts of theft in this case, all other counts but one were dismissed by Judge Waldrip.) The Crusaders will be looking into these many other cases to see if the money can be returned to the taxpayers.

    So far, we have not determined that any of the money was returned to the County since the ‘return money’ checks we found were made out to the LA Superior Court which is funded by the State of California.

    October 15, 1999 – Over a year later, Fenton and Pentoney’s bail has been reduced to $100,000 and now Pentoney (public defender Walter Katz) has filed a 170.1 to recuse all the judges in LA County. The recusal was granted by Judge Hess and the case is being moved to Orange County. All judges in LA County are unable to hear this case. (Does this mean they are all connected to the scheme? And why did it take a year to learn that all the judges must be disqualified in this case?)    . . . 

    “Since substantial sums are involved due to compounding interest, municipalities and even private citizens working for the municipalities sometimes subsequently try to locate the cases in which they believe money is owed. But success is limited, the prosecutor said, because the county refuses to provide outsiders with a blanket list of all such cases.

    Pentoney, however, is charged with providing that information to Fenton, who, between December 1995 and November 1996, submitted 99 requests for disbursements of more than $5 million from the trust accounts on behalf of various municipalities.”

    END OF PUMPHANDLE QUOTE...

    To understand this some (why not?), read the various Los Angeles articles describing the crime, and scheme — how Pentoney had to sell Fenton insider information about accounts that still had compounded interest due the municipalities in emininent domain cases.  In other words, a city (municipality) wants to grab some land.  They have to deposit money into an account (“condemnation”) until the case is finished, that money gets compounding interest.  I’m sure it adds up.  Sometimes the cities forget to collect the interest too — and then “bounty hunters” can go try and get it back.  Problem:  The county didn’t want to ” ‘fess up” where such funds were so cities could go get them back, even though those funds belonged to the cities….

    Amazing what one finds looking for simple information.  I found this on a Yahoo groups “Family court reform” message — Marv Byer was looking for Gregory Pentoney’s ex-wife, who it appears he also cheated in a property matter, failed to disclose to a judge during the divorce, and guess what — it looks like Pentoney got custody of the children (because his ex-wife is paying him child support!)   As Pentoney went to jail, that meant the former Mrs. Pentoney ended up paying child support to the jailed Pentoney’s girlfriend.  Marv Byer wants to help her, and I can imagine is at the time rather peeved at having disc overed the scam affecting his own daughter’s custody case, no doubt….

    Marv Bryer wants to know where to find Irene Pentoney, formerly married to
    Gregory Pentoney of Los Angeles    .

    “You should have money coming to you. Your ex husband cheated you out of
    community property. He is going to State prison for bribery.

    While you were married, your husband failed to disclose that he had money in
    escrow in a housing complex he was buying. It is located at 7336 Unit #66 in
    Downey. He didn’t list it as community property, although he signed for it
    while he was married to you.

    He did not disclose the escrow account to the judge, and after the divorce he
    lied on public record. He held up the final property closure until after the
    divorce was final. Then he went to a notary and did a quit claim on the
    property. He swore that he had made an error in his grant deed and he swore
    he was NOT married when he signed. This is a lie. His statement is perjury.
    In addition Pentoney quit claimed the property as a “gift” to himself as an
    unmarried man and to his father and mother.

    Then on March 8, 1995 Gregory Pentoney allowed Melissa Wall to start a
    criminal enterprise from that property using a dba Morris and Associates
    Bookkeeping Service. On Nov 1, 1996. the police raided the house and found
    checks from Robert Fenton to Morris. The checks were confiscated by the DA
    and are the subject matter of a bribery scheme and conviction. The case is
    People vs Pentoney BA173392 in Orange County.

    In case you’re a little mixed up:  Pentoney was the finance employee, Fenton was the outside attorney.  For Pentoney a.k.a. connected to “Morris and Associates” out of Pentoney-owned property( that he possibly cheated his ex-wife out of during a prior divorce) are paying FENTON, then was Morris and Associates a money laundering situation?

    As I (again) read the “Beware AFCC” post of “stopcourtorderedchildabuse.” (FYI — itself a nonprofit claiming to be a nonprofit that I haven’t yet located…  and run by another AFCC member (at least at one point) family lawyer also running ANOTHER training operation, Child Abuse Solutions, claiming to be a nonprofit whose registration may be a PO box in Berkeley, but which nonprofit registration I haven’t found yet — and is in this same business, training court professionals….    ……     ) ..   The timeframe is very closely connecting this information with the origins of the AFCC, and connecting the origins of the AFCC (Los Angeles COunty Superior Court Judges Slush Fund) with the habit of tax evasion and other not so legal activity . . . . . ..  and then we learn that the bank account in question was Bank of America (formerly Security Pacific) which the man Charles Rossotti (See this post), also formerly IRS and with stock in the accounting used (then) in L.A. — it gets very interesting indeed.

    HERE:  And I paste the relevant paragraphs into the link title (hover cursor to read)

    While he was pleading not guilty, he and his parents sold the property in
    violation of criminal forfeiture laws. There is criminal victim restitution
    laws that appear to allow you, the former Mrs. Pentoney, to have a claim on
    the sale of this property.

    Even knowing that this is true, the DA nevertheless allowed Gregory Pentoney
    to increase your child support that you will be paying to him while he is in
    State prison, The money will go to his girl friend who is now his wife, and
    who is caring for your child while Gregory Pentony is in prison. This is
    wrong. Please contact us. “

    AND HERE, (MOREOVER) IS MARV BRYER PUBLICIZING HOW THE PEOPLE V. PENTONEY TRIAL WAS SHIFTED, QUASHED, AND DISAPPEARED, ETC.  VERY INTERESTING READING. HE BELIEVED THAT THE PENTONEY CASE WAS KEY TO THE L.A. AREA “RICO,” AND PENTONEY’S.  HIS BAIL WENT SOMEHOW FROM $1.5 MILLION TO $100K.  BYER BELIEVES THEY LET HIM OFF SO HE WOULDN’T RAT THEM OUT.  


    As a result of a series of Insight articles about theft from the C&I trust account, Schonbach was directed to produce a listing of the unclaimed funds and make it publicly available. This currently reflects a balance of a little more than $54 million but does not include the “zero-balance” cases, where principle [“principal”] has been paid but interest still is accruing. Insight’s articles also prompted the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors in September 2000 to request a special audit of the C&I account — at a cost to taxpayers of $18,000 — which eventually was made public last February. (2001)


    The accounting firm of Vasquez Farukhi & Co. conducted the special audit of the C&I trust account and stated it did not find “any material misstatements in the Condemnation and Interpleader Fund.” In other words, the C&I account is in good shape. But is it?   


    For the purposes of defining the fund Vasquez Farukhi explained that the “SK4 [Condemnation and Interpleader Fund] was established by the County of Los Angeles for the Superior Court of the county to account for four types of deposits consisting of eminent domain [condemnation] deposits, interpleader [deposits for credit relief], nonbondsmen bail deposits and deposits made in compliance with judicial order.” Having been advised by Los Angeles County Treasurer Joe Spillane that the county takes in between $400 million and $600 million a year, financial analysts tell Insight it seems odd that the C&I fund audit would reflect a mere $54 million.   


    Even more odd is that no one in the county government could provide Insight with a bottom-line figure of how much cash was collected through the C&I fund for fiscal 2000 alone. Spillane explained that he had little or no knowledge of the court’s finances. He receives a bottom-line figure from the auditor but has no clue about the deposit specifics. “We’re not looking,” explains Spillane, “for each of the individual deposits for each of the funds. That would be impossible.  

    Impossible?  WHY?  

    Any individual being audited would have to give a reconciliation, some backup documentation!  THis is part of good business practice.  I have seen other county records (in FL) where the transfers by clerks of the court are shown.  THey deal with huge amounts, but it’s their responsibility.       

      My function is to account for funds that are in the treasury, balance those to our bank accounts and our investments and have cash available for disbursement.” Spillane insists, “The auditor has the detail. I don’t know what is in the condemnation fund because it’s a fund that we don’t maintain.” Claiming to have exhausted his knowledge of how the money moves in Los Angeles, Spillane recommended that Insight speak with McCauley, the county auditor — a task easier said than done. 


    Several weeks passed before McCauley allowed a brief telephone interview and, while the agreed-upon focus of the conversation was to provide a bottom-line figure on the amount of cash being collected at the Superior Court, the auditor said he could provide few specifics. For those, he said, Insight would have to go to Schonbach in the Superior Court Finance Office. And, of course, Schonbach refused to discuss the court’s cash collections

    SCHONBACH appears on the other timeline as well (to which I’m sure Bryer’s and some NAFCJ reporting went in as well):

    Begin quote from:

    History of the AFCC – Association of Family and Conciliation Courts

    COURT CANCER METASTASIZES Metamorphosis of the Conference of Conciliation Courts into the Association of Family Conciliation Courts A Guide to Destroying Children BY MARV BRYER

    1995:

    • Also in May, Deputy Executive Officer to Auditor Judy Call (who is on the signature card for the LASCA and person who signed the checks to cash and to judges) sent a letter to Tyler McCauley, LA County Auditor- Controller (who is doing the audit). The letter stated that Judy wanted all the money transferred from the (Subject: transmission of administrative responsibility for the LA Superior Court Judges Account ) to transfer LASCA account to the judges. • LASCJA is still not registered at IRS or FTB or city. The only identity belonging to the account is the Auditor-Controller because the tax number is for LA County. None of the money has been reported to IRS. (just like if I used Marv’s SSN and opened an account…and then got a job using Marv’s SSN. He would be reported to IRS if he didn’t report taxes after cutting the W- 2. If I don’t pay taxes, they will come after the ID and Marv) a Federal crime

    • Also in May, a letter saying Confidential from Tyler McCauley to John Clark, admitting that there was an attempt to charge Marv $2000 which Marv called extortion. Admitted that the checks that Pentenoy gave Marv should have gone into the Court revenue, not into the private fund for judges. • Marv’s daughter subpeoned the Auditor’s investigation file. The Auditor admits they are doing an investigation but refused to give the file to her.

    1996

    August 6, Marv sued Pentenoy and Patricia Higgins for fraud and lying about court money.

    DA raided the court with a search warrant and shut down work in Finance Dept.

    • November 1, DA raided Pentenoy’s office, car, home (which is the same as Morris and Associates) and Judy Call’s office, locked up the computers and home [of?] Robert Fenton in Encino (who was bribing Pentenoy) and hid evidence.

    Reminder.  The L.A. County D.A.’s office around this time must’ve been Gil Garcetti’s, which was also sitting on undistributed child support, a.k.a., topic of Silva v. Garcetti lawsuit (Richard Fine). …  So while they are racing around to prosecute crime, remember who it is ….

    (Marv was busily suing and now could not get to the evidence.) • November 7, DA made another raid on Finance Dept and took a package marked “Marvin Bryer”, Pentenoy had notes on Marv.(Unconstitutional because no new search warrant…still don’t know what first search warrant said)

    {{how Marv knew this??}}

    • Dec 10, the Daily Journal reported the raid. (Since 1900, LA has been stealing money from the public. Pentenoy had lists of all the money that was stolen in Eminent Domain (when take people’s money) and Interpleader Accounts. He and Al Schonbach take it to the dumpster, but Pentenoy went to the dumpster later and retrieved it.)

    1997

    Marv Bryer subpoenaed all bank statements.

    The LA Superior Court Judges Association bank statements state they have been a customer since 1962.

    This LASCJA has to be the beginnings of the AFCC.  It is doing the same thing and has the same behavioral problems, like ETHICS!

    1998

    LA Superior Court Judges Association corporation incorporated Jan 1, 1998  {{see  above, 12/10/1997, close enough}}….

    Registered with IRS and Secty of State/FTB with a new EIN # after Marv subpoenaed the bank statements.

    2000

    Hypothesis: CCC became the AFCC which became the JMEF which became the LASCJA.

    NOW I am back to the Kelly O’Meara article, above:  The same journalist then goes on to describe how a faulty computer system may have let about $59 billion go missing from HUD around 2000:

    Perhaps taxpayers in Los Angeles will have time to find out what happened to all those millions.
    Meanwhile, Insight pressed on trying to obtain a bottom-line figure for cash taken in by the court. McCauley’s office finally provided a 37-page computer printout that allegedly reflects the court’s cash deposits for fiscal 2000. Although the printout provides a monthly ending balance for credits and debits, the report provides no details about the source and amounts of the debits and credits represent, providing only the unauditable lump-sum transfers. 
           As one accountant put it, “This is archaic. It’s ridiculous to think that a county as large as Los Angeles can’t program an accounting system that reconciles the books on a daily basis and [that] also can easily produce specific information about various accounts and provide yearly fund balances. It’s just absurd.” 

    Faulty Number Crunching

    How could the books for the County of Los Angeles be in such a mess if the authorities there weren’t trying to hide something, critics ask. At least some of the problem appears to lay with the computing system. The Countywide Accounting and Purchasing System (CAPS) is a product of American Management Systems (AMS) and has been used in Los Angeles since 1987. IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti is the founder and former chairman of AMS and remains a major stockholder in the company that provides computing services not only to Los Angeles County but to key federal agencies, including the IRS. 

    Charles Rossotti is Georgetown, Harvard, very smart, characterized with 5 others who founded AMS as “whiz kids.”

    As Insight recently reported, due to severe problems with its AMS accounting system, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was unable to balance its books under the recently departed secretary Andrew Cuomo (see “Cuomo Leaves HUD in Shambles,” March 5) and, in 1999, was unable to account for $59 billion (see “Why Is $59 Billion Missing from HUD?” Nov. 6, 2000). ** Not surprisingly, under pressure from Insight, HUD since has decided to scrap the HUDCAPS computer program. But others have had similar problems with AMS finance systems, including the states of Mississippi and Kansas. Then again, as any auditor will be glad to confirm, there is nothing like institutionalized confusion to cover for and invite corruption.

    (SMILE….)

    ** I started to read this $59 Billion article, and feel it should be on the post.  Look below…..

    Results of search for “AMERICAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS” returned 9 entity records.  (likely no relation, but interesting enough….)

    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C0602191 07/03/1970 SUSPENDED AMERICAN BUSINESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC.
    C0941617 10/01/1979 DISSOLVED AMERICAN DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
    C1170493 03/07/1983 SUSPENDED AMERICAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. LLOYD C OWNBEY JR
    C1167394 01/21/1983 SUSPENDED AMERICAN FACILITIES MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. ANTHONY J THOMAS JR
    C1132885 01/21/1983 DISSOLVED AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS DAVID L ANDERSON
    C1327378 12/28/1984 DISSOLVED AMERICAN RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. JOHN L TUCKER
    C1096092 11/09/1981 SURRENDER AMERICAN STORES MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS COMPANY C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
    C0842796 04/05/1978 SUSPENDED PAN AMERICAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. ** RESIGNED ON 03/18/1991
    C1093417 10/21/1981 FORFEITED SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AMERICAN CORPORATION ** RESIGNED ON 10/31/1994


    Modify Search New Search 

    Charles Rossotti’s background sounds almost frighteningly competent.  HEre it is, in “The Carlyle Group.”  I have no idea what happened to AMS functioning in California, but imagine an archaic management system run by an IRS commissioner?  WHen the issue is getting the figures out so someone pays taxes on them?

    http://www.carlyle.com/team/item5829.html  (Global ALTERNATIVE Asset Management….)

    Charles O. Rossotti
    Senior Advisor
    Washington , DC
    Segment :  Corporate Private Equity
    Fund :  U.S. Buyout ,  U.S. Growth Capital
    Industry  :  Technology & Business Services

    Charles O. Rossotti is a Senior Advisor focusing primarily on investments in the fields of information technology and business services. He is based in Washington, DC.

    Prior to joining Carlyle, Mr. Rossotti served from 1997 to 2002 as Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, the federal agency that serves 175 million taxpayers and employs 100,000 people. As a result of his leadership, the public’s rating of the IRS increased greatly and relationships of trust with Congress, tax professionals and business groups were restored, and the agency’s effectiveness turned around.

    In 1970, Mr. Rossotti co-founded American Management Systems, Inc. and until 1997 served at various times as President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman. AMS grew through his tenure, becoming a major international business systems consulting and systems integration firm with revenues of more than $1 billion. AMS clients include Fortune 500 companies and federal, state and local government agencies in North America and Europe. In 1979, AMS was one of the first technology services firms to go public.

    Mr. Rossotti earned his A.B. in economics, magna cum laude, from Georgetown University and his M.B.A., with high distinction, from Harvard Business School. In 1970, he received the Distinguished Civilian Service Medal from the Department of Defense. In 2002, he received the Alexander Hamilton Medal from the Department of Treasury. In 2003, he received an Alumni Achievement Award from Harvard Business School.

    Mr. Rossotti is on the Board of Directors of Carlyle portfolio companies Apollo Global, Booz Allen Hamilton, Compusearch Software and Wall Street Institute. In addition, he currently serves on the Board of Directors of Bank of America Corporation and AES Corporation, a publicly-owned global electric power company.

    Bank of America is distributing California Child Support (the Statewide Distribution Unit).

    In addition to his business activities, Mr. Rossotti serves on the Boards of Capital Partners for Education and the Comptroller General’s Advisory Committee of the Government Accountability Office (GAO). In 2005, he served as a member of President Bush’s advisory panel on reform of the income tax.

    Not exactly too comforting that AMS (and this IRS commissioner) had a DOD background: Wikipedia:

    But only after a year, Rossotti went to work for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. From 1965 to 1969, Rossotti worked for Robert McNamara, becoming Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Analysis at age 29.

    In 1970, Rossotti and several DOD colleagues co-founded American Management Systems, a technology and management consulting firm. Rossotti served as Chief Executive Officer from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s.

    IRS Years

    In 1997, Rossotti was named Commissioner of Internal Revenue by then President Bill Clinton where he served for 5 years.

    He was considered a reformer, upgrading the agency’s technology, as well as turning the IRS into a more customer service oriented agency. Rossotti received a waiver from the Clinton administration that allowed him to retain his AMS stock in a blind trust.

