Posts Tagged ‘MPDI (Minnesota Program Development Inc)’
My June 4, 2011 Post on Four Special Issue Resource Centers, Pt 3 of 3, “Same text, better formatting,” [From June 4, 2011 \ Updated Formatted, Publ. Here March 30, 2016].
Post title (with publish dates added), updated April 2022, to get the short-link. I also changed background-color to white (from light-blue) and removed the default font specs for this post. My new blog default font is “sans-serif” but too many paragraphs within this one copied “Georgia” which is more curly in look. I’m not re-doing fonts para. by para., so individual paragraphs will not all be in the same font. //LGH Apr. 22, 2022.
My June 4, 2011 Post on Four Special Issue Resource Centers, Pt 3 of 3, “Same text, better formatting,” [Updated Formatted, Publ. Here March 30, 2016]. (short-link ends “-3e7”)
Last post left off at my 2011 exclamation about,
WHO IS MPDI? …WHO are these guys??
WHY WE MIGHT CARE, WHO IS MPDI:
(I figure $18 million to one organization might get our attention. From HHS):
..and discovering (2016) that the HHS database “TAGGS.hhs.gov” quoted and featured SO MUCH in this blog, just has gotten a facelift. Over the years I have raised MANY questions about the integrity, organization (flexibility for the public) and reliability of this data, and even set up a blog in Fall 2013 to exhibit some of the seriousness of the issues: HHSGiveways, Government Shutdowns. The project was not finished, but the Pages and Posts up so far show-and-tell some of the accountability issues.
The new interface will take some getting used to.. but may make blogging easier, as it does produce those reports in several different formats. My most immediate concern was no field labeled “Recipient” (but a prompt to type in recipient name into “Keyword” field — and NO search field to input an EIN#. DUNS# option remains, but the EIN# Select Option does not seem to.
Report Totals of HHS Grants for 2016 at https://taggs.hhs.gov/SearchRecip, this morning, Year 2016 only, is $241,236,771,196, a.k.a. $241B, approximately one quarter-year’s worth. Maybe we should pay better attention…
Unlike Parts 1 and 2 (of this mini-series), most of this post is actually what was written in 2011, about two years after I first started this blog. Further down on the post is a photo of the building MPDI was in, which I also found interesting… I’ve attempted several clean-ups of the charts, especially, TAGGS.hhs.gov charts, shown then. I’ll mark 2016 Updates with a different background color and teal-green borders, like this:
UPDATE interjection:
If the charts are still hard to read below, I suggest use the “ADVANCED SEARCH” link at the new-user-interface-website “TAGGS.hhs.gov” — here’s a link. It’s a good habit to develop anyway!
The post might still be a little complicated reading. If a chart isn’t clear enough — re-run it. The conclusion of the matter (or at least, the post written 6/4/2011) I think still makes sense:
(Sorry about the laborious length of this post, which started when I saw several DAIP-type programs at a Family Justice Center ALLIANCE Conference in San Diego.)
Now, we need more “justice centers”? ?? At what point does a person get to say STOP? Where’s the justice, and why hasn’t domestic violence — or family violence — stopped by now, with all that intervention going on? Are we chasing the virtual Holy Grail here, or what?
While “Minnesota Program Development, Inc.” is not of the size and funding of “MDRC” — I feel it’s in the same business, with slightly different staffing and origins. It is in[to] the Development of PROGRAMS based on personal visions of the founders — and being spread with Technical Assistance and capacity building public funded help like a fast growing tree nurtured by the IRS and the dual prongs of HHS and DOJ (all EXECUTIVE BRANCH of USA) grants.
I understand that people want to respond to PROBLEMS and then start and continue PROGRAMS to solve them. But now the PROLIFERATION OF PROGRAMS has really become a major PROBLEM itself. These programs have tremendous leverage because of their existing structures, and relationships. Too much of the public remains clueless that half of them even exist.
And — people “served” doesn’t mean people — or even lives! — “saved.” Nor do judges (etc.) trained necessarily increase judicial ethics or “domestic violence awareness.” I see the grants, I see the people, I see the programs described, and you can’t beat those website — but where is the data that any of this is actually helping?
Instead, the Supervised Visitation Network is being used AGAINST the mothers and children it supposedly is to protect.
And, because we are here looking at “MPDI” which is in effect, Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs (with a new name), this quote from their website (link probably no longer current) showed their statewide influence as far back as 1991s. We might ask why it was so well-received in just a decade’s worth of operations (and how much any pre-1995 HHS grants may have helped with that reception):
(RESULTs/Accomplishments at “TheDuluthModel.org”) Due to DAIP’s success, in 1991 the Minnesota Legislature mandated that each of the 38 Legislative Assignment Districts establish an intervention project coordinated by a battered women’s advocacy group. As of 1997, there were 44 intervention projects in Minnesota.
This set up for the coordination of the entire criminal AND family AND social services AND nonprofit (Community referrals) system based on the ideas, in part derived from a Brazilian Christian Socialist / theology of the oppressed (Ellen Pence/Paolo Friere — look it up), and in part from a Toronto institutional ethnographist[?] professor (again, look it up), i.e., the art and practice of systems change to affect mothers, fathers, and children nationwide, and internationally. That takes a certain amount of arrogant, sheer, abusive/controlling/coercive narcissism to push through — which in some ways reminds me of characteristics of batterers as described by the same groups….
//LGH
This now begins the older post text:
WHY WE MIGHT CARE, WHO IS MPDI:
(I figure $18 million to one organization might get our attention. From HHS):
(HHS grants, from TAGGS.hhs.gov) RECIPIENT INFORMATION
Note: One EIN can be associated with several different organizations. Also, one DUNS number can be associated with multiple EINs. This occurs in cases where Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) has assigned more than one EIN to a recipient organization.
Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC | DULUTH | MN | 55802-2152 | ST. LOUIS | 193187069 | $ 18,027,387 |
Showing: 1 – 1 of 1 Recipients
(Note, this database only goes back to 1995, i.e., there are 14 previous organizational years unrecorded on the database).
Recipient: | MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC |
Address: | 202 EAST SUPERIOR STREET DULUTH, MN 55802-2152 |
Country Name: | United States of America |
County Name: | ST. LOUIS |
HHS Region: | 5 |
Type: | Other Social Services Organization |
Class: | Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations |
Re: My June 4, 2011 Post on Four Special Issue Resource Centers (Ellen Pence/MPDI): (Pt 2 of, well, now it’s 3), “Same text, better formatting, some updating”). [Publ. again March 29, 2016<~~].
You will notice that some grants refer to the “Special Issue Resource Center.” …
Given the column headings I selected, that of over perhaps twenty years, only THREE different women are shown: Ellen Pence and Denise Gamache headed up most of them as “Principal Investigator”, then in about 2000, mostly just Denise Gamache, and in 2016, I see a “Renee Gutman.”
Denise Gamache is now associated with “Battered Women’s Justice Project” (and was while working also at DAIP) which decided to “come out” (incorporate in MN) in the year 2013. I see that “Renee Gutmann” got her degree in 1993, and has worked for DAIP since 1993 (LinkedIn) and is characterized as “Accountant” for DAIP.
THIS POST IS:
Re: My June 4, 2011 Post on Four Special Issue Resource Centers (Ellen Pence/MPDI): (Pt 2 of, well, now it’s 3), “Same text, better formatting, some updating”). [Publ. again March 29, 2016<~~] (short-link ends “-3ck”).
Part 1 (most recent post) explains why I’m re-blogging it with some updates. It was recently reblogged on Red Herring Alert, in an interesting juxtaposition of articles.
This version of the same post makes some charts more readable. The gist of the material is the Ellen Pence / Casey Gwinn connection (representing the Duluth, MN-based “DAIP” as it now goes by, and the Family Justice Center concept (now called “Alliance for Hope International” as a California nonprofit of which the “Family Justice Center Alliance” has become a program). It also intersected with Telling Amy’s Story, and got under my skin at the time, as it still does.
As does the entire “Family Justice Center” setup. I still remember “connecting the dots” on discovering that the San Diego Family Justice Center Foundation (it’s full original, corporate name) existed to funnel money to Camp Hope, Inc. — but Camp Hope, Inc. wasn’t staying properly incorporated. No matter, shut down one version, file for a new one, move the money. It was a minor, minor detail — charitable registration number was so close, and more recently realizing it’d changed names AGAIN, that got me reviewing the earlier tax returns of this operations. I have been living IN California before, during, and while, this business model was created, funded, and replicated. It’s worth an entirely separate blog to alert people to what, exactly IS that business model — but I am only one person.
The fuller background on the original (a) philanthropic private wealthy couple and (b) public funds behind the multiple names surrounding both the San Diego Family Justice Center and the associated “Camp Hope” theme, are another separate story which I also learned considerably more fascinating background on this past summer. By doing, the usual thing — scrutinizing tax returns and looking up the entities and people named in them. Some of this is exposed below in the section with light-brown-background and teal borders. Actually, influence from “Fuller Seminary” leadership may have been involved so, “fuller background” could be a pun, also.
