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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Posts Tagged ‘AFCC/NCJFCJ Joint 2007 Conference

“By Now We Should Know!” (Impromptu Re-cap of Key Players addressing [how to handle] Domestic Violence especially as it impacts Family Courts) (Apr 28 ~> June 22, 2019).

leave a comment »

“By Now We Should Know!” (Impromptu Re-cap of Key Players addressing [how to handle] Domestic Violence especially as it impacts Family Courts) (Apr 28 ~> June 22, 2019).  (short-link ending “-9NU,” post drafted as insert to “More Perspectives” in late April, under 4,000 words, for starters…). (now exactly 6,000 words; latest revisions for clarity and extra links, 6/23/2019).


re: ‘TWO HELPFUL LINKS’ — Image from TopRightSidebar, ‘GO TO POSTS’ widget, shows TOC 2019 & 2018 + ‘Key Posts 2012-2017’ (LGH, @ Sept. 1, 2019)

TWO HELPFUL LINKS added Sept. 1, 2019 (for recent subject matter overview):

 Table of Contents 2019, Family Court Matters’ Posts + Pages: January 1 – August 31 (so far). (Shortlink ends “-ayV.”  About 6,300 words,posted August 5, updated Aug. 31) (You can also link to this TOC post any time from the top right sidebar, under”GO TO: All Posts, incl. Sticky, Tables of Contents..” widget, which holds several boxes for navigating to specific important places (posts or pages, incl. the home page), and, 

(Table of Contents 2018, Posts and Pages.. (publ. 24Mar2019, short-link ends ‘9y7’)


This post (that you’re reading now) prepares people for another post, already written, which asks a hard, “what-if” rhetorical question.  I hope readers on considering that (coming post’s) rhetorical question have the integrity to consider where they may have been radically mis-led about the real purposes of family court reform/fix/correct movements.  Even though it may be embarrassing, confronting, or disturbing.

(WAS FINALLY PUBLISHED LAST WEEK OF AUGUST, 2019).


IF I COULD FIGURE THIS OUT 2006-2010, especially (and subsequently)…

If I could figure this out with what I was going through 2006 through 2010 especially (and subsequently) under the related conditions post-DV, post-overnight-custody-switch and all kinds of family betrayal, amid professional livelihood destruction, repeated stalking over the years, and at this point it seems about every other year, another lawsuit of some sort — when I don’t have the ongoing income to predict a future at times more than a half year, or a quarter-year in advance — then I know other, more consistently employed and less family-court-plagued individuals, including professionals such as lawyers, psychologists, law professors, psychology professors, state court administrators, and politicians could have chosen, IF not in on it, to figure it out and, for mutual public benefit and “out of the goodness in their hearts” share it.

And share it not just among the mutual professional circles within court-connected and cause-related [abuse prevention, etc.] fields, but also with the people they are charged to help, while dealing with the issues named and as reflected in the respective organization’s business names (i.e., “Family” or “Battered Women” or “Violence Prevention” etc.)…

What’s more, outside the professionals, there are plenty of women (and men) who have been in my situation who could’ve figured out and reported (blogged! spoken consistently) about the same things I did as just a human being with (I admit) at most times — some times a lot harder to access than others — access to the internet and (eventually) a laptop so that access wasn’t limited to library hours and time limits (where I lived, generally maximum 1 to 2 hours at a stretch)… And common sense enough to pay attention! 

“BY NOW, WE SHOULD KNOW!”

In fact (looking for a certain reference to include just before publishing this post), about a year ago, I see I went through it again last spring (May, 2018), even though at that time I was being gradually pushed out of temporary housing, and within just two or three months of having to flee the state:

Post title: How Relevant is AFCC — and Who, UNLIKE many ‘Crisis in (or ‘Enhance/Reform’) the Courts’ groups and associated professionals who won’t, in public or on-line — Acknowledges Its Existence and Significance? (started May 7, 2018) (Case-sensitive shortlink ending “-91l”; that’s two numbers, as in the year “1991” and a lower-case “L”) (Posting “as-is” about 5,680 words on Mothers’ Day (USA) May 13.  Subject to later updates for clarity and/or towards bottom of the post).

(I was also active on Twitter today with more links, documentation and as ever, reminder of terms in use in current fatherhood policy, particularly as involves Temple University-housed, Center for Policy Research-organized “FRPN.org” (also previously posted herein).  http://bitl.ly/2KVQHOi) {{<~~may be multi-Tweet/ a thread; see the whole thread if so and I tend to have attachments (media) to Tweets to explain them}}

This post will illustrate both those who won’t (while talking on the same topics) and those who, obviously do acknowledge AFCC when presenting at its conferences or listed among its ongoing board of directors or other activist members (i.e., on individual C.V.s)

That post has has some typos I see but its contents are still relevant.  Some emphases added.

I even found a post written almost exactly EIGHT years ago, featuring the general operations and co-operations among key organizations.  It doesn’t drill-down tax returns so much, but it does show tendencies and business relationships among them (reference, background, cream-colored, inside green borders added one day post-publication here);


Post Title with shortlink and enclosed comments added June, 2019. Post written eight years earlier.(This post came up in a search and I needed to add a “Read-More” link anyway).

OVW + BWJP-FVPF + PRAXIS + NCADV(s) + AFCC = same old, same old (with new names on the grant systems) Here’s why: [Publ. July 6, 2011]

[WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link here ends in just two characters, probably because it’s so early in this blog:  “-K7”].  As first published, about 10,800 words, incl. any & all quotes, image captions, tables, etc. //LGH June 23, 2019]

On review of this post, I see that perhaps the final ⅓ is quoting (at length) three sources on Irish Slavery, including “Tangled Roots’ “Barbadosed: Africans and Irish in Barbados” (2008, I think) from GLC.Yale.Edu, a center originally inspired when businessmen/history buffs G&L heard lectures by a Yale history professor David Brion Davis, who I now see died this past April after a long, productive life:”Prizewinning Historian of Slavery Dies at 92” NYT April, 2019.

Professor Davis wrote or edited 16 books, but paramount were the three that examined the moral challenges and contradictions of slavery and their centrality in American and Atlantic history. ~~|~~The first, “The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture” (1966), won a Pulitzer Prize and was a National Book Award finalist. The second, “The Problem of Slavery in the Age of Revolution, 1770-1823” (1975), won the National Book Award as well as the Bancroft Prize, one of the most prestigious in the study of American history. ~~|~~The last book of the trilogy, “The Problem of Slavery in the Age of Emancipation,” was published in 2014 as Professor Davis approached 90. It won the National Book Critics Circle Award…~~|~~President Barack Obama presented Professor Davis with a National Humanities Medal in 2014 for “reshaping our understanding of history,” as the citation said. ~~|~~The fundamental problem of slavery, Professor Davis wrote, “lay not in its cruelty or exploitation, but in the underlying conception of man as a conveyable possession with no more autonomy of will and consciousness than a domestic animal.”                                                          [ “~~|~~” = para. break omitted]

I was (and still am) pretty irritated at the exclusionary practices of the above-named groups in deciding how to solve “family” problems involving abuse; see concluding paragraph.  And there are many parallels between abuse and slavery.


Most of the July, 2011, post deals with and quotes the entities its title names (starting with the OVW as part of the US DOJ, the associated “entity” here is the U.S. federal government (with DOJ under its Executive, not Legal or Judicial Branch, despite the word “Justice” in the Department name); all other “entities” referenced are either nonprofits, or projects of them)..

I don’t know how many “re-caps” and reminders it’s going to take to sink in….or what it’ll take, but I write (in part) because I know for some, it’s not reminder — it’s news.  On hearing this news, some decisions might need to be made (unless you’re OK continuing to “float” and becoming a “floater” when it comes to effective strategy, or even figuring out what’s going on…. “just go with the closest flow that sounds friendly…  or go against the closest hostile currents around, and hope that’s got some real impact, makes a splash, makes a difference (etc.)….).


(Impromptu re-cap, with attention to the key players addressing “DV” aspect hitting family courts.)

By now people should also be aware of to what extent and HOW the “sleeper organization” Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (“AFCC”), working often in tandem with the better-known “National Council of Juvenile and Family Courts (“NCJFCJ”)## all but runs the family court system as we know it today …  

(I’m referring to in the USA, while aware of a longstanding intention to align practices across country lines, not to mention through private association influence as has already been taking place, across state lines.)

This Impromptu Recap isn’t going to post tax returns or extensive documentation, which are spread throughout the blog and searchable on it (or search even post titles throughout the blog). For the most part here, although there are some links and images, I’m going to just say it.
Read the rest of this entry »

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

leave a comment »

……… As I say within this post:

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

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

 

This post is: 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NCJFCJ 81st Annual Conference in Denver

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Total results: 3Search Again.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 22, 2017 at 6:57 pm

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

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

Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture (#3 of 3 on a “Red Herring Alert” Post and HHS/OFA’s “Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood” (“HMRF”) Ongoing Distributions)

with one comment

Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture

I JUST FOUND RECENTLY:  Meyer Elkin Feb. 27, 1992 Oral interview by David Kuroda, found on Video, posted on May 6, 2013.  The 1992 transcript is on my right sidebar (has been for some years) and a link also within the summary below.

Meyer Elkin (d. 1994?) has more to do with the origins of family court than most people outside the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts may realize.  This would be a good listen (and/or read) showing the original inspirations, which continue today…  It’s good to hear folklore, which this is,  (self-reporting on one’s own work, as interviewed by someone engaged in similar business and as a “founder” of such a movement) in the folklorists’ own words..  As summarized on YouTube — bookmark this in your memory please, and take some time to consider what you find in that interview, how it may relate to what we are experiencing today in the same courts:

Published on May 6, 2013

Interviewed by David Kuroda on February 27, 1992

An interview with Meyer Elkin as he discusses the beginning of his career in social work; education in social work at Berkeley; early positions during social work career; work with the Jewish Committee for Personal Service; the Conciliation Court in Los Angeles.

Meyer Elkin, a social worker with an MSW from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Social Welfare, created the Conciliation Court in Los Angeles as a vehicle for the Court to provide mediation and counseling to families considering divorce. It became the prototype for other conciliation court programs elsewhere in the United States.

To view a transcript of the interview, visit https://libraries.usc.edu/california-…

The California Social Welfare Archives (CSWA), established in 1979, is a non-profit organization operating under the auspices of the USC School of Social Work and affiliated with the University Libraries. It collects and preserves documents and personal histories of significant contributors to the evolution of social welfare ensuring their availability to future generations — students, teachers, historians, and researchers. Collection activity includes gathering and archiving social welfare materials of historical significance, conducting oral history interviews with contributors to social welfare solutions in California, and creating events to publicly recognize significant contributors to California social welfare.

For a written transcript of the interview, please email cswa@usc.edu.

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts jointly publishes Family Court Review with Hofstra University (Maurice A. Deane? School of Law).  A look at its editorial board would be a lesson in itself in who’s been running these operations, or trying to anyhow.


For the context, see blog title.  I wrote out, non-stop and almost intuitively, what I believed was relevant to the viewing audience of a 4/26/2016 post which had actually raised information on the HMRF funding — below detailed, case-specific information about no less than FIVE criminal prosecutions arising out of ONE high-profile (at least in the Dakota County, Minnesota) case with which many family court litigants might identify, regardless of whether they may be on the same socioeconomic scale (apparently — high) of the two family lines involved.

That post actually has given rise to what will be FIVE other posts:  This 3-part series, one I already published, and another one which is looking in more detail at a specific “FBO” (Faith Based Organization) in Georgia with some peculiar fiscal habits I haven’t gotten to the bottom of.

Such as, how HHS is citing (again) the wrong city and address for this grantee, as compared to what the grantee is writing on its own tax returns; [##straightened out below; see “Georgia Corporation Search Results” found after THIS post was published.  It doesn’t “straighten out” why a Board of Directors would use a different address on its federal tax returns than when reporting to the State of Georgia, however…];

…and how the grantee is functioning apparently under two DIFFERENT EIN#s, only one which shows up as the legitimate recipient of tax-deductible contributions, and another which has been used since 2014 (fiscal year 2013 as I recall),

…and — more to the point — why again, there is enough internal inconsistency in this organization’s reporting of its predominantly ABSTINENCE_focused activities (along with healthy marriage, etc.) — such that it is self-reporting on the organization details, receipt of profits in EVERY category of program service activity– but this does NOT show on Page 1 (at all) and it does not show on the Schedules at the back of tax returns which are supposed to also report this, along with the grants.

Again, the organization itself (according to their tax returns) seem to exist primarily courtesy federal HHS grants (and some, other levels — state or county I guess, which might likewise still represent HHS grants to the state, passed through to the county, or directly to that county) contributions, and supposedly NOT running a profitable business, courtesy the taxpayers, tax-exempt, and without admitting to the profits. But, that certainly does appear to be what it’s doing.


Let me talk about this for a bit:

A big case of “Huh??? !!” regarding just ONE, and hardly the largest one among others, grantee in Georgia…

(running programming from another grantee, in Colorado who at a certain point not too many years ago, got mixed up in an Uganda President’s “kill-the-gays” movement and had to backtrack, apparently ALSO change organization names and corporate business entities a few times, issue a disclaimer “THAT wasn’t our intention!” (searchable on this blog and on-line)

..and that entity in Georgia’s lack of demonstrating (year after year) even an understanding of how to fill out a tax return, let alone those tax returns reflecting what HHS says the organization is and where it operates (!!).  Even a casual look only leads to even more “Questionability” on the ultimate purpose (agenda) behind these HMRF and post-PRWORA-based federal grants systems in the first place.

Read the rest of this entry »

Early Morning Intuitive on “the Larger Picture” (#2 of 3: TAGGS, FBOs, Competitive Abstinence Education, and other Oxymoronic Public Policy Labels)

leave a comment »

….So few people are keeping these topics “on the front burner,” despite their regular impact on the federal budget (a few billion over the years) but much larger on the public, including confusion, family partition, and fragmentation of understanding!

As these things go, I write, sometimes the core post in one sitting, then I start adding supporting detail (links, visuals), clarifying terms with examples, and we have a very long post.  Or, the posts are split, requiring linking narratives.

So, here is the second three posts labeled “Early Morning Intuitive” because that’s how they started on my reading a certain Red Herring Alert post written by someone in Minnesota, courtesy Dakota County Family Court Case, who is at risk of being incarcerated by the State of Minnesota for allegedly interfering with an allegedly (but now that past is being actively dismissed, as is typical for the family court venue in general) abusive father’s parental rights to access all children, including two teenagers who at the time made it quite clear they didn’t want that contact, or to live with him.
In fact, in this case, which on my part is hearsay — I understand he is also ordered to also receive child support payments and health insurance payments from his ex-wife, although the court seems to have already broken her back financially some years ago. But I do realize generally, this is about  par for the course in family court contested cases — SOMEONE is going to lose through attrition, and someone else is often going to win. What’s less well-known is how our federal government both stages some of these battles AND sets the stakes, places the odds on one party to win and another to lose.

Most people don’t stage bloodsports (which divorce, face it, sometimes literally is) and dramatic conflict through altruism, but usually because it’s good for business — that is to say, profits.  This is ALSO true, whether you like this news or not, as to HHS as a grant-making agency involved in the “Federal Designer Family” business (my terms) or, if you will “healthy marriage promotion/responsible fatherhood” business (their terms).  “HMRF!!”  Here, one can identify spectactors, promoters, agents, and the extended family of those actually in the ring.  There are the coaches, and the medics (obviously a necessary part of the deal)…and sometimes, crime-scene cleanup.

It is not a popular view to see a major federal agency primary purpose, as regards healing and helping families, to actually be “losing the money in the cracks, and keeping up the pressure on the middle- and of course, low-income population” by continually talking about debts and deficits.

And not talking about just how very large is the nonprofit sector, including the FBO nonprofit sector in this country, along with the religious-exempt organizations who tend to sponsor the same (and get to do so with complete lack of transparency as to their operations to the general public, and working with a handy set of volunteers and target audiences (for government programs, I’m talking) who typically are not well-informed on their leaders’ assets, liabilities, income and revenues — or just how many corporations the head pastors (in some denominations) may be setting up, controlled by them, and both 501©3 and for-profit LLCs.  And with who else are they setting these up.

Before you pass judgment on my supposedly unpatriotic and/or heretical attitude, my skepticism, or my so-called negativity, please put your hands, as I have been, on some of the evidence, and identified place where that evidence cannot be shown.

