Posts Tagged ‘Prevent Child Abuse America’
Child Support, Fatherhood Promotion: More DIALOGUE and TABLES of OCSE Grants to States (CFDAs 93601, 93563, 93564) from my 7/26/2011 Post (For example, in Alabama..)
. . .
Yep…I’m regrouping from an over-extended (vertically and horizontally, and probably subject-matter-wise) 2011 post….For more background on why and how I’m doing this now, in April, 2016, see the last installment (post) in April 2016, “Dialogue from 7/26/2011 post charting HHS/OCSE Grants to States (CFDAs 93563, 93564)” which, as that post explains, excerpts the most of the DIALOGUE from the earlier posts, and adds (marked by different colors) updates, leaving more of the charts to this one…..That post began:
2016 Update (I will use this background-color for this post to indicate):
RE: OCSE: Child Support Enforcement/Federal Grants to States: Let’s Look at the “TAGGS” HHS Charts (CFDAs 93.563 & 93.564) Originally published July 26, 2011, and at 25,000+ words
This blog excerpts most of the DIALOGUE from an older post, leaving the charts, breaking it into pieces so as to format the post with the real payload — the charts.
Also know that the above coloration (cream-colored background inside maroon-borders) basically represents 2016-added information, anything more than a paragraph. Naturally, in almost five years, some links will be broken, images not displayed, etc., which I will either correct, or at least mention.
I don’t expect this all to sink in with one reading or exposure to the information. I will be repeating the general concepts in following posts, “the Lord willing”…. meaning, as I can get to it. As sometimes happens when new or “cosmic” information or level of awareness starts to sink in, it grips my attention and I do have trouble getting a post out in one post… as opposed to one, long, linear, and systematic (covering each and every organization referenced) post
Tags on this blog — there are more tags than covered in this post; I took an EXTENDED 2016 update to a separate post and will duplicate the list of tags. This happened when I looked closer at a set of grants in Alabama hooking up with “Prevent Child Abuse America” and started, well, “taking names and posting tax returns.”
I discovered not just the defunct (but still advertising) nonprofit cited at the state level (“VOICES for Children in Alabama”), and the system of funding of multiple similar-but-not-identical “Children’s Trust” “Children First” and other things “Children” — and the pushing of more PreK education.
The Pre-K education pushing led to the authority for doing this, called “NIEER” which being “National Institute for Early Education Research: a Unit of Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey” and with this, direct connections to the UNC (University of North Carolina -Chapel Hill) based, and now 50 years old as of 2016, “Frank Porter Institute for Child Development.”
So far, that was “only” a New Jersey and North Carolina University weighing in on what should be done with public funding under CAPTA (to prevent child abuse), Tobacco Settlements (federal), and a state level board for preventing child abuse and neglect in ALABAMA.
But then a closer look at a letter posted on “NIEER (which, again, was used to validate the programming being run on Alabama’s poor, at-risk, abused, etc. children who were not showing up “Ready” for state-sponsored kindergarten) 
School of Education(the oldest school of pedagogy in the US; it was “experimental education” then and is ‘holistic education” now under the new, improved (and referencing a 2001 $10M benefactor) “Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development”
http://Children.ALABAMA.Gov/first-class-pre-k-grants/ references the NIEER:
First Class Pre-K Grants
About the First Class Pre-K Process
The First Class Pre-K Program is Aabama’s state funded pre-K program for 4 year old children who are residents of the State of Alabama. The program is funded by the Education Trust Fund through the Alabama Department of Children’s Affairs Office of School Readiness. In order to receive funds for a First Class Pre-K Classroom, organizations must first complete an online application.
First Class Pre-K has been recognized by the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) as meeting 10 of 10 criteria for the highest quality Pre-K programs. Funding for First Class Pre-K is to (1) provide access for more children to attend high quality pre-K and (2) enhance quality of existing classrooms by providing funding and support to meet the high quality standards. All state funded classrooms receive coaching from specialized coaches to support classroom instruction and Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP). Additionally, DCA monitors to ensure grant compliance and a high level of accountability for the grant funds
Note: Children.Alabama.gov doesn’t provide a courtesy link to NIEER, mention that it’s based at Rutgers (and probably not a 501©3) or who decided that this NJ group should be evaluating programs for Alabama. Who, if anyone, is monitoring whether there might be some conflict-of-interest relationships between coaches & curriculum providers and the evaluators? Yet State funds TO Alabama fund the programming.