    More on “AMS” same source:

    The company grew throughout the 1980s and 1990s, implementing key systems such as the accounting system for New York City and The Standard Procurement System for the United States Department of Defense. The company was acquired by CGI Group in 2004, with AMS’s federal defense business being acquired by CACI.

    AMS was founded in 1970 by five former Defense Department “Whiz Kids”: Charles Rossotti, Ivan Selin, Frank Nicolai, Patrick W. Gross, and Jan Lodal.

    If they were such whiz kids, then how come no one can find that money or the accounting for it, for Los Angeles that Insight was looking for?

    The company’s initial headquarters were in the Washington, D.C. suburb of Arlington, Virginia. From its inception, much of AMS’s revenue was derived from contracts with federal agencies. The company grew quickly during the 1970s. During its first decade of operation, AMS focused its business on consulting and selling customized software to large government and corporate organizations. [1]

    The company grew to over nine thousand employees, with many offices in both the United States and other countries. At one point in the 1990s, one quarter of the company’s revenue, albeit none of the profit, came from Europe.

    I hope you find some of this detail interesting (I do….)

    Lawsuits, divestiture, and sale

    In 1999, the state government of Mississippi terminated an $11.2 million contract with AMS to modernize the state’s tax system and sued the company for $985 million in damages.[3] A jury awarded the state $474.5 million in actual and punitive damages in August 2000, causing a drop in stock price from 44 3/8 to 14. The company subsequently settled the suit for $185 million.[4]

    Another customer, the Federal Thrift Investment Board, cancelled a contract in 2000 for a system to make Thrift Savings Plan data available online. The subsequent lawsuit was settled for $5 million in June 2003.[5] A subsequent United States Senate investigation authored by senatorsSusan Collins and Joe Lieberman identified various reasons for four years of delays and cost overruns, including lack of formal agreement on a detailed design and problems with the structure of the contract.[6]

    In December 2002, AMS sold its Global Energy Group to Bangalore, India-based Wipro Technologies.

    New CEO Alfred T. Mockett was hired by AMS in 2001 to grow the company’s sales from $1.1 billion to $3 billion a year, with a goal of becoming a top tier system integrator through growth and acquisitions, with an eventual goal of a “big bang merger of equals.” When this strategy proved unsuccessful, Mockett negotiated a sale of the firm. CGI, a Canadian company, was the primary purchaser, paying $858 million for the commercial business and all government business not related to national defense. The defense portion of AMS could not be sold to a foreign-based company so CACI purchased the defense and intelligence practice for $415 million.[7] The AMS brand was retained by CGI for a time and the AMS website directed users to the CGI site. CGI’s United States headquarters are in Fairfax, Virginia.

    Bloomberg profile of Mr. Rossotti and all the boards he’s on at age 7,

    Or this one:

    CCHR Int
    Jun 19, 2:37 AM
    Watchdog Radio with guest Kelly O’Meara

    Read more…

    GOOD work, Kelly O’Meara!  All these months I’ve been reading your name on just one or two articles, but I see that’s the high standard of ferretting out the facts is typical!

    Here we go:

    Why Is $59 Billion Missing From HUD?

    Posted Nov. 6, 2000
    By Kelly Patricia O Meara
    Insight Magazine

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has earned a failing grade from the House Government Reform subcommittee on Government Management for the way the agency manages taxpayers’ money. Subcommittee chairman Stephen Horn, R-Calif., is said to be furious that HUD’s most recent financial report shows the agency is unable to balance its checkbook and cannot account for $59 billion.

    For most Americans, it is incomprehensible that $59 billion could be missing from the ledger of a single agency. But despite years of earning failing grades — as well as years of being unable to account for tens of billions of dollars — the Clinton/Gore management team at HUD has continued to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars to the same contractors hired to ensure financial systems are in place and working. It doesn’t take a certified public accountant to see that HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo’s financial house is not in order, and Susan Gaffney, the inspector general (IG) of HUD, tells Insight, “It’s more serious than you know.”

    This dire yet brutally honest evaluation by the IG came in response to questions about her testimony concerning HUD’s 1999 audit, delivered before Horn’s subcommittee in May. And HUD’s 1999 audit still has not been completed even as the agency is nearing the starting date for the 2000 audit. Instead, Gaffney submitted a 14-page “summary” for 1999, providing a laundry list of systemic reasons for HUD’s financial woes. Indeed, it took Insight a day and a half just to make sense of the IG’s simplified testimony concerning these financial shenanigans.

    Beyond the fact that $59 billion is unaccounted for and that auditors have had to make manual adjustments to the checkbook system retroactively, it is glaringly apparent in the IG’s report that taxpayers should consider themselves lucky that the amount isn’t much higher. What also is more than evident is that the IG devoted most of her testimony to explaining failed processes at HUD rather than focusing on any specific examples of theft, conversion, embezzlement and other larceny.   . . . 

    . . .

    What the IG is saying is that HUD’s finances are in a shambles because, during 1999, the agency was converting to a new computer system, the field offices didn’t balance their checkbooks on a monthly basis and manual postings were made to the financial statements so late that the IG had no time to review whether the postings were correct. Gaffney does report in one section of her testimony that “242 adjustments, totaling about $59.6 billion, were made to adjust fiscal year 1999 activity.”

    The IG, however, does not explain where the “adjustments” were made, for what services or from which region or field office. But she tells Insight that HUD’s financial problems stem from glitches within the agency’s computer systems.

    THis next segment of quotations is long, but the same principle — seems to me — applies to the computer conversion of CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT to statewide, at just about this same time (late 1990s, and for California, it was not done by 1999, as I recall).  They say :  You keep the old system running alongside the new one until the kinks are worked out.  And you balance the books at least monthly.  Well, here’s how HUD — and the Housing Inspector chose to do it, instead:

    According to one source familiar with HUD’s finances who spoke on condition that he not be identified, blaming computer glitches is what is done when they want to hide fraud. “The history of effort and expenditures that has been poured into correcting deficiencies at HUD does not support a theory of incompetence. If you don’t have decent accounting systems it’s because someone wants to make sure you don’t. It’s standard operating procedure that if one system is being replaced you keep the old one up and running while you work out the kinks in the new one — they’re run parallel. In this case, they took down a system that was running, replaced it with a system that wasn’t and then cried, ‘Oh, we can’t balance the books!’ They can’t say the resources don’t exist to correct the problem. If Cuomo can find hundreds of community builders to run around neighborhoods, he can find enough people to balance the checkbooks.”

    And the source adds, “Furthermore, if I wanted to rip off HUD, this is exactly how I would do it. Don’t run parallel systems, don’t bother to balance the books and then radically reengineer the system all at the same time that you double the volume of work. It’s a system ripe for financial fraud.

    Like the family law system also… and the OCSE.

    The point is that you have to know what checks were authorized in a specific place and how they sort out, and if you balance the books monthly it becomes very easy to zero in on where the fraud is taking place. What the IG has missed is that it’s not about knowing a problem exists, it’s about fixing the problem — you want to know where and why you’re missing $59 billion. A huge computer system isn’t needed for HUD to balance the books; monthly statement reconciliation is all that is necessary.”

    The source continues: “Everything that has transpired at HUD is not an accident, and it sure isn’t a computer glitch. When you take the different material violations of the most basic financial-management rules and compare them to the time and effort put in to have first-rate systems, it is impossible to explain it as anything other than significant financial fraud. The losses could be far greater than $59 billion, but they don’t know for sure because the audit isn’t completed. Secretary Cuomo is a very smart control freak, so it’s ludicrous to think that he doesn’t know what is going on.

    Any more than the Charles Rossotti who co-founded AMS system that was in use in Los Angeles, and completely turned around the IRS; who is running the Carlyle Group now, on a whole lot of Boards (including Merrill Lynch) and who at age 29 after Georgetown and Harvard, was working for the Department of Defense on Systems  _____ (see this post).   Doesn’t know what’s going on?  I don’t think so!

    There are several ways to correct these problems. Most are basic, but if you want to use the big sledgehammer, the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] and Congress have the ability to make HUD balance the books or [they] shut down the money supply. They are the guardians at the gate. But that is the most telling thing about this problem — OMB and the appropriators have been silent. This is exactly what happened right before the savings-and-loan scandal.”

    I found out today that the OMB got moved to become the responsibility of the President (of the US) in 1970.  I put up the link to the U.S. Code requiring the Commissioner of the Treasury to report to the American public, where the money is…..

    So is it possible that a problem within the agency’s computer systems is the cause of tens of billions of dollars being unaccounted for or missing? Not if you ask whistle-blower Jack Ballinger.

    Change of focus to NYC Housing Authority, NYCHA — which is evidently under HUD:

    In 1994 Ballinger began working for the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) as a contract inspector. He worked his way up through the system and was made manager of a new section, the Computer Operations and Reports Section. He was there only a few weeks when he became aware of major problems in payments to contractors. What he found was the main financial-management computer system, known as Financial Management Services (FMS), contained files verifying payments of more than $50 million on nearly 150 contracts that did not show up on the computer system used by the bookkeepers and investigators to track the services provided. Called CAD, this system should have been keeping track of the inspections, the inspector, dates of inspection and inspection results.

    One system (FMS) tracks payments to vendors, the other (CAD) tracks the actual work.  FMS seems to be generating its own payments that don’t correspond to work done.  Now go back to the IRS General Fraud Investigations page, and notice that this is how fraud is sometimes done.

    Realizing the gravity of the problem, Ballinger reported the missing files. Shortly thereafter the new section was disbanded, his staff was sent back to their previous positions and he was transferred to Coney Island as a boiler inspector. Nonetheless, he was joined in calling for an investigation by a dozen other “clean” inspectors. Ballinger first requested an investigation by the New York City Department of Investigations. When nothing happened, he contacted Bill DiBlasio, then the IG for HUD in New York (and now Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign manager); HUD IG Gaffney in Washington; Rep. Rick Lazio, R-N.Y.; and HUD Secretary Cuomo, whose agency provides more than 90 percent of the funding that NYCHA receives.

    Despite overwhelming evidence of corruption — including audio- and videotapes of bribes being offered and accepted, as well as one inspector telling his story of an organized group of inspectors receiving bribes — there was no serious investigation of the misappropriation of funds within the NYCHA. “The IG,” says Ballinger, “said it was a paperwork mistake and cleared up. But not one person who looked at this could see it as a paperwork problem, and this has been going on for almost two years.

    COnclusion:

    Gaffney is saying that just about anyone can get into HUD’s financial system, including many who don’t have any business or authorization to be in it . Once in, intruders can change numbers, take money and engage in financial fraud without anyone catching or stopping them.

    While Gaffney cannot force changes within HUD, as IG she can bring the problems to light. Unfortunately, the testimony she provided to Congress did little more than alert members to the already-known fact that there are serious financial-management problems under Cuomo at HUD. The IG’s report provides no specific data to help lawmakers, who have oversight of this agency, recommend appropriate and necessary changes. In fact, it is possible members of Congress had the same difficulty deciphering the IG’s testimony as everyone else with whom Insight has spoken. Despite the fact that the entire report by the IG to Congress deals with financial mismanagement at HUD, not once in all of her 14 pages of testimony did Gaffney so much as use the word “money.”

    How much HUD’s missing $59 billion is of concern to lawmakers is anyone’s guess. Chairman Horn, as well as Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Fred Thompson of Tennessee and Senate Appropriations subcommittee on VA-HUD Chairman Kit Bond of Missouri, did not return Insight’s calls about these matters.

    [again, Posted Nov. 6, 2000
    By Kelly Patricia O Meara
    Insight Magazine]

    This has been a very long day, and post.  Please go to the Petition site and at least read it, understand that this is Business as Usual in the U.S. and sign to cut — at least specific to our interest here — pork from the TANF diversionary and incentive to prolong custody conflict monies.  THis is a measly $ 4 billion, but it’s affecting all of us to take these families out of the market, forcing some of them to become unwilling social burdens, as they fight for sanity and safety of their kids, while the groups running the place got started RIGHT HERE as I have (again) described — somewhere between a los angeles county judges association that didn’t feel like incorporating til caught, and the desire of would-be mental-health coaches to the world’s intention to exploit a captive audience situation through Conciliation Law.  To me, that’s what I spell RACKET, i.e., R.I.C.O. with this exception:

    Kind of like ALEC (and aided by some of the same corporations that FUND ALEC), the AFCC/CRC/OCSE combination is basically setting up a parallel system of justice, altering the basic forms of government; they are taking the money (not paying taxes properly) and running with it.  Sometimes they take children too — do you realize how many children are actually lost in the foster care system?

    The Lost Children

    It took the death of Florida’s Rilya Wilson in the Spring of 2002 for the issue of children “missing” from foster care to garner national attention. It first came to light that the state of Florida had managed to lose track of nothing less than 500 of its foster care children. Some time thereafter, the body of 17-year-old Marissa Karp was found in Collier County Florida. She had run away from her state-designated foster family in April. The Collier County Sheriff’s Office explained to the St. Petersburg Times that she had been murdered.

    Since August of 2002, officials in the states of California, Tennessee, and Michigan have disclosed that hundreds of children are similarly “missing” from their foster care systems.

    The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services reported in August that 740 foster children were missing from its system.

    Shortly thereafter, Michigan foster care officials announced that 300 foster children were missing from their foster care system. Governor John Engler declared that finding these children would be a “top priority.” As of November, 2002, the Family Independence Agency (as Michigan’s child protection agency is known) had managed to locate only 48 of these missing children.

    “Anytime a child is missing, that’s a big concern for us and we make all the efforts we can to try and locate them as quickly as possible,” explained Carla Aaron, a spokesperson for the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services. Aaron reported in November of 2002 that nothing short of one out of every 20 foster children were missing from Tennessee’s foster care system. Tennessee officials reported that 98 percent of these 496 “lost children” were adolescent runaways.

    Here is the article “The Lost Children,” much as it appeared on Lifting the Veil in 1997, with some minor subsequent edits having been made in 1998.

    Read The Lost Children

    Last updated December 07, 2002

     

    But that’s a topic for another day.  CHECK THIS OUT!

    http://www.change.org/petitions/cut-tanf-title-iv-d-programs-which-represent-4billion-of-waste

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

    October 2, 2011 at 8:21 PM

    Posted in History of Family Court

    Tagged with , , , ,

    OCSE: Child Support Enforcement/Federal Grants to States: Let’s Look at the “TAGGS” HHS Charts (CFDAs 93.563 & 93.564)

    with 5 comments

    (POST is incomplete — but I’m going to post anyhow for a sample of some of the funding for child support, and how one can look up Who’s Who when a nonprofit exists to take some of that extra-special “child support research and demonstration” (etc.) grant monies, especially when it is combined with other money in fatherhood initiatives to help men with their child support and custody issues (i.e., taking TANF money to promote fatherhood to encourage child support payment in hopes that it will trickle down to less overall TANF $$ == huh?)

    I realize that few people are going to get through 20K words of text from my last post. However, it should be clear by now that a lot of child support COLLECTED simply ain’t reaching the customers, although that was the ostensible (as opposed to “evolving”) purpose of child support enforcement, to start with. Today, I am providing some visuals, from the Grants to States for Child Support Enforcement, culled from the “TAGGS.hhs.gov” database I keep yakkin’ about.

    2016 update: Database TAGGS.hhs.gov has recently got a “facelift” on its search pages.  It generates a re-usable link (“url”) for any report — among the options on the top right of a generated report, you’ll see buttons for “Export to Xl,to pdf, to text, and furthest right, will generate a “tinyurl” link to copy and save.  This

    CFDA 93.593, “CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT” Grants to States — selected Years 2010 & 2011

    These are the columns one can select for any Advanced Search on TAGGS: “OpDiv” would be for example, “ACF,” Program Office — in these cases — would be OCSE, Office of Child Support Enforcement.

    Grantee Institution Grantee Address Grantee City Grantee State Grantee Postal Code Grantee Country Grantee County Grantee Type Grantee Class Fiscal Year Operating Division Program Office Grant Title Award Number Award Code Budget Year Action Issue Date Principal Investigator Award Action Type Award Class Award Activity Type CFDA Number CFDA Program Title Award Abstract Text Recovery Act Indicator

    I learned yesterday that a Supreme Court Case had verified that a man (or woman) about to be incarcerated for FTP (failure to Pay) child support does NOT have a constitutional right to a public defender — because it’s a “civil” right involved. That’s official now. Center for American Progress

    Families Lose in Child Support Case

    By Joy Moses | June 22, 2011

    The Supreme Court’s Recent Decision in Turner v. Rogers Suggests More Work Ahead

    There were no winners in the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Turner v. Rogers. The Court decided that the appointment of an attorney is not required when parents, who are typically fathers, face jail time for not paying child support. This decision means more fathers will likely end up in jail. The Court required some lesser protections that could help fathers avoid jail time, but more action is needed from outside the courts to help these families. Fathers obviously lose since their freedom is on the line when they’re unable to launch the best possible defense. For many, there is a legitimate defense that they are simply too poor to pay. Half of all child support debtors are the poorest men in society, and 70 percent of past due payments are owed by those making $10,000 or less. Some men are more at risk than others because they have the highest unemployment rates, including those who are black (17.5 percent), Latino (10.1 percent), and/or have limited education and skills (13.7 percent). But mothers lose, too. The Court says {broken link} men can’t be guaranteed attorneys because women may not have them. This is certainly fair—unless you focus on the fact that women may not have attorneys. Equalizing this disadvantage is better than some other options. But what if both parents had the help they needed? . . . Children lose as well. Court and child support systems that are meant to serve their best interests will continue to fail far too many, reaching some issues beyond those that were before the Court. When their dads refuse to pay, punishing them with jail time is helpful. But what about the children with fathers who can’t afford to pay, have difficulty representing themselves, and end up in jail? For them there’s now zero chance that their dad will work and pay support, and it’s much harder to see him behind bars. Importantly, an opportunity is lost to help the child through more family-friendly child support policies that increase the ability to collect via help with employment and fostering father-child connections.

