Posts Tagged ‘AHA – American Humane Association (involved in NQIC-NRF HHS grantee)’
For Political Clout, Big Isn’t Always Best, as the National Fatherhood Initiative, Inc. (1993ff, EIN# 23-2745763) and its Disproportionate Influence Considering Its Small Size and Financially Fuzzy IRS Tax Returns Show. (Started Jan. 23, 2020, Published May 20.)
This Post: For Political Clout, Big Isn’t Always Best, as the National Fatherhood Initiative, Inc. (1993ff, EIN# 23-2745763) and its Disproportionate Influence for its Small Size and Financially Fuzzy IRS Tax Returns Show (Started Jan. 20, 2020, Published May 20). (Case-sensitive, generated short-link ends “-c80,” that final character is a “zero” not capital “O”) (about 5,200 words). Minor copy-editing revisions May 29.
For this post, recognize the acronyms “NFI” (see title) and “NGA” (for ‘National Governors’ Association,’)## and “QIC-NRF” (the “Quality Improvement Center for Non-Resident Fathers” — searchable on this blog, and my post on misleading* terms including “QIC”).
*Why are such terms”mis-leading”? When it comes to tracking public funds to their private (or other public) grantees or other independent contractors, to the extent this information is supposed to be made available to the public, it’s the ENTITIES that must file and to read what they filed, you must find their names to look them up. A program (including a non-entity “Center” at some large institution such as a university — or federal/state department) is not an “entity.” See “example” section, next, but the concept in this paragraph (stemming from the “QIC-NRF” term) continues after the marked section with a few images.
This post holds some text I’d compiled in 2016 on a Page (published separately April 27, 2017 but before then a page published Sept. 2016), then moved here as a draft post, with updates, January 23, 2020 and SHORT intro. It had since then remained in draft status. //LGH 20May2020
That Page:
Title probably should’ve read “1996” — not sure why I put in 1998 at the time. PRWORA was passed in 1996. Certain fatherhood-related, Congressional resolutions, etc. were also passed in 1998 and 1999 while the nation was changing its entire Social Security Act funding (and along with it, distribution methods for child support) in the years after 1996. [//LGH 2020 comment]
Two images (snapshots of a few paragraphs each) from my 2017 Page, next below, give more content. I also see on review that this page dealt more with the NGA, while today’s post with the NFI. On seeing substantial overlap (i.e., the ‘NFI’ part I’d obviously planned to transplant here a few months ago), I’m going to remove it from the 2017 page to be replaced with a link here. //LGH 20May2020.
(These links refer to the post from which two (fuzzy) screenshots below came:)
at shortlinks for pages use a capital “P” as in “http://wp.me/PsBXH-4qs. By contrast, short-link for this post would be “http://wp.me/psBXH-c80“. I usually provide just the last three characters as I more often write posts than pages…
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Don’t know Who or What ~QIC-NRF ~ is? Looks like neither do the AHA, the NFI, the ABA Center on Children and the Law, and HHS/Children’s Bureau (at least as uploaded at UCBerkeley’s School of Social Welfare CalSWEC) who collaborated on IT, then reported IT as a WHO (2010). File under Fatherhood Engagement Absurdities — or at least, lots of anomalies — 2010
The title of this post I started Feb 15, 2017 Don’t know Who or What ~QIC-NRF ~ is? Looks like neither do the AHA, the NFI, the ABA Center on Children and the Law, and HHS/Children’s Bureau (at least as uploaded at UCBerkeley’s School of Social Welfare CalSWEC) who collaborated on IT, then reported IT as a WHO (2010). File under Fatherhood Engagement Absurdities — or at least, lots of anomalies — 2010. (case-sensitive shortlink ends in -5U6)
It was “on ice” for a few weeks (see yesterday’s post for an idea why) and having been pretty full of information and annotated images done early on (mid-Feb. 2017), I’m publishing it early March 2017. I added some material towards the end, but not much more. One entity that may get its own character assessment is the Buhl, Idaho (address) NYC Park Avenue (Legal Domicile) Intensive Family Preservation Services National Network, Inc.” whose website is NFPN.org and is selling “three tools to 50 Domestic and Foreign Agencies” (that’s from the FY2015 return found at Charities NYS.com) to train direct service workers, doing this tax-exempt. Interesting scenario -I’m uploading several miscellaneous images (most from Year 2002) and the link is to that whole tax return from 2002 showing “Name Change” on top-left, and a number of other very interesting items. Which would take a while to narrate (not on this post…., though!).
[This short section adds those images].