Let me show this with a link to the “NIEER” letter, the statement of whose publication the letter was based on, and an (amazing, actually**) few resumes, wealthy, PRIVATE foundations, and sponsored (by those foundations and of course federal agencies such as the US/DHHS and/or the US/DOE) university centers, not to mention a set of global connections which shed an entirely different light on why there is such ongoing interest in compiling social science data on “low-income” American families and why the pre-school school should be extended, and the pre-school year become year-round..
Apparently, there’s an intent to know what also works overseas in low-income families on other continents, and JUST HOW MUCH can we standardize, streamline, coordinate, and efficiently replicate “what works” overseas too. Also, how long can all the American public be persuaded that their taxes should not just be to save all the children HERE (which, FYI, isn’t happening) but also globally. And, apparently our “overseers” (Congress who appropriates, and federal agencies who distribute, particularly HHS) have already chosen their champion proselytizers with stellar academics (mostly in psychology, still !!) and PhD-published coming out the ears. In journals put out in corporation with universities alone, or (one example below) University (Princeton) + Famous Nonprofit (Brookings).
Regardless of what you may think about the programming, it’s time to look at the sponsoring foundations, the lingo, and why not, some of the people involved? HOW are they doing this, WHAT (in other terms than the profession/practitioner-specific jargon) is actually taking place here, and based on a closer look at that, WTF is the endgame?
Is there, or is there not, any genuine intention that the current generation of “low-income children” young, or youthful, actually stop being “low-income” and make it into another social class in ANY method other than a chosen few of them becoming mentored scholars (it comes up below) of the same scheme (or “schematic” if you wish) for another generation?
I wonder how the sponsored professors with named chairs at public/private-sponsored center (and their networked colleagues and philanthropists) would feel if forced to become subject matter of collected (and published) studies by low-income ADULTS (especially PARENTS) proposing that instead of redistributing OUR taxable wage revenues to these places, it’s time to flip the table sand redistribute some of the research grants, endowed professorships, and put a “chill” on how many tax-exempt entities any one family may start, sit on the board of, or otherwise control. (That statement may make more sense after you look at some of the numbers involved in these networks, and start counting just how many foundations are in on it….)
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually)
BLOGGER note: I determined to start posting “fast and furious” which may mean, less developmentally edited. So, you may see in this one what a copyeditor or developmental editor would clearly mark as two or three different “starts” to the post. That is indeed what happened. You may also notice not completely consistent styles for quotes (though I tried to mark off the different sections). I am sacrificing these technical issues for quantity of publication on material already looked up. I may (or, may not) come back and clean it up, add a full list of “tags.” I often tweak published posts when possible (out of desire to avoid humiliation if nothing else, at the format, or wording). BUT, this is still good material, so out it goes. Also — thanks to some recent paypal contributions through my Donate Button, much appreciated. They are rare, generally speaking….and to reiterate, I am not a 501©3.
FYI, I am also in significantly pressured litigation involving my immediate future (I’ll leave it at that description). I just came from ANOTHER (local) court venue yesterday, and now have another level of understanding of what “theater” means. I had the facts, I even complied with the rules of court; the plaintiff didn’t have a cause of action, proven standing, the lawsuit was obviously retaliatory for exercising known rights, and I was up “pro se” and under conditions of ridiculous duress (documented in my Answer) against two lawyers, ONE of who I learned in this process was a frequent-flyer in this jurisdiction and after a “rout” (which was clearly expected) expressed (his) real feelings about women like me, and about the class I represented in the present case. A reference to the Salem witch trials (process of trying the witches) was made. The other one (the real motive behind the lawsuit and not the “fake plaintiff” labeling), being much younger, represents literally decades more of this self-assured crooked behavior being financially rewarded without objection from anyone wearing a black robe.
On the bright side, I heard (though haven’t seen the print yet) that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was just released from jail. Not from having to face a felony trial in the near future — but at least she’s been de-incarcerated. GOOD.
This post highlights the a footnoted portion of a recent post, published January 23: 2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers) which picked up on some passing language in a related Carver County Corruption post which, unfortunately (in my opinion) was circulated, it says, to 150 legislators.