    This author has  a B.A. from Stanford and a J.D. from Georgetown and is a Senior Policy Analyst at a Progressive organization. Joy Moses

    Senior Policy Analyst with the Poverty and Prosperity program at American Progress. Prior to joining American Progress, she was a Children and Youth Staff Attorney at the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty. The majority of her practice focused on the education rights of homeless students, 

    Therefore, I allege that, although she has been focusing on different (and quite valid) issues she is smart enough to figure out what’s up with the child support & access visitation grants system (among others), and how fathers are already having grants-funded free legal help to “facilitate” their family connections.   It seems she has come to a decision that the Fatherhood Policies are needed, and working — as seen by her other articles, and publishing one with Jacquelyn Boggess, co-founder of CFFPP (search my blog) and also a member of Women in Fatherhood, Inc. (A recent nonprofit profiting from HHS fatherhood grants). . . . . CFFPP, as we may recall, is a nonprofit that changed its name to remove the word “Father” from the title and use instead “Family” to be less obvious about how “fatherhood” they actually are in practice, and focus.

    Sisters Are Doin’ It for Themselves, But Could Use Some Help: Fatherhood Policy and the Well-Being of Low-Income Mothers and Children (2010) by Joy Moses (Center for American Progress), Jacquelyn Boggess, and Jill Groblewski >>

    EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE ASKS and ANSWERS its own question: The tension between progressive notions about strong independent women and the benefits they get from help with child rearing is just one philosophical question underlying the debate about the relationship between women and fatherhood policy. Others include:

    • Do policies that promote responsible fatherhood fail to recognize that women also face significant financial hardships and structural barriers on the road to self-sufficiency?
    • Do all women and families have the same stake in fatherhood responsibility policy without regard to differences associated with socio-economic status and race?
    • Do discussions about fatherhood amount to attacks on single mothers?

    Although the authors understand the underlying concerns giving rise to these questions, we would answer all of them with a “No.” First, we contend that it’s not necessary to pit fatherhood responsibility policies against the interests of women, especially low-income single mothers who rely on federal social services programs. Rather, fatherhood policy is family policy that benefits all family members, including mothers. Suggesting the need for social services programs that encourage and facilitate fathers’ economic and emotional support for their families need not equate to a lack of recognition of the challenges faced by these women or an indictment against single mothers.

    I deduce that Ms. Moses has not participated in a custody war against a former abuser and been baptized in the fire of this process, post-1994….  First of all, those questions, while nice philosophically — were not asked here in an open format Notice, the link to the post has no COMMENTS format, typical).     The detached tone and generic terms, asserting that Fatherhood Policy benefits all family members — is simply false; TANF funds are diverted to fatherhood projects on the presumption that there is a trickle-down benefit.   Abstinence Education (still going on), Marriage promotion, and increasing and expanding the child support enforcement apparatus into “family-friendly” ever-evolving programs DOES help provide jobs — for those administering the programs and evaluating them, that is.   I found this site, the other day, chasing down a multi-million $$ organization called “MDRC” (or “Manpower Research Development Corporation”) which puts the giant (as to funding, in the DV prevention arena) “Minnesota Program Development, INc.” (MPDI), a.k.a. the outfit from Duluth which is pushing supervised visitation so hard, and collaborating (or one of its subsidiaries / offshoots, Battered Women’s Justice Project, “BWJP”) with the AFCC (my favorite acronym for this blog, I guess — it comes up nearly every post) — to undermine the language defining crimes as crime, re-characterize individuals as family members, and both responsible for criminal activity by one of them, and so forth  The Child Support Enforcement in Kentucky (Family) Courts has a nice little extortion unit for fathers found in arrears — either go (back) to jail, or get a “get out of jail free” pass if they will participate in a court-favorite program Turning It Around (how to be a man, a father, and other things probably aimed at the 6th grade level, although it’s to men who have sired children)….. the kicker in this one being that it probably also gets grant funding — and if Dads participate, there’s an incentive for the states to get supportive grants. “Turning It Around ” works with the “Home Incarceration Program, yes:

    “Turning It Around” is a collaborative effort, which works in conjunction with the Home Incarceration Program, with most of the attendees coming from contempt proceedings in Family Court in non-support cases. The purpose of the program is to increase the collection of child support payments, reduce recidivism in contempt cases, and encourage and increase cooperative parenting. Turning It Around may be offered as part of a plea agreement for those facing sentencing. Compliance with the program requires making weekly child support payments as well as attending a twelve (12) week class.

    It appears that in 1975, Kentucky restructured its courts.  This 2002-2003 Report on the courts has a flowchart showing when a Family Court was added, and describing some of its programs, including “Turning It Around”:

    In 1975, Kentucky voters supported a constitutional amendment to the Judicial Article that provided for a unified, four-tiered judicial system for operation and administration, called the Court of Justice. Judicial power of the Commonwealth of Kentucky is thus vested in one Court of Justice, which is divided into the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, trial courts of general jurisdiction known as Circuit Courts, and trial courts of limited jurisdiction known as District Courts. In the 2002 general election, Kentucky voters overwhelmingly approved passage of the Family Court Constitutional Amendment, thus creating a Family Court division of the Circuit Court tier. . . . In FY 2002- 2003, the average number of cases heard by family court judges was 1,477 per judge  {X 33 judges in this court}, representing cases originally within the jurisdiction of the circuit and the district courts.  {And it says approximately half the citizens in the state…?} … the Department has coordinated training for family court judiciary and staff, disseminated information via development of a quarterly newsletter, website, a family court benchbook and various reporting materials. The coordination of legal and social services and the provision and support of many programs, including but not limited to divorce education, Families in Transition, Turning It Around, Domestic Violence Information Sessions and truancy court projects have had a significant impact on the citizens of Kentucky

    YES of course it has.  This report is actually some good reading, including relating how it was in 1996 that the JURISDICTIONAL basis for Family Court was established in 1996 (odd, funny, how that dates to WELFARE (TANF) REFORM year and the addition of access visitation grants to help support programs such as they mentioned above — divorce (parenting) education, and so forth.   This report shows NINE new justice centers being built (mostly in 2000ff) and notes that:

    In the 2002 general election, Kentucky voters overwhelmingly approved passage of the Family Court Constitutional Amendment, thus creating a Family Court division of the Circuit Court tier.

    {{NOTE:  In 2001, then-President George Bush initiated — by Executive Order — the OFFICE of FAITH-BASED AND COMMUNITY etceteras, aggressively helping put faith-based organizations, including plain old churches — on the federal grants stream and interspersed throughout government, meaning that they could also apply for funds to teach:  Parent Education, and “How to be a Man” etc…}}

    Family Court. With ratification of the Family Court Constitutional Amendment in all 120 counties, the Kentucky Constitution has seen the most sweeping change in the structure of our court system since we adopted a unified four-tier court system in 1975. This historic moment came during the 2002 general election when more than 75 percent of Kentucky voters approved passage of the Family Court Amendment. This mandate permanently added Family Court to the state’s court system and proved that the people of Kentucky have overwhelmingly embraced the concept of “one family, one judge, one court.” Family Court, which is involved in {{I.E. NOW REGULATING AND AFFECTING..}} the most intimate and complex aspects of human nature and social relations, provides a court devoted exclusively to the needs of families and children. It currently serves 2 million people in 42 counties — nearly half of Kentucky’s population. My goal is to see that within 10 years every family in the state has access to a court that makes families and children the highest priority.

    Kentucky’s court pages has one of the most active set of programs for kids, Moms, Dads, of any states that I’ve seen.  It was here I found a parenting education class (Kids First) which led directly to a nonprofit (I’ll say it:  “Front Group”) in PENNSYLVANIA — of course AFCC in origin and intent.  I wonder if some double-billing goes on (and how much) as has been discovered already in other programs around the country, in custody cases. In 2002 also, an “Alternate Dispute Resolution” Department was added (like many others nationwide).  While this may be appropriate in many types of situations, this process is unfair and DANGEROUS to parents, I’m referring primarily to mothers, whose custody case stems from violence issues.  It dilutes protections, attorney-client confidentiality,and to the extent mediators are court-paid (and/or AFCC-trained, meaning they are going to be hostile towards mothers) it is a bad deal for everyone involved.  I obviously am opposed; in what other areas of crime is a victim MANDATED to mediate with the perp, leaving the decisions to be influenced by a person whose very position has a built-in motive to extend the litigation?  Here it is:

    Chief Justice Joseph Lambert approved the creation of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Services Department in April 2002. The mission of the Department is to promote, facilitate, and maintain the effective use and growth of alternative means of resolving disputes. Initiatives include mediation training for general civil and family mediators, small claims mediation programs, and guidelines for mediators and mediation training. The AOC-sponsored training program is the most thorough alternative dispute resolution initiative to date. Several week-long seminars are designed to train lawyers, judges, educators, mental health and human resource professionals, family court staff, pretrial mediators, and AOC management. The proliferation

    FEB, 2011 article by this justice defending himself against a newspaper attack:

    n any event, let me set the record straight. In my 10 years as chief justice, I established family courts in Kentucky, and those courts now serve 75 percent of our population. At my request, the General Assembly authorized construction of 50 or more judicial centers, almost all of which are located in rural counties that often get little attention from state government. Those court facilities provided thousands of jobs for Kentuckians who needed work, and they were built with money to be repaid over 25 years borrowed at historically low interest rates. I was also instrumental in establishment of the senior judge program, which has resulted in far greater efficiency than ever before in Kentucky courts. Hardly ever is a court day lost because the judge is unavailable. When judges are ill or must attend to family matters, as in the federal system, a senior judge is available to fill that seat for the day or week of the regular judge’s absence. Jurors, witnesses, and others don’t have their time wasted. I also established nearly statewide drug courts, whereby non-violent offenders are given treatment and are closely supervised by judges and caseworkers. Drug court have been about the only significant progress made in recent years in combating the scourge of drug abuse.

    He complained that he was not given (by the senior judge) leave to run for Attorney General while in his position as family judge; this JAN 25, 2011 (blog quoting said )article mentions some of the financial conflicts of interest — and the major court-house construction projects in some detail:

    Lambert established guidelines for leaves of absence in 2005, a time when he was rumored to be considering a run for governor in 2007. Minton has not granted any judge a leave from the program. Lambert apparently only granted one, for a judge to complete an advanced degree at Yale University. It comes as no surprise that Lambert’s decision about running for public office is so closely tied to his financial planning. As chief justice, he designed the senior judge program that will provide him, and others, a generous retirement. Lambert also conceived the widely criticized $880 million courthouse construction program and hired the residential architect who designed his own home to oversee it. The firm that sold the bonds on the lion’s share of the courthouse projects employed Lambert’s son for a time. And the construction company that got more than half the courthouse business contributed generously to the judicial campaigns of Lambert’s wife, Debra.

    Here’s a nice 2007 Continuing Legal Education Commission schedule, from the Kentucky Bar, giving thanks for contributors:

    ␣ ABOUT THE HANDBOOKS AND PRESENTATIONS ␣ Handbook materials are the result of the combined efforts of numerous dedicated professionals from around Kentucky, and elsewhere. The KBA gratefully acknowledges the following individuals who graciously contributed to this publication: AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination  (the link is a Google search, it brings up my posts on the topic as well as of course a course selling information at a discount to AFCC members on how to implement “parenting coordination” (translation — how to steer a family court case against mothers, I kid you not….), how to basically CHANGE courts, and a potpourri of other AFCC agendas  They really are a marketing outfit….  Parenting Coordination Task Force (a concept pushed by this group) consisted of:  “ The members of the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination (2003 – 2005) were: Christine A. Coates, M.Ed., J.D., Chairperson and Reporter; Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Secretary; Barbara Ann Bartlett, J.D., Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D., Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, J.D, Philip M. Epstein, Q.C. LSM, Barbara Fidler, Ph.D., C.Psych, Acc.FM. Jonathan Gould, Ph.D., Hon. William G. Jones, Joan Kelly, Ph.D., Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D., Robert N. Wistner, J.D.

    Overview and Definitions

    Parenting coordination is a child-focused alternative dispute resolution [ADR] process in which a mental health or legal professional with mediation training and experience assists high conflict parents to implement their parenting plan** by facilitating the resolution of their disputes in a timely manner, educating parents about children’s needs,*** and with prior approval of the parties and/or the court, making decisions within the scope of the court order or appointment contract.
     

    3 para. of rant, here, plus come copyediting notes: [**”assists . . . .. to” is a grammar mistake!  “Assist” is a transitive verb that takes a direct object.  They wrote the sentence without one.  It’s “assist in implementing/implementation” or “Help Parents implement.”  And these are the perpetual teachers…The task force boasts TWO “M.Ed.”s, a JUDGE, a JD, and a bunch of Ph.D.’s — did they do this on their dissertations?][***”EDUCATING PARENTS ABOUT CHILDREN’S NEEDS” already has a cash-supported grants stream dedicated to it, called access and visitation ($10 million/year nationwide, and California, where some of these are, gets about $1 million of that still).  Maybe what the parents need, instead, is lower legal bills — and fewer AFCC personnel on their case, particularly the ones that double-bill the grants program, and the parents, and/or are affiliated with the SF court system and Kids Turn (which is trading funds [i.e., a lien!], or was, with the SFTC, Trial Courts, system mysteriously….). Labeling parents “high-conflict” when one parent may or may not be having a “conflict” with the law-breaking, or child-endangering behavior of the others, is a word-trick used by such professionals to place themselves as the supposed “adults” in the matter, reframe what may be some VERY serious issues as “disputes” and sometimes reframe actual domestic violence, threats to kidnap, etc. as “conflict” — squarely blaming both parents for the behavior of ONE.  There are very, very few truly neutral individuals in this world — EVERYONE has a viewpoint.  However, few parents, particularly mothers, are aware of the influence and viewpoints of this organization and how neutral it is on pedophilia and abuse, and how activist it is in preventing women from leaving such situations with their children safe.   I seriously doubt that many people outside some of us mothers who have been diligently blogging this, in recent years (following upon NAFCJ and a VERY few others original exposures of the origins of the AFCC) understand how VERY large a part of the AFCC is #1.   Driven by simple greed — the money motive to market their own materials, and have a monopoly on the marketplace; #2.  Unbelievably activist, narcisssitically so — they position themselves to, and do, re-write laws (or add new ones), or by PRACTICE simply undermine and reverse existing state codes; #3.  Improperly continue to handle CRIMINAL matters in the FAMILY context — pleading caseloads all the time.         I have been systematically looking up (researching, if you will) AFCC individuals, task forces, memberships (i.e., who are judges where) nationwide as part of advocacy for noncustodial mothers in shock (including myself, initially) at what happened to our civil rights?    The behaviors and patterns of AFCC are very predictable, and their rhetoric uniform — rarely does an actually new IDEA come up — just a new market niche.  SImilarly, the nonprofits formed by man of the AFCC-personnel have a few commonalities — namely, they are geared to get court-referred business, they take sometimes grants monies, and they relentlessly conference, publish and collaborate to change the language and practice of law to a direction that this group, in particular, likes.  They are inbred with bar associations, the APA and several other groups as well — I know this because I look, closely The success of this organization which began as a SLUSH FUND IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY COURTHOUSE (from the best I can tell, and others — in articles written about this in the 1990s; don’t take it on my word — go to “the money trail” in Full Disclosure.net which follows Richard Fine’s case and work) depends upon inherent greed and egotism.  Parents are perceived as a PROBLEM, and they are the SOLUTION.   The success — besides who is positioned where in the judicial and court-referral professions — is also demonstrated by the total silence of domestic violence groups on this one.     To take the “veil” off — combine some listening, some reading, and then go check the financials!   Ask, how long are adult mothers and fathers supposed to be forced into educational materials designed at the FIFTH GRADE level (I found one today, may blog it tomorrow)???      The people most qualified to help their children, for the MOST part, are the parents — they live with them, they know them!   With this court system having been around now for several generations, many of the troubles we are seeing — like familicides, terrorism, fatalities on court-ordered exchanges, and/or kidnappings by parents to avoid payment of child support ! ! – or to get even — are now elements of the difficulties single mothers face.     I do not believe that the family court system (which exists primarily because of these individuals — some still practicing — to start with) is reformable, and I DO not believe it is broken — I believe it is doing exactly what it was designed to do — provide steady income growth for an otherwise low-paying field (psychology, absent the Ph.D.s), and a cult-like evangelizing of products (parent education, batterers intervention, supervised visitation, etc.) — which will provide secure retirements for the people who (a) designed and/or (b) parroted and helped affiliate-market them. )      

    OK, I know that was 3 LONG paragraphs, but at least I kept it to only 3!
     
    Parenting coordination is a quasi-legal, mental health, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process that combines assessment, education, case management, conflict management and sometimes decision-making functions.