“Getting” the reality of the Family Justice Center Alliance is, I’d say, as important as getting the reality of the Duluth Model, CCR, treat everyone and let us be the train-the-trainer people concept. So I will continue to bring it up, where it ties into the other subject matter. Both involve replicating BUSINESS models. A close diagnosis of the original models then, is always appropriate — and by “diagnosis” I mean, accounting-wise. This can’t be just one organization, but involve the various related organizations (translation: “networks”) to construct something of a picture of operations. Even for people who weren’t “there,” right on scene locally — it can still be done.
My June 4, 2011, Post on Four Special Issue Resource Centers (Ellen Pence/MPDI), a 2016 Intro (Pt 1 of 2)
Two excerpts from the post. Fair warning, I may still revise after publishing it today, 3/28/2016. Also, some of its many tags actually refer to the one I just published yesterday, which also has some (minor) revisions, relating to list of YE 2014 sub-grantees from Futures without Violence, towards the bottom of the post…I took that post from the middle of this one, in order to keep this one shorter, and linked with the “Part 2” for which it is “Part 1.”
ABOUT THIS POST
This “Part 1” INTRO commentary introduces occasioned by a re-post of my 6/4/2011 “Ellen Pence and Casey Gwinn — Will the real Minnesota Program Development Inc. please stand up?“by Dede Evavold on Red Herring Alert 3/15/2016 under the title “Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs,” In “Part 2,” I simply block-copied the text (but not comments on original post) of my June 4, 2011 post to clean up the html (formatting of quote and tables) for easier reading, and possibly updated broken links or some of its information.
and:
- Many of us may know about the 1994ff “VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) which brought funding (grants, presumably also contracts) through the USDOJ along certain lines.
- However, there was an earlier 1984 “FVPSA” (Family Violence Prevention Services Act) passed by Congress, from which some of these resource centers apparently date. HHS itself only dates to 1980 (before, there was HEW, Dept. of “Health, Education and Welfare).
As you can see from the excerpts, I’m (a) responding to a recent re-post from 2011, and, as ever (b) have certain topics I wish to continue talking about. As I learn, so I also teach. This post then concludes with some information about the Colorado-based NACC (National Association of Counsel for Children), as it came up in a Huffington Post article quoted by the re-blog and a reference to NCJFCJ’s “Project One.” For “Project One,” …”One World Order,” despite all the talk of desired outcomes protecting human rights, women, children, reducing poverty, increasing justice and equity, etc., this One World Order (Government) seems to be the overall agenda — total control of major aspects of life and commerce (including of domestic human livestock — which is a “resource” of a different kind — breeding and training).
Despite how “special” we in the USA may wish to believe our country is, and that in many respects, no question it IS quite special, a lot of this type of programming can be traced back — which I can say because I have been tracking several programs and operations back to originators and designers — to two countries, both of which attempted to and to a degree established empires: England (Great Britain), and Germany. Both tried this in Africa as we know (along with others) AFTER the USA fought England in a war for independence in the late 1700s. Include some Freud et al., for the 1900s, maybe a few more countries could be referenced.
What I would like to call attention to is the use of private corporations as a method, in addition to the combination of tax / tax-exemption to sway the outcomes AGAINST the individual rights and against individuals, in the name of services provided and problems solved. All I’m saying is, the “solutions” seem to trend in a certain expansion of scope and shrinking of accountability to taxpayers, which continues to turn up the heat on the public at large. It’s not good enough to provide even some very decent services while progressively compromising justice and fiscal accountability. Fiscal accountability is EVERYTHING when it comes to administering justice!!
My most recent post (published March 27, 2016 — yes, on Easter Day) fills in some background on the networked organizations involved in the HHS-funded “DVRN” (Domestic Violence Resource Network) as set up, I learned, under the “FVPSA.” In 2011, obviously, I didn’t know all this. It’s important information to know, however… In expanding such “resource centers” which then receive — and, to a degree, sometimes redistribute — public and private money both — the trail of public “ROI” (Return on Investment) of tax revenues continues to expand, become more complex, and become less carefully watched.
Read the rest of this entry »
Most have heard of the VAWA (passed 1994), But what about the earlier (passed 1984) FVPSA? Or, the “DVRN”? [Published March 27, 2016].
Post Title: Most have heard of the VAWA (passed 1994), But what about the earlier (passed 1984) FVPSA? Or, the “DVRN”? [Published March 27, 2016]. (shortlink ends “-3dk”). Looks like about 10,800 words.
UPDATE COMMENTS: (Font-change, date added to the title itself, and this short-linked title added to the body of post, added December 12, 2020, during my construction of a 2020 Table of Contents. No, I’m not going to go through and re-format this one otherwise!
I may refer to it in the context of there actually being an “FVSPA” in addition to the VAWA, which still seems conveniently ignored (though is most certainly known by grantee organizations in the network) when most talk about the state of “Prevention of Violence Against Women” movement in the USA, whether talking about it within the USA, or as seen from other countries.
I’m sure the membership of the DVRN has changed meanwhile, but as it’s not a specific organization, but an amorphous, mixed group of entities and non-entities CALLED the “DVRN,” this is still important to comprehend. As I understood the situation in March, 2016, obviously. Thanks for any time you spend reading this and other posts. //LGH Dec. 12, 2020.
(AS WRITTEN IN 2016…)
It seems to me that the national response to wife-beating and/or child abuse may have already been put on a sort of auto-pilot, knee-jerk response decades ago, and is simply being refined, fine-tuned, and turf-and-territory-protected ever since. The more I learn about HHS programs inspired or validated by Acts of Congress focused on stopping abuse or preventing family violence, reducing juvenile delinquency (etc. — remember my two “About NCJJ” recent posts** showing the privatization conflict of interest covered up by “NCJFCJ” which is also benefitting from the FVPSA-inspired funding as a “Special Issue Resource Center” ???) the more aware I become of what was set in motion, a lot of which I would take issue with, but probably “too late and too bad,” as it happens.
** link added 4/24/2022, in expectation of re-promoting ALL March, 2016, posts, and publishing some which had remained in draft: Updated title corrects “UNevada-Reno format, adds dates published/update (to the title itself) and corrects, which I hadn’t caught before, the spelling of “TUCSON.” //LGH: About University of Nevada, Reno-based NCJFCJ, Its Pittsburgh-based NCJJ, and NCJJ’s E.Hunter Hurst III (d.2012)’s Tucson-based, multi-million-dollar, NASDAQ-traded Company (“PRSC”): First, the Context [Publ. Mar. 10, 2016, More Font-Changes Apr. 24, 2022]. (short-link ends “-2Se” About 7,500 words)
Nevertheless, it’s still important to be aware of these things and come to some opinion on them.
But, let’s Look at the FVPSA-inspired, HHS-funded and facilitated “DVRN.” Like that “National” “Responsible” “Fatherhood” “Clearinghouse,” what the heck it is, or is doing, is less than clear from the official sources, such as HHS websites talking about the network, its member agencies, and its “special issue resource centers.”
I’m tempted to personal comments here, but they are stowed at the bottom of this post, for now.
File this under federalizing, evaluating and quality control (?) of EVERYTHING that relates to anyone under 21 — and their caretakers, which is almost everyone else..
The DVRN is multi-jurisdictional, subject-matter defined, and its presentation seems designed to confuse the readers and discourage identifying just how FEW organizations have been given control of policy, or operations designed to influence policy from the Executive Branch of government and so to speak “from the sidelines..”
This post follows logically from my attempt to explain “Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs” (in connection with a recent reblog of my 6/4/2011 post on this) as one of “Four Special Issue Resource Centers” — when the HHS report of those same Special Issue Resource Centers (numbering, actually 5, not 4) doesn’t even mention that organization’s name. In fact, it downplays actual names of recipient organizations in their description.
I trust this will be an interesting and illuminating post to why certain things seem so much the same from state to state when we (parents) go to court.
The “DVRN” – Domestic Violence Resource Network
(Described @ http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/fv-centers)
Family Violence Prevention & Services Resource Centers Listen
The Domestic Violence Resource Network (DVRN) is funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to inform and strengthen domestic violence intervention and prevention efforts at the individual, community and societal levels.
It’s promoting awareness and policy through digital dissemination, with help from certain organizations…..
The DVRN works collaboratively to promote practices and strategies to improve our nation’s response to domestic violence and make safety and justice not just a priority, but also a reality.
Note the grammar — the “DVRN” is being given anthropomorphic qualities, as if it was a single living entity — or, in the case of “corporate persons” (our system in the USA), a single business entity. BUT, it’s not. It’s by definition networks synched along certain policies and practices, and also as to some of their sources of funding. But the network elements span different states.
Read the rest of this entry »