Please take into consideration the next few paragraphs.
I know they may have long sentences and what may appear to be “far-off” topics. However, you are hearing from an individual (myself) who has been studying and writing on this for SIX YEARS now, diligently, while also, experientially, dealing long-term with many of the institutions and issues involved over time: domestic violence, family courts, custody/visitation / child support issues, overnight switch of care-taking parent, abrupt cutoff of contact with one’s own children, corollary (and predictable) impoverishment through ongoing court litigation, stress (off the charts, throughout), forced dealings with social service organizations, familiarity with the wild-goose-chase of 800#s people approaching any public institution for help tend to get, usually coming up empty where actual help is concerned.
I’ll bet several of those legislators, know a lot more about why custody-switching takes place (and under which programs) than the well-intentioned authors. There is no bliss, nor do I see any purpose, in continuing to ignore how power is consolidated in and around government in an urgent focus to obtain press coverage of specific, local, or even county or state-level policies. As a country, we have been (I eventually learned) at least 100 years, ALL of us (all citizens, all taxpayers, and most residents, citizens or not) living and functioning in a land where public/private partnerships are the political clout. Public signifying “Government Entity” and Private signifying “NOT government entity.” I did not always know this — I deduced it after about a year of delving into the realm of non-profit organizations strategically coordinated to co-opt the judicial process.
The Private “NOT government entity” functions in both tax-paying (corporate) and NOT tax-paying (corporate) forms. I’m over-simplifying that, obviously (government entities pay FICA, social security, etc. — but they do NOT pay the corporate taxes because, as entities, because they themselves are receiving payments collected by the IRS or (depending on the level of government, if federal, state, local, special district, or multi-district, i.e., Joint Powers Authority, etc.)
Legislators, already by definition in positions of power, are more likely to be aware how financial power circulates among from public (federal to state to county, or metro regions or “joint power authorities” etc.) to, and in combination with private (for-profit/nonprofit corporations and associations) and in and through academic centers at universities, and all that ….. The University of Minnesota is, I hear, the 9th largest research institution in the nation and is essentially part of government.
As to domestic violence issues, a center at its School of Social Welfare called “Institute on Domestic Violence in the African American Community” has several people on its steering committee, including Oliver Williams, PhD (who has published alongside Jeffrey Edleson, PhD** who has moved from UMN to UCBerkeley, where he is Dean of School of Social Welfare) as well as Johnny Rice II, M.S.,
Minnesotans, Did You Know About IDVAAC and MNCAVA? And, “the Jeffrey Edleson” Connection, how Men’s Groups & Father’s Rights (federally supported) Continue to Influence DV Policy? And how, separately, the Duluth-based nonprofit (cf. Ellen Pence) “DAIP” fits in?
IDVAAC is a key — but so far as I can tell, unincorporated website and collection of networked professionals, at UMinn School of Social Welfare; an example of coordinated control of national social policy from “centers” or “institutes” within academia.
But that’s another topic — coming soon…..
- Attributing PAS Theory as a CAUSE in Custody-Switching:Should We Focus on the Individuals (Judges + Psychologists), or Perhaps Court-Connected Corporations [especially 501(c)3s] + Their Networks, Initiatives, and Projects?
- Why Focus on Individual Judges + Psychologists, instead of their Networks of Court-Connected 501(c)3s + Favorite Initiatives, Projects, and Purposes?
The absurdly long titles are the same rhetorical question I’ve been asking for years, and already know where I stand on it. As most people go with the other choice (focus on individual performers in the family court system), I’ve had a lot of free, not-socializing time to keep investigating the networks, in a public-access, free (except for time invested!) way, and continue to learn about some of the key players. The patterns are easy to see, but not of course, if you never, EVER, go through a few basic look-ups to start to see some of the evidence revealing those patterns.
For one, the systems are not designed so as to be easily viewable by ANYONE struggling with a current case, or by tax-payers, because they involved corporations. Tax-exempt, and able to take both private and public donations, and as corporations, not as restricted to local political (state/county/municipal, metro, etc.) jurisdictions as are the specific courts themselves. But, heck, it’s not as though they are 100% leaving no footprint, or linguistic similarities to identify themselves.
Read the rest of this entry »
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 