This image is from Charities NYS on what’s now called “Intensive Family Preservation National Network, Inc.” — at least in NY. So Far, I’ve not been able to find ANY registration for it in Idaho, either charitable (Idaho doesn’t require charities to register) or as a business entity (under either name). I’m not finished looking, but under a straight name search, no deal so far. //LGH
X in upper left corner is for “Name Change.” So it changed its name TO “National Family Preservation Services, Inc.” FROM something else. I notice the NYS filing (and this is a NY Legal domicile entity, despite its “Dairyland” (Idaho) address) reads as it does now: Intensive Family Preservation Services National Network, Inc. The NYS filing shows it started in 1992 (as I recall, adding the link here, with two images) as that name and no “dbas” (at least in NY) are listed. The tricky part is, originally (or at least around turn of the century) its revenues were more dominated by contributions with only (as on this 2002 Form 990) about $25K “Program Service Revenues (Part I, LIne 2, page 1). That just about equals the expenses later in the return. By 2015, the return is showing there have been no contributions except a single $40,000 (even) for the past 5 years (or so), and most revenue is from Program Service Revenues. The products they are selling seem to be proprietary software-based. Surprise, surprise. See “Raymond Kirk, Ph.D.” (or “Dr. Kirk” from NC, per website). SOMEONE is being paid royalties as part of the tax-exempt services under this 501©3.
Click to read (includes some of above images): NFPN “Safe Children Strong Families” (IDAHO) Form 990 2002 last 2 pp lists Bd of Dirs affiliations One is NJ Office of Child Support & Paternity) EIN#133715995_200212_990
From NYS Business Entities Search (screenprints, repeat the search if you’re curious!). The next link is to an IRS search showing (maybe make a note of it) that this IRS search database doesn’t necessarily display an entity’s LEGAL DOMICILE but possibly filing address. I don’t know (will try and find out, however). That’s interesting, because I don’t see it registered as a business OR charity in Idaho.
IRS ‘Exempt Orgs Select Check’ showing EIN#133715995 belongs to Intensive Family Preserv’n Svces Nat’l Network Inc in Buhl ID (I think legal domicile is NY though) (option Is Elegi 
If you can view this image (I didn’t provide a pdf link) on your device, notice lower right corner shows that IF we are talking about the same entity throughout, this one was first (at least in NY) named IFPSNN, Inc. not NFPN, Inc. (using their acronyms here just for the caption). Also start date, and absence of any “Registered Agent” or floor or suite# at the 695 Park Avenue NYC address (!!)
That was a “sneak preview” of another subject matter, only touched on again at the bottom of this post.
(End of update section adding NFPN images)
My previous attempt at this title gives a bit of a preview:
2010, report on the QIC-NRF (“CWS”) One-Day Social Worker Training Curriculum for Father Engagement, despite help from of the NFI, The AHA, and HHS and as uploaded at CalSWEC.Berkeley.EDU, holds Misleading, Internally Inconsistent and Inaccurate Info on Award 90CA1025 (which doesn’t exist)
THIS material (now, post) previously located at, introducing, and probably overlap in content with:
“Progressive Language Creep Section from 2012 “Reconceptualize This” post (reviewed and reformatted 2017)“[with short-link ending “-5SR, “]
- Under THAT post, I called THIS post “2017 Offspring #1”
Which, being a clean-up and update formerly concluding a January 22, 2012 post called:
ABA, APA, AFCC, AAML, . . and others: Reconceptualize This! [Some Ohio Councils, Commissions, and Headlines, Incl. Basic Links][Chosen to represent 2012 in my 2017 Retrospective, includes its own] with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-101” (all numbers).
Which ending section of 2012 post began like this:
NOW LET’S LOOK AT SOME OF THIS PROGRESSIVE LANGUAGE CREEP AS FACILITATED BY CERTAIN ASSOCIATIONS**…
[***Referring in that 2012 context to the ABA. the APA, the AFCC, of course, the AAML]
NOW that I’ve clarified (or perhaps further muddled?) the relationships between my own posts spanning a five year learning curve on projects (like this QIC-NRF) and involved entities (including but not limited to those named in the post title) I raised five years ago, as a volunteer public-interest investigative blogger for these efforts, …..
…. can we talk about how some other powerful, well-heeled and well-positioned longstanding entities including one big player from the public resource sector (US DHHS/CB), paying (tba — read my post!) one of the private entities almost $5 million over about the same number of years, managed to confuse a What for a Who (or hope we’d take that bait), and while doing so, got the grant name wrong too? I searched “QIC-NRF” again, and from two pages of results, chose to look at one on the first page posted at CalSWEC.Berkeley.edu and representing a 2010 report.
This is what raised (because the uploaded document– not produced but certainly promoted by CalSWEC at Berkeley School of Social Welfare — cited to a certain grant) more “anomalies” as there was no such grant. Looking closer, I then saw the “avoidance” language (and internal inconsistencies) in the opening pages, and decided to go explain why, especially at $1M/year grants from the public (administered by the Children’s Bureau of ACF of HHS), this was so inappropriate.