    Correction:  It is an all-expenses paid (to the coordinators) method of engaging in dubious QUASI-LEGAL and so-called “MENTAL HYGIENE” processes which BECAUSE OF THIS have ZERO business in OR around the courtroom UNLESS the parents opt for it — BOTH of them, and WITHOUT court coercion. Do they expect, in the cases of impoverished parents, to take some of their fees from the already compromised TANF funding, or what? ALSO — PARENTING COORDINATION is yet another tool of the trade of playing the PARENTAL ALIENATION card in a custody hearing and calling for “intervention” (a la Dick Warshak or Matt Sullivan, Ph.D. & Friends) “reunification.”  In other contexts, this would be called deprogramming, a practice which in the 1970s was played on some young adults by their parents, and was criminal — because it involved kidnapping.   It’s claiming that brainwashing happened (whether or not it did, and without true discretion) and so justifying coercive, “INTERVENTIONS” “Intervention Strategies for Parenting Coordinators in Parental Alienation Cases” (AFCC author Susan Boyan and probably the other one also) Divorce Wars: Interventions With Families in Conflict Ms. Ellis’ book, above is Copyright 2000 by the APA, and has of course a chapter on “Parental Alienation Syndrome:  A New Challenge for Family Courts (p. 205)” and by the end, p. 267, she gets around to “Evaluation of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Child Custody Cases.”  (Note:  PAS is real — see chapter title; but Sexual Abuse apparently is not, because it only surfaces next to the word “Allegations” emphasizing doubt (like Sexual abuse just doesn’t happen in families, or in divorcing families?) — and in the context of how to EVALUATE . . . . ALLEGATIONS.     Typical AFCC priorities…..”Lead” with PAS, and then — if forced to — say “sexual abuse” but never as if it were truly an issue.) It is a MAJOR issue….. (The Franklin Coverup)  Click on the link summary — the material is very disturbing, though…. Now, let’s reconsider why the AFCC, with it UNTRACKED and EVER-EXPANDING FUNDING AND REVAMPING OF THE LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS emphasizing instead PROGRAMMING activities (endless trainings……) IS SO URGENT TO DESTROY ANY LEGITIMATE DISCUSSION OF THE HORRORS OF THIS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN, AND AGAINST ONE (OR MORE) OF THEIR PARENTS WHEN THEY ATTEMPT TO STOP IT. https://events.afccnet.org/store/online_bookstore Susan M. BoyanAnn Marie Termini: The Psychotherapist as Parent Coordinator in High-Conflict Divorce: Strategies and Techniques; December 2004 Cooperative Parenting and Divorce: A Parent Guide to Effective CO-Parenting   August 1999 WELL, this post was to be a little sample — only — of some places that “child support enforcement” monies (grants/which are incentives) are going to the states.

     BACK to Ms. Moses’ article though:

    To be fair, the Supreme Court decision did include some important protections the Obama administration suggested in its brief to the Court. The Court required safeguards that are alternatives to an appointed attorney such as telling men that they can avoid jail if they can’t afford to pay and providing them with an opportunity to demonstrate that they can’t pay.

    The man in question from South Carolina did time for failure to pay amounts less than $60/ week. I’m so glad to know that our country is willing to go after the “real” culprits and thieves in lifes — people who cannot afford defense attorneys — and just SO “uninterested” in actually distributing money garnished (improperly and sometimes, in excess of court orders) from parents amounting to, sometimes, millions of dollars per state. SOME CHARTS: I did a basic search on the CFDA category “93563” which is Child Support Enforcement, plain and simple — and I selected only the years 2011 and 2010. I’d like this to exhibit how in different states (and tribes) different agencies collect, and how much money is spent on this. By publishing the street addresses fo the state (or tribe) designated agency, people can then search on-line for those addresses and see what else is going on at that street address. Although this is more helpful for private companies or nonprofits, it’s a good habit to develop. For Year 2010 only (seeing as we are not through with 2011 yet), this is the report:

    FY 2010 Grants to States, Tribes, and D.C. for Child Support Enforcement

    CFDA Prog. No.

    OPDIV

    Popular Title

    Number of Awards

    Number of Award Actions

    CAN Award Amount

    93.563

    ACF 

    Child Support Enforcement (CSE)  

    180

    1,037

    $3,604,010,339

    Page Total

    180

    1,037

    $3,604,010,339

    Report Total

    180

    1,037

    $3,604,010,339

     

    Same category, FY 2011:

    CFDA Prog. No.

    OPDIV

    Popular Title

    Number of Awards

    Number of Award Actions

    CAN Award Amount

    93.563

    ACF 

    Child Support Enforcement (CSE)  

    170

    713

    $3,258,225,288

    Page Total

    170

    713

    $3,258,225,288

    Report Total

    170

    713

    $3,258,225,288

    (So, one can see where I got my “$6.8” billion figure  from by adding the totals, there). USASPENDING.gov (year, 2010, same code) shows:

    Total Dollars:$3,604,010,339 (probably includes some contracts, not just grants….)

    NOTE:  these are GRANTS only — for contracts, plus grants, plus loans, plus (etc.) one would have to hop on over to another database, such as USASPENDING.gov.  however (the thing is) with both of those, the amounts are provided from the agencies themselves; there might be a better way to actually see what went out (like the individual state grants received documents, etc.) There are also SPECIAL PROJECTS for Child Support — CFDA 93601…

    CFDA Prog. No.

    OPDIV

    Popular Title

    Number of Awards

    Number of Award Actions

    CAN Award Amount

    “2010”

    93.601

    ACF 

    Child Support Enforcement Demonstrations and Special Projects  

    118

    257

    $17,306,652

    93.601

    CDC 

    Child Support Enforcement Demonstrations and Special Projects  

    1

    1

    $601,234

    Page Total

    119

    258

    $17,907,886

    Report Total

    119

    258

    $17,907,886

    NOW, what exactly are those projects?  I decided to take a look (FY 2010) and recognize quite a few names – especially the first one here:

    Program Office

    Grantee Name

    {Yr “2010”}

    City

    State

    Award Number

    Award Title

    Budget Year

    CFDA Number

    Principal Investigator

    Sum of Actions

    Award Abstract

    OCSE 

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    2

    93601

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    3

    93601

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $50,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Circuit Court for Baltimore County 

    BALTIMORE 

    MD 

    90FI0057 

    OCSE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 5 

    1

    93601

    PETER J LALLY 

    -$1,215

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

    CLEVELAND 

    OH 

    90FI0093 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    93601

    KENT K SMITH 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    93601

    BEN LEVEK 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    93601

    BEN LEVEK 

    $24,300

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Florida State University 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    90FI0107 

    USING FLORIDA???S SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAMS TO INCREASE ECONOMIC SELF SUFFICIENCY FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES 

    1

    93601

    KAREN OEHME 

    $100,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0095 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    93601

    JOE FINNEGAN 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0095 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    93601

    JOE FINNEGAN 

    $25,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0097 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    93601

    PHYLLIS NANCE 

    $25,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 

    MILWAUKEE 

    WI 

    90FI0103 

    IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

    2

    93601

    JANET NELSON 

    $25,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0082 

    2005 SIP GRANT 

    2

    93601

    JOY LYNGAR 

    -$1,203

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    93601

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    93601

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    3

    93601

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $24,170

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

    HERNDON 

    VA 

    90FI0102 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    93601

    DAVID P POPOVICH 

    $22,816

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

    SAN JOSE 

    CA 

    90FI0101 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    93601

    RALPH MILLER 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

    SAN JOSE 

    CA 

    90FI0101 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    3

    93601

    RALPH MILLER 

    $25,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Summit County Child Support Enforcement Agency 

    AKRON 

    OH 

    90FI0109 

    OCSE DEMONSTRATION 

    1

    93601

    JENNIFER BHEAM 

    $83,330

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    93601

    MICHAEL HAYES 

    $0

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

    COLUMBIA 

    SC 

    90FI0105 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

    2

    93601

    PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

    $50,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. 

    TUSCALOOSA 

    AL 

    90FI0108 

    CO-PARENTING WITH RESPONSIBILITY 

    1

    93601

    TERESA COSTANZO 

    $100,000

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

    BOSTON 

    MA 

    90FI0106 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    93601

    DENISE M FITZGERALD 

    $48,995

    View Abstract

    OCSE 

    URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0096 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    93601

    SANDI CRAWFORD 

    $33,052

    View Abstract

    I’ll look up a few (that I know less about, for example, Karen Oehme in FL is a known position….): MICHAEL MAGNANI in NY (apparently relates to a Drug Court): Michael Magnani Director Division of Grants and Program Development New York State Unified Court System 25 Beaver Street, 11th Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: 212-428-2109 Fax: 212-428-2129 Email: mmagnani@courts.state.ny.usFor example:

    Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc.  EIN#63-12904,

    I looked this one up at NCSSDATAWEB.org — revenues showing over $2 million. 990 nonprofit purpose:

    “TO EMPOWER FAMILIES BY PROVIDING SUPPORT SERVICES THAT DEVELOP SKILLS AND RESOURCES TO IMPROVE THE FAMILY’S QUALITY OF LIFE, PREPARE THEIR CHILDREN FOR SUCCESS IN A COMPETITIVE SOCIETY, AND ALLOW EACH INDIVIDUAL TO REALIZE HIS OR HER POTENTIAL FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY”

    With this nonprofit purpose, I shoulda been a nonprofit as a mere parent — this is what parents generally do!   They basically want to be some other family’s “family.”     So at what point is this outsourced to nonprofit organizations instead, supported by federal grants?   ‘Howsabout’ empowering parents by consistently refusing to violate their fundamental rights as individuals and help keep YOUR local neck of government honest and accountable for its use of OUR money (via IRS, or wage-garnishments in child support programs, or sales taxes, etc.) and your officials, accountable for its use of all program funds? Their 2010 IRS filed Form 990 shows program income revenues ZERO; contributions and grants, $2,082,707 — considerably higher than last year (which was $1,917,454) of which $2,5K (roughly — and lower than last year’s which was over $6K) INVESTMENT income.  There are 17 officers and directors… Part III, #4, they are required to report have a ‘Statement of Program Service Accomplishments” (with  expenses and revenues — and this section is blank.!  This is th section that justifies the tax-exempt purpose.  Instead, they simply re-stated their purpose (not what they actually DID)… and claimed that doing (whatever) cost “$1,968, 563” “All Other Achievements Description” — (after a number of blank pages of the form — and this is a statement, not an “achievement”) reads: FORM 990, PAGE PART I,LINE4D (the part I just noted was blank, but shouldn’t have been……)

    “CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND OF ALABAMA AND DHHS GRANT AND FAMILY RESOURCE PROGRAM GRANT USED TO PAY SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF DHR CASE CONTRACTS FOR THE COUNTY AND CITY OF TUSCALOOSA AND TO PAY TFRC SALARIES AND EXPENSES RELATED TO CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION PROGRAMS” “Organization’s process to review Form 990″:  ” NO REVIEW WAS OR WILL BE CONDUCTED”  (that seems obvious.  AFter all, it’s only $2 million, right?) “GOVERNING DOCUMENTS DISCLOSURE EXPLANATION FORM 990, PAGE 6, PART VI, LINE 19 NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC” Here are a bunch of directors:   “

    • TONYA ADAMS-NELSON DIRECTOR
    • CARLA BAILEY DIRECTOR
    • AVANTI BAKER DIRECTOR
    • ELIZABETH BEEMER DIRECTOR
    • MARY BETH CAVERT DIRECTOR
    • ROBERT WHALLI JR DIRECTOR
    • HELENE HIBBARD DIRECTOR
    • ALISON HUDNAIL DIRECTOR
    • TOM LEDBETTER DIRECTOR
    • AMANDA MULKEY DIRECTOR
    • SANDRA RAY DIRECTOR
    • MIKE RUSSELL DIRECTOR
    • TAMMY YAGER DIRECTOR
    • KIM THOMA BAILEY PRESIDENT
    • DEBRA NELSON -GARDELL VICE-PRES
    • STEVEN K CASE TREASURER
    • LESLIE GUY SECRETARY

    (Alabama has been dealing with tornado damages…) solicitation (same address) from a group dealing with youth homelessness:There’s a blog and this shows a history — of TOP spot Family Resource Center.  It began (like many nonprofits) with someone formerly in government social service work, and a grant of $80,000 — not bad for a startup:

    In 1999, a group of concerned community members came together to create the East Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. The goal was to create a place where underserved members of the Tuscaloosa community could come to gain access to services that were already available in other parts of town. The board of directors hired as the agency’s first executive director Teresa Costanzo, a social worker with management experience as the director of the Hale County Department of Human Resources. The budget in that initial year was $80,000; there were three employees.

    Teresa’s Vision:

    Very soon, Teresa’s vision began to exceed the limits of east Tuscaloosa, so, in 2001, the board of directors decided to drop the “East” from the name, making it the Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. The agency [TECHNICALLY, it’s a “nonprofit” not an agency] continued to grow, as did the array of services provided. Soon, the community began to think of the agency as a “one-stop-shop” for a wide array of family needs. In an effort to reflect this perception of the agency, the board decided to begin operations under the business name Tuscaloosa’s One Place, a Family Resource Center.
    {{More likely, this was a phrase promoted by the management, similar to the One-Stop-Justice-Centers started on the West Coast and encouraged in part by faith-based grants funding availability}}
    Through the years, many of our services have changed. We now offer many school-based programs, several career-development programs, an on-site adult education program, an English-as-a-second-language program, healthy relationship programs, a juvenile detention alternative initiative, a Hispanic outreach program, and home visitation programs, to name a few of our services. We press approximately 800 volunteers, from all walks of life, into service for our community every year, and that number is growing. Our budget for the most recent fiscal year was approximately $1.5 million; we now have approximately 25 full-time employees and 80 temporary or part-time employees. To say that we’ve changed would be an understatement.Through all these changes, though, the agency’s constant has been its executive director. Teresa continues to be at the forefront of everything TOP does. Her oversight has been and still is the key factor in the agency’s place in the community.

    And she got $100K of “Child Support Special Resource & Demonstration” project funds.  Recently. ALABAMA UNDISTRIBUTED CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS(posted in an Iowa Fathers’ group), 2005:

    ALABAMA $11,765,750 $8,271,986 70.3% $3,493,764 29.7%

    (Columns:   NET, PENDING & % of NET (cols. 2&3) Unresolved & % of NET(last 2) Fatherhood Groups tend to be up on Where is the Money Going? — as here (but as we look below, TANF money IS being diverted to Fatherhood programs, at $30 to $50K a pop; and I have a 2011 list)  In that link, I see the group complaining that money was given to the Administrative Office of the Courts, and not “promoting responsible fatherhood”  (??the courts are where that promotion would be most likely to take effect!) MEANWHILE, this appears to be an outfit offering MARRIAGE CLASSES with a “Focus on the Family” (very strong) emphasis = NOT good.  See:

    Marriage Classes/Curriculum 1. Classes Offered by Tuscaloosa’s One Place. http://www.etfrc.org, P.O. Box 40764, 870 Redmont Drive, Tuscaloosa, AL 35404 (205) 462- 1000 (Contact Wanda Martin, wmartin@etfrc.org Relationship/ Marriage Educator, Family Support Specialist; or D’Undray Peterson,

    www.etfrc.org They have the solicitation part of the website all nicely set up:

    We also accept monetary donations to support our programs. Because we are a non-profit social service agency, all donations are tax deductible. Please mail or deliver monetary donations to our offices, conveniently located in Alberta City or click below. Become a fan on Facebook!!

    There’s the “Home visitation” services under “Parenting” and here is the “Let’s Help Dad with His Custody Case” (reduced or free legal fees) segment. Dads who are not actually getting legal results from these grants should complain to their local legislator, because that’s the purpose (also, for each State to conduct social experimentation at the direction of the Secretary of HHS, as 45 CFR 303.109declares): Apart from trouble with using the word “assist” or “assisting” correctly, this segment appears to have been part of the “special demonstration” funded program, above?  Tax-funded, so noncustodial MOTHERS can know that their tax dollars, if they are employed, are going to the good cause of a nonprofit organization taking advantage of its tax-exempt status to help connect the fathers with REDUCED-FEE OR FREE LEGAL SERVICES, no doubt to also help them with custody matters as well.

    D.A.D.S. Program (Dads Are Dynamite)

    The DADS program is designed to assist non-custodial fathers comply {{“in complying”}} with child support obligations. Participants in this program will receive job search assistance as well as learn skills to strengthen their relationship with their child and his or her primary caregiver. DADS participants receive individualized case management services, which includes assisting those fathers who are underemployed become {{“in becoming”}} gainfully employed.

    One night per week, fathers will participate in a class/support session to discuss issues unique to non-custodial fathers. ** Legal services are also available to fathers at either a free or reduced fee.  Fathers interested in voluntarily participating in this program should contact Tuscaloosa’s One Place to schedule an initial intake. Call David De Shazo at (205) 462-1000 to sign up.

    **if these are unique to noncustodial fathers, they do not apply to noncustodial mothers.  They are family court &/or child support matters.

    HOPEFULLY no one providing such services has any inappropriate relationships with (a) any family court judges or (b) program disbursement authorities in any of the grants being used to assist the fathers, such as we found (1999) in the Karen Anderson, Amadaor County (CA) case, where her ex-husband’s attorney just so happened to also have authority over the A/V funds, and just-so happened to also be in business? with a little nonprofit outfit receiving those funds…..

    $1,500 of Tuscaloosa’s 2011 proposed Community Developmt Block Grant going to this DADS program

    However “DADs are DYNAMITE” got $50,000 — from TANF funds — in The CHildren’s Trust Fund in this (Alabama Dept of Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention )

    THE LINK above IS LOADED WITH FATHERHOOD FUNDING (DESIGNATED “TANF” ON THE RIGHT COLUMN AS WELL)  — PLS. BROWSE.   Clearly the way to reduce childhood abuse and neglect is to dedicate public funds to fatherhood policies, including some that will provide legal help (reduce/low-fee) in their child support and most likely child custody/visitation cases — which the mothers do NOT have a source of legal help for, for the most part.  How does that work out when the reason for separation (or not cohabiting) was abuse to start with?

    Other groups that received from this fund (dated March, 2011) include:

    Grantee / Program / Source / $$

    • Baldwin County Fatherhood Initiative, Inc./ (same)- TANF funding – $50K  [for-profit, inc. 2004]
    • Alfred Saliba Family Services Center / Saliba Center Fatherhood – TANF funding – $40K
    • Autauga County Family Support Center / “DADS” / TANF – $40K
    • Family Guidance Center of Alabama / Fatherhood Program / TANF – $5oK
    • Family Services Center of Coffee County / Coffee County Fatherhood Initiative / TANF – $35K [Non-profit, reg. 1998, but no reports since 1999 and where is the EIN#?  Cotter R. Rainer, III, purpose “assist families in need of prevention” at 203 EAST LEE STREET

    ENTERPRISE, AL (currently an attorney’s office, Tindol- M. Chad & Cotter- R. Rainer- III Attorney) ACTUALLY — here is a Youtube 41second blurbon this one (date?) — I think it’s being offered at the courthouse, a judge announced:

    The judge says the program will help the non-custodial parent pay his child support and have a relationship with his child.

    Coffee County District Court Judge Paul Sherling says the state court system has awarded grant money to the county for a fatherhood initiative. He says that when a person charged with nonpayment appears in court and says he can’t afford to pay, he’ll have an alternative.

    The program will direct the parent to a 12-week seminar program designed to help him find ways to earn income and pay for his child. The fatherhood initiative will be offered through the Coffee County Family Services Center.

    This “eprise” site is interesting — because along with this article, are several others involving, for example, child abuse, murder, and complaints that the courts are short of money: this site states who helped get this money.

    County gets almost $45,000 for fatherhood program

    • A new program designed to help fathers help their children has received a financial boost. District Judge Paul Sherling announced that Coffee County has been awarded nearly $45,000 from the state court system to fund a fatherhood initiative.
      08/27/2010 6:00 AM
    • An Enterprise man was sentenced to 90 years in prison on six charges involving sexual abuse of three minor children.District Judge Paul Sherling sentenced Jack Ellis Hockemeyer, 54, to serve 15 years in state prison on each charge, with the sentences to run concurrently, meaning he will serve a maximum of 15 years.Sherling imposed the sentence Tuesday afternoon following Hockemeyer’s guilty plea on one count of sexual abuse of  child under age 12 and five counts of second-degree sodomy involving minors over age 12, but under age 16ENTERPRISE, Ala. —      The 12th Circuit District Attorney Office’s recent child support roundup was its most successful to date, collecting more than $25,000 for Coffee County families. Assistant District Attorney Chris Kaminski said, as of Friday, the office has collected $25,573.69. Five more people remained in the Coffee County Jail on cash bonds, which will increase the total, he added. Kaminski said Friday’s total was “by far the best we’ve had.” From late March until April 8, the DA’s office allowed anyone behind on child support payments to catch up or arrange a plan without a penalty. Twelfth Circuit District Attorney Tom Anderson said about 80 percent of this year’s collections were obtained during that period.

      Former Elba lawman {stepfather} charged with torture, willful abuse of child

      (and let out on $5K bail after THIS:)

    A 3-year-old child is now in the custody of the Coffee County Department of Human Resources after his stepfather was arrested and charged with torture/willful abuse of a child.  {{WHERE WAS MOM!??!}} Coffee County Sheriff’s Office Chief Deputy Ronnie Whitworth said the child’s grandfather reported the incident to law enforcement authorities. Jeffery Hayes Fuller, 28, of County Road 349, Elba, was arrested and charged with the Class C felony Dec. 22. Fuller is reportedly a former Elba police officer and a former firefighter. Whitworth said the baby was found badly bruised in the buttocks region with blood coming from the wounds.   Fuller reportedly confessed to paddling the child with a hand-gripped paddle, then placing the child on a hot pad and then rubbing peroxide on the wounds. Fuller was released from the Coffee County Jail on a $5,000 bond and ordered by Judge Paul Sherling to have no contact with the child. Whitworth said the case remains under investigation. (SORRY about all those extra hyperlinks)…..

    REPEAT THE MANTRA:  Fatherhood training will reduce child abuse and prevent it……  Here’s a 30 yr old Army Sgt caught with 18 videos of child porn (same judge, which is how it came up)  – he’s in jail. . . . .    “The child pornography evidence against Hogan includes 18 videos and pictures of him sexually assaulting 2 out-of-state girls, ages 8 and 10. Authorities arrested Hogan Jan. 28 on charges of second-degree possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and felony possession of a controlled substance.”

    THIS “family services center” appears to be not just a regular nonprofit, but one of the many situations that appear to be a public/private project involving an actual building; it was dedicated in 1998, per this article (and also articles of incorporation):

    Coffee County Family Services Center receives 2010-2011 Children’s Trust Fund grant funding

    Check presented in the amount of $103,400

    Linda HodgeThursday, Dec 02,2010

    Elected officials, officials from the Alabama Department of Abuse and Neglect Prevention and the board of directors of the Coffee County Family Services Center all gathered Tuesday morning, Nov. 30, in Enterprise, Ala. for the announcement of the 2010-11 Children’s Trust Fund grant funding. Coffee County Family Services Center received $103,400 from the Children’s Trust Fund to be used for child abuse and neglect prevention programs. “I can not tell you how much we appreciate this money and their (Alabama Dept. of Abuse and Neglect Prevention) support of our programs,” said Judy Crowley, executive director of the Coffee County Family Services Center.

    The Coffee County Family Services Center opened its doors in 1998, and Crowley said that also was the first year the local organization received grant funding from the Children’s Trust Fund for assessment referral, which remains a number one priority today as the programs most highly utilized area.  In regards to the 2010-11 grant funding announced Tuesday morning, Crowley said the monies will be used also to assist with all child abuse and neglect prevention programs, as well as, the Building Blocks program and the new Fatherhood Initiative program.

    This is a listed nonprofit (Here’s the 2009 “990 “filing from NCCSDATA.org — though mostly blank, it confirms that it gets about $265K grants/contributions per yr and Judith Crowley earns only around $40K.  There is no description of services provided . . . . . it does have an EIN# (721374603 ) Heritage Training and Career Center, Inc / Faithful Fathers Fatherhood Program / TANF – $30K (THERE are 11 pages of this, and I don’t feel like going through all – -most pages have several, not just one or two, fatherhood programs on them) Any of these can be looked up (for example, the last one shows at the Alabama Secretary of STate site as existing, yes, as of 2007 — and as a nonprofit, but I don’t see any filings yet.   ”

    Entity ID Entity Name City Type Status
    565 – 632 Heritage Training and Career Center MONTGOMERY, AL Domestic Non-Profit Corporation Exists

    This group (under a “Cynthia Brown”) when I looked up the street address, is a “New or Rejoined Nonprofit” member of the Montgomery chamber of commerce:

    A “Billy W. Jarrett Construction Co., Inc.” at this address apparently got a contract (for a North Carolina Military project) …. There are also 5 entities, some LLC’s  incorporated (or registered agent) by a “Cynthia Brown,”(without middle initial)  not that this isn’t a common name…

    EVERY/ANY one of these organizations (in whichever state) can be looked up as to:  Incorporation (Secretary of State) and any related dbas (other names it does business as), if nonprofit, the NCCSDATAWEB.org or other site showing some of the 990 filings for these groups; their websites, their directors, and other LLCs they form.  SOMETIMES these are front groups that exist ONLY to catch the fundings.

    EVERY organization (for example) that is taking TANF funds in particular, can and should be looked up and checked up (especially for any Alabama residents with access to internet) — again there is a LOT of fatherhood funding showing up here:   http://www.ctf.alabama.gov/Grantees%202010-2011/2010%202011%20Grantees%20Funded%20as%20of%20March%2029%202011.pdf

    AND, of course the “Healthy Marriage” part as well, right underneath help to enroll in Food Stamps.  (If you are Title IV-A, your Child Support qualifies for Title IV-D, and as such a diversion into marriage promotion will of course help establish the steady payments of fathers). (A LINK from the TUSCOLOOSA ONE-STOP group)

    Alabama Community Healthy Marriage Initiative

    AGAIN, here is the child support funding for “Regular” (not “research and special demonstration”) child support.  In each State, County — your county — what does this translate to, and who is watching?  Who is profiting — are the children subject to the child support order profiting, and is this consistently effective in reducing TANF expenditures?

    CFDA 93.593, “CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT” Grants to States — selected Years 2010 & 2011

    Also for scope, the chart should show how which agency gets this varies from state to state. The “activity type” is at all times described as “SOCIAL SERVICES” and note that the grants type is either NEW, or Administrative Supplement/Discretionary — meaning, they asked for more… I left blank the column Private Investigator — because it’s agencies getting the monies. Keep in mind also that some states farm out the responsibilities to private contractors, some of whom I have been researching, and the large ones of which have been in several cases caught in major money-laundering or fraud. This is good to keep in mind when considering how quickly one state (South Carolina) is to contribute (further) to the racial inequality in the US prison system by jailing low-income black males for nonpayment of child support — and then going to the public and complaining that the child support system is unfair to low-income black males (although the literature saying this typically calls the males “fathers” and the mothers’ households, “female-headed households” as if they were domesticated breeding stock (which, viewed in certain lights, they are…. being treated as). FOR A SAMPLE of this chart:

    Grantee Name

    Grantee Address

    City

    State

    County

    Grantee Type

    Award Number

    Award Title

    Budget Year

    Action Issue Date

    CFDA Number

    Award Action Type

    Sum of Actions

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0804AK4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $217,656

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0904AK4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/07/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$471,245

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0904AK4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $154,695

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$1,435,990

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,971,304

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $873,529

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,370,981

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$113,038

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,857,781

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $423,527

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,558,010

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004AK4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $522,227

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $2,394,674

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$666,335

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,766,654

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $807,328

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,424,624

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,270,146

    AK ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION 

    550 WEST 7TH AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR 

    ANCHORAGE 

    AK 

    ANCHORAGE 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104AK4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,564,608

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    0804AL4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $443,330

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    0904AL4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/24/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,870,128

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    0904AL4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,563,098

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,878,920

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,738,775

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,666,800

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $270,313

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,294,300

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$609,699

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,197,264

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004AL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $384,262

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $12,437,200

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $17,670

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,295,520

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,975

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,514,100

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$816,471

    AL ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    50 RIPLEY ST S GORDON PERSON B 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    MONTGOMERY 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104AL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,712,928

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0804AR4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $606,262

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0904AR4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $882,220

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$1,081,749

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,336,191

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $954,627

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,324,393

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$781,215

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,779,830

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,503,484

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $14,637,460

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004AR4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$75,008

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $9,824,903

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,897,250

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,537,998

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,644,995

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,733,689

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,761,165

    AR ST DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADM 

    PO BOX 1272 

    LITTLE ROCK 

    AR 

    PULASKI 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104AR4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,481,843

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    0804AZ4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $424,427

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    0904AZ4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $687,232

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$7,236,581

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,991,382

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,324,572

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,682,219

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,350,417

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,093,961

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,748,400

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1004AZ4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,547,956

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $10,840,894

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$4,085,910

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,450,246

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,402,213

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,570,129

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,960,501

    AZ ST DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY & VOCATIONAL REHA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 6123 

    PHOENIX 

    AZ 

    MARICOPA 

    Rehabilitation Organization ( Other Than Criminal ) 

    1104AZ4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,249,743

    BLACKFEET TRIBAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT 

    TRIBAL OFFICE 

    BROWNING 

    MT 

    GLACIER 

    Educational Department 

    10IBMT4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $296,873

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    0804CA4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,520,413

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    0904CA4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,981,714

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$20,049,309

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $145,968,345

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $38,513,768

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $129,832,458

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$10,597,780

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $62,305,239

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $107,984,151

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $125,931,992

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$9,448,771

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $122,438,508

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$20,997,400

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $129,166,305

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,142,721

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    744 P STREET, MAIL STOP 20-72 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    SACRAMENTO 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $94,719,355

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $695,218

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $579,348

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10TCOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $463,479

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10TCOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $463,478

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $634,920

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $529,100

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $529,100

    CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    POST OFFICE BOX 948 

    TAHLEQUAH 

    OK 

    CHEROKEE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $423,281

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    10IAOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $659,158

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    10IAOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $549,298

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    10IAOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $136,183

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    10IAOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $336,160

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11IAOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $476,612

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11IAOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $397,177

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11IAOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    03/31/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $97,022

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11IAOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $397,177

    CHICKASAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 1548 

    ADA 

    OK 

    PONTOTOC 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11IAOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $608,870

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMT4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $194,631

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMT4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $162,193

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMT4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $162,192

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMT4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $129,754

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMT4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $208,457

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMT4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $173,714

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMT4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $173,714

    CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE 

    ROCKY BOY ROUTE 

    BOX ELDER 

    MT 

    HILL 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMT4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $138,971

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    0804CO4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $271,490

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    0904CO4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $713,994

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$1,963,471

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,858,500

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $792,000

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,057,020

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$918,244

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,702,000

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,404,043

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,696,534

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CO4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,224,106

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $9,840,330

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $911,350

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,499,260

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$286,137

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,561,620

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $689,647

    CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1575 SHERMAN STREET 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    DENVER 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CO4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,398,700

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAID4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/13/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $177,492

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAID4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $177,492

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAID4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $152,137

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAID4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $221,058

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAID4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $184,215

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAID4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $184,215

    COEUR DALENE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 408 

    PLUMMER 

    ID 

    BENEWAH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAID4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $147,372

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 150 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    OKANOGAN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IEWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $397,415

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 150 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    OKANOGAN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IEWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $331,179

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 150 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    OKANOGAN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IEWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $331,179

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 150 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    OKANOGAN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IEWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $264,942

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 150 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    OKANOGAN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IEWA4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $460,212

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 150 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    OKANOGAN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IEWA4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $383,510

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IFOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $134,424

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IFOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $112,021

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IFOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $119,314

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IFOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $91,440

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IFOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $159,310

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IFOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $165,209

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IFOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $132,758

    COMANCHE INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 908 

    LAWTON 

    OK 

    COMANCHE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IFOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $73,755

    CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES 

    P.O. BOX 278 

    PABLO 

    MT 

    LAKE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IDMT4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    12/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $238,765

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $143,989

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $119,991

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $119,991

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $95,994

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $147,185

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $133,983

    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION 

    P.O. BOX 638 

    PENDLETON 

    OR 

    UMATILLA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $127,804

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    0804CT4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,790,720

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    0904CT4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $609,139

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,193,136

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,637,365

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,408,041

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,266,669

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,895,077

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $367,943

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,326,324

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1004CT4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,200,208

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $11,887,422

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,270,701

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,778,199

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$37,738

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,966,424

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$953,656

    CT ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFF OF FINANCIAL MGMT 

    25 SIGOURNEY STREET, 7TH FLOOR 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    HARTFORD 

    Welfare Department 

    1104CT4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,278,236

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    0804DC4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $83,962

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    0904DC4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    10/08/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $802,300

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    0904DC4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $136,662

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,593,280

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,241,838

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,604,840

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,217,637

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,100,520

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $971,680

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,123,940

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1004DC4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$563,656

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $4,032,033

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $301,643

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,597,460

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$961,498

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,479,620

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$69,798

    DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL 

    441 4th street, nw 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

    Welfare Department 

    1104DC4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,672,240

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    0804DE4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $58,246

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    0904DE4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $276,175

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$4,373,359

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,935,571

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $201,342

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,532,156

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,306,420

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,179,132

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,635,337

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,889,253

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1004DE4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$4,432,595

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $7,499,212

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$5,070,262

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $7,503,364

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,450,993

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,230,650

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,116,225

    DE ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES 

    1901 N DUPONT HIGHWAY 

    NEW CASTLE 

    DE 

    NEW CASTLE 

    Health Department 

    1104DE4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,056,512

    EASTERN SHOSHONE TRIBE 

    P.O. BOX 538 

    FORT WASHAKIE 

    WY 

    FREMONT 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    08IBWY4004 

    2008 OCSET 

    1

    10/19/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$401,375

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0804FL4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,789,799

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0904FL4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,159,234

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$22,719,061

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $56,042,541

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,179,266

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $53,033,364

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,227,388

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $38,803,054

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    05/18/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $17,299

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $48,079,001

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004FL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/30/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,556,024

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $56,287,376

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,588,919

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $52,482,981

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$8,808,111

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    03/17/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,677,187

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $46,465,236

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$9,538,373

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    500 SOUTH CALHOUN ST, RM 143 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    LEON 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104FL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $51,635,458

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $165,653

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $171,413

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $143,054

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $92,097

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10ICWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/19/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $21,440

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10TCWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    06/05/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $59,393

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10TCWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    08/30/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $567,600

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $179,039

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $149,199

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $149,199

    FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY 

    P.O. BOX 396 

    CRANDON 

    WI 

    FOREST 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11ICWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $119,359

    FT BELKNAP COMMUNITY COUNCIL 

    FT BELKNAP AGENCY 

    HARLEM 

    MT 

    BLAINE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    09ICMT4004 

    2009 OCSET 

    1

    09/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $283,281

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    0804GA4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $370,916

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    0904GA4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,857,146

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $15,500,754

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$4,978,898

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $19,305,654

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$999,477

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $19,305,654

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$738,535

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    05/18/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,026

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $19,246,254

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004GA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$4,015,821

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $20,496,254

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$7,174,590

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $16,496,254

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,008,830

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $16,496,254

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,049,097

    GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    2 PEACHTREE NW, SUITE 27-295 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    FULTON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104GA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $24,496,254

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    0804GU4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $41,400

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    0904GU4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $115,246

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $345,101

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $300,126

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $200,000

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $529,436

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$66,329

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $554,629

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,190

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    05/18/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $156

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $710,340

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1004GU4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $317,016

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $759,911

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $66,203

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $727,644

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $318,769

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    02/09/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $200,000

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $604,521

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$274,696

    GU DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

    194 HERNAN CORTEZ AVE, STE 309 

    AGANA 

    GU 

    AGANA 

    Planning & Administrative Organizations 

    1104GU4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $675,165

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0804HI4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $162,504

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0904HI4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $346,576

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$382,743

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,942,600

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,895,080

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $242,655

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,798,060

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,994,191

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,236,960

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$525,251

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004HI4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $982,476

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $3,090,400

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$948,371

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,962,200

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,092,179

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,530,200

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$713,234

    HI ST OFFC OF ATTNY GNRL, DIV OF CHILD SUPPRT/ENFORCMNT 

    601 KAMOKILA BLVD, SUITE 207 

    KAPOLEI 

    HI 

    HONOLULU 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1104HI4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,001,440

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    0804IA4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,034,154

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    0904IA4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/24/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$8,750

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    0904IA4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,535,162

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$9,033,996

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $19,519,024

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,688,235

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,723,100

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,814,802

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,063,100

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,992,298

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    05/18/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,357

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,376,500

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$5,392,854

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $11,526,500

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,266,820

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $7,076,500

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$5,690,379

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,213,200

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$5,496,825

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    1305 EAST WALNUT 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    POLK 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $10,776,500

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    0804ID4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $227,639

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    0904ID4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $207,448

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$1,282,527

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,403,756

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $423,956

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,987,028

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$471,286

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,325,460

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,925,578

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,861,854

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1004ID4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,715,774

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $4,235,706

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$954,759

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,504,043

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$679,903

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,467,225

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,180,751

    ID ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & WELFARE 

    450 WEST STATE ST, 9TH FLOOR 

    BOISE 

    ID 

    ADA 

    Health Department 

    1104ID4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,684,935

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    0804IL4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,048,070

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    0904IL4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/24/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$87,230

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    0904IL4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,727,004

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $30,172,273

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,235,953

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $31,611,964

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,853,722

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $34,984,718

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,780,679

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $34,504,934

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IL4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$4,040,629

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $28,644,219

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,935,737

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $28,382,830

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,077,767

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $37,210,017

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,258,566

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    2200 CHURCHILL RD C2 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    SANGAMON 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IL4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $33,507,714

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    0804IN4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,046,221

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    0804INHMHR 

    2008 HMHR 

    1

    10/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $198,000

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    0904IN4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/24/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$164,556

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    0904IN4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $8,868,855

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $14,487,923

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,041,143

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,324,023

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$3,952,413

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,629,715

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    05/18/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,602

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $14,137,408

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$8,314,548

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1004IN4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/13/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,242,000

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $13,396,113

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,293,314

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,961,368

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$9,942,425

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $16,775,367

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,624,634

    IN ST FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

    POST OFFICE BOX 7128 

    INDIANAPOLIS 

    IN 

    MARION 

    Welfare Department 

    1104IN4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,090,305

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IGOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $102,908

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IGOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $85,757

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IGOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $85,757

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IGOK4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $68,604

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11GIOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    NEW 

    $73,145

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11GIOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/12/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$73,145

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11GTOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/12/2011 

    93563

    NEW 

    $73,145

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IGOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $109,717

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IGOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $91,431

    KAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

    698 GRANDVIEW DRIVE 

    KAW CITY 

    OK 

    KAY 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IGOK4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $91,431

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $78,498

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $65,415

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $71,606

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAMI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $42,261

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11AIMI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    NEW 

    $16,660

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $78,904

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $71,035

    KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY 

    107 BEARTOWN ROAD 

    BARAGA 

    MI 

    BARAGA 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAMI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $75,727

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAKS4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $105,494

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAKS4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $87,912

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAKS4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $85,653

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAKS4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $63,551

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAKS4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $160,536

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAKS4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $133,780

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAKS4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $133,780

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF KANSAS 

    P.O. BOX 271 

    HORTON 

    KS 

    BROWN 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAKS4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $107,025

    KICKAPOO TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA 

    P.O. BOX 70 

    MCLOUD 

    OK 

    POTTAWATOMIE 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    09IIOK4004 

    2009 OCSET 

    1

    06/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $263,587

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IBOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $95,783

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IBOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $79,819

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IBOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $79,819

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IBOR4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $63,854

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IBOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $104,487

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IBOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $87,072

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IBOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $87,072

    KLAMATH TRIBE (ONAP) 

    POST OFFICE BOX 436 

    CHILOQUIN 

    OR 

    KLAMATH 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IBOR4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $69,658

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    0804KS4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $279,439

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    0904KS4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/24/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$72,200

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    0904KS4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $698,875

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$5,270,236

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,631,555

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,803,001

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,943,573

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $296,186

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $7,036,770

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,517,041

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    05/18/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,540

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,130,248

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004KS4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $952,911

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $8,480,533

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $676,001

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,938,255

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,652,115

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $7,600,934

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$907,503

    KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES 

    915 HARRISON STREET 

    TOPEKA 

    KS 

    SHAWNEE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104KS4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $7,238,308

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0804KY4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $782,208

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0904KY4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    05/11/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,296,286

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    0904KY4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,127,059

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$7,394,829

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,256,316

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $5,047,054

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $896,494

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,485,158

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,579,378

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $6,267,103

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1004KY4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,038,706

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $5,458,820

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,439,672

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,864,886

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$836,980

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,112,680

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $1,379,228

    KY ST CABINET FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN 

    275 EAST MAIN ST, 5TH FLOOR 

    FRANKFORT 

    KY 

    FRANKLIN 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    1104KY4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,229,773

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    0804LA4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $681,486

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    0904LA4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$4,929,044

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$8,336,935

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $15,790,604

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $4,964,952

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $19,915,563

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $2,040,488

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $16,164,782

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,715,603

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $16,778,349

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1004LA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    08/06/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,436,578

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $14,405,038

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    12/09/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$2,573,946

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $11,881,604

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    01/24/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$1,164,059

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,933,756

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    04/26/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $102,845

    LA ST HEALTH, SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN 

    POST OFFICE BOX 44215 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    EAST BATON ROUGE 

    Welfare Department 

    1104LA4004 

    2011 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,370,140

    LAC COURTE OREILLES TRIBE 

    113394 W. Trepania Road 

    HAYWARD 

    WI 

    SAWYER 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IEWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/13/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $242,207

    LAC COURTE OREILLES TRIBE 

    113394 W. Trepania Road 

    HAYWARD 

    WI 

    SAWYER 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IEWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/12/2011 

    93563

    NEW 

    $257,793

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $97,241

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $81,034

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $81,034

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    10IAWI4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $64,828

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $106,825

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $89,021

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $89,021

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

    P.O. BOX 67 

    LAC DU FLAMBEAU 

    WI 

    VILAS 

    Indian Tribal Council 

    11IAWI4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $71,215

    LEECH BAND OF OJIBWE 

    115 6th Street, NW 

    CASS LAKE 

    MN 

    CASS 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    09IDMN4004 

    2009 OCSET 

    1

    03/25/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $223,202

    LEECH BAND OF OJIBWE 

    115 6th Street, NW 

    CASS LAKE 

    MN 

    CASS 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11ICMN4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    NEW 

    $81,077

    LEECH BAND OF OJIBWE 

    115 6th Street, NW 

    CASS LAKE 

    MN 

    CASS 

    Other Social Services Organization 

    11ICMN4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    06/10/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $62,328

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    10ICWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    $265,452

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    10ICWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $221,210

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    10ICWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $221,210

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    10ICWA4004 

    2010 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $176,967

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    11ICWA4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    10/01/2010 

    93563

    NEW 

    $256,619

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    11ICWA4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    01/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $213,849

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    11ICWA4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    04/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $213,849

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    2616 KWINA ROAD 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    WHATCOM 

    Community Action Organization 

    11ICWA4004 

    2011 OCSET 

    1

    07/01/2011 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $171,080

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0804MA4004 

    2008 OCSE 

    1

    12/17/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $917,199

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    0904MA4004 

    2009 OCSE 

    1

    12/21/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $3,032,452

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    09/23/2009 

    93563

    NEW 

    -$3,734,789

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    10/01/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,308,292

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    11/23/2009 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $781,695

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    01/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $12,023,485

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    03/05/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,261,339

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $9,746,540

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    04/29/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    -$6,413,634

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    141 PORTLAND ST FL 10 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    MIDDLESEX 

    Law Enforcement Agency ( Including Criminal Rehabilitation ) 

    1004MA4004 

    2010 OCSE 

    1

    07/01/2010 

    93563

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    $13,883,799

    This is 500 names (at least, the search results were sorted to show 500 names at a time) of approximately 1,308 names.  I’m not sure why several years displayed, i.e., why a 2009 date would show up.  However, the point is to get an idea of where & how much money is hitting is inbound, at least the state level. As this is PUBLIC money, anyone has a right to find out what is the local public payroll, how grants are being spent, who is allocating them to whom (Subgrants).  Some of this can be looked up on-line and some can be formed in a FOIA letter, which by law, has to be responded to in a certain time frame.  It may not be, but it is a legal right to request public information. AT ANY POINT — it’s appropriate to ask what are these grants being used for  They are Smaller, but they are in positions of influence, including some courts. ALSO notice the ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT / DISCRETIONARY BLOCK category seems the main category (sometimes being adjusted downward).  If I looked only at “NEW” grants for (YRS — “All”, i.e., database goes back to 1995).  Notice how active Center for Policy Research is — hardly surprising:  JEssica Pearson was a co-founder of AFCC (Per Liz Richards) and this Denve

    Grantee Name

    City

    St

    Award

    Award Title

    Budgt Yr

    Action Issue Date

    Award Activity Type

    Award Action Type

    Principal Investigator

    Sum of Actions

    AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    90FI0047 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 2 

    1

    12/20/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ALICIA LUCKIE 

    $200,000

    AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    90FI0077 

    FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

    1

    08/30/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MARIAN LOFTIN 

    $100,000

    AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    90FI0077 

    FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

    2

    08/24/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MARIAN LOFTIN 

    $100,000

    AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    90FI0077 

    FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

    2

    12/29/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    VICKI C COOPER-ROBINSON 

    $0

    AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    90FI0077 

    FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

    3

    08/20/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    VICKI C COOPER-ROBINSON 

    $100,000

    AL ST CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT PREVENTION BOARD 

    MONTGOMERY 

    AL 

    90FI0077 

    FAMILY CONNECTIONS IN ALABAMA- (PRIORITY AREA #3) 

    3

    01/11/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    VICKI C COOPER-ROBINSON 

    $0

    Allegheny County Court of Commons Pleas 

    PITTSBURGH 

    PA 

    90FI0065 

    COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHANY COUNTY 

    1

    06/23/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    PATRICK QUINN 

    $99,978

    BALTIMORE COUNTY HEALTH DEPT, PUBLIC HEALTH NURSES SVCS 

    TOWSON 

    MD 

    90FI0057 

    OCSE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 5 

    1

    06/16/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    PETER J LALLY 

    $150,815

    CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    SACRAMENTO 

    CA 

    90FI0008 

    CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE IMAGING SYSTEM AND DATABASE FOR VOLUNTARY PATERNITY DECLARA 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

     

    $180,000

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0059 

    EXPANDING CUSTOMER SERVICES THROUGH AGENCY-INITIATED CONTACT 

    1

    06/16/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DR JESSICA PEARSON 

    $99,926

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0073 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    08/31/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $100,000

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0073 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    2

    08/25/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $24,730

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0073 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    2

    09/03/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/24/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $198,664

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/24/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $124,820

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    02/22/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    DR NANCY THOENNES 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    06/26/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    DR NANCY THOENNES 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/04/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $124,829

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    06/30/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    DR NANCY THOENNES 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    02/15/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PHEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    06/15/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PHEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    4

    09/01/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DR NANCY THOENNES 

    $124,863

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    4

    03/31/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PHEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0085 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    4

    06/20/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PHEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    1

    06/26/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $99,908

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    2

    07/24/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $50,000

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    2

    10/23/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    2

    09/18/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $0

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    3

    08/02/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $50,000

    CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0098 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA #3 

    3

    09/25/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JESSICA PEARSON 

    $0

    CHANGE HAPPENS 

    HOUSTON 

    TX 

    90FI0076 

    FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

    1

    08/30/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

    $100,000

    CHANGE HAPPENS 

    HOUSTON 

    TX 

    90FI0076 

    FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

    1

    09/21/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

    -$1

    CHANGE HAPPENS 

    HOUSTON 

    TX 

    90FI0076 

    FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

    2

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

    $100,000

    CHANGE HAPPENS 

    HOUSTON 

    TX 

    90FI0076 

    FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

    2

    12/06/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

    $0

    CHANGE HAPPENS 

    HOUSTON 

    TX 

    90FI0076 

    FAMILIES UNDER URBAN AND SOCIAL ATTACK, INC. PRIORITY AREA #3 

    3

    09/20/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MS RIVA F OKONKWO 

    $100,000

    CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

    GRAND RAPIDS 

    MI 

    90FI0087 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CANDACE COWLING 

    $199,323

    CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

    GRAND RAPIDS 

    MI 

    90FI0087 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/20/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    CANDACE COWLING 

    $124,898

    CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

    GRAND RAPIDS 

    MI 

    90FI0087 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    03/17/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    CANDACE COWLING 

    $0

    CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

    GRAND RAPIDS 

    MI 

    90FI0087 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/12/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    CANDACE COWLING 

    $124,674

    CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL 

    GRAND RAPIDS 

    MI 

    90FI0087 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    4

    08/29/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    KARROL MCKAY 

    $124,938

    CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0044 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 4 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    PAULINE BURTON 

    $100,000

    COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES 

    NESPELEM 

    WA 

    90FI0006 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MARLA BIG BOY 

    $32,800

    COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, INC 

    ALLENTOWN 

    PA 

    90FI0048 

    SPECIAL INPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 2 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    PATRICIA W LEVIN 

    $177,374

    COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, INC 

    ALLENTOWN 

    PA 

    90FI0048 

    SPECIAL INPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 2 

    1

    05/04/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    PATRICIA W LEVIN 

    $99,227

    Christian Community Council 

    ALBANY 

    LA 

    90FI0084 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/25/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CHERYL BREAUX 

    $100,000

    Christian Community Council 

    ALBANY 

    LA 

    90FI0084 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/24/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    CHERYL BREAUX 

    $50,000

    Christian Community Council 

    ALBANY 

    LA 

    90FI0084 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    01/24/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    CHERYL BREAUX 

    $0

    Christian Family Gathering 

    MILWAUKEE 

    WI 

    90FI0038 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ADVOCACY INTERVENTION TRAINING – SIPS 

    1

    02/09/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MARIA J JENKINS 

    $99,895

    Circuit Court for Baltimore County 

    BALTIMORE 

    MD 

    90FI0057 

    OCSE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 5 

    1

    04/07/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    PETER J LALLY 

    -$1,215

    Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

    CLEVELAND 

    OH 

    90FI0093 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/29/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    FRANCINE B GOLDBERG 

    $100,000

    Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

    CLEVELAND 

    OH 

    90FI0093 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/13/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    FRANCINE B GOLDBERG 

    $25,000

    Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

    CLEVELAND 

    OH 

    90FI0093 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    10/22/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    KENT K SMITH 

    $0

    Cuyahoga County Prosecutor`s Office 

    CLEVELAND 

    OH 

    90FI0093 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    09/07/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    KENT K SMITH 

    $25,000

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    06/09/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BEN LEVEK 

    $99,800

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    07/24/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    BEN LEVEK 

    $24,300

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    11/18/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    BEN LEVEK 

    $0

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    06/06/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    BEN LEVEK 

    $0

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/02/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    BEN LEVEK 

    $24,300

    DENVER CTY/CNTY DEPT HUMAN SVCS 

    DENVER 

    CO 

    90FI0094 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    06/16/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    BEN LEVEK 

    $0

    ECUMENICAL CHILD CARE NETWORK 

    CHICAGO 

    IL 

    90FI0026 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (SIPS) PRIORITY AREA -1 

    1

    06/20/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DEBRA HAMPTON 

    $50,000

    EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT 

    LAS VEGAS 

    NV 

    90FI0030 

    CHILD SUPPORT & DRUG COURT PROGRAM 

    1

    06/27/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    KENDIS STAKE 

    $50,000

    Episcopal Social Services, Inc. 

    WICHITA 

    KS 

    90FI0079 

    RELIABLE INCOME FOR KIDS COALITION (PRIORITY AREA 1) 

    1

    08/29/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MR GAYLORD DOLD 

    $193,600

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & REHABILITATIVE SERVICES 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    90FI0022 

    FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    NANCY LUJA 

    $79,495

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    90FI0009 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

     

    $25,864

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    90FI0022 

    FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

    1

    03/28/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    NANCY LUJA 

    -$29,753

    FL ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    90FI0022 

    FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

    1

    09/15/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    NANCY LUJA 

    -$280

    Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

    SAN ANTONIO 

    TX 

    90FI0086 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    1

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

    $200,000

    Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

    SAN ANTONIO 

    TX 

    90FI0086 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    2

    08/24/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

    $125,000

    Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

    SAN ANTONIO 

    TX 

    90FI0086 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    3

    08/11/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

    $125,000

    Family Service Association of San Antonio, Inc. 

    SAN ANTONIO 

    TX 

    90FI0086 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    4

    08/09/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    RICHARD M DAVIDSON 

    $125,000

    Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis 

    SAINT LOUIS 

    MO 

    90FI0070 

    HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP SKILLS FOR FRAGILE FAMILIES 

    1

    08/09/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    HALBERT SULLIVAN 

    $100,000

    Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis 

    SAINT LOUIS 

    MO 

    90FI0070 

    HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP SKILLS FOR FRAGILE FAMILIES 

    2

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    HALBERT SULLIVAN 

    $100,000

    Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis 

    SAINT LOUIS 

    MO 

    90FI0070 

    HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP SKILLS FOR FRAGILE FAMILIES 

    3

    08/06/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    HALBERT SULLIVAN 

    $100,000

    Florida State University 

    TALLAHASSEE 

    FL 

    90FI0107 

    USING FLORIDA???S SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAMS TO INCREASE ECONOMIC SELF SUFFICIENCY FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES 

    1

    08/30/2010 

    OTHER 

    NEW 

    KAREN OEHME 

    $100,000

    GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    90FI0074 

    GA STATE UNIV. RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

    1

    08/19/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DOUGLAS G GREENWELL 

    $100,000

    GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    90FI0074 

    GA STATE UNIV. RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

    2

    08/24/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DOUGLAS G GREENWELL 

    $25,000

    GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

    ATLANTA 

    GA 

    90FI0074 

    GA STATE UNIV. RESEARCH FOUNDATION 

    2

    12/18/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    DOUGLAS G GREENWELL 

    $0

    GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF PITTSBURGH 

    PITTSBURGH 

    PA 

    90FI0080 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    09/01/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ERIC YENERALL 

    $200,000

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0095 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    06/24/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MARIE THEISEN 

    $100,000

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0045 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 4 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MELINDA ROMAN 

    $99,090

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0066 

    CONNECTING CHILD SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY TO SECURE IMPROVED OUTCOMES FOR CHILDR 

    1

    06/22/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    KAREN FROHWEIN 

    $100,000

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0095 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    09/01/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JOE FINNEGAN 

    $25,000

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0095 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    10/26/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JOE FINNEGAN 

    $0

    IA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/HUMAN SERVICES 

    DES MOINES 

    IA 

    90FI0095 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/30/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JOE FINNEGAN 

    $25,000

    IL ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES 

    SPRINGFIELD 

    IL 

    90FI0007 

    IMPROVEMENT GRANT 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MARTIN D SUTHERLAND 

    $149,686

    Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program 

    EL CENTRO 

    CA 

    90FI0051 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 1 

    1

    12/20/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MARY N CAMACHO 

    $141,858

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0088 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/29/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JUAN VEGAS 

    $100,000

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0088 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/28/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    PHYLLIS NANCE 

    $25,000

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0088 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    09/07/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    PHYLLIS NANCE 

    $25,000

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0097 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    06/23/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    PHYLLIS NANCE 

    $100,000

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0097 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/18/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    PHYLLIS NANCE 

    $25,000

    Kern County Department of Child Support Services 

    BAKERSFIELD 

    CA 

    90FI0097 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/30/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    PHYLLIS NANCE 

    $25,000

    LA ST DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF MGT & FINANCE 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    90FI0015 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    GORDON HOOD 

    $50,000

    LARIMER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 

    FORT COLLINS 

    CO 

    90FI0014 

    CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MYRNA MAIER 

    $170,244

    LARIMER COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    FORT COLLINS 

    CO 

    90FI0014 

    CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

    2

    08/04/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MYRNA MAIER 

    $248,972

    LARIMER COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    FORT COLLINS 

    CO 

    90FI0014 

    CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

    2

    08/08/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    MYRNA MAIER 

    $0

    LARIMER COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    FORT COLLINS 

    CO 

    90FI0014 

    CHILD SUPPORT ASSURANCE 

    3

    08/27/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MYRNA MAIER 

    $249,781

    LIVINGSTONE COLLEGE 

    SALISBURY 

    NC 

    90FI0025 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES AND PAYMENT COMPLIANCE 

    1

    01/03/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    WALTER ELLIS 

    $49,668

    LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

    BELLINGHAM 

    WA 

    90FI0019 

    LIBC CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DAVID BUNTON 

    $129,181

    Louisiana Family Council 

    METAIRIE 

    LA 

    90FI0060 

    LOUISIANA FAMILY COUNCIL 

    1

    06/23/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    GAIL TATE 

    $100,000

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    90FI0024 

    INCOME WITHHOLDING & ASSET SEIZURE STRATEGIES 

    1

    09/14/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DIANA OBBARD 

    $544,500

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    90FI0024 

    INCOME WITHHOLDING & ASSET SEIZURE STRATEGIES 

    1

    07/21/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    DIANA OBBARD 

    -$469,500

    MA ST DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

    CAMBRIDGE 

    MA 

    90FI0024 

    INCOME WITHHOLDING & ASSET SEIZURE STRATEGIES 

    1

    09/15/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    DIANA OBBARD 

    -$38,000

    MARRIAGE COALITION (THE) 

    CLEVELAND HEIGHTS 

    OH 

    90FI0054 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 2 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    SANDRA G BENDER 

    $199,994

    MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    BALTIMORE 

    MD 

    90FI0010 

    PATERNITY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    GINA HIGGINBOTHAM 

    $100,312

    MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    BALTIMORE 

    MD 

    90FI0052 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 1 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOHN LANGROCK 

    $200,000

    MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

    BALTIMORE 

    MD 

    90FI0052 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 1 

    1

    08/19/2003 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    JOHN LANGROCK 

    -$200,000

    MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH 

    LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0075 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/18/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JANE ALEXANDER 

    $99,792

    MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH 

    LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0075 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/24/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JANE ALEXANDER 

    $24,805

    MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH 

    LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0075 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    09/21/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    TANYA LOWERS 

    $0

    MICHIGAN STATE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT 

    DETROIT 

    MI 

    90FI0032 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    06/28/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    NANCY CHRIST 

    $187,550

    MICHIGAN STATE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT 

    DETROIT 

    MI 

    90FI0081 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    2

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JOSEPH SCHEWE 

    $37,500

    MICHIGAN STATE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT 

    DETROIT 

    MI 

    90FI0081 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    2

    11/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JOSEPH SCHEWE 

    $0

    MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

    EAST LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0071 

    CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    08/22/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    RICHARD BRANDT 

    $98,364

    MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

    EAST LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0071 

    CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    2

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    KAREN SHIRER 

    $99,996

    MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

    EAST LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0071 

    CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    2

    05/31/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    DAWN CONTRERAS 

    $0

    MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 

    EAST LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0071 

    CHILD SUPPORT DEMONSTRATION/SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    3

    08/20/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DAWN CONTRERAS 

    $99,952

    MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT 

    LANSING 

    MI 

    90FI0064 

    OCSE’S SPECIAL IMROVEMENT PROJECT/PRIORITY AREA 1 

    1

    06/21/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BILL J BARTELS 

    $100,000

    MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 

    MILWAUKEE 

    WI 

    90FI0103 

    IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

    1

    09/01/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JANET NELSON 

    $100,000

    MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 

    MILWAUKEE 

    WI 

    90FI0103 

    IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

    2

    09/28/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JANET NELSON 

    $25,000

    MN ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    ST PAUL 

    MN 

    90FI0041 

    INTERVENTION STRATEGIES FOR WORKING WITH LOW INCOME NON CUSTODIAL PARENTS – SIP 

    1

    02/01/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    LAURA KADWELL 

    $300,000

    MONTANA SCHOOL DISTRICT 

    HELENA 

    MT 

    90FI0049 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 3 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BARBARA DELANEY 

    $149,464

    MONTEREY COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

    SALINAS 

    CA 

    90FI0078 

    MOBILE CUSTOMER SUPPORT 

    1

    09/02/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JAMES HANSEN 

    $200,000

    MUSKEGON COUNTY COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES BOARD 

    MESKEGON 

    MI 

    90FI0050 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A. 1 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BRAIN P MATTSON 

    $199,772

    Massachusetts Probate and Family Court 

    BOSTON 

    MA 

    90FI0106 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    03/23/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

    DENISE M FITZGERALD 

    $0

    Milwaukee County Dept. of Administration Fiscal Affairs 

    MILWAUKEE 

    WI 

    90FI0103 

    IMPROVING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (CSE) AND COURT COLLABORATION 

    1

    11/17/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

    JANET NELSON 

    $0

    NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION 

    BOULDER 

    CO 

    90FI0055 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 5 

    1

    12/19/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    VINCENT L KNIGHT 

    $199,887

    NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS 

    WILLIAMSBURG 

    VA 

    90FI0034 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    02/09/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    KAY FARLEY 

    $40,000

    NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0017 

    NATIONAL CERTIFICATION FEASIBILITY STUDY 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOEL K BANKES 

    $48,548

    NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0039 

    CHILD SUPPORT CASEWORKER CERTIFICATION PLANNING PROJECT 

    1

    02/20/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

     

    $74,900

    NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0039 

    CHILD SUPPORT CASEWORKER CERTIFICATION PLANNING PROJECT 

    1

    11/06/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    THERESA MOASSER 

    -$20,982

    NATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0039 

    CHILD SUPPORT CASEWORKER CERTIFICATION PLANNING PROJECT 

    1

    09/21/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    THERESA MOASSER 

    $0

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0012 

    JUDICIAL TRANING PROJECT 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOY ASHTON 

    $36,125

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0012 

    JUDICIAL TRANING PROJECT 

    1

    03/20/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    JOY ASHTON 

    -$9,605

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0082 

    2005 SIP GRANT 

    1

    08/19/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOY D ASHTON 

    $150,000

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0082 

    2005 SIP GRANT 

    2

    08/29/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JOY D ASHTON 

    $37,500

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0082 

    2005 SIP GRANT 

    2

    10/01/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    JOY LYNGAR 

    $0

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE COURT JUDGES 

    RENO 

    NV 

    90FI0082 

    2005 SIP GRANT 

    2

    03/31/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    JOY LYNGAR 

    -$1,203

    NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0023 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOAN ENTMACHER 

    $50,000

    NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0029 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT & SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    06/06/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOAN ENTMACHER 

    $50,000

    NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0029 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT & SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    11/20/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    JOAN ENTMACHER 

    -$50,000

    NC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

    RALEIGH 

    NC 

    90FI0099 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    06/26/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    KRISTIN RUTH 

    $78,842

    NC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

    RALEIGH 

    NC 

    90FI0099 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    03/16/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    KRISTIN RUTH 

    -$78,842

    NC ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 

    RALEIGH 

    NC 

    90FI0046 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.A. 4 

    1

    12/20/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BARRY MILLER 

    $200,000

    NJ ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC WELFARE 

    TRENTON 

    NJ 

    90FI0028 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    06/12/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ALISHA GRIFFIN 

    $50,000

    NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    08/06/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $99,830

    NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    08/12/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $24,325

    NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    03/03/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $0

    NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    08/09/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $24,997

    NY STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    10/23/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $0

    New York State Unified Court System 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    11/30/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $0

    New York State Unified Court System 

    NEW YORK 

    NY 

    90FI0092 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    12/21/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    CHANGE OF GRANTEE / TRAINING INSTITUTION / AWARDING INSTITUTION 

    MICHAEL MAGNANI 

    $0

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    1

    06/23/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $100,000

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    08/24/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $24,170

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    12/15/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $0

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    04/07/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $0

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    3

    08/20/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $24,170

    OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    OKLAHOMA CITY 

    OK 

    90FI0100 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    3

    04/14/2011 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    KATHERINE MCRAE 

    $0

    OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER 

    FREDONIA 

    WI 

    90FI0067 

    PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY & PROMOTING HEALTHY MARRIAGE 

    1

    06/09/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BERNADETTE W KARANJA-NJAAGA 

    $100,000

    OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER 

    FREDONIA 

    WI 

    90FI0067 

    PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY & PROMOTING HEALTHY MARRIAGE 

    1

    03/08/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    BERNADETTE W KARANJA-NJAAGA 

    -$100,000

    OR ST DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

    SALEM 

    OR 

    90FI0104 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    09/01/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    BECKY L HUMMER 

    $88,371

    PHILADELPHIA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 

    PHILADELPHIA 

    PA 

    90FI0083 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    RYLANDA WILSON 

    $100,000

    PHILADELPHIA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 

    PHILADELPHIA 

    PA 

    90FI0083 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    10/14/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    RYLANDA WILSON 

    -$47,438

    PHILADELPHIA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 

    PHILADELPHIA 

    PA 

    90FI0083 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/27/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    RYLANDA WILSON 

    $50,000

    PUYALLUP INDIAN TRIBE 

    TACOMA 

    WA 

    90FI0001 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    WILLIAM VELIZ 

    $69,531

    PUYALLUP INDIAN TRIBE 

    TACOMA 

    WA 

    90FI0001 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    03/31/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    WILLIAM VELIZ 

    $69,531

    Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe 

    KINGSTON 

    WA 

    90FI0018 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DALLAS I DEGUIRE 

    $50,400

    RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

    PROVIDENCE 

    RI 

    90FI0002 

    DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT LIEN REGISTRY FOR RHODE ISLAND AND REGION 1 

    1

    09/18/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

     

    $149,820

    RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

    PROVIDENCE 

    RI 

    90FI0013 

    CHILD SUPPORT LIEN NETWORK (CLSN) 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JACK MURPHY 

    $149,380

    RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

    PROVIDENCE 

    RI 

    90FI0013 

    CHILD SUPPORT LIEN NETWORK (CLSN) 

    2

    06/28/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JACK MURPHY 

    $41,472

    RI ST DEPT. OF ADMIN/DIV. OF TAXATION 

    PROVIDENCE 

    RI 

    90FI0013 

    CHILD SUPPORT LIEN NETWORK (CLSN) 

    3

    09/19/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    JACK MURPHY 

    $40,840

    SAN FRANCISCO CITY & COUNTY MAYOR’S OFFICE 

    SAN FRANCISCO 

    CA 

    90FI0063 

    INCREASE PARENTAL PARTICIPATION IN ESTABLISHMENT OF SUPPORT AND PATERNITY JUDGEM 

    1

    06/21/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MILTON M HYAMS 

    $200,000

    SAN MATEO CTY DEPT OF HEALTH SCVS 

    SAN MATEO 

    CA 

    90FI0011 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION & SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ILIANA M RODRIQUEZ 

    $97,437

    SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

    SAN JOSE 

    CA 

    90FI0101 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    1

    06/26/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    RALPH MILLER 

    $100,000

    SC ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 

    COLUMBIA 

    SC 

    90FI0043 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS P.A 4 

    1

    12/20/2002 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    THOMAS L CHRISTMUS 

    $414,574

    SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE 

    TOKELAND 

    WA 

    90FI0089 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/24/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DEB DUNITHAN 

    $99,896

    SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE 

    TOKELAND 

    WA 

    90FI0089 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/28/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DEB DUNITHAN 

    $49,934

    SHOALWATER BAY INDIAN TRIBE 

    TOKELAND 

    WA 

    90FI0089 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/29/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DEB DUNITHAN 

    $24,991

    SISSETON-WAHPETON SIOUX TRIBAL COUNCIL 

    AGENCY VILLAGE 

    SD 

    90FI0020 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    B. J JONES 

    $50,000

    SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    90FI0069 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    08/31/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CAROLYN A MYER 

    $99,703

    SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    90FI0069 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    2

    09/05/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    CAROLYN A MYER 

    $99,962

    SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    90FI0069 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    2

    08/27/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    CAROLYN A MYER 

    $0

    SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    90FI0069 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    3

    09/20/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    CAROLYN A MYER 

    $98,962

    SOUTH BATON ROUGE CHURCH OF CHRIST 

    BATON ROUGE 

    LA 

    90FI0069 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    3

    06/12/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    CAROLYN A MYER 

    $0

    SOUTHWEST DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

    CALDWELL 

    ID 

    90FI0004 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CHRIS P NELSON 

    $59,176

    SOUTHWEST DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

    CALDWELL 

    ID 

    90FI0004 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    12/02/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) 

    CHRIS P NELSON 

    $13,711

    SOUTHWEST DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 

    CALDWELL 

    ID 

    90FI0004 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/15/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    CHRIS P NELSON 

    -$48,235

    STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

    HERNDON 

    VA 

    90FI0102 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    03/16/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    VIVIAN L LEES 

    $78,843

    STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

    HERNDON 

    VA 

    90FI0102 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    07/24/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    VIVIAN L LEES 

    $60,082

    STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

    HERNDON 

    VA 

    90FI0102 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    07/30/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DAVID P POPOVICH 

    $22,816

    STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM 

    HERNDON 

    VA 

    90FI0102 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    10/15/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    DAVID P POPOVICH 

    $0

    STRIVE DC, INC. 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0035 

    ASSIST EX-OFFENDERS OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT, COMPLY WITH THEIR CHILD SUPP 

    1

    02/20/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

     

    $75,000

    Sagamore Institute, Inc. 

    Indianapolis 

    IN 

    90FI0090 

    DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    07/25/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MR ALAN W DOWD 

    $83,498

    Sagamore Institute, Inc. 

    Indianapolis 

    IN 

    90FI0090 

    DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    07/15/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DR DAVID G VANDERSTEL 

    $24,995

    Sagamore Institute, Inc. 

    Indianapolis 

    IN 

    90FI0090 

    DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    08/09/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MR JAY F HEIN 

    $24,995

    Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

    SAN JOSE 

    CA 

    90FI0101 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    09/07/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    RALPH MILLER 

    $25,000

    Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

    SAN JOSE 

    CA 

    90FI0101 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    2

    01/12/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    RALPH MILLER 

    $0

    Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Svcs. 

    SAN JOSE 

    CA 

    90FI0101 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) 

    3

    08/20/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    RALPH MILLER 

    $25,000

    State of Connecticut Judicial Branch 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    90FI0068 

    STATE OF CONNECTICUT JUDICIAL BRANCH 

    1

    06/23/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CHARISSE S HUTTON 

    $100,000

    Summit County Child Support Enforcement Agency 

    AKRON 

    OH 

    90FI0109 

    OCSE DEMONSTRATION 

    1

    08/30/2010 

    OTHER 

    NEW 

    JENNIFER BHEAM 

    $83,330

    THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF MICHIGAN 

    DETROIT 

    MI 

    90FI0081 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GRANT 

    1

    08/10/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    JOSEPH SCHEWE 

    $145,950

    TN ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    NASHVILLE 

    TN 

    90FI0058 

    TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

    1

    06/22/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CHARLES BRYSON 

    $100,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0003 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    SCOTT SMITH 

    $123,870

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0003 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    01/18/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    SCOTT SMITH 

    $30,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0003 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 

    1

    04/04/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    SCOTT SMITH 

    -$18,242

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0033 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (SIPS) PRIORITY AREA – 1 

    1

    06/20/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    GARY CASWELL 

    $196,600

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0033 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (SIPS) PRIORITY AREA – 1 

    1

    04/23/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    JAMES MOODY 

    -$90,218

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0056 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – P.A. 7 

    1

    06/21/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    HARRY MONCK 

    $100,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0072 

    NEW PARENT OUTREACH PROJECT: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, PATERNITY, CHI 

    1

    09/01/2005 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    GILBERT A CHAVEZ 

    $100,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0072 

    NEW PARENT OUTREACH PROJECT: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, PATERNITY, CHI 

    2

    08/17/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    NOELITA L LUGO 

    $25,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0072 

    NEW PARENT OUTREACH PROJECT: A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, PATERNITY, CHI 

    2

    12/06/2006 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    NOELITA L LUGO 

    $0

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    08/06/2007 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ANITA STUCKEY 

    $100,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    08/08/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MICHAEL HAYES 

    $25,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    12/11/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    MICHAEL HAYES 

    $0

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    2

    06/14/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    MICHAEL HAYES 

    $0

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    08/09/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    MICHAEL HAYES 

    $25,000

    TX ST OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

    AUSTIN 

    TX 

    90FI0091 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    3

    08/10/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    MICHAEL HAYES 

    $0

    The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

    COLUMBIA 

    SC 

    90FI0105 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

    1

    08/30/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    MRS PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

    $90,429

    The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

    COLUMBIA 

    SC 

    90FI0105 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

    2

    09/27/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

    $50,000

    The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families 

    COLUMBIA 

    SC 

    90FI0105 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (SIP) IMPROVING CHILD SPT ENFORCEMENT & COURT COLLABORATION 

    2

    11/01/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    PATRICIA LITTLEJOHN 

    $0

    Tuscaloosa Family Resource Center, Inc. 

    TUSCALOOSA 

    AL 

    90FI0108 

    CO-PARENTING WITH RESPONSIBILITY 

    1

    08/30/2010 

    OTHER 

    NEW 

    TERESA COSTANZO 

    $100,000

    UNITED MIGRANT OPPORTUNITY SERVICES, INC 

    MILWAUKEE 

    WI 

    90FI0037 

    LATINO/HISPANIC COMMUNITY CHILD SUPPORT OUTREACH PROJECT – SIPS 

    1

    02/09/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CHERYL COBB 

    $142,626

    UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

    BOSTON 

    MA 

    90FI0106 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    08/30/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CHRISTINE YURGELUN 

    $99,581

    UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

    BOSTON 

    MA 

    90FI0106 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    08/31/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DENISE M FITZGERALD 

    $48,995

    UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

    DURHAM 

    NH 

    90FI0016 

    CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES AND PAYMENT COMPLIANCE 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DR. WALTER ELLIS 

    $49,668

    UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

    DURHAM 

    NH 

    90FI0016 

    CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES AND PAYMENT COMPLIANCE 

    1

    01/03/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    DR. WALTER ELLIS 

    -$49,668

    URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0061 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – P.A. 6 

    1

    06/21/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    LAUDAN ARON-TURNHAM 

    $100,000

    URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0096 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    1

    06/23/2008 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    RENEE HENDLEY 

    $68,355

    URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0096 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    2

    07/24/2009 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    SANDI CRAWFORD 

    $48,881

    URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0096 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    07/25/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    SANDI CRAWFORD 

    $33,052

    URBAN INSTITUTE (THE) 

    WASHINGTON 

    DC 

    90FI0096 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 

    3

    07/29/2010 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS 

    SANDI CRAWFORD 

    $0

    VT ST AGENCY FOR HUMAN SERVICES 

    WATERBURY 

    VT 

    90FI0062 

    PROJECT WEB-MED SUPPORT 

    1

    06/10/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ROBERT B BUTTS 

    $100,000

    WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

    OLYMPIA 

    WA 

    90FI0005 

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEMONSTRATIONS AND SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    09/17/1998 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ART HAYASHI 

    $17,171

    WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

    OLYMPIA 

    WA 

    90FI0040 

    OUTREACH TO YAKIMA CTY LATINO &/OR HISPANIC COMM. TO EXPLORE THE BARRIERS TO EFF 

    1

    02/15/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    CONNIE AMBROSE-SQUEOCHS 

    $150,000

    WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

    OLYMPIA 

    WA 

    90FI0040 

    OUTREACH TO YAKIMA CTY LATINO &/OR HISPANIC COMM. TO EXPLORE THE BARRIERS TO EFF 

    1

    03/12/2004 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    OTHER REVISION 

    CONNIE AMBROSE-SQUEOCHS 

    -$2,013

    WA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES 

    OLYMPIA 

    WA 

    90FI0042 

    NEW APPROACHES TO ENGAGE NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT OFFENDERS JOB PROG AND PAYMENT OF 

    1

    02/08/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    FRAN FERRY 

    $175,000

    WV ST DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES 

    CHARLESTON 

    WV 

    90FI0027 

    SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 

    1

    06/20/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    SUSAN HARRAH 

    $25,597

    WY ST DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

    CHEYENNE 

    WY 

    90FI0021 

    FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

    1

    09/07/1999 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    DAVE SCHAAD 

    $140,000

    WY ST DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES 

    CHEYENNE 

    WY 

    90FI0021 

    FOSTERING IMPROVED INTERSTATE CASE PROCESSING 

    2

    08/28/2000 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION 

    DAVE SCHAAD 

    $140,000

    Womens Education & Legal Fund (CWEALF) 

    HARTFORD 

    CT 

    90FI0036 

    LOCAL NETWORKS – LATINO COMMUNITY – SPECIAL INITIATIVES PROJECT 

    1

    02/02/2001 

    DEMONSTRATION 

    NEW 

    ALICE PRITCHARD 

    $183,313

    r-based organization is often working the Child Support Field.  The for-profit arm is Policy Studies, Inc. — CPR is the smaller, leaner, nonprofit…This table has 224 rows; I will also upload it here, for easier viewing: ///

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

    July 26, 2011 at 8:27 PM

    Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, Child Support, CPR Center for Policy Research, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, OCSE - Child Support, Parent Education promotion, Parent Education promotion, Parenting Coordination promotion, PhDs in Psychology-Psychiatry etc (& AFCC)

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

    Yes, Child Support Industry IS a For-Profit Government Fraud (“F.R.A.M.E.D.” and other topics)

    with 18 comments

    (after update notes, 2 paragraphs):

    Posted originally July 17, 2011. I see from some of the charts that I updated it since (there are tables from HHS of Access Visitation grants showing from year 2014, 2015), probably to clean up the table formats. Visiting it again because of a recent comment (approved 2/17/2016). Searchable terms, “undistributable child support collections.” Beware challenging stockpiles of improperly withheld (by government) wealth — a long time ago, attorney Richard Fine representing John Silva (a father) — did this. Fine also challenged illegal payments to judges from the County after judges’ salaries were officially transferred to the State level (ongoing process of removing local control), and some powerful RE developers. He spent 18 months in solitary coercive retirement (designed to produce behavioral change) and as an old (69,70 yrs old) and lost his law license (was disbarred) as a result.

    Since 2011, I became aware of a source of reading government financial statements (“CAFRs, see more recent posts), and and more aware of fund accounting within government. I recommend people (the public), particularly in your areas of subject matter priority, including child support, go hunt down some of these funds, demonstrate you have read and comprehended the basics in those statements, and start asking hard questions.

    This blog discusses

    “Child Support is a For-Profit Government Fraud” From:  “F.R.A.M.E.D.” (framedfathers.blogspot.com) Saturday, May 15, 2010  / Bruce Eden

    And while agreeing with the title, makes a few other points by commenting on it.

    Family Court Judges order such onerous child support amounts in some cases, along with alimony, daycare, medical expenses, and other expenses, that the father can’t survive. He ends up becoming despondent, leaves his job and drops out of sight. He loses all contact with his child(ren) as a result. This is the government’s ultimate goal.** Breaking up of father-headed families (and then mother-headed ones when there are no more fathers, wherein, the government will come for the children without any resistance)

    2014 update, (next few paragraphs in italics)

    **The government’s ultimate goal appears to be power and control, for profit.  The entire population, if it became fully aware of the actual profit retained by all levels of government entities (as expressed on their “CAFR” reports I learned in spring 2012 and have been reporting since), many of us would be justifiably outraged, and some of this outrage would not be expressed in nice, compliant, obedient manner.

    By keeping us economically strapped through these institutions of perpetual warfare,  against individual rights, constantly eroding them under the premise it’s for our own good (and usually what’s being held over anyone’s head at any point of time is someone else’s poverty.  Put up with more erosion of rights “for the good of the group.”  

    At times, the government doesn’t just strip children off their mothers, but gives them back to the fathers after the domestic violence protection has been removed.  That’s the game, folks.  Promise protection, then fail to deliver.  Take situations in crisis (for a variety of reasons, but definitely may include abuse), and exploit them – – – for profit.  What I do, and what I recommend both mothers AND fathers do, is find that profit.  To find that profit, one has to, after the anecdotes and narratives, which speak to the emotional, wounded, and high-charged issues, get clear, cold, hard, focused and analytical — and use that analytical truth in its own words, to expose the systems.  These are not just one system with one results, but multiple systems with multiple goals, depending on what sector they are in.
    Read the rest of this entry »

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

    July 17, 2011 at 8:31 PM

    Posted in Business Enterprise, Child Support, Context of Custody Switch, Funding Fathers - literally, OCSE - Child Support, Parent Education promotion

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

    Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet].

    with 9 comments

    This post title with a “shortlink” attached is:

    Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case &amp; “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet]. (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-JR”. Note: for normal URLs (web addresses), upper or lower case alpha doesn’t seem to matter, but I’ve learned that within this domain (WordPress) and in such short-links, it does.

    LGH UPDATE NOTE:  My current table of contents only goes back to Sept., 2012; this is a June 15, 2011 post (early on in this blogger’s learning curve!) so would only be found by search, some other link reference to it, or by Year/Month/Date through the “Archives” (by month) on this blog.  

    I added some quick (not thorough) updates on Overcoming Barriers at the bottom in response to a comment submitted March, 2016…including tax returns, California corporate registration (Massachusetts could also be searched). 

    For a December 2017 Update (which at first I thought might fit in here), see:

    Revisiting Reunification Camps and Treatments, The good Clinical Psychologist Just Want to Help Traumatized People and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), the Good, Ole Court-Ordered (and of course (™)’d Service Model) Way. Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC” and this was written Dec. 16, 2017, starting as a post update to [another] one for which I wanted to cite to this older post on reunification camps for “estranged” families, but from different angle of approach, as that one explains in the first few paragraphs.  After that, on “Revisiting Reunification Camps,” above, I get into looking at what isn’t apparently a large operation, but one with connections in more than one state to the family court system.  It’s in draft, but will be a short post and out Dec. 16 or 17, 2017. [Published Dec. 21 + (additions/clarifications) 22nd] //LGH.
    I expect to publish (shortly) a follow-up to the Reunification Camps post above, some information I came across recently which connects the AFCC-drenched providers of at least three camps (Two mentioned here, one featured in my recent post above], the new one trademarked only 2016 (described in the above post) whose lead psychologist apparently was on-call from the NCMEC (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children) who shortly after Jaycee Dugard (and the two children born to her 18-year-long kidnapper rapist and herself) were rescued, was put in touch with Dugard who then (2009/2010) got a $20M settlement from the State of California and set up the JayC Foundation (of very modest size, but it seems in part supporting the reunification camps used ALSO to force-feed alienated children back in to the parent’s life, particularly in cases where the alienation is connected to litigation around the issues of abuse/domestic violence by the “targeted” parent (the one the kids don’t want to see).
    (TRANSITIONING FAMILIES, STABLE PATHS (Abigail M. Judge (“clinician”) Boston, S.Florida, with involvement from Transitioning Families clinician R. Bailey. who has a recent book out co-authored with one of the co-founders (mentioned below in THIS older post) of “Overcoming Barriers.”  In addition, in the context of a recent case (2015) of Judge Gorcya and 3 children aged 9-14 ordered into “juvie detention” for refusing to have lunch with their father then, at last check, attempts to get them for aftercare into some Reunification camp — the Detroit Free Press (now part of USA Today franchise) reporting said the Judge was hoping to get them into Warshak’s “Family Bridges” or one modeled on it — in Toronto, Canada!!, while Dr. Bailey was quoted in the context).  I’m taking bets (just kidding) on how long Gorcya has been (if she is) an AFCC member and how much of that county’s system the association controls. Michigan is also long home, at least by organization name, to a batterers’ intervention coalition (BISC-MI).  //LGH 12/22/2017.

    I was just going to add a very short update (that comment, it seems, in March 2016), but instead added a section on renewed Parental Alienation discussions, and the socialist “re-education camps” in Viet Nam after South fell to the North, in 1975.  Similar in other countries.   Major quality and scope difference — but force is force, and at some levels, it’s also a form of psychological, personal violence. In my opinion.  So, the original (written/published in 2011) post begins in maroon font and below a double-line after the following paragraphs and a few quotes:

    Speaking of how to continue keeping “Parental Alienation” conversation going — and ordering services to undo it through the family courts — I recently noticed that a “Dr. Craig Childress” (Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.) is resurrecting parental alienation under a different theory; I have some comments on it over at Red Herring Alert (a wordpress blog).  “Same old, same old” with new window dressing and tactics (Childress recommends pressuring providers who do NOT recommend IMMEDIATE, safety-for-the-child total separation from the alienating parent (i.e., “mom” typically) through their licensing board, if this could be categorized under some existing DSM-defined disorder.  

    You cannot really argue with self-referencing, self-congratulating circles of experts on this matter which is why I recommend a more interesting angle of approach:  If they incorporate, find tax returns and corporate records; if they get contracts with the courts, or government grants to run “reunification camps” and similar therapy for parental alienation (in its old or new classifications), pay attention to the details!

    The technique and ability to re-indoctrinate people in groups, as well as children, was also in common use in socialist countries; I believe the term used was “re-education camps,” referring to those in South Viet Nam after the fall of Saigon in 1975:   Search “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps: A Brief History” (that’s supplemental reading, from a man’s father’s oral history — he lived through such camps — from “Choices” program at Brown; see website) or  “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.”

    The second link introduces and describes the various levels.  I wonder, in the USA, why the country is so heavily invested in a class of professionals whose purpose seems to be behavioral change and keeping up-to-date with tactics and strategies for re-indoctrinating children, women and men into their proper social relationships with each other and particularly after one or more of the same has spoken out about some prior injustice, or sought to escape being subjected to abuse by a family member.  These camps apparently went on from 1975 – 1986 until people still being held were allowed to emigrate to the US.

     “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.” Posted 4/17/2014 by “kubia”

    Following the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vietnamese Communist government began to open hundreds of “re-education” camps throughout the country. Those camps, as Hanoi officially claimed, were places where individuals could “learn about the ways of the new government” through education and socially constructive labor.

    In 1975, it was estimated that around 1 to 2.5 million people1, including former officers, religious leaders, intellectuals, merchants, employees of the old regime, and even some Communists, entered the camps in the hope that they could quickly reconcile with the new government and continued their peaceful life. However, their time in those camps did not last for ten days or two weeks as the government had claimed.

    Re-education Camps Levels

    The re-education camps were organized into five levels. The level-one camps which were called as study camps or day-study centers located mainly in major urban centers, often in public parks, and allowed attendees to return home each night. In those camps, some 500,000 people2 were instructed about socialism, new government policy in order to unlearn their old ways of thinking. The level-two camps had a similar purpose as the level-one, but attendees were not allowed to return home for three to six months. During the 1970s, at least 200,000 inmates entered more than three hundred level–two camps2.

    The level-three re-education camps, known as the socialist-reform camps, could be found in almost every Southern Vietnam province containing at least 50,000 inmates2. Most of them were educated people and thus less susceptible to manipulation than most South Vietnamese in the level-one and two camps. Therefore, the inmates (or prisoners) in these camps had to suffer poorer living conditions, forced labor and daily communist indoctrination.

    The last two types of camps were used to incarcerate more “dangerous” southern individuals – including writers, legislator teachers, supreme court judges, province chiefs – until the South was stable to permit their release. By separating members of certain social classes of the old regime, Hanoi wanted to prevent them from conducting joint resistances and forced them to conform to the new social norms. In 1987, at least 15,000 “dangerous” persons were still incarcerated level-four and level-five camps2.

    Camp Conditions and Deaths

    In most of the re-education camps, living conditions were inhumane. Prisoners were treated with little food, poor sanitation, and no medical care3. They were also assigned to do hard and risky work such as clearing the jungle, constructing barracks, digging wells, cutting trees and even mine field sweeping without necessary working equipments.

    Although those hard work required a lot of energy, their provided food portions were extremely small. As a prisoner recall, the experience of hunger dominated every man in his camp. Food was the only thing they talked about. Even when they were quiet, food still haunted their thoughts, their sleep and their dreams. Worse still, various diseases such as malaria, beriberi and dysentery were widespread in some of the camps. As many prisoners were weakened by the lack of food, those diseases could now easily take away their lives.

    Starvation diet, overwork, diseases and harshly punishment resulted in a high death rate of the prisoners. According to academic studies of American researchers, a total of 165,000 Vietnamese people died in those camps4.

    The End of “Re-education” Period

    Most of the re-education camps were operated until 1986 when Nguyen Van Linh became the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He began to close the harsher camps and reformed the others5. Two year later, Washington and Hanoi reached an agreement that Vietnam would free all former soldiers and officials of the old regime who were still held in re-education camps across the country and allowed them to emigrate to the United States under the Orderly Departure Program (ODP). As of August 1995, around 405,000 Vietnamese prisoners and their families were resettled in the U.S6.

    – See more at: thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/..

    The forced “Reunification Camps” (far less harsh, but still forced, and still designed to produce an attitude change) have their professionals willing to engage in these practices.

    I think it must take a certain kind of mentality, if not personality aberrancy, to believe in this and what’s more preach about it and take in business to engage in it.

    For some reason, those “Re-education camps” remind me of, though lesser in degree, the same idea as, for example, “overcoming barriers.”  It’s still based on force — and who knows how many similar programs are operating around the country.  As I write this, the Grazzini-Rucki runaway teens were reported (in 2016) to being re-indoctrinated to like their father (who they’d run away from as young teens), while the mother, until recently, was incarcerated for parental interference.  See my more recent 2016 posts).

    Here’s a sample.  I see he’s from Pasadena, California (Los Angeles area).  To see it in better formatting (the “copy” function sometimes removes all spaces between words!) click on link:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394444/Dr-Craig-Childress-DSM-5-Diagnosis-of-Parental-Alienation-Processes#scribd.

    C. A. CHILDRESS, Psy.D.LICENSED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, PSY 18857

     547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398
    Page 1 of 10
    DSM-5 Diagnosis of “ParentalAlienation”

    Read the rest of this entry »

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

    June 15, 2011 at 3:54 PM

    Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, History of Family Court, Mandatory Mediation, Metaphors for Family Law, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids

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

    « Older Entries
    Newer Entries »