After doing this, give me a better way to describe the same evidence, or interpret it, and I’ll be glad to consider — if I see that you have actually looked at it, and have some insight into its existence in the first place. (Comments fields are appropriate places to do this).


That RedHerringAlert (blog) post, Conversation with Dakota County Commissioner Chair Nancy Schouweiler Posted on April 26, 2016Dede Evavold’s continued attempt, with assistance, obviously from the individual over at LionNews …

Image from Lion News


On the other end of the “prosecuting and jailing people for parental interference spectrum are countless cases where the authorities, including law enforcement AND the courts, didn’t give a cr@p about a fathers’ interference with mothers’ rights, even court-ordered ones.

As I’ve made clear periodically in this blog, I’m one of those mothers.  I also have seen the long-term, chronic impact of this on my family line (three generations of it).

The original alleged purpose for radically restructuring welfare (that is, the Social Security Act of 1934 as reframed in 1996 under the privatization and “Block Grants to States” and “fatherlessness is a social disease” logic), the rationale was an emotional mix — wrapped up in some social science rhetoric to make it seem less emotional (and racist/sexist) than it actually was, is that to help people out of poverty, they must constantly be reminded what got them there — too much sex too early (as opposed to safe sex, abstinence is the preferred FBO solution), and especially not getting or staying married. However, once the infrastructure was set in place — as no question, this “HMRF” grants stream has been — there’s nowhere to go but expand and perpetuate, re-brand and replicate — trademarking terms along the way as needed.


Along those lines —
Read the rest of this entry »

Early Morning Intuitive on “The Larger Picture” (#1 of 3, Intro.)

leave a comment »

It’s taking too long (nearly a week, sometimes) to get out these posts. While I’d rather just do this as one long one — as I learned, I added the material, which has now resulted in 18,000 words. Splitting this into three posts seems fair enough — the alternative being, I shut up — so it is now partitioned. Some language in the middle may refer to “below” when it’s actually in another section, but for the content, the value is still delivered. I used the same tags are the same for all three.

Speaking of value delivered year after year free of charge, here’s myDonatebutton for those with the inclination and the wherewithal. It’s processed through PayPal, so any amount accepted. I’m not a 501©3 though, so don’t do it for tax exemption purposes…because it’s not tax-deductible.

I included some of the surrounding text from my appeal on the sidebar:

This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn’t be!

What I do here: I expose the Systems Design, and the Designers, so Y.O.U. can Show Others, and to notify those playing certain games, “you’ve been flagged.”


Heard of “disruptive technologies?” Disruptive innovations?  Well, this is a disruptive blog. I give people who’ve already been strung out and stripped down BY the system another place to stand and look at it, and a clear, fairly diagnostic language (vs. pretty logos and moving pictures) to describe it to others. AND, which many don’t do, I tell how I found the information; links databases and all.


Despite the blog’s appearance, I know what I’m doing! You’re looking at long-term leverage, in the hands of the “non-experts,” in the public interest, not public funded propaganda to drive business to private pockets. Hence, I’m not afraid to ask:


Donate Button with Credit Cards
The formula wasn’t complex, but the concept itself was just so devious insidious, parasitic, grandiose, and by now, so baked into the economic, institutional infrastructure, people either don’t notice, or, in a common, cowardly, but all too human response they see, and just start denying, or looking for nicer explanations of an ugly truth — where it’s heading, and for lack of nicer, but still honest terms, it’s heading towards yet more slavery (and tolerating it) and genocide (and tolerating it).

Thanks for any contributions to the cause…

 

“Introduction”

The post has three major sectionsinstallments marked by titles of this size, alignment and color: each preceded by “Early Morning Intuitive on “The Larger Picture.”  This post is “Introduction,” then, the next will be:

Intermediate Section 

(TAGGS, FBOs, and Sex Prevention*) 

(a.k.a. “Abstinence Education”)

[And the last will actually be that “Early Morning Intuitive” writing]…and the one which inspired this post is the third (see below).  It started as a comment on a post over at Red Herring Alert, which had brought up things I report on, as well as progress of a case I’m also interested in for several reasons:  like how in the heck does an entire system, the family law system, whose self-declared leadership back in the 1970s emphasized new words and new practices to reduce the OLD language of criminal law in favor of the NEW language of behavioral health** — in order to rescue families, better, my dear— end up with multiple state-level, felony criminal prosecutions against one mother, another mother, and a married couple for actually helping protect children who had run away from, several say, an abusive situation?

**Check out that “Combating Divorce” link  which starts with a quote from parental-alienation-original Richard Gardner, M.D., or at least referencing him, followed by the sales pitch for “Collaborative Divorce” and Mediation — followed by the quote I was referencing above:  “new vs. old.”

In 1975, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Review Editor Meyer Elkin, editorialized on the language of family law:

“Why do we continue to use the language of criminal law in family law? Is it primarily tradition that causes us to continue to use the old words in family law? Or is it something else? Is it a reflection of the prevailing ambivalence of this society which, on the one hand, tells people that divorce is okay, but by its actions, or lack thereof, shows that many still do not accept the idea of divorce in a pair-oriented society? We need to develop new words that will alleviate stress on the divorcing family rather than add to stresses already present…. Family law is entering a new period. There is now present an opportunity for introducing new practices and procedures—and words that will represent the combined expertise of both law and the behavioral sciences who, after all, are equally concerned and have similar goals regarding the strengthening of the family. Lets us now start the search for the words.”

And in the 20th Anniversary issue (1983) of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Review, Elkin commented on the ripple effect of transforming divorce from a battle into a process of healing and growth:

“Let all of us, in our own unique way, recommit ourselves to the search for the pebbles of change that can be cast into the social pond. Let us create a divorce process that recycles divorce pain into new patterns of personal and familial growth, which, in turn, will also strengthen our entire society. Let us protect our children from the unnecessary hazards of the divorce experience so that they, like their parents, can be strengthened by divorce rather than defeated by it. And let us never forget that if the lights go out in our children’s eyes, be they children of divorce or any other children, we will all live in darkness.”

What’s interesting — I found this by a straight Google search for Meyer Elkin’s 1975 speech.  However no link on the current menu of the fairly simple web page “divorcepeacemaking.com” leads to this page, or would alert the unaware that this individual has a high allegiance to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, as a “neutral” professional in the divorce field. Unless through exposure one knows the authors and noticed those on the Resources page as, largely AFCC also, i.e., Wallerstein, Kelly, Constance Ahrons, Philip Stahl, etc…


Yes, let’s get divorce away from the courtroom and into better and MUCH less scary-looking hands whose academic interests appeared to have been Germanic languages, apparently brilliant, but then(?) took a turn into a more guaranteed line of work — clinical psychology, educational psychology and counseling psychology in California’s State university system…====>

Carol R. Hughes, Ph.D., L.M.F.T., psychotherapist, in Laguna Hills, CA

And, rather than presenting evidence before merely a judge, why not get more paid professionals involved and let them work it out with divorcing couple?

Traditional Litigation — Courthouse and the couple below (“Subjected!” and the text says there are actually winners and losers, and it’s a battle);  Mediation, no judge and the couple on top (“You”l be in charge” and the text says the mediator is a neutral);Collaborative Divorce — the Gang’s all Here (images from same website FAQs page).

Each Parent has Divorce Coach & Attorney. “Family” has “Child Specialist” and “Neutral Financial Professional.” More accurately, this would have (3+3+2=)8 stick figures shown. The circle “Family” is emphasized, however more accurately it might read “Children” and have more figurines. What there really are more of is involved professionals — but no Judge. NO JUDGE and NOT IN COURT seems an overall goal, although most of one’s legal rights to due process, codes of evidence, the right to subpoena, etc. seems to exist when there IS a legal case.

 

What’s that about — reducing the competition in the “modern family rescue team” business– “No Parents Allowed!” ???

 

 

I’m starting to think the overall picture was to disarm and dilute prosecution of crime, in general, giving safe haven to certain kinds of crimes which are fairly unique to families.  (See also elimination of the seven prior causes of divorce — one of which included involvement in felonies — which “no-FAULT divorce” facilitated).   Redefining what is, and is not, a felony ???   Which brings me to the third section title:

Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture.

Which is below the other sections, the bottom “third” of this post of this series.