Showing Search results for QIC-NRF referring to this flyer
<==The attempt to portray the It as a Who even included — not for long, apparently — a one-page flyer advertising the website fatherhoodQIC.org (as displayed on website starting NWCCE.org. (<==see funders) which, at Hunter College (CUNY)‘s (<==Wiki – Read –it began as a “normal school” (training teachers) and all-women, until 1964. It’s also a public college ). Silberman School of Social Work, stands for “National Center for Child Welfare Excellence“) which flyer looks like this:
You can probably read, but if not, Click here to see flyer advertising fatherhoodqic.org
But once clicked on, leads instead to this:
And a wrong grant # substituted for the right one, obscuring that nearly ⅓ of grants to the entity whose name was omitted from the paragraph providing the (wrong) HHS grant# were TO the AHA and FOR the purpose of fatherhood engagement, per TAGGS.HHS.gov results.
It’s important, or I wouldn’t post it! However I will at least change the background-color of that section and use a smaller font. (A first attempt to keep it in place on the Progressive Language Creep post…)
SHARE THIS POST on...
Swirling Circles of Influence among Networked Nonprofits (Tend to have a Single Vortex)
It’s definitely no fun conversing with a linear-based blog platform (minus an enforceable stylesheet) to whoever swings by here– on things, Let’s Get Honest, I’m reasonably angry and distressed about, and which I know to be driving the future downhill while calling it uphill.For example, how much more individual family prosperity might be around if these “change agents” were actually themselves open to outside input (like feedback) to the collective impact on the coverage gaps in their collective models?
Or from those who do not think the entire problems of the world actually fit into human neuroscience-based motivational paradigm, nor should they be crammed into that paradigm just because the giant contractor called the USA prioritizes that research. Are you NUTS??? We’d better stay on top of what THAT’s all about (what’s the endgame…..).
There has to be a truth meter, and there has to be a balancing of this power. And I’ll tell you what — it’s real hard to negotiate with someone who’s in control of the media, the money, to an extent the courts, and has their collective expert mouths open 24/7 (through the internet, conferencing, etc.).
In truth, this gets down to basically an economic model — and that is the best way to understand it. Cut the crap — show me the funding, and I’ll tell you what the group’s about, truthfully… and how those who are constantly teaching and programming do not, by and large, walk in the same shoes (or paths) as their clients or the people on the radar to be socially changed… Actually, as most groups don’t talk about their tax returns, it’s up to use to talk about them. UNBELIEVABLE what you can learn by reading these (assuming they exist…).
But if these weren’t the latest experts (God’s gift to humanity)– then they wouldn’t be “change agents” in the true meaning of the word, would they? Because to force change implies to use of collective (networked) force and driving public opinion towards a certain solution to a certain problem, as framed by (the change agent).
Unfortunately, they are copying each other’s models, and starting to clatter and clang to the same general beat. those who don’t, don’t get grants next year. Besides, what’s the point of access to all that wealth, if not becoming a change agent?
But what about the human spirit?
And what about meeting and talking with others with the intent to actually hear from and listen to them — and not an ulterior motive of behavior modification.
I hear people’s stories EVERY day (by virtue of being accessible) and many are hair-raising and involve an interaction with the court system, abuse by other family members…
Wikipedia illustration of “Vortex”
“Vortex created by the passage of an aircraft wing, revealed by colored smoke”
The Miami Child Well-Being Court Model Concept,** though, has GEARS… doesn’t sound or look as exciting — it has three interlocking labeled gears and is designed to be replicable. (Link is from LAW.Harvard.EDU, CAP (Child Advocacy Programs) but apparently this model is spreading rapidly)
(Just dropping the reference; it’ll get posted eventually….)
Link Updates — that’s now a generic link to Harvard’s CAP news. However, here’s a 2015 link to what it appears this post was referencing, with the gears: http://cap.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/22_miami-child-well-being-court-model.pdf
That is a 3-pager link explaining the model. Notice the participants in fine print at bottom of first page (I just transcribed, as it’s impossible to copy from website, or website as pdf, or to upload the same pdf, it seems to a blog for public discussion of the trademarked plan to alter the focus and form (nationally) of public institutions….
“The MCWBC Training & Evaluation Team is led by Judge Cindy Lederman, Miami-Dade Juvenile Court (11th Judicial Circuit, FL) and Dr. Lynne Ktaz, University of Miamia Linda Ray Intervention Center, in collaboration with researchers at RTI International, Dr. Jenifer Goldman Fraser and Dr. Cecilia Casanueva. This effort is currently being funded by a generous grant from the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control (No. R18 CE001714). The model began as an innovative collaboration between the judiciary and infant mental health, led by Judge Lederman in partnership with trauma expert, Dr. Joy Osofsky, of the Lousiana State University Health Sciences Center, and Dr. (Lynette) Katz.” [quote added to post 12/2015]
I took some time (just now — on this major holiday weekend) to look at the participants here, in some detail. Interesting affiliations and in what fields the various “Drs.” above, all women as it turns out, actually hold doctorates. (Hint: Apparently none are M.D.s)… This is becoming a separate post — it ties into major, systemic changes to the courts already set in place, and how they are occurring. As far as representative government f the people by the people, with citizenship being tied in the USA to specific states and people being subject primarily to laws (and taxation) in those states, this process is NOT good news.
This model was developed — excuse me — “evolved” and by 2013 was trademarked. See (later than this post — added during an update) http://www.floridaschildrenfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/MiamiChildHandbook.pdf I’m saving this to Media — click for image. Apparently, despite the public funds (federal grants, juvenile court) — we’re not supposed to as general public, actually discuss the material on a public blog — see encryption of the text to prevent quotation under Fair Copyright Law):
!”#␣!”#$”␣%&”‘(␣)*”␣+*”,-␣%./012␣$%&#’␣()␣*␣+(%,##-(,.␣/%0-1␣(,(1(*1#&␣)2)1#$)␣(,1#.-*1(%,␣*++-%*/”␣1%␣ +-%$%1#␣”#*'(,.␣*,&␣-#/%3#-2␣4-%$␣1-*0$*␣(,␣$*’1-#*1#&␣2%0,.␣/”(‘&-#,␣*,&␣1%␣5-#*6␣1″#␣(,1#-.#,#-*1(%,*’␣ 1-*,)$())(%,␣%4␣/”(‘&␣*50)#␣*,&␣,#.’#/17␣8,␣1″()␣$%&#’9␣1″#␣&#+#,&#,/2␣/%0-1␣()␣*␣+’*14%-$␣4%-␣(,/-#*)(,.␣1″#␣-#*/”␣ *,&␣#44#/1(3#,#))␣%4␣1″#-*+#01(/␣#3(&#,/#␣5*)#&␣(,1#-3#,1(%,)␣4%-␣$*’1-#*1#&␣/”(‘&-#,␣*,&␣1″#(-␣/*-#.(3#-)7␣!”#␣ $%&#’␣4%/0)#)␣%,␣:;<␣/#,1#-(,.␣1″#␣*11#,1(%,␣%4␣1″#␣/%0-1␣%,␣1″#␣#’%+$#,1*’9␣#$%1(%,*’9␣-#’*1(%,*’9␣*,&␣$#,1*’␣ “#*’1″␣,##&)␣%4␣1″#␣2%0,.␣/”(‘&␣(,␣=0&(/(*’␣&#/()(%,␣$*6(,.9␣/*)#␣+’*,,(,.9␣*,&␣+#-$*,#,/2␣#-$(,*1(%,>␣:?<␣ 1($#’2␣-#4#–*’␣1%␣*,&␣=0&(/(*’␣$%,(1%-(,.␣%4␣)#-3(/#)␣4%-␣*&=0&(/*1#&␣/”(‘&-#,␣*,&␣1″#(-␣+*-#,1)9␣*,&␣:@<␣/-%))␣ &()/(+'(,*-29␣)0)1*(,*5’#␣+-*/1(/#␣/”*,.#␣*1␣1″#␣/*)#␣’#3#’7␣!”#␣$%&#’␣”*)␣.#,#-*1#&␣*␣.-%0,&)A#”␣%4␣(,1#-#)19␣A(1″␣ /%$$0,(1(#)␣*/-%))␣1″#␣/%0,1-2␣*,&␣(,1#-,*1(%,*”2␣)##6(,.␣1#/”,(/*’␣*))()1*,/#␣1%␣#B+’%-#␣*&%+1(%,␣*,&␣*))()1␣A(1″␣ ($+’#$#,1*1(%,␣%4␣1″#␣$%&#’7␣C)␣1″#␣%-(.(,*’␣#’%+#-)␣%4␣1″#␣$%&#’9␣1″#␣D(*$(␣1#*$␣”*)␣/%,1(,0#&␣%,␣*␣)1#*&2␣ /%0-)#␣1%␣50(‘&␣1″#␣1-*(,(,.␣-#)%0-/#)␣1″*1␣A(”␣.0(&#␣#44#/1(3#␣*,&␣)0)1*(,*5’#␣($+’#$#,1*1(%,␣%4␣1″#(-␣/%$+’#B␣ $%&#’7␣
30#”,”,-4␣5’#,,”,-␣#,(␣67#’/#1″.,␣8␣9::.$;'”<&$*,1<␣1.␣=#1*>␣
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 