Posts Tagged ‘AFCC and its Chapters | Chameleon Corporations’
‘We Must Have a Stomach for the Details and Willingness to Look at the Numbers…’ (Orig. Jan. 2018 on LGH Front Page | Updated, Supplemented & Published Sept. 30, 2019).
POST TITLE: ‘We Must Have a Stomach for the Details and Willingness to Look at the Numbers…’ (Orig. Jan. 2018 on LGH Front Page | Updated, Supplemented & Published Sept. 30, 2019). (shortlink ending “-aYW”, length: about 7,500 words)
“…As These Situations** Continue to ‘Morph,’ ‘Evolve’ (and Expand) Our Collective Stomach for Noticing the Details WILL Impact Our Collective Level of Freedom (LGH Front Page, Sept. 5, 2019).”
THIS POST is an OFF-RAMP with INTRO, REVIEW and INTERNAL CONNECTIONS TO EARLIER WRITINGS. I moved a short section with details on a specific parent education/anti-parental alienation curriculum targeting parents, a section written probably in January 2018, from my Front Page to this new post. That starts several paragraphs below, under:
“**These Situations” as referenced in post title:”
This post is also exhortation and some paragraphs are in second person: direct address, not third-person, descriptions. The direct address tends to draw of my experience on-line (admittedly limited, but I have been blogging a long time, and Tweeting, at times more intensely, several years, commenting on others blogs, on-line journals, formerly more active in forums, etc. So there is a basis for that subjective “grow up!” commentary). As usual, it’s subject to further revision and I’ll likely move the “Read More” link up higher after a few days or a week. //LGH.
It shows a drill-down, related posts previously posted on the topic (and the main organization featured) and some tactics used in concealing the money trail originators were and still are so eager to access, that is, forced-consumption of behavioral modification classes as a market niche feeding off public institutions — often through judicial order to start, followed by attempts to then legislate it into practice, and involving the family courts.
Those who came up with these concepts were “insiders” obviously aware which federal funding streams were most likely to support it before it hit the public conscience, as they have continued to this day. Family courts and anything dealing with young children (and young children’s parents) were always a target population.
Talk about reforming family courts because of their corrupt, flawed, broken, or unsafe status decision-making is beside the point until the infrastructure — basic financial details, gatekeepers, and To/From sources of revenue — is exposed. There’s a movement and attempts to get parents (especially mothers) to self-identify as “dumb” by re-tweeting, posting, circulating references to numbers without any surrounding context on social media. Circulating such things without fact-checking, or demanding more specifics from the source IS dumb; it shows gullibility and puts a “for-sale” sign on the promoters.
How hard it is to respond with a “Sez Who” or “When?” instead of mindlessly RT-ing or re-Posting? As a group, are “we” really so co-dependent on others’ approval that asking that is a new group dynamic? That’s cult-like behavior, and encourages more of the same. If you’re going to engage in such behavior, then quit complaining when your kids are taken by others of similar behavior intent to program them unfairly against you, for profit or just for fun and spite. It’s time to grow up and expect others around you, for continued associations, to start doing the same. Adulthood can be contagious, but it’s not time-free or a free ride mentally. If it’s not put together FOR YOU as an engaging story, then your attention wanders? ….
(Moving on,…): The goal of centralized control of not just the system, but also reform of the system mimicks specific business models becoming popular around the same time, but developed earlier (i.e., I call it the Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan model: University Center (for credibility and citations), Bain (a consulting company with strong political — and Harvard/Boston connections) and “Bridgespan” representing the philanthropic (i.e., nonprofit niche) consulting. I don’t care if people call it something else, just that they get a glimpse of it by sticking their OWN heads into some of the documents which aren’t 100% spin, advertising, and vague, and quit making excuses for not doing so. Learn to chew on the information and spit out what’s roughage, not real substance.
Look if an abuser continues to tell you you’re stupid, can’t do anything, incompetent, as an excuse for hiding his (or her) financials within a household, while engaging in theft, threats, bullying, and other forms of violence, would you know that’s wrong? So what’s the big difference when the same behaviors occur on macro-economic and micro-economic sectors too?
Develop a stomach for the details now; it’s already late in this game, and understanding it really does help.
HERE, I wrote and inserted three inset (boxed sections with bulleted lists and hyperlinks) listing connecting to other posts to This post introduction and off-ramped section: In order, these insets are:
- KIDS’ TURN POSTS (in Introduction), and
- HEALTH SYSTEMS FLUSH WITH CASH prior posts
- PARENTAL KIDNAPPING posts, because they overlaps with KIDS’ TURN creators,..
…KIDS’ TURN Creators who just so happen to have strong connections to the AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts) which also has maintained throughout high interested in convening, conferencing, and coordinating internationally, at least in Commonwealth (and some European) countries how to run their own programming through what increasingly looks like a privatized court system run internationally also, parallel to the public ones, but with different standards (and more conflicts of interest built in). While this is now more out in the open (see my Twitter threads on CAFCASS, AFCC, and NCJFCJ and the involvement of private UK famous foundations such as Nuffield, Leverhulme, etc.) it’s always been there as I was reminded in revisiting some of the earliest posts.
If you’re unfamiliar with “KIDS’ TURN” specifically as started in California, by looking at this understand that it stands in for “Parent Education Psych-Educational Re- (or De-)Programming,” was sold as an antidote or vaccination against “parental alienation” (which sold well in certain quarter obviously), it was a FRANCHISE operating through Nonprofits, and its founders being highly positioned within the state-level court systems (i.e., AFCC had staff members at the California Judicial Council AOC/CFCC as well as consulting retired judges, other judges etc. working throughout the system for many years), PARENT EDUCATION was in California one of only three limited purposes for those Access/Visitation Grants, and it in general represents a developed field, specialized, and intentionally “vertical” monopoly, self-sustaining once up and running.
Whether or not the classes successfully turned kids’ heads or immunized them against “parental alienation” isn’t the issue. Setting up the business operations was, and still is. Getting on the “community referrals” list at local courts, organizing it over larger geography for referrals (particularly to AFCC membership) and setting up the direct ability for donors to the private nonprofits to, potentially, bribe a judge with an open case before them also on the board (or staff) of said nonprofits.
It has crossed my mind more than once that my coming out of nowhere as an unknown blogger in 2011 to showing some of the “Kids’ Turn” board members, court contracts, and set-up may have had something to do with its eventually going underground (as shown below on this post, which I’ve had up almost two years now in part). I certainly don’t know for sure, but I do know my posting at the time was intentional, and that imitation operations under slightly different names can be seen in other states.
At the post bottom (short) section (tan background) comments briefly on how databases I’ve used since starting this blog at times change, or change hands. This complicates tracking programming over time. Generally, I find it really hard (without a letter-writing campaign or multiple subscriptions to databases which may or may not have this information) to get information pre-dating this century. That’s a problem when so many key organizations running program started in the 1970s (some) 1980s (many more) and even 1990s (still more, especially the kind dependent on massive public grants to exist):
- PUBLIC (GOVT-OWNED) AND PRIVATE DATABASES ALSO CHANGE, EVOLVE, ARE BOUGHT & SOLD.
While that’s obvious, it’s also significant, but I don’t have much to say other than point it out, this time.
The post is exhortation and show and tell, and also that I’ve been saying this for years now, under MY banner: “Let’s Get HONEST.” That’s a group effort, not a solo effort. Getting honest I find more than getting “even” (unlikely), or even some form of imaginary revenge without consideration about who might already be counting on that motive to move ALL system even further away from accountability.
The stomach for details and willingness to look at the numbers are basic survival skills and essential to safeguard against, essentially, crooks who know how to play both the words and the numbers to access public resources and sell policy. There is no substitute for the conceptual understanding of whether or not, and if not, how, books can be cooked, tales spun, and how a legitimate cause, so stated, so often masks fake advocacy by simply withholding and failing to operate “above-board” when the operations involve public funds.
Some private organizations don’t need, except enough to justify tax-exempt status and don’t directly take public funds; they are privately funded but target the public institutions we still support. Read enough tax returns and you’ll see many of these also pay cities, counties, school districts, and/or universities (both public and private) to run pilots of their coordinated (or, proprietary) causes which eventually, most people will be subjected to and pay for through taxation.
More can always be done as there is always more to research and because organizations tend to “evolve” constantly in this sector, but my main concern is how few people seem to be even starting to look such things up, admit they exist, and after admitting they exist, speak of them in terms of what they are as much as what they’re doing.
“What they are” individually, if it’s an “entity” is going to be either public or private; if private, it may be a whether a nonprofit taking mostly government funding, mostly or only private funding, or some of both, or a part of government itself. It is where the two sectors connect, start mimicking each other in project and purpose names that the support for them — which comes from the public “purse” in many ways, and should be taken personally if squandered, lost, or misappropriated.
When you start reading tax returns (which should happen soon if it hasn’t, including — try it on for size — some really big ones: just look at the categories, browse for general understanding) it should not take too long to run across private foundations which are, systematically, directly grantsing funds to government entities across jurisdiction lines (i.e., in-state, out-of-state from wherever the foundation is registered) to promote or test private-purpose programming.
It’s rarely a one-way or interest-free street, the “commerce” (information, capacity-building, Social Science R&D, etc.) between private and government functions.
SHARE THIS POST on...
A(nother) RICO Case? Rapid Proliferation, International Expansion of Avirat, Inc.’s OurFamilyWizard® Exposes the Private Enterprise Entrenched in the Family Law Associations, Courts, and their various Nonprofits, starting with the AFCC. Family Court Judges Can Mandate Parents to Subscribe to this Electronic Platform [WRITTEN Jan. 2018; PUBLISHED Nov. 24, 2018].
A(nother) RICO Case? Rapid Proliferation, International Expansion of Avirat, Inc.’s OurFamilyWizard® Exposes New Levels of Existing Private Enterprise Entrenched and Innate to the Family Law: Bar Associations, Courts, Judicial Trainings, and Various Nonprofits, starting with the AFCC [WRITTEN Jan. 14, 2018; PUBLISHED Nov. 24, 2018]. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8pp” This is a SHORT post!)
Subtitle: Avirat’s Financial Success (2001ff) is built and still relies for promotion upon Family Court Judges Mandating Parents to Subscribe, and Continued Jurisdiction over Domestic Violence, so-called “High-Conflict” Divorce, Custody and Child Support cases.
Avirat, Inc. incorporated only in 2001, but now lists offices in Minnesota and London, while at least another privately controlled corporation by the same name (and at same address) dealing with “Global” registered recently 2016/2017 in Minnesota, per Minnesota’s Business Entity Search portal
I’ll repeat subtitle and that first paragraph after my update section, next. FYI, not too much post is below the update & lead-in text. I think it makes enough points for now.
Nov. 24, 2018 note: See also my Jan. 2018-restructured home page (just “FamilyCourtMatters.org”) (scroll down pretty far) for more images on this conference and paragraphs on OurFamilyWizard® | Between January and now I was busy maintaining housing, several relocations within just a few months, and (finally) fleeing California w| only what fit in my car thanks to a kind offer to couch-surf (briefly!) and obtaining housing in another state and time zone spring/summer/fall 2018. I have now signed a lease and am back onto posting and Tweeting on these matters and reporting as I can and as I see them, on so-called new developments, most of them predictable with the directions the field has been expanding for several decades. Most are simply new labels with a tweak for the same old practices — and agenda.
NOV. 2018 “Update” PARAGRAPHS with TWO IMAGE GALLERIES
This topic is always timely but came up again in context of seeing on Twitter (yet) another disturbing scenario involving “One Mom’s Battle” where the [OMB] legal filing existed briefly as a nonprofit but never (under that name) obtained an IRS# that IRS website shows, yet the website is still up hawking wares and, in a rather devious attempt to distract from the term “parental alienation,” substitute instead “DV by Proxy” but continue to focus on psychological not legal terms…
Dec. 5, 2018 (after publication), I took some time to sound off, impromptu, on what looks like a deceptive usage here of “DV by proxy,” and “buyer beware” even if that means, buying (believing, re-publicizing and echoing) the concept. Do you really know what it represents?
This section (these paragraphs in light-blue background) is a call to exercise common sense and pay attention to details, notice what does and does not fit with declared agenda. In exchange for your sociomedia referrals or re-tweeting/posting (etc.) attention, demand that people behind an entity, or turning their stories into books and hitting the conference/coaching circuits alongside family court-associated professional fields (law, psychology, judges), consistently comply with state codes regulating registration of nonprofit — or for-profit — business entities, and with the IRC , i.e., federal income tax code requirements for corporate or business entity exemption from it. Or say why they couldn’t/didn’t.
We COULD put a stop to the ‘BS’ by refusing to disseminate it. That’s a personal commitment to just not be used any more! Women in particular should know what I mean…Show more self-respect and self-discipline; do your homework!
Let me say that again, for current or formerly battered mothers — fathers is a different situation because unlike as for mothers, there is still a government website and related programming “Fatherhood.gov” — using the term “DV” doesn’t by definition mean those promoting (selling or helping other sell) this new phrasing are empathetically aware that the use of “parental alienation” can distract from domestic violence, i.e., including physical assault & battery behavior by an intimate partner, spouse (live-in or “estranged” after protective order was filed). At first glance, it may seem to by using the two letters “DV” or the two words “domestic violence.”
Not everyone talking about “domestic violence” or working in the field (and certainly not all foundations backing organizations) are against domestic violence and for prosecuting it where found instead of pointing fingers and devising new jargon (names) (like “alienators”) for those reporting it! If you have been so assaulted, and are now fighting to retain contact with your children, not having engaged in criminal activity yourself or facing a legitimate accusation of having engaged in such criminal activity — not all people talking about DV and campaigning it are your friends!
That also goes for not all people campaigning to reform the family courts are righteously indignant AND transparent to you and the public about their stated agenda. I say, develop accounting literacy, do some basic background checks (where possible, i.e., if it’s a nonprofit or claims to be a business entity, there should be a footprint and trail of filings) and compare what’s found with the proclamations. Those checks often reveal through basic deductive process (including process of elimination as being forthcoming and honest in general) what an ultimate goal would be. Sometimes it takes time and attention to various “players” and their constant reference to each other (and refusal to reference any evidence or anyone calling attention to said evidence, which counter the basis for the intended “solutions”) ….
“Domestic Violence” is a field of practice now; the word “advocates” is commonly used. People have invested their lives in the philosophy of whoever’s been hiring them (sometimes low pay, sometimes high pay) to work in the nonprofits — or volunteer, NOT aware of the larger economic picture — at service provision level. This field has been drastically impacted by diversion of prosecution and cases into “family court” and miscellaneous (though organized in conferences still) intervention programming. It is a career path for many – -not, usually if ever, battered women and their children (or men, or sexual and family molestation survivors, etc.). Those who have made it such a career path have seen fit to NOT report openly on in how many ways government already funds the “opposition” (I’m referring to 1996 Welfare Reform and the years leading up to it… USA) also. Essentially, this is a sporting event, gender-based, and with rigged outcomes.
It’s time to find out who is backing which sides and for how much — now, and planned in the future. Then compare that to what is in the future for survivors plowing through the family court / child support / retaliation for having sought child support / seeking safety (etc.) gauntlets. How many of these are then going back and making a living in the same field? Is there any way, reasonably, that 50 – 75% of these parents could or should? (No…). But others are, or sure are trying hard (case in point, One Mom’s Battle) and not all are playing “by the rules,” that is rules applying to corporate registrations and commerce, or where claiming nonprofit status and seeking donations, online — to the IRS and state-level qualifications for doing so.
I have a post comparing this to dog-fighting and cock-fighting. Done in prisons, it’s outrageous when discovered. Done on a massive scale by our own federal government, followed through down to state and local, with private entities egging ’em on (and subcontracting, feeding off the conflict and confusion) — it’s “business as usual.”
IT’s NOT! It’s an attempt to apply the words “domestic violence” to “parental alienation.” This is the next logical step in decriminalizing (i.e, undermining criminal statutes nationwide) and switching the accusing terminology “DV by proxy” to the reporting person. Just read the websites carefully, and “for God’s sake!” (and/or your kids’ and the public’s), get a grasp on how those two words relate to funding streams to both state entities and nonprofits (worldwide, but I’m most familiar with the US system — and that’s by way of US Dept of HHS under 1984 FVPSA (Family Violence Prevention and Services Act) which is under “CAPTA” (Child Abuse Prevention AND TREATMENT Act) and by way of US DOJ “Office of Violence Against Women.” Both streams seem to incorporate fathers’ rights groups and, some, fathers’ rights funding too.. JUST BECAUSE IT SAYS “DV” on the label doesn’t mean it (or the speaker or organization) is taking a stand against criminal felony or misdemeanor acts and patterns of activity.
The concept is to control, centralize, and standardize responses to domestic violence from the federal level, using the weight of available money (or obtaining more) for agency behavioral change. It’s a FIELD — just as “Fatherhood” is also a field. Now, which one is better funded and by how much? I’ve looked — have you? [[comments between these two lines added Dec 5, 2018//LGH]]
(BACK TO MORE SPECIFICS AS IN THE POST TITLE):
The gallery (six images) just below is from California Secretary of State, Office of Attorney General and (one image) IRS: standard places to look for any California-domiciled entity. The website remains up but the registration is gone — leaving it unclear (so far) who, REALLY, is doing business – legally — under this name, or if not, why the misleading website remains up.
Meanwhile seeing the “Educate Your Judge” and promotion of “OurFamilyWizard®” links at the top of OneMomsBattle.com prompted me to at least finally post this, and continue seeking to warn ALL concerned to do basic due diligence before assuming based on either gender, expressed empathy, or allegedly shared personal family court/custody experiences whose interests are being promoted.
I included the Tweet thread [http://bit.ly/2r0BzX8] which got me again wondering how is it that so many Moms actually ARE seemingly aware of at least the existence {if not the methods or stated agenda} of “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts” and its significance to their children’s lives (and their own) — while year after year so many of the professionals working with each other and sometimes (as in Tina Swithin’s example here) victorious survivors of family court nightmares manage to barely reference it — while promoting other solutions, jargon and selling stuff under mysterious or barely-registered, and changing entities.
(Dec. 5, 2018 related question)… Why should women aware of AFCC continue promoting the products, services, jargon, and purposes of the family court professionals — and/or survivors associating with them — who are so intent on NOT mentioning AFCC? When it’s OUR lives, time, case histories, stories; our time and attention are valuable commodities to these family-court associated professionals and survivor-speaker-author-consulting-coaching survivors. Why give it away indiscriminately? Have more self-respect and awareness of your personal value as members of this demographic (i.e., survivors, mothers, fathers…)..
The image gallery (nine images) just below shows: my recent search of the term “DV by Proxy quickly led to OneMom’sBattle (which had been quoted in a Tweet); my subsequently (heavily) annotated images from the website, and as I recall a link-through or another phrase search result exemplifying that “ALL PR is GOOD PR” allowing Amy J.L. Baker to argue with Leadership Council’s Joy Silberg over usage — while both of them (and I’m sure those involved in OMB website and promotions surely must know too) know full well that AFCC exists — but continue to play the “don’t name it game.” Amy Baker’s 2012 article (in the gallery) responds, it says, to a 2009 Leadership Council article (hard to find, but it was at “TheLizLibrary” (LizKates) well-known to many of us over the years in this field. Which brings up despite what an extensive library it is (!) how it, too, barely/RARELY references the organization AFCC as having ANYthing to do with parental alienation promotion, tactics, and antidotes. Then I also take into account that Ms. Kates is also a family lawyer.
At this point, others will have to do the work they haven’t been.
WHERE JANUARY 2018 POST STARTED (and remains unchanged below, except I added tags before publishing)
Subtitle: Avirat’s Financial Success (2001ff) is built and still relies for promotion upon Family Court Judges Mandating Parents to Subscribe, and Continued Jurisdiction over Domestic Violence, so-called “High-Conflict” Divorce, Custody and Child Support cases.
Avirat, Inc. incorporated only in 2001, but now lists offices in Minnesota and London, while at least another privately controlled corporation by the same name (and at same address) dealing with “Global” registered recently 2016/2017 in Minnesota, per its Business Entity Search details.
Here, the subtitle is an important part of the topic. I am summarizing what I had to, literally, bite my tongue from speaking out substantially more about, when discussing the 2017 Boston 54th Annual Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Conference, which on its “sponsors” and “collaborating associations” page listed OurFamilyWizard as the only “Diamond” sponsor — whatever level of donations that represents. (See large, colorful and/or annotated images below)
Meanwhile, and I did blog this recently in the context of “Reunification Camps,” a 55th Annual Conference is scheduled for 2018, highlighting some members’ involvement with the high-profile Jaycee Dugard Abduction that took place, actually (the recovery of Jaycee and her two daughters from NON-family abduction a full generation — 18 years — before; she was about 11 years old only!!) and “reunification” therapy and camps, some involving horses.
I already posted on this and have been discussing “reunification” situations, but here’s a reminder image.
It turns out, that the therapist Rebecca Bailey (from N. California) of “Transitioning Families” (the term trademarked years before, and the LLC finally registered only in 2016 — to be voluntarily dissolved in 2017, AFTER (not before) which the area in which the horses were held was destroyed by wildfires in the area. Northern California was on fire.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page].
I might as well get this over with, and am taking the opportunity at the same time to say I finally published a related PAGE, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov (Page started 8/29/2017, published Mon 9/18 evening. With case-sensitive shortlink ending “-7w9″).
Together, that page, another post introducing that page (full title soon, just below) and this post About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women Who ~Just Say No!~ to Abuse and Proceed in Misplaced Belief They can actually Exit it) [started Sept. 18, Publ. Oct. 9, 2017, see also Collaborative Justice post/page](case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7AD“) are “good stuff” and history on some major program-propagation vehicles in New York and in California, with more in their middles on Minnesota-related events, people, and even a few nonprofits.
What’s here below was originally an insert or aside. At the bottom here, I again provide the link to both the page and my post introducing the page. I hope readers will go back and read both if they haven’t yet.
There are reasons we are continuing to have “family court fiascoes” and destructions of household wealth generation after generation by way of prolonged litigation IN these courts.
Why not take a closer look at how they were assembled, systematically, in recent decades (generation or so) and the pieces from which the parts comprise the whole, or the engine, chassis, fuel, guidance system, [I’m no auto mechanic, but consider the essential parts — and the roads as part of the infrastructure too] and ensuring a constant stream of passengers, with “no stone left unturned” and no child, or life, left unscathed….?] That’s what I tend to do, when not speaking personally..take closer looks. Lots of them.
“ABOUT HOLIDAYS, SPEAKING PERSONALLY:”
About Holidays, Speaking Personally (Personal Backdrop to Post-PRWORA Social Policy towards Women who Say No! to Abuse and Proceed to Exit it) (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7AD.”)
This post, while written (except this foreword) around Sept. 4, Labor Day Weekend 2017, was taken from another post then still waiting publication; its full title (and basic background-color) is “Introducing A New Page, How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov. AND Some of the Backdrop (Personal Experience of Turn-of-Century Social Policy towards Women Reporting Abuse and Their Efforts to Exit It… ).”(case-sensitive short-link ends “-7xs“)
Exactly one week later, in fact another historic (but not “holy”!) day in recent history, I was still working on both post and page, as I was over Labor Day weekend, a major US holiday from September 2, 3, and (Monday) Sept. 4, 2017,* through to that day, Sept. 11, 2017…
{*The aside added for international visitors to the blog. I don’t know all their national holidays, and they might not know all ours, either. While this blog covers some international issues because it covers private associations dealing with US courts — many of which make sure to advertise that they have an international membership— FamilyCourtMatters still primarily addressed to people dealing with Life In The USA… because the courts here are tax-supported and public institutions in every state, and in territories, of the USA. We pay plenty for them, while we also through our system here (as to the income tax, corporate taxes, and tax-exemptions) sponsor, incubate, and overall, encourage the formation of tax-exempt corporations to fix whatever national, state, or local governments omit, forgot, or “got wrong..”}
BELOW HERE (within this blue box) is “Soap Box” talk on public vs. private. If you “get this,” skip it this time. If you don’t, please consider the stakes are high in blurring one with another, which is a known practice and agenda now commonplace in the country (and not USA only).
These tax-exempt and other corporations can legally register as domiciled in one place, but operate and influence operations across state and national lines. But the family courts regulating life within the states are subject to state legislatures for individuals once they obtain jurisdiction over a case — and through that, the family members involved — do not have innate jurisdiction over people outside the state except as related to something anchored in it. There’s a division, in other words, between jurisdictions within states, and federal. What I’m saying here – it seems to take corporations to overcome legal boundaries to representative government at the state level — and that seems to be the intent and purpose of a variety of such corporations who would rather “legislate” or at least influence, rule, and have power, over whole regions, or nations, at a time, and the streamlined ability to also influence legislation in multiple jurisdictions without having to fight it locally, place by place — and deal “face to face” with those who might, were they aware of the purposes — have cause to oppose them. (See “Big Seven Associations” and/or the variety of “Do You Know Your NGA, NCSC” etc. posts I’ve written within the last year, or maybe two.. for how this seems to work when those on the private corporations ALSO hold public office, either concurrently, or in revolving-door fashion, recently…
{{As I understand it, there ARE no “regional governments” under the US Constitution, that I’m aware of. Some people have a problem with that (search “functionalism” on this blog for more info), and want it changed. The more and more functions that can be “outsourced” to regionally organized private-sector organizations (or JPA’s — Joint Powers Authorities) — the less and less individually responsive less-than-regional governments become. They feel the pressure and appreciate the prestige of “belonging” as evidence of good governmental behavior.
Sure, federal government’s Executive Branch Departments (like HHS, which was formerly — taken together with the part that split off, the Dept. of Education and any other — “HEW”) organize operationally by regions (cross-state lines), as do Districts of the Federal Court system yes — but even those are not independent government entities.
To organize legally cross-jurisdiction WITHIN government here, one must either be anchored in some part which IS either federal OR state, i.e. be state government or something underneath it– or simply be a corporation, including tax-exempt ones. Joint Power Authorities such as I’ve been blogging, like WestED, SWRL, or FWL (Far West Labs, South West Regional Labs — subject matter, education) still must anchor with a state domicile. WestED’s state domicile, so far as I know, is in California, although other states are spanned in its OPERATIONS (shared programming).}}
That’s why, at a time when “Public/Private Partnerships” (or, strategic operating relationships in the forms of Memos of Understanding — one shown below here as to CENIC and California’s HighSpeedRail Authority) are MOST popular with those already in power — we really should be able to tell the difference between that which is public — and its LEGAL power over individuals, including the power to tax, incarcerate, seize assets, seize children, etc. — and that which is NOT public, over which when we are not consumers of the product or entering into conscious contracts with the corporations, we don’t have many real rights. So government uses corporate to cross jurisdictions, and to (as privatized) avoid full responsibility for its actions, and streamline (efficiency) and corporate uses government to encourage conditions it finds conducive to operations and bottom-line profits. This may or may not include the public interest or health; it depends on the situation. [[end of “SoapBox” commentary.]]
Personal timing & publication dates:
The weeks between Sept. 11 and now (early October, 2017), I was working again on some personal writing for an ongoing situation, which was because of its nature and, shall I say, “tenacity,” triggering PTSD and some deep, deep considerations about how far I should or dare take the push for justice in that situation and with these particular individuals who have gained a legal inroad into my life recently, caused damages, and then inflicted further distress through minimizing/dismissing the same. Classic gaslighting and strategy for controlling personalities and/or abusers.
In “About Holidays,” I also speak about some of the long-term tenacity of the prior personal situations, without naming names — because the names aren’t the point. The patterns are. I realize this type of communication is anecdotal, and speaking about it here is for general info.; expressive, not presented as a basis for policy.
When that communication (or at least the initial stage of it) Sept.11 / end of Sept. was handled (or, at least, delivered) I worked again diligently to update this post’s Table of Contents page, a project I am finally, for the most part, satisfied with (for now) and which led to more fascinating subject matter to research, involving consolidation of telecommunications (broad-band-providing) companies servicing government entities (like schools, public and private universities and research institutes), and such.**
**[Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California, “CENIC.org”; its network “CalREN,” and as it’s a membership association, one of its Auxiliary Associate members (in fact the only one currently) “City of Hope” (hospital, institute, development corporation, foundation all inter-related) and dark-fiber network subcontractor, “Level 3 Communications” with its own fascinating history, intersecting with some of the giant telecommunications providers (esp. broadband) mergers of the turn of the century — and its predecessor entity “Kiewit Diversified Group,” which came out of Peter Kiewit & Sons (or similar name), the construction industry. This is basic communications history in the US, and fascinating. It also speaks to the access to high-quality internet capacity and speed of higher education institutions (membership to CENIC or groups like it) vs. the average person, who is the subject matter of so many of the programs, including the social science R&D, federal designer family, poverty research, behavioral mod etc. — while when working as employees, contributing to support the same infrastructure financially based on the trickle-down premise.
Californians are aware of longstanding plans, highly political in nature, for a high-speed physical, commuter (to carry human beings!) rail system connecting Northern Cal. to SoCal (take another look at the map of the USA and see — that’s a good distance!).
So, it looks like CalREN’s (CENIC’s network name) involvement with this high-speed rail project may result in communities along the intended route getting an upgrade to their free? Broadband service. Amazingly, the researchers figured out that poorer, less-educated people living in rural areas are less likely to have internet connections –aren’t they smart? Courtesy “California Emerging Technologies Fund” field research poll, I see.
CENIC article referencing Calif. HighSpeed Rail Authority (a gov’t entity) plans to make broadband communities. CENIC is private nonprofit, so that’s another Public/private partnership, assuming it goes through.
Announced at “Cenic.org” · PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES & NPS, RENS & NRENS
In general, the HSR will connect Los Angeles to San Francisco at 200mph or in about 3 hours by (2025? see info). Another phrase that comes up is “Silicon Valley to Central Valley” with Central Valley being an area where unemployment (and poverty) are high. I see from HSR website that ARRA funds were involved:
SACRAMENTO, Calif. –The California High-Speed Rail Authority today announced it has met federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 requirements by fully investing the more than $2.55 billion granted to the State since 2009 to build the nation’s first high-speed rail system. These funds have helped to create thousands of new jobs and generated approximately $4 billion in economic activity in the Central Valley and across California. Read our News Release to see what Board Chair Dan Richard is saying about meeting the ARRA deadline. For more information, read the full Investing in California’s Future through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 report.
Wow. I remember where I was in high-employment area SF Bay Area in 2009, after child-stealing events, retroactive reduction of child support arrears owed, dramatic curtailment of my own work as I went repeatedly to court in an attempt to resolve the household who stole the kids’ reluctance to comply with court orders granting me: visitation, or even at its lowest point, weekly phone calls placed by the children (after my attempts to reach them weekly went unanswered time after time), and by 2009 I had not one job in the profession left. No one in the agencies or law enforcement seemed to care about enforcing any court orders which would mitigate the situation, and I was running out of the wherewithal to keep coming back to court (let alone even get TO the courthouse) time and again. During that time I had not yet “figured out” what I have since (on this blog) regarding potential financial DISincentives for continuing any government OR nonprofit advocacy group, i.e., the whole systems, to protecting maternal parenting time once it’d been eradicated without legal cause stated on the record, let alone proved on any record…
In other words, those “access and visitation” grants aimed at increasing non-custodial parenting time, apparently lost their motivational impact when that non-custodial FATHER time had been increased to 100% and mother’s to “0%.” I had never been offered or encouraged to do supervised visitation to prevent the stealing in the first place, and when it was brought up, a commissioner said “there’s no money for it here..” — AFTER which I realized, well, yes there was, in the form of those grants to the state of California for such supervised visitation and exchange — to protect the children from being stolen, and myself from injury or repeated forced dealings with traumatic situations absent support for them, in the context of known prior domestic violence…
That fall 2009, I also had learned my children had been abandoned by their father (physically and it appears financially) and was dealing with both stalking while attempting to extract information from ANYONE involved on WHEN this occurred (including what month/year) or in what manner (two conflicting versions were presented by the ex-girlfriend and my ex-batterer (husband) and father of two children by then both almost adults, with me. Abandonment is also a felony, so I was working through both shock and again attempting to speak with law enforcement on this (district attorney’s office, as I had when they were stolen the first time three years earlier). This went nowhere — other than that in my need to speak to their father for this information, he somehow decided again to claim me “before God” as his wife, resulting in the need to at this low point now deal (again) with the stalking issue — which was terrifying… especially without funds to leave the area even temporarily which was a need.
But that commentary is getting ahead of the subject matter of this section…. Just correlating the State-level developments with my personal timeline developments. Back to “HighSpeedRail”….
Read it from the HSR.CA.GOV (HSR=”High Speed Rail”) point of view — this is their MOU (Memo of Understanding) which, actually, clarifies that one is a 501©3 and the other a state agency, and that a partnership, this absolutely does not make!. The signatures of each party are shown — but not dated (so this is probably not an executed copy of any MOU, despite its title page):
MOU as shown (Nov. 2016) header.
REGARDING OTHER CENIC or “NATIONAL LAMBDARAIL, LLC” referring to a different kind of “rail” with different kind of cargo (the optic fiber kind) images I may include below — these are obviously another story waiting to be posted (here — it’s already posted elsewhere!), consider these footprints and reminders for now.//LGH 10/9/2017
This excerpt of a Form 990 shows Nat’l LambdaRail as a related entity of CENIC, though not the largest one… || … “NLR” has a major, and dramatic though short history, and was purchased in 2011 by a billionaire from its university (public/private) membership. Won’t fit in a single caption. Stay tuned (or look up yourself!)It is a 12,000 mile optic network and the first one to go transcontinental (See Wiki or Bloomberg.com for more; also IO.com)
just web page header.
CENIC corporation, California Registry of Charitable Trust (search results page)
These sprang from an unusually-named corporate (nonprofit) visitor to the blog, but in general reflect major themes and turning points in U.S. history, i.e., control of access to the internet, and characteristics of the organizations controlling this access. For the general outline, see my 2017 Table of Contents page, about half-way down, and the bottom section, and the second section of my Oct. 9, 2017 post talking about SIZE STILL MATTERS. …..
WOW: See that image on National LambdaRail, LLC, above? Well: from Wikipedia:
…National LambdaRail was founded in 2003 and in 2004 its national, advanced fiber optic network was completed. In addition to being the first transcontinental, production 10 Gigabit Ethernet network, National LambdaRail was also the first intelligently managed, nationwide peering and transit program focused on research applications.
In 2008, a company named Darkstrand purchased capacity on NLR for commercial use.[1] By the end of the year the Chicago-based company was having trouble raising funding due to the Great Recession.[2] On May 24, 2012 the NLR network operations center services were transferred to the Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California.[3] In October 2009 Glenn Ricart was named president and CEO.[4] On September 7, 2010 Ricart announced his resignation.[5]
In November 2011 the control of NLR was purchased from its university membership by a billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong for $100M, who indicated his intention to upgrade NLR infrastructure and repurpose portions of it to support an ambitious healthcare project through NantHealth.[6] The upgrade never took place. NLR ceased operations in March 2014.[7][8][9][10]
Bloomberg.com on National Lambda Rail. Bloomberg.com gets its data from S&P Global Marketing, part of S&P Global Group (S&P = Standard & Poors, probably)
http://internet2.edu/news/detail/3695. Not shown — this is a 2003 article. See Wiki for follow up info on NLR.
Please click link (or image to enlarge) and read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_LambdaRail#cite_note-5
At Bloomberg.com, but can’t read more w/o subscription to “Professional Services.”See more at NLR “Wiki” page.
Internet2® started in 1996 and has a timeline. See website for more info.
Internet2® doesn’t post its financials With offices in these states, perhaps they could be found. If “internet2” isn’t an entity, then some membership organization ENTITY does have financials somewhere…
Found at Internet2.edu home page, blog article Sept. 17, 2017.
Separately, which I know from email news alerts and family court reform advocacy groups’ social media sites, there are also pending “current events” in local (California) “family court reform” news making the rounds which I feel urgent to address in new posts. I have an idea of a better way to present the situation to people new to it (those familiar with it are welcome to watch from the sidelines, or inbetween rallies, re-blogging, or complaints about the overall injustices in the system, judge by judge or jurisdiction by jurisdiction, something I can’t remember the last time I EVER signed onto that approach as halfway sane, or effective, given the disparate resources….). Some of that way is blended into this otherwise more anecdotal, expressive post about the personal backdrop to our so-called problem-solving courts.
I keep hoping to squeeze enough blogging and activism in between my own ongoing, though more periodic, life events which have been incited by the systematic disruption of my household, work and relationships through the family court and now, probate court, systems and self-important, self-congratulating, and overlapping circles of well-endowed and court-AND social-service-systems-connected “fauna and flora.”
That is, just as in any domestically violent relationship, while there may be at times a “plateau” between incidents (events), during which not a whole lot can be done to push them forward (whether through availability, regulations, or simply personal stamina), and then, responding to moves the individual (here, me) might make to change the status quo or resolve the conflict — there’s an escalation, or other way in which “power-over” is communicated. This communication may be first made in private, but sooner or later can be gestured towards (by the abuser) should it go public, “we attempted to communicate with [____].” Communicate in that context is a euphemism. Something WAS communicated — message of intent to continue the dynamic was sent-and-received — but it’s not what witnesses or outsiders are, for lack of tangible substance, or facts in context, unable to do anything other than assume might be meant were both parties above-board and honest. [I don’t know how that last sentence in green may read to others, but I do know what I meant. There are just multiple layers of meaning, and a style of speaking — which I hate! in trying to actually get down to the facts and resolve the situations — which is more theatre than written communication of important truths. It’s for show, but only those closest to the situation and “in the know” about the overall pattern of the relationship in question, realize how fake it is.
So, again, stamina, or consequences, etc. I don’t know how much longer this can be kept up, either the personal fight, or the writing. It worries me, and may be prompting to get what’s done already in order, backed up, and on-line. And it’s no way to live… with constant risk management while resources are drained, year after year.
Moving on….
Blogging Context/Sequence:
“Introducing A New Page… Problem-Solving (‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts…,” (for short) has a case-sensitive short-link ending “-7xs” and is now published.
See next inset block:
[That] page (#28901) I have named: How and When Problem-Solving (make that ‘Collaborative Justice’) Courts were Institutionalized and other Consolidate/Coordinate/Standardize/ PRIVATIZE Stories at Courts.CA.Gov
I was talking on [the] post — NAATPN, Inc (2000ff, Total Current Assets, $0) and Caffee, Caffee and Associates PHF, Inc. (Hattiesburg MS, 2003ff, Total Assets $0, Tax Filings Questionable), and others trying to squeeze a California Race-Based Stop-Smoking Network (AATEN) into that recipe. .. [Published 8/28/2017 evening and as usual may be updated for clarity, basic copyediting, or length (splitting)//LGH] —— about how the 1996ff (PRWORA-related) events overlapped with my current blogging interest, the 1998 (Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement) events, and similarities (not to mention overlap) of involved networking nonprofits, along with the stories told the public omitting the details of Who’s Who and the gradual, (dare I say “progressive” in today’s political climate, but referencing the generic, not political, meaning of the word?) incremental erosion of local or even state-level accountability to citizens living within those state, as opposed to privatized special-interest nonprofits continually telling us all that the same are protecting against other privatized special-interest FOR profits as though these two were unrelated….
Again, the genealogy (so to speak) of that page, includes ITS originating post, on the NAATPN. So, the sequence is from NAAPTN {already published} ==> Page “How and When Problem-Solving..” ==>Post “Introducing New Page” + ===> before I publish either that Page (or the post introducing it), I sequestered my expressive/reflective section “About Holidays” which you are now reading.
The originating post (“Introducing a New Page…”) will contain some lead-in and concluding material from below for a “footprint,” as is my writing style.
Impediments / Other reasons for the delays:
SHARE THIS POST on...
Courtesy PRWORA, HHS, and Public Apathy, the Good Ol’ Boys Network with help from (speaking of which) Yale University is Re-packaging the Same Old Schlock, in this example, as “Male Involvement Network” [Publ. June 8, 2016].
Post title: Courtesy PRWORA, HHS, and Public Apathy, the Good Ol’ Boys Network with help from (speaking of which) Yale University is Re-packaging the Same Old Schlock, in this example, as “Male Involvement Network” [Publ. June 8, 2016]. Short-link ends “-3Jv”);
(Written June 8, 2016. For some reason I DNR, including possible amnesia while working on other projects, left in draft… Found during search of my own blog Nov. 2018 for a post with the word “Male” in it which (other post) I knew detailed several of the statewide Coalitions Against Domestic Violence (“CADV”) by CFDA#… The post I’d been looking for referenced the relative difference in size between ‘fathers’ rights” and “feminists'” funding which I wanted to point out on Twitter after the fact that federal government was funding both had been raised.//LGH))
(After publishing any post, I review it, and may revise or clarify with added material, something posted. Anyone who receives the post through a tweet or as a follower is best served by going back to original link for must current version. This time I added a table of annual report filings (underneath the first logos shown below) and some links which didn’t make the “saved” version that was first published 6/8/2016 evening. Post currently runs under 10,000 words….Make that almost 12,000 words, after I added more details on the involved The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven” and its financials and the next paragraph explaining why I added that — and a dark-green background section about the CNCS and Social Innovation Funding…:) 🙂
I may subtract that, later, but remember to keep an eye on “COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF [name your Metro/Regional Area, or major, particularly port city: San Francisco, Baltimore, etc.]” (nationwide, and especially in metro regions, which also tend to have some high-profile universities (like, Yale…. in this case); they are fast-tracking “What Works” from federal/private power block to “community level” and are an identifiable part of the MACRO business model privatizing government, in preparation of course for “outflanking sovereignty through functionalism.” These organizations have local credibility, significant assets obtained over the years, and significant connections to local power. In addition through such things as the Federal “CNCS” (Corporation for National and Community Service) (URL: NationalService.gov) helping the big guys pick their favorite programming and make sure the commoners (peasants and/or, low-income population, male and female, and whatever the ethnicity) are run through the “What Works” programs that Big Brother and Relatives have determined are best for all. Notice that the Social Innovation Fund only dates to Year 2009:
The Social Innovation Fund (SIF) is a powerful approach to transforming lives and communities that positions the federal government to be a catalyst for impact—mobilizing private resources to find and grow community solutions with evidence of results.With the simple but vital goal of finding what works, and making it work for more people, the Social Innovation Fund and its grantees create a learning network of organizations working to implement innovative and effective evidence-based solutions to local and national challenges in three priority areas: economic opportunity, healthy futures, and youth development.
In just five years, the Social Innovation Fund and its private-sector partners have invested more than a $800 million in compelling community solutions. The Social Innovation Fund’s portfolio represents over $295 million in federal grants and more than $582 million in non-federal match commitments. To date, the SIF’s Classic program has made 35 awards to grantmaking organizations and 290 nonprofits working in 39 states and the District of Columbia. In total over 360 nonprofit organizations are being funded by the SIF to conduct diverse interventions and evaluate results through highly rigorous models. Through the SIF’s Pay for Success program, over 25 states across the United States are engaged in testing and implementation of Pay for Success projects. Across both programs, the Social Innovation Fund is committed to expanding the impact of effective community solutions to make a difference in the lives of more Americans.
Authorized by the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act in April of 2009, the Social Innovation Fund is a program of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), a federal agency focused on improving lives, strengthening communities, and fostering civic engagement through service and volunteering. Together, service and innovation provide a vehicle to harness the power of ordinary people and unleash the potential of innovative ideas to help address our communities’ toughest social problems and transform lives.
Check Out Our Interactive Map See the General Fact Sheet
Consider Yourself Forewarned to Pay Attention to the CNCS and what the Social Innovation Fund (Big Brother and Big Tax-exempt Foundation) have planned for our local communities.//LGH.)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4015970/
WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS. I’LL SHOW HOW I CAME ACROSS THE ABOVE LINK and “MALE INFORMATION NETWORK,” AND RE-ITERATE THE POINTS I WAS MAKING THREE YEARS AGO DURING AN UPDATE ON THE “NON-FILING” HABITS OF THE “ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS” (AFCC) AND ITS CHAPTERS (now not shown — the Connecticut Chapter). AND AT THAT TIME EXHORTING MORE PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED DOING WHAT I DO, ONCE THERE IS SOME MEDIA ATTENTION TO A SITUATION IN THE FAMILY COURTS — AND AT THAT TIME, PARTICULARLY REGARDING AFCC AS AN ORGANIZATION. //Background-color emphasis added during Jan. 2, 2020 review (blog search on “PRWORA” included this post…)//LGH.
For example, as to those filings of AFCC and its Chapters, on its website and IRS filings, this (?) organization claims to be legal domicile Wisconsin (see Heading row ending in “M” Legal Domicile”) and having existed since 1963, but the State of Wisconsin only admits to the existence of a Chapter of AFCC, and that only since Year 2012:
| ID | Entity Name /Type | Registered Effective Date |
Status / Status Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| W060179 | WISCONSIN CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS, INC. 06 – Non-Stock Corporation |
10/15/2012 | Incorporated/Qualified/ Registered 10/15/2012 |
Meanwhile, Illinois Secretary of State records the existence (still active) of a business entity since 1975, under two prior names, the current one matching the one on the AFCC logo below.
(Click for search results image: CyberdriveIllinois.com AFCC Search Results. Use CyberdriveIllinois.com link to repeat a name search showing one prior name, and clickable to read details (including that it’s a “Domestic” Illinois organization originally filed 1975, with two prior names, dated 2001 and 2002 as I recall. Illinois has it File No. “50708497”).
I PUT AN EXTENSIVE UPDATE ON THIS PARTICULAR FIND ON ONE OF THOSE OLDER POSTS, WHICH EXPLAINS MORE FULLY WHY I GET TO USE THE WORD “SCHLOCK.”
ON THAT UPDATE I ALSO NOTICED THAT ONE OF THE KEY PARTICIPANTS IN THIS REPORT, ONE YEAR AFTER HAVING ITS NAME ON THE SAME, APPARENTLY QUIT FILING ITS TAX RETURNS. While I’d like to further verify that those returns aren’t on some other database, even if they have filed, I noticed that this organization’s primary source of revenues three years ago was government grants, and primary use of those was on its own employees. The grants are not being redistributed to anyone (individual or organizations). Yet the website is still up and, looking quite nice and colorful, having its logo — it still features requests for funds:
New Haven Family Alliance (FYI, EIN#061324343)
A Partnership For Family & Community Empowerment.”
Here’s The Community Foundation Greater New Haven (from “GiveGreater.org“) soliciting for the above organization on a page “last updated 8/7/2015“
“giveGreater.org “Your Local Resource for Learning and Giving || The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven” (CT)
Feel free to explore that link, “Leadership and Staff” for from 1996-[8/7/2015] CEO “Barbara Tinney, MSW” (only former CEO listed Mr. Mustafa Abdul Salaam,** 1991) and the comments at the bottom of its page about some excess administrative costs:
(Google search results on Mustafa Abdul Salaam, May 7, 1998 has him quitting after being accused of forging a signature to obtain Community Development Block Grants, on a different organization: Neighborhood Agency Chief Quits After Forgery Accusation) (<==read!!)
Neighborhood Agency Chief Quits After Forgery Accusation
May 7, 1998 by Johnny Mason, Jr. of the Hartford Courant:
Mustafa Abdul-Salaam, executive director of the Upper Albany Neighborhood Collaborative in Hartford, resigned April 17 after being accused of forging a signature on an application for city funds.
The resignation was triggered when Mustafa apparently forged the name of Gerald Thorpe, chairman of the Upper Albany Neighborhood Revitalization Zone, on a February letter recommending that the collaborative be given city Community Development Block Grant funds
…Abdul-Salaam is the former executive director of the New Haven Family Alliance, a social service agency. A former captain of the 1975 University of Connecticut men’s basketball team, his name was Earl Wilson before he converted to Islam…
Abdul-Salaam, who became the executive director of the North End collaborative after a nationwide search, at a salary of $63,000 per year, was the agency’s fifth executive director in seven years. Florence Ehiboir-Cole, assistant executive director, is serving as interim director. The agency, at 1339 Albany Ave., has an annual budget of $325,000. Most of its funding comes from the Ford Foundation, but it also has received city funds.
Interesting as the Ford Foundation in general is heavily involved in promoting fatherhood studies and professionals in the field.
1) NHFA’s fiscal, administrative and programmatic infrastructure has not kept pace with its development and implementation of innovative programs and interventions. This is in part a result of limited non-restrictive, flexible funds. In response to this challenge, the agency is implementing the recommendations proposed in the FMA assessment report
2) NHFA needs to reduce administrative cost in order to stabilize its financial situation in 2015 and beyond. As part of this effort by the end of December, NHFA is moving its office to a less expensive, community based location in the Dixwell neighborhood.
Found under “CEO COMMENTS” on same or related page at the Community Foundation:
NHFA Board of Directors will be working with the Yale School of Management to develop a five year strategic planning that includes a fund development plan.
I don’t know who ‘FMA” is, and this page at “GreaterGiving.org” doesn’t tell me readily.
However, next, go to the “Financials Link” regarding the New Haven Family Alliance and click on “990s” — no 990 past 2012-2013 fiscal year is uploaded. Interesting…. Even if it didn’t file, it takes three years in a row of not-filing for the IRS to revoke a tax-exempt status, and then some additional time to tell the public on “Exempt Select Organization Check.”
Impact locally of endorsement of NHFA by this Community Foundation — see their main page (CFGNH.org):
The Community Foundation is one of the oldest and largest community foundations in the United States and remains the largest grantmaker in a twenty-town region located in the heart of central Connecticut.
The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven is a philanthropic institution that was established in 1928 as the community’s permanent charitable endowment. For more than three generations, thousands of donors have built our community endowment by establishing permanent funds or making gifts to existing funds that distribute grants to a broad variety of issues and organizations.. [Para. order reversed]
Separate Topic, should be a separate post. This pattern can be found in metro areas throughout the country. To discuss requires discussing details on the tax returns, not just organization websites.
Notable finds regarding this particular one (CFGNH not NHFA), though:
(1) It is not posting ANY details, not even the names of its grantees and amounts granted on either the IRS form on their own website, or (from what I can see) on other sources showing the same IRS#, previous years.
- For example, on June 9, 2016, looking for anything granted to this (non-filing — see chart of annual reports and last known tax returns, below) The New Haven Family Alliance, Inc. I found that the organization simply lists “to various tax-exempt organizations” and no “See Additional Table.” It does not provide another table. Yet, it is taking in government grants yearly.
(2) Big Changes/Increased Revenues for 2015 Makes one wonder Why, and From Whom, and highlights that, with or without the word “Community” on an organization name, it’s still by definition a privately controlled (by its board of directors) nonprofit, nonstock corporation, NOT a government entity. If you compare Schedule F (foreign investments) for year 2015 to (must look up the organization separately) to even Year 2014, it’s clear that the organization is purchasing investments in the Cayman Islands, in a major way compared to prior years when its only overseas activity on Schedule F looked like a minor (about $10,000) donor-advised fund to Ireland.
Any Form 990 (currently) on Part I (page 1) has a “Prior Year/Current Year” column, showing any major changes. 2015 represented a MAJOR increase in CFGNH’s Revenues. Take a look at this community foundation’s 2015 IRS return posted on its site, its EIN# 066032106.
Notice the upwards jump on both “Contributions” (Line 8. from $24.0M to $65.6M) and Investment Income (Line 10. from $29.6M to $75.4M)? For Total Revenues (Program-Related only), that’s almost a TRIPLING of revenues in a single year. From $51.6M to $145.0M (check link). Did this result in a tripling of donations to other organizations — its primary reason for existing, allegedly? NO. The jump was from $20M to $29M.
Shows huge size (close to one-half billion$ of assets), huge revenues ($69M contributions that year alone, and $79M “investment income” — mostly from selling over $470M of Securities for that amount of net profit. Despite this, it still got close to $1M of “government grants” anyway. This may have to do with the composition of the board membership which by definition includes gets appointed by public officials and at least one board representative from Chief Executive of the City of New Haven, from Yale, the Bar Association, etc. (see tax return details).
Having received $145M Revenues (but over $500M gross receipts) in 2015, it dispensed $29M of grants (THAT schedule not attached to their website’s 2015 financials).
I went looking from a different source for prior years, and found that unlike most organization, dispensing that amount of money ($20M/year, roughly) they don’t bother to include a Schedule I. A comment is made that grants are tracked online. What should be looked at is the difference between 2015 and 2014 (below) “Schedule F” which is outside investments. And the major change (almost tripling) in revenues. All I was looking for is anything donated to New Haven Family Alliance after it stopped filing tax returns and annual reports (apparently). Not that easy to find when the tax returns available (or offered by the organization) are not producing any Schedule I, Grant to Governments and Organizations in the US.
Search Again** (COMPARE these to the 2015 posted on their site, above).
Total results: 3. Search Again. CFGNH.org (EIN# 06-6032106) Forms 990 run Jan. 2, 2020.
UPDATE COMMENTS: The Fiscal Year ends Dec. 31 — so where is the tax return for FY2018? Not here! (I did find it on the organization website. However, like the others below, it, too, utterly omits to record Sched I grantees, despite claiming several million dollars’ worth of grants to domestic organizations or governments. There are simply ZERO details on “to which ones” and not even (which the form, at the bottom has a blank for) even a count of how many. Much more can be understood about the organization (in addition to its withholding of identities of claimed grantees, even when taking several hundred thousand dollars’ worth of government grants TO it) by reading its “Financials” page subdocuments.
Other comments: See FY2017: The Schedule I of ($24M) of grants is — guess what — omitted except for a single statement, “various 501©3s” and no detailed information. $222M of investments held (per Sched F) in Central America/Caribbean region. $149M (per Sched D) in “Alternative Investment”. etc. //LGH Jan. 2, 2020.
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthy Start – Community Impact Grants | CT | 2017 | 990 | 59 | $594,866,274.00 | 06-6032106 |
| Community Foundation for Greater New Haven | CT | 2016 | 990 | 55 | $487,352,421.00 | 06-6032106 |
| Friends of Boulder Knoll | CT | 2015 | 990 | 45 | $482,430,411.00 | 06-6032106 |
(June 8, 2016, table as originally published):
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | 2014 | 990 | 45 | $443,530,278.00 | 06-6032106 | |
| Community Foundation for Greater New Haven | CT | 2013 | 990 | 41 | $416,295,565.00 | 06-6032106 |
| Community Foundation for Greater New Haven, The | CT | 2012 | 990 | 40 | $363,752,780.00 | 06-6032106 |
(*Wrong name here factor of The Foundation Center, not the organization filing its returns).
I just looked at 2012, 2013 and 2014 tax returns available through a different source
The influence of large “Community Foundations” throughout the country should be looked at closely when they become conduits for federal public/private partnerships, helping conceal major private foundation backers’ money. For example, out of the list of 498 funds at “CFGNH” I see that Annie E. Casey Foundation established a Donor-advised fund in 2003. They are listed “alpha” but only 25 results per page. I guess if anyone is then willing to flip through about 1,000 pages @ 25 names/page (or use the slider bar and guesstimate) this will give name and origin of the funds — but not their individual amounts held. Annie E. Casey is already a major player in foster care, fatherhood movements, “JDAI” and other “shifting the paradigm” movements in family and juvenile courts. I have a sticky page on its “Kids Count” data book, and this came up again recently in looking at Alabama also.
“Read my lips” — promoting fatherhood is a public/private COORDINATED effort involving major foundations (bipartisan — both sides of the political spectrum do this). I run around behind and look up the grantees, and find them seriously wanting in basic organization filings compliance, which doesn’t seem to be coincidental.
I went to “C.O.N.C.O.R.D.” which is the state’s Business Entity Search Site. According to this NHFA is still active — but still lives at a different street address 370 James. I clicked details and see that its last filed ANNUAL report was in 2011.
| # | Business Name | Business ID | Status | Business Address |
| 1 | NEW HAVEN FAMILY ALLIANCE, INC. THE | 0260970 | Active | 370 JAMES STREET, SUITE 201, NEW HAVEN, CT, 06513 |
[Checked post-publication. If that link isn’t still active, repeat the search to learn that, according to this database, The New Haven Family Alliance, Inc. has been filing its annual required reports “periodically” — that means several times since incorporation, they have gone many years without filing, apparently not been administratively dissolved or put on notice (?) as happens in some states, and forced to re-instate. Compare the “Filing Type” column to the Filing Date/Time column to see a gap for 1992 (second year never filed), 1994-5-6-7-9 = its post-PRWORA years!; catch up filings in March, 2000.]
| Business ID | Business Name |
| 0260970 | NEW HAVEN FAMILY ALLIANCE, INC. THE |
| Filing Number | Filing Date/Time | Effective Date/Time | Filing Type | Volume Type | Volume | Start Page | Page # |
| 0000624488 | 12:00 AM | REPORT(1994) | 0 | ||||
| 0000624486 | May 21, 1991 12:00 AM | INCORPORATION | C | 11860 | 0653 | 0 | |
| 0000624487 | Aug 12, 1993 12:00 AM | ORG REPORT | C | 12330 | 3315 | 0 | |
| 0002094498 | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | REPORT (1996) | B | 00328 | 3109 | 3 |
| 0002094500 | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | REPORT (1997) | B | 00328 | 3115 | 3 |
| 0002094501 | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | REPORT (1998) | B | 00328 | 3118 | 4 |
| 0002094504 | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | Mar 24, 2000 8:30 AM | REPORT (1999) | B | 00328 | 3127 | 3 |
| 0002117676 | May 24, 2000 8:30 AM | May 24, 2000 8:30 AM | REPORT (2000) | B | 00341 | 0397 | 3 |
| 0002289591 | Jul 18, 2001 8:30 AM | Jul 18, 2001 8:30 AM | REPORT (2001) | B | 00428 | 0540 | 3 |
| 0002783858 | Mar 01, 2004 8:30 AM | Mar 01, 2004 8:30 AM | REPORT (2002) | B | 00685 | 3086 | 3 |
| 0002783860 | Mar 01, 2004 8:30 AM | Mar 01, 2004 8:30 AM | REPORT (2003) | B | 00685 | 3091 | 4 |
| 0002893257 | Aug 26, 2004 8:30 AM | Aug 26, 2004 8:30 AM | REPORT (2004) | B | 00742 | 0042 | 3 |
| 0003069936 | Jul 05, 2005 8:30 AM | REPORT (2005) | B | 00840 | 1096 | 5 | |
| 0003257554 | Jun 29, 2006 8:30 AM | REPORT (2006) | B | 00938 | 2228 | 4 | |
| 0003471885 | May 31, 2007 8:30 AM | REPORT (2007) | B | 01049 | 0537 | 4 | |
| 0003741867 | Jul 16, 2008 8:30 AM | REPORT (2008) | B | 01187 | 2344 | 2 | |
| 0004569307 | Apr 11, 2012 11:32 AM | REPORT (2009) | B | 01636 | 1123 | 3 | |
| 0004569314 | Apr 11, 2012 11:34 AM | REPORT (2010) | B | 01636 | 1138 | 3 | |
| 0004569319 | Apr 11, 2012 11:35 AM | REPORT (2011) | B | 01636 | 1148 | 3 |
(Any background colors added by blogger LGH). In addition to the irregularity of filing annual reports, there are despite this still years missing as you can see simply looking for all consecutive years since 1991, or at least 1993 filings. Where are years 1994 and 1995 (first two of its existence?).
Also, a recent search for this organization by name or the EIN# below, pulls up nothing past its own Fiscal year 2012: (As of Post publication June 8, 2016. Reviewing this Jan. 2, 2020 i.e., a new year, in a new decade, I’m re-running the search for the same EIN#). The comments below FYE 2010-11-12 table apply to that table only. for consistency (with updated re-run of CFGNH.org Form 990s, above, I’m posting an extra table above the original one (i.e., both rows and the two tables are most recent years on top).
January 2, 2020 re-run of the NHFA EIN# for (the last three) tax returns since then:
Total results: 3. Search Again.
(Click on the column headers to sort.)
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NEW HAVEN FAMILY ALLIANCE INC | CT | 2017 | 990 | 37 | $27,547.00 | 06-1324343 |
| NEW HAVEN FAMILY ALLIANCE INC | CT | 2016 | 990 | 27 | $143,550.00 | 06-1324343 |
| New Haven Family Alliance | CT | 2012 | 990 | 21 | $118,437.00 | 06-1324343 |
As originally shown on this post:
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New Haven Family Alliance | CT | 2012 | 990 | 21 | $118,437.00 | 06-1324343 |
| New Haven Family Alliance | CT | 2011 | 990 | 25 | $246,260.00 | 06-1324343 |
| New Haven Family Alliance | CT | 2010 | 990 | 26 | $148,285.00 | 06-1324343 |
Click on any of the above three years, look at Part I Details (main source of revenues, Line 8, is grants, main expenditures (Part I) is “Salaries,” look at Page 2 scanty description of what organization is doing (I saw top row’s only so far), go to Part VIII Statement of Revenues and notice that main source of Contributions (non-government donations) and Grants (government donations) is recorded as $1.4M out of total $1.5M (for YE2013) “Government Grants.”
….I just checked TAGGS.hhs.gov, and so far, do not see any direct grants to NHFA above (=Link to search results: All years, CT only, I entered Organization Name). I searched (org. name only) the Community Foundation for Greater New Haven and found no direct grants. I then searched (CT, all years) under two known CFDA’s: 93086 (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood) and 93597 (Access and Visitation) to see who, in the state of Connecticut, is getting those types of grants. These are the Title IV-A and Title IV-D grants, post-welfare reform of 1996, specifically promoting two-parent families and increased noncustodial parenting time (i.e., more fatherhood involvement where there is a single mother involved).
{{The gov’t grants on a Form 990 could be from ANY government entity; so they might have been state grants.//LGH Jan. 2, 2020}}
Summary, having written the post:
Truly we the public has been weighed in the balance (overall) and been found wanting. Every four years — and between — we go to sleep on what, REALLY, did welfare reform do, and instead of going for our own close-up sources of reference across multiple sources, take public media, politicians, in combination with accredited experts (ever think of checking out WHO FUNDS THEM? I sure have been…and posting it when it pertains to this subject matter also.)
If something has an opinion from a Republican and an opinion from a Democrat, making it “bipartisan” we still apparently think that’s meaningful. Ditto if it’s supposedly religiously neutral because it’s in the sphere of “social science” and couched in economic terms about reducing poverty.
Under the banner of helping the low-income and reducing abstract, generalized terms such as “poverty,” and through ignorance (of how government reports its revenues to the public, not just what it does with them as publicized by the government or those contracting with government to describe how wonderful and transparent it is, and how great its programming and policies) we have been induced to create more and more layers of administration of public-purpose services, and once created, assume they should continue forever.
When it comes to post-PRWORA policy on promoting fatherhood, a look at the tax returns shows this literally props up a middle-class income in the private tax-exempt sector, and far from trickling down, is running into rivers of opportunity and shell organizations for less than public-interest purposes. When I say “shell organization” I mean, the entity either doesn’t exist at the state corporate level (for long), or the tax-filing level (as required to) consistently, but still keeps the website up and the solicitations — long after they’re out of compliance. THIS is “business as usual” and if you’re in it (as a woman or as a man) it is an extension of the Good Ol’ Boys Network.
Who’s ever going to squeal the truth, the whole truth, or anything remotely resembling the truth? Should some dare to do this, the means to squelch the individuals and make an example of them to others is already available. I will say again the ENTIRE family court system is itself one of those tools. It still matters who and what is running it and who set it up.
Read the rest of this entry »
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 