In between are several charts, tables, basic vocabulary, and how to tell an HHS “tell”  for consideration.  It’s called “Early Morning Intuitive” because that’s what it was.  I’d had a nearly sleepless night after another, recent, psychic shock, although its accusations as some of the others, were pure “schlock” and was almost absent-mindedly reviewing a recent Red Herring Alert post, and noticed it had mentioned the federal funding.  This being familiar territory, I just opened my mouth (sic) and went into what ended up being a nonstop narrative that pretty much distills the essence of (this blog, and the larger picture).  It came out at least coherent enough to preserve on a post, not comment alone.

Pretty much what’s in between is much more analytical, show-and-tell, and labored.  That doesn’t make it any less valid.

Show and Tell is important.  But, if you just want “Tell” for a change (not my style), scroll or page down to that bottom section, and hopefully your eyes may peripherally catch some of the substance in between, for example, that it’s time to for more people to get hands-on to TAGGS.HHS.Gov, start using it (with observation in the “on” position) and asking some intelligent questions about what they see there, and what they do NOT see there, and how it does (or does NOT) correspond to other sources of information on the same data.


One reason my posts tend to get so long as I am talking about things people tend NOT to talk about it, and doing so using terms and resources that are also typically under-utilized, and some, so broad and vague in their symbolic meaning (example:  “Fatherhood” “Marriage” “Faith-based Organizations” and anything labeled “_______ Prevention”) I feel it necessary to continue re-iterating what vocabulary might better describe how the entities (often government entities — here, a federal agency called “HHS” — actually are talking about — without really talking about it — if you know what I mean…

First of all, anything labeled XYZ “Prevention” (case in point in this post, having sex outside marriage, especially while a teenager) means running some programming, possibly developed originally by another organization already on the HHS grants stream, as a nonprofit or for-profit.  Case in point “Abstinence Education,” “The Center for Relationship Training” (Colorado) and it’s “WAIT Training” as well as a Stone Mountain, Georgia (?) FBO (Faith-Based Organization) called “More Than Conquerors, Inc.” whose most recent nearly $10M of funding and historic activity has centered around Abstinence Education — including using that WAIT Training Curriculum and targeting at-risk youth.  Meaning, typically, poor and/or of the darker-skinned ethnic backgrounds…

So, regarding some of these terms SHOULD you happen to stumble across the existence of $150M/year allocation (since 1996) and $10M allocation (since 1996) being run through HHS using such terms as “Fatherhood” “Marriage” “Faith-based Organizations,” and “_______ Prevention” including “family violence” or “child abuse” prevention, as well as good, positive words like “Healthy” and “Responsible” — know that:

There’s the intended meaning for the target audience — the bystanding public who IF they even hear about these social policies and programming, and the family courts as they exist now vis-a-vis diverting criminal prosecution of so-called “family/relationships” matters [[which what we used to mean by “domestic violence” or “child abuse” is rapidly becoming]] is supposed to feel great about all this when they file income taxes or deal with the IRS, or even thank their “lucky stars” (or God, or whomever, including perhaps their own wisdom in not having such crazy lifestyles?) that they aren’t facing some of the hellish circumstances some neighbors, or others heard about (on-line, in print, or locally/nationally) are, Grazzini-Rucki case in point, in which one family with young children is split into multiple pieces (including potentially some runaways, some in foster care, one or more pieces in jail or threatened with it) locked in chronic war with each other +conflicting stories about WHY from the presiding court-appointed professionals, and law enforcement and/or MSM contributing their insight and opinion on who’s the good guy and who’s the bad-guy and just how this ties into XYZ national problem….

….and then there’s the telegraphed meaning for those on the inside, participating program recipients, curricula providers, tax-exempt foundation backers, and I suppose potentially HHS employees** who thankfully, can routinely choose the same, or similar, organizations to distribute the largesse (grants) to THIS time. Many of these will be thanking their “lucky stars” (or God, or whomever, including perhaps their on sagacity in hooking up with, or forming 501©3s exempt from paying taxes on corporate revenues because they ARE the good guys (charitable service providers) — and these people know more directly what the symbolically, internationally, quasi-religious language actually means to their bottom line, conference circuits, write-offs, and social networking.   (**whether or not HHS employees feel this way, they at least currently have a job — and probably have a nice pension also….and health insurance, etc., and if they get laid off, some business connections in this field….)
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: