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 ‘Legal Momentum (formerly 1970ff NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund) on “TANF”

1. ‘Really Want Systems Change?’, |2. ‘LGH. There’s STILL No Excuse. But…,’ |3. ‘To Support and Visually Upgrade,’ and, |4. ‘Technical Training and Assistance Excuse’ [Started Oct. 3, Publ. Oct. 4, 2019].

leave a comment »

This post names four sidebar widgets  and includes additional information on Wellesley Centers for Women and the BMTP (Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project) as it relates to violence-prevention efforts for the past several (more than two) decades.  See also added blog right sidebar widget extension (under “More Resources”) for link to the Wellesley Centers for Women.  The funding/funders of the WCW reveals another layer of critical, basic information to the field and involved professionals (cf. Batterers’ Intervention-focused male participating leadership) and why (almost from the start) it was international in focus, thus (conveniently?) ignoring the specifically domestic (USA) components as reflected in the mid-1990s, “Welfare Reform” years except as a progressive orientation might filter this information. [[Lead-in text updated during reformat, Nov. 3]]

1. ‘Really Want Systems Change?’, |2. ‘LGH. There’s STILL No Excuse. But…,’ |3. ‘To Support and Visually Upgrade,’ and, |4. ‘Technical Training and Assistance Excuse’ [Started Oct. 3, Publ. Oct. 4, 2019]. (shortlink ends “-bcv”, contains short-versions of sidebar widgets named in title).  

At Oct. 3, under 5,000 words.   With additional (top and footnoted) information on Wellesley Centers for Women and the Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project (BMTP’s 2002 “Speak Out” report), Oct. 4, about 9,500 words.  ALSO NOTE: I’ve added a sidebar widget linking here (under “More Resources” section) also updated to reflect its added narrative & drill-down contents.//LGH Oct. 11, 2019.

Those name four sidebar text widgets….


This post delivers a bit more than promised, which I’ll leave you to deal with until or unless I decide to split it. Right now, I feel like “speaking out” about a number of things. The Wellesley part was an afterthought to the widget off-ramps which, due to timing probably, took on a life of its own today, Friday, October 4, after I thought the post was fine “as-is” October 3 evening.//LGH.

(“SPEAK OUT” | Cover page w/ year, title and “℅” who produced it) Image and link to full ‘BMTP at WC4W’ report’s 2002 pdf shown again below on “Footnote” to this Oct., 2019 LGH|FCM post (shortlink ending “=bcv”).

I completed this post fully Oct. 3 evening, without the verbal “outburst” I just wrote.  I had intentionally postponed publishing one day til Oct. 5, then saw quickly on social media how timely the message on its footnote (itself a kind of indignant commentary on feminist “Gender Bias / Human Rights — vs. System Operations” response to domestic violence). I would consider myself feminist, except for the association with such behavior.

Below, I’d mentioned, off the top of my head (having already looked into the (websites, stated missions, financials where shown and 990s where they didn’t show but could be found anyhow) two obviously feminist-oriented US-based 501©s (tax-exempt, “nonprofit” organizations (Legal Momentum and Institute for Women’s Policy; | See Footnote) and another one which work seems central, is still often cited, but which was produced not out of a nonprofit, but out of an (elite: Ivy League I believe) New England college’s “Centers for Women” — the (2002) Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project (read the cover, above right).

This document’s publication date, project committee members (with a whole “1” woman actual survivor — the others are all JDs and a PhD (with which LundyBancroft sneaks in there, non-PhD’d as a co-author), “Contributing Authors” (actual survivor, not included; look closely), and on the bottom of the same page, the composition of its “Advisory Committee” are all helpful in understanding domestic violence advocacy today and why it seems so ineffective as applied to the family courts, IF you have some grasp of the funding and federalization of the movement, and when this began.  (Answer:  by the 1980s….)(~>Link to a pdf I made last July). BMTP FinalReport (I have been looking closely at this in its timeframe (post-PRWORA) and at involved parties who did NOT examine who or what are the Family Courts (AFCC or etc) | 2019July5


Read the rest of this entry »

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”

with 2 comments

Post title & shortlinkCourtesy 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” (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#…   Short-link ends “-3Jv”)…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.

Goodwill of Silicon ValleyIn 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.

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.

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!!)

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).

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Friends of Boulder Knoll * 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:

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).


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 »

Georgia Center of OPPORTUNITY (for whom?) in re: Exploiting 1996 PRWORA (Personal Responsibility and Work OPPORTUNITY Reconciliation Act) HHS grants streams

with one comment

Did you read my last post?  Got Feedback or Questions?


A much more detailed Feedback Form available at an 11/24/2013 post, however it comes with a rant. Either one, feedback is emailed to me. I may not reply, but will read.


Related post:   Despite Truly Funky Tax Returns, HHS Remains Loyal (2010-2015) to One Faith-Based (under Two Diff’t EIN#s, ONE of which the IRS acknowledges#) in Stone Mountain–or is it Conyers?– Georgia.  Also, Page (see rightsidebar, “Vital Links”) on HMRF funds in Georgia and recent “Note to Readers” post notifying about the page, and containing more related information.

 

ForeWords.

I have been exploring certain networks and explaining the elements of them.  I look up not only grants, grantees, or organizations, but also for where and how these connect or are networked with others.

I also know, generally speaking, the average readership — not including those entities I’ve been reporting on, which can sometimes be seen on the blog —  has not voiced or demonstrated an understanding of the basic networked elements by type, and what business models (macro) are at work here.  Talking across the chasm of understanding and definitely at cross-currents to the typical agenda requires a lot of repetition, defining terms, and pointing out what the background-story may be on a better “translation according to usage” of some of the typical jargon, which will help recognizing it as jargon when it’s encountered.  Perhaps remember this phrase: “The Power of Networking is the Appearance of Consensus“(I just made it up)…  Looking at the network may show just how much overlap between seemingly multiple different entities of different types, especially when academia gets in there, the temptation may be to just give up and think, “I disagree — but I’m such a minority!!”As my blogging, I hope, shows, most people thinking this, or over-whelmed by the same rhetoric coming at them from so many angles — and IF you engage in receiving social services, you will encounter its influence, whether or not its acknowledged — actually are NOT “the minority.”  In fact, the majority of population was not consulted in advance about the wisdom of these programs.

Congress (which, it’s fair to say, does represent a major power structure) authorized PRWORA once and continued re-authorizing subsequent versions of it, periodically. Not one version of it ever removed the HMRF funding, and there was little debate on this, in part, because of just how many people in the know agreed NOT to publicize it outside of their own circles and where marketing.

Did you ever hear, in the years 2000 – now, a major women’s rights or feminist organization engaging in ongoing, serious debate on their websites about these HMRF grants streams?

I recently reviewed “Legal Momentum,” formerly “NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund” on its’ “Welfare Reform” pages.  Not a word about these grants.  Take a look under their “Programs” (a well-developed menu), heading “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families”).  It is informative, but not one (!!) reference to HMRF funding, or Access and Visitation as a factor why mothers are losing custody of their children to fathers (and being driven into poverty) as a result of its successful policy intent to do just that, exactly.

TANF: A Social Safety Net for Women and Families

TANF stands for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, the federal name for the national assistance program for needy families with children. TANF is often referred to as “welfare.” The majority of families assisted by TANF are families headed by a single mother.

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: