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 ‘Public Servants Private Profits Nonprofit Charities

A Few FAQs on Major Family Court Programs (NYEve 2012 Reflex on the Gender Gap)

leave a comment »

(Written the last day of 2012) This post is about 10,000 words and was edited supplemented several times after publishing [INCLUDING IN 2014, when I was formatting a Table of Contents] .
FYI, that’s typical of my blogging… Also thanks for patience with formatting, as I deal with a different input device and fewer “buttons.” It’s cumbersome, only lets me compose in HTML mode..) [extra horizontal lines may appear as forced “paragraph breaks” which otherwise, get erased.

I am, to tell the truth, having an awful day, struggling with computer issues, web access, and, apart from the electronic struggles, with grief.

Also the long-term effects of chronic, for lack of a better term, Family Violence — in its ugly, needless, heartless, dishonest, deceitful and extortionist self. People reach a limit, and because I am NOT of the inclination to behave like those who have a conflict with me — i.e., my faith doesn’t endorse the criminal behavior part — I am finding it just this much family violence, all this just too much.

Normally this article wouldn’t be much of my concern — it’s talking about “Wage Gaps in MBA Programs” — I mean, a woman that has got through an MBA program is not likely facing the same issues I have been.

But from my perspective (year after year, there has been a return to literally begging status around the court fiascos, which is hardly unintentional from a systems, or my ex’s part; I’d been promised before separation that he knew how to get out of paying child support (wonder where learned it from….), but well, I just didn’t know at the outset of the program how many other parties profit from this. In fact I didn’t know til I revisited Liz Richards’ NAFCJ.net site and worked through the basics — almost no one else at the time was talking about the grants incentives…..


So what happens when WAGE GAP is multiplied by REPEATED WAGE DISRUPTIONS AND DECREASES (when an employee has to miss too much work, move for safety, return to court to try to contact one’s kids — often — deals with stalking and has to re-arrange work life for protection from it, has to take into account client/employer safety in future business dealings, and word gets around that the individual has “family problems” which interfere with work problems, and that’s chronic? The main concept behind having a sustainable work life is that it’s sustained. Or moves are strategic, or for exploring different options?


So, look at this from SFGATE.com (San Francisco on-line, it was also in the print edition, page A1):

MBA Wage Gap between Men, Women Grows” Dec. 29, 2012

[Alison Damast is a Bloomberg Businessweek reporter. E-mail: adamast@bloomberg.net] Ten years ago, the wage gap between men and women graduating from top MBA programs appeared to have been nearly erased. {{that’s astounding, considering the rest of society..}} That suggested that women would launch their careers on an equal footing with men and then experience a gender-blind sprint up the corporate ranks. A decade later [i.e., NOW], a far more sober picture is emerging: The pay gap among graduates of elite business schools is widening, according to new research from Businessweek’s biennial survey of MBA graduates. On average, female grads from top MBA programs now earn 93 cents for every dollar paid their male classmates.

{{that still didn’t grab my attention. At least they are working!!}}

At about a third of the top 30 U.S. business schools, women earn less than men – sometimes considerably less. Female MBA graduates from the class of 2012 at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, for instance, earned 86 percent of male wages, while those at Stanford Graduate School of Business earned 79 percent.

{{Now, that has my attention. (I’m also remembering that Catherine Austin Fitts attended Wharton. Of course she had a lot of other things going for her personally as well, I saw some MIT in the background, time in China — she’s no slouch…)…Two more short sections of this article here:}}

“The gap numbers at the beginning are not very large and can be mostly accounted for by differences in grades, course selection and the fields people are starting in,” says Marianne Bertrand, an economics professor at University of Chicago Booth School of Business, citing results of studies on compensation among female MBA graduates from her school.

What is much more striking is how much that gap grows over time.The pay gap is especially wide for women heading to finance jobs.

A study of 2010 census data by Bloomberg found that among the six categories with the largest gender gap in pay were insurance agents, personal advisers and securities sales agents.

Women in those jobs earned 55 to 62 cents for every $1 men pulled in, the census data showed.

In 2010, research from Catalyst, a nonprofit group that focuses on expanding opportunities for women in business, found that female MBAs were being paid, on average, $4,600 less in their first job than men, a disparity that grows to $30,000 by mid-career, says Anna Beninger, a senior associate in Catalyst’s research department.

{{Add to this the fact that the dollar is hardly stable, you can imagine it makes an increasing difference!}}

Even women placed in high-potential leadership development programs often miss out on what are considered hot jobs, or projects most critical to career advancement, Catalyst found. Says Beninger: “Women’s careers lag behind men from day one.” . . . .

[Alison Damast is a Bloomberg Businessweek reporter. E-mail: adamast@bloomberg.net]

Read the rest of this entry »

Technical Assistance and Training = Silencing Mothers’ Voices, Taking their Money…

leave a comment »

[post is about 11,000 words long.
I am showing many TA&T [Technical Assistance and Training] programs and their relationships, although my interest in Battered Women’s Justice Project (BWJP) stems from their recent collaborations with (instead of confrontation of) “AFCC” and drawing upon public funding (HHS grants) to do their analyses.  It’s pretty obvious that the organizations writing up the projects/situation/subject matter are not going to BE the subject matter — and if so, it will be self-description.
My takeaway is, the better way to describe “the situation” is corporate economic viewpoint.   I use corporate lookups, tax return lookups, sometimes grants lookups to describe (and compare to) any organization’s self-description on its colorful, hyperlinked, “Donate Here” websites.  
I also  try to remember which nonprofits have spun off earlier ones that made a name and got the grants.
In that regard, Technical Assistance =  Propaganda Promotion, even if the topic they are writing about is or was indeed legitimate; to dominate the field by the internet, conferences, training, federal funding, and nonprofit status — is to exclude the clientele’s voices as an equally relevant viewpoint.
It should be remembered that several of these organizations got their start in the 1980s, before (really) the Internet Revolution got underway.  However now that it is, business just got easier, and for individual victims of (for example) battering or abusive control — who are often fighting for sheer access to an internet (i.e., isolation is a factor in controlling others) — to expect to keep up with the rapid expansion of certain viewpoints (which are good for sales, if not necessarily good for actually stopping violence against women, or promoting responsible fatherhood EITHER) — is, well unreal.
The only way to even the playing field (being outnumbered and out financed, and less well organized) is to, I hope others also will, EXPOSE the circumstances, and then demand that certain programs be DEFUNDED (they are not reducing “roadkill” they are simply spawning more proselytes and building professional conferencer-careers) –and the organizations pay their own way through life.
When it comes to ECONOMIC control, the United States (obviously) has collective wealth beyond individuals — but I suggest addressing this issue sooner rather than later, anyhow.  TAKE A LOOK!  No matter where one digs in, similar behaviors will prevail; this is as good an entry point as any….]

SOCIAL CHANGE TO END VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN:  

HOME OF THE DULUTH, MODEL

This website has changed, and no longer openly lists certain projects that are underneath it (an older version may be on my blog)…  Which I seem to recall included groups like PRAXIS International:  “integrating theory & practice,” which like DAIP, had close ties to Ellen Pence (who actually was Praxis “founding director.”  Their home page still holds a eulogy, as Ellen Pence died recently:

Praxis believes in social change through advocacy & training “since 1996”.

  •  “Since 1996, we have worked with advocacy organizations, intervention agencies, and inter-agency collaborations to create a clear and cooperative agenda for social change in their communities.

Like others, they endorsed the “SUPERVISED VISITATION & EXCHANGE” (USDOJ Safe-Havens grant series support):

 Since 1996, we have worked with advocacy organizations, intervention agencies, and inter-agency collaborations to create a clear and cooperative agenda for social change in their communities.

Interesting year — startup year coincided with welfare reform…  Like OH SO MANY helpful nonprofit groups getting significant HHS and/or DOJ grants (although I DNR what Praxis got) — they are really “into” technical assistance and training” and quite willing to help grantees — from a safe distance from ongoing, shall we say, volatile, situations at the street level.  Maybe the founders had this experience initially but after all, people age out, and it’s safer to teach than to confront in a group setting — or dispense studies on-line.

Read the rest of this entry »

Another POV, Point Of View, on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012)

with 3 comments

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012) (WordPress- generated shortlink ends in “-190” which is all numbers, no alpha character for the “0” which otherwise would look like this:  “O”).


Excerpt from this post pulled to top, in the form of a screenprint (image) in 2016.  This sticky post originally published 9/22/2012.  It should be put in bold print, large letters and stuck on a refrigerator IF one is stuck in divorce drama at this time, as a reminder of the resonance of the rooms it will be taking place in!


 

This image is simply a quote in image form from my own post, Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012) (shortlink ends in “-190,” all numbers)

(The text in the image is repeated below in the post.  Link from the image/quote):  For more, see March 5, 2014 post “Suppose I’m Right Here ….What Would You Do When the Lights go on?”   Read the rest of this entry »

Get Smart about “ALEC” (American Legislative Exchange Council)!

with 3 comments

ALEC is, of course, a nonprofit.   I was surprised to see a photo of it on TV the other day, and attempted a short and sweet post on the dangers of allowing this level of private planning to write model legislation to be delivered to state legislators BY state legislators — who are a good portion of the ALEC membership.

 

One good summary of how ALEC operates came from another nonprofit dealing with juvenile justice disparities; I researched this nonprofit and it background and got a good lesson in how & why the very real racism inherent in America’s Incarceration practices tends to lead to a conflicts between diversionary justice programs for youth, commissions and focus on “The African American Male” (etc.) – — and the fact that the fatherhood program as practiced in the custody system prejudices women of all color by definition, thereby breaking down whatever neutrality may have (potentially) existed in those courts.

It’s a highly appropriate topic for January 16, 2012, Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday.  However, this post was too complex to post, really.  Even I hesitated to hit “Publish.”  It needed an introduction.

Today’s post may be a little different, and requests visitors to dedicate a little time to reading about ALEC.    It’s such a hard sell to get even parents with severe family court issues to consider even AFCC and CRC (for the most part) and how it ties into public welfare law (1996 and following revisions). . . ..

This would be far more important.  ALEC makes AFCC look like amateurs when it comes to pretenses, purposes, and intent to dominate the landscape for personal corporate profits.

At the bottom of the post, I’ll link to perhaps four links to “ALEC,” and save the narrative (plus more explanation) for tomorrow.

 

ReFLeCTiONs from Years of Tracking This Trail:

I usually am blogging about subterranean behaviors by nationwide nonprofits affecting, mostly, the family court system.  This is fairly specific and underreported, but it turns out to be woven into the very fabric of of our country from top to bottom.

I simply looked and kept following the trail, which often led upwards to HHS and from there to “Institutes” “Task Forces” and “Think Tanks” — plus naturally, it got round to the corporations funding the various studies.   I came to the conclusion that the entire “nonprofit” system was set up not to help the poor (which is probably where it was sold as) and for public purposes, but more likely to benefit the already wealthy, for tax write-offs, helping hide income, and influencing government favorably to accumulate more wealth and make sure that competition for jobs remains keen enough to keep wages down and profits high.

 

Unfortunately, looking at this material was like staring straight into the face of unbelievable arrogance, pride, and particularly prejudice towards anything “other,” starting with gender, then race, and of course religion.   The sense of betrayal and disgust in reading some of the academic verbiage (plowing through some of it, actually) to describe people in my situation, or others I have lived and worked with peaceably and know to be contributing positively to their communities — in short, the whole attitude stinks.  Not even so much that it despises others based on circumstances of birth (Y chromosome or no Y chromosome), but even more so, the attitude of the academically and emotionally “detached” and therefore supposedly somehow superior, or innately more competent. People are discussed in the plural as the substance to be manipulated; they do not have any individuality that can’t be tabulated, measured, and managed.

 

The closer one looks at this, the more networking and disheartening corruption surfaces.   A reason to continue has to come from somewhere, and it has to be based on hope and faith in something sustainable, or with prospects of being sustained at least a few months in a row.  However, after my exodus from a subterranean nightmare of a marriage in pretty good shape (all things considered), only to realize that by being one in this category,

SINGLE MOTHER BY CHOICE*

(*I chose life over fast-track to death)

The single plus having care and custody of young children basically put a Target on our home for people who perceive women as incompetent and single mothers as severely compromised (per se) when the fact it, there’s a huge energy and determination coming from the wellspring of Freedom From Abuse in many such mothers.  Yeah, we need some time to heal, but we are also rejoicing we’re OUT of the tunnel for a while, and — I know I did — worked diligently and speedily to rebuild a life, for the children and for ourselves.

In recent posts I explained how the “Domestic Violence” Rhetoric courteously cooperating with the Fatherhood Rhetoric, agrees to omit discussion of a minor detail — the state is going to make a play for your kids (and income); any protection order wasn’t an real exit, just a temporary hall pass in the larger scheme of program fundings.  The room in which the stripping takes place is generally called family court, although there are other means for detaching children from protective or otherwise non-abusive parents, particularly female ones.   So, our lives, because of things like government, corporate, and nonprofit/profit dynamic duos in these friendly and increasingly “United” States,  collectively, symbolically and sometime literally, still have something of this nature:

The GOOD news is that, as “Canaries in the Coal Mine” (except we choose to stay alive), we are indicators of how much the entire country has become a battlefield, littered with trenches and landmines which cannot be seen unless one has learned to be alert, and what they look like.    One cannot just look at the individual personalities in the local courthouses, or local politicians, because politics no longer ARE local.   It is necessary to keep one’s feet on the ground, in the present, as well as eyes, ears, and other senses functional, and to develop some tracking skills, which includes (like good bloodhounds?) refusing to get distracted from the scent.

Bloodhounds join search for toddler – San Antonio Express-News Feb 7, 2011 .yofoyox.web44.ne

Bloodhounds are distinguished from other breeds by their extraordinary olfactory powers, which enable them to hunt entirely by air-borne scent. They are the oldest breed of sporting dogs which hunt by scent, and Bloodhound Trials enable the hounds to demonstrate the remarkable abilities for which they have been bred – a fine illustration of dogs that are ‘Fit For Function: Fit For Life’.   (Flickr photo of bloodhound running)

And when people are trompling the ground* one can get a clearer perspective away from the crowd using basic search skills and information-gathering from actual sources.

(*as happened at BMCC, [See recent posts, also posted January, 2011) by refusing to discuss the obvious (that the conference from the start brought in DV professionals, which affected content, for I believe very obvious reasons), and insists that it takes an expert to interpret a battered mother’s voice or words (“read my lips!”), not to mention collecting people under the term that speaks of weakness, not strength:  “Battered” rhymes with “Tattered,” and focuses on bonding around the negative, not to mention chosen spokespersons, etc.).

Tracking is not a group profession — and it can get lonely — but the reward is the finds, and the service that the finds brings to others.  I happen (as a young person) to have read a book called ‘The Tracker” (Tom Brown), and adventures including getting stuck in a tree surrounded by a pack of wild dogs in (as I recall) the “Pine Barrens.”  He had to figure the situation out, and get out; it took a while.

I also seem to recall in his working with young people (teaching them “tracking”) who one of the most common maladies was — once they have labeled a plant an animal, they cease observing, and lose their curiosity.  Lack of curiosity in the young is a very sad thing.  However, people that have been placed in survival situations, and isolated, had their world repeatedly disrupted and behaving in strange and unfamiliar ways — tend to develop skills — tracking skills — over time.  They are valuable — but they are undervalued in our society, with its insistence that Ph.D.’s, Politicians, and Profiteers are the most important voices to ‘track.’

When one is hunted and/or huntING, and survival (whether huntED or huntING) depends on accuracy, I find the learning curve tends to accelerate!   Stalking (FYI) by an “ex” in person, or through third parties, and/or through the courts, is a form of hunting, as well as (at times) intimidation.    It is no joke; I have dealt with this over many years with  my ex, and also with the authorities who tend to discredit things that (women in this situation) know could spell life or death or simply a decent, free life, or a terrorized and distressed life.

So I want to show (us) some information from “Tom Brown, Jr.’s  The Tracker School” site.  This is not for entertainment — it’s an example for comparison to what mindset, what type of skills, are needed, today, to stay awake and — well, free — in the USA, when most of one’s neighbors are happily, or unhappily as it may be, asleep.  Or out occupying or protesting, at the direction of their leaders, before doing the basic scouting activity which might make better use of their time.   Sometimes a crowd is not a safe place to be!

First, about Stalking Wolf, “Grandfather” 

Grandfather

Stalking Wolf was raised free of the reservations in the mountains of northern Mexico. Born in the 1870’s during a time of great warfare and violence, he was part of a band of Lipan Apache that never surrendered. He was taught the traditional ways of his people and became a shaman and a scout. When he was twenty a vision sent him away from his people, and for the next sixty-three years he wandered, seeking teachers and learning the old ways of many native peoples, and others who lived close to the earth. Stalking Wolf traveled the length and breadth of the Americas, following the Creators call. He never held a job, drove a car, paid taxes, or participated in modern society. When he was eighty-three years old, he encountered a small boy gathering fossils in a stream bed. He recognized that boy as the person with whom he would spend his final years, and to whom he would teach all that he knew. That boy was Tom Brown, Jr. Tom became the recipient of not only all that Stalking Wolf had learned during his travels, but the distillation of hundreds of years of Apache culture as well. These are the teachings that Tom passes on at his famous Tracking, Nature, and Wilderness Survival School.

AND:

Tom Brown Jr.

Tom Brown, Jr is America’s most acclaimed outdoorsman, and a renowned tracker, teacher, and author. When Tom was only seven, Stalking Wolf (Grandfather), an Apache elder, shaman and scout, began coyote teaching Tom in the skills of tracking, wilderness survival, and awareness. After Stalking Wolf’s final walk, Tom spent the next ten years wandering the wilderness throughout the America’s with no manufactured tools—in most cases not even a knife—perfecting these Grandfathers skills and teachings. Tom came back to “civilization” and began looking for people interested in all that he had learned, but found none. He felt lost and confused until a local sheriff who knew Tom called him in to track a lost person. Tom found the missing person and, in the process, found his Vision.

Over the next few years Tom earned his reputation as “The Tracker” by finding lost people, and fugitives from the law. He has since worked with many law enforcement agencies, throughout the United States and internationally, on cases involving abducted children, lost hunters and hikers, and fugitives. He wrote about his experiences in a book titled The Tracker, which was published in 1978. Soon after, Reader’s Digest ran a condensed version of Tom’s story and included information on the Tracker School. That was almost thirty years ago, and today Tom Brown Jr.’s Tracker School is the largest of its kind, teaching people from all over the world and from all walks of life. Since the success of The Tracker, Tom has authored 16 books on tracking, awareness, nature observation and survival, including, Grandfather, The Vision, The Way of the Scout and a series of field guides, which have sold well over a million copies.

Interestingly (remember my “Tom’s River” post) The Pine Barrens in Toms River, NJ were part of his childhood.  Wikipedia article here, not for authority, but (again), I’m talking about this situation for purposes of comparison:

In his books, Brown states that from the age of seven, he and his childhood friend Rick were trained in tracking and wilderness survival by Rick’s grandfather, a Lipan Apache elder called Stalking Wolf, who had relocated to the Pine Barrens wilderness near Toms River to be closer to Rick’s family.[2]

Tom Brown’s brother, Dr. Jim Brown, the Dean of Science, Engineering, Health Sciences and Human Performance, and former President and Chairman of the Board of the New Jersey Public Health Association, has confirmed Tom Brown’s biography. Dr. Jim Brown writes in the Biography of Dr. Jim Brown:

Tom, his friend Rick, and Rick’s grandfather, Stalking Wolf (a native American and an expert in the Wilderness), were a huge influence on me and helped develop my love for nature. I use many of these experiences to enrich my teaching of biology and microbiology. Tom’s incredible abilities for teaching nature observation, pointing out minute details and relating them to plant or animal anatomy, physiology and ecological relationships strongly influenced my teaching style, especially using the laboratory and real life experiences to reinforce learning in the classroom.[8]

 

It sounds like he combined “minute observation” with relating the parts to the whole, including context.  That’s what I’m talking about; which contrasts from what we have now (in American politics) which is isolated “think tanks” framing the issue according to the funding, and failing to understand varying points of view.  The point of these think tanks is not to think, but to collaborate on what to preach — which is an entirely different mindset.

 

I have been blogging almost three years on wordpress here, including during a seriously “wilderness” time for me as a person, having had all primary social, work, community connections (basically) severed.  I was experiencing extremes in many ways, including how to get up when a day seemed hopeless by the traditional indicators, deal (alone) with my anger, sense of betrayal and frustration, and the lack of productivity and effectiveness which women (by and large) function well with.  This came from the repeated shocks of dealing with family betrayal, family COURT betrayal, failure of law enforcement, and the unnecessary drain on my personal friends — year after year — who helped sustain me, and (while they lived here), my kids under continual attack from a variety of sources.   I also was becoming increasingly aware of how useless major nonprofits were, and how many of them had simply lied to me, and other mothers, about their purposes.  There was no help available unless would become a client of a program, which compromised one’s liberty, privacy and freedom of movement.

I prioritized and began making better decisions about who to hang out with, and who was NOT a loss when it came to communications.  I also stayed alert to indicators (from afar) what was happening with my children.  To date, most of these have proved true (for what it’s worth), i.e., their father had abandoned them pretty quickly after obtaining custody (and a few other private matters).  I was ridiculed for speaking about this fraud, and outrage, and noticed that each time I sought help from the courts — or the District Attorney’s Office — they simply tried to pull in another program.   The larger context was manifesting itself more and more clearly.

I do not understand, yet, why so many mothers and women (and men) continue to prefer talk of personality, psychology, and only their local courtroom, and cannot see what is not a physical person in front of them, or a newspaper headline — that these things are organized in terms of networks connected to financing, and a basic setup, once solved, is often a pattern to how organizations work.

It is as though people are so used to being “Fed and Led” (Fed Information and Led to Respond only in certain ways) that they cannot change their path, even if leaving the comfort zone looks like a shorter route to success.   Perhaps the many hours I spent alone as a child, in one activity or another (and not highly supervised) simply allowed me to develop independently, and not feel so uncomfortable simply because I wasn’t on the beaten path.

Speaking of which, The Road Not Taken:

 

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim
Because it was grassy and wanted wear,
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I marked the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way
I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference. 

Robert Frost

 

Or perhaps it was curiosity, or perhaps the insistence on NOT following things that have been proven to make zero sense.  I’m sure living with domestic violence and learning how to respond QUICKLY to dangerous situations (in the home) including protecting the children (by fleeing or defusing, or avoiding, til I could get safe) helped.  I’m also sure that living with such a person (including the deceit, the tactics, the predictable patterns) also sharpened some recognition when it happens elsewhere.

 

So now, I am going to pull in just a few links to this ALEC and maybe talk about it more another day.

Like termites, or a computer virus, or underground pipe fissures, or an unsound foundation, some problems are not understood by the public until it’s simply too late, and then it’s often in the form of a disaster.   But the groups and people whose business it is can detect them earlier, but don’t always.  The fact is, our lives (speaking USA) are already so institutionalized, so internetworked and so interdependent by design that only the designers know for sure (if then) what the original purpose was, or guidelines.

But, by reading “historical” documents in some of these institutions — not just their own self-promotion, but a variety of critiques and explanations, and then pick which one MOST resembles current operating reality — we can get a better idea.  That’s one reason I am so interested in comparing documentation of groups I know to be running the court systems, at least parts of it, and contrast them with hard reality of the headlines, which include people dying around the divorce process, and no legal remedies within family law to stop the process of producing death-by-divorce, or death-by-saying-No!-to-abuse.

Language Change is a measure of thought — and operating systems — change.    In any society it is ALWAYS important to notice language and rhetoric, IF there is any intent to have a society with some basis in truth, and life based on some sort of sound principle, not just repeatedly responding to crises caused by craziness.

 

It’s probably time to revisit “Four Arguments For the Elimination of TV” by Jerry Mander, in which he talks about access to the airwaves, from the perspective of former publicist. Please review the article.  Here’s a small enough excerpt to remain, I believe, with in Fair Use compliance.  This was published (by permission) in Mother Earth News in 1978.

INTRODUCTION
THE BELLY OF THE BEAST

If this book has any basis in “authority,” it lies in the fifteen years I worked as a public relations and advertising executive. During that time, I learned that it is possible to speak through media directly into people’s heads and then, like some otherworldly magician, leave images inside that can cause people to do what they might otherwise never have thought to do.

. . .Here was a typical problem: A group of demonstrators would occupy a hotel lobby, demanding that blacks be hired at front-desk jobs, rather than bussing dishes in the coffee shop. Newspapers and television would run enormous stories about the demonstrations while editorially denouncing the tactics as “counterproductive to what might be worthy aims.” The stories concentrated upon sloppylooking demonstrators, moments of violence, and lengthy statements by officials about law and order. In an entire week’s news coverage there might be one passing reference to the fact that for forty previous years the hotel hadn’t hired a black person in a visible job. . . .

My evening clients, speaking of social issues, needed to organize hundreds of people into confrontative acts which could get them extensive, if often unfavorable, coverage. Or, if they chose less confrontative routes, they could spend weeks of time and all their hardwon nickels and dimes to organize press information programs which would, at their most successful, net them a few inches in the back of the newspaper.

Meanwhile, any of my daytime clients, speaking for commercial purposes, could and did buy advertising space and time worth tens of thousands of dollars. Then they would do it again the following week.

I already knew that, in America, all advertisers spent more than $25 billion a year to disseminate their information. Now, however, I was beginning to pay attention to an obvious, yet little noticed, aspect of this situation. Virtually all of the $25 billion was being spent by people who already had a great deal of money. These were the only people who could afford to pay $30,000 for one page of advertising in Time ($54,000 by 1977) or $50,000 for one minute of prime television time ($125,000 by 1977). Ordinary people and small businesses, even those which are successful by most standards, can rarely afford any advertising beyond the want ads, or a small local retail display. Only the very rich buy mass national advertising. And they do this to become richer. What other motive could they possibly have?

A.J. Liebling once said, “Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one.” I was learning that access to the press was similarly distorted by the possession of wealth. People with money had a 25-billion-to-nearly-zero advantage over people without money. The rich could simply buy access to the public mind while the not-rich had to seek more circuitous routes.
Read more: http://www.motherearthnews.com/Nature-Community/1978-09-01/Subliminal-Messages-From-TV.aspx?page=4#ixzz1kzLxLbbh

He (Jerry Mander) had a social conscience and was struggling with ways to act on it:

corporate policies . . .antithetical to simple rules of human well being, or justice or planetary survival. They finally added up to a single generalization: Corporations are inherently uninterested in considerations aside from the commercial.

We began to feel that our balancing act was draining us personally. At last we saw that it was doomed to fail. Maintaining commercial accounts in the hope of using the income from them to finance other projects about which we cared more deeply was not going to work out.

So tried the nonprofit route:

We soon decided to dissolve the agency, and I began to work with a number of other people to establish a foundation-funded, non-profit advertising and public relations office. The first in the country, it was called Public Interest Communications and it was devoted solely to working for community. organizations which are largely excluded from media. The project was launched in 1972 with a grant from the Stern Fund. It succeeded for a little while in performing useful services for ecologists and farm workers, consumer groups, Indian rights activists and peace groups. But keeping it alive proved difficult. The problems were much like those we had faced at Freeman, Mander and Gossage.

Whereas I had formerly spent a major part of my day keeping the agency going by caring for the needs of corporations, at Public Interest Communications we spent a majority of our time seeking grants from the few foundations interested in media reform.

Even worse, there was a feeling that everything we were doing was ineffective. A nameless juggernaut was advancing unretarded. We felt as if we were throwing snowballs at tanks . . .Unemployment was growing and welfare lines with it, yet in the end economic reform measures always seemed to hurt the very segments of the population they purported to help while the rich got richer.

Read more: http://www.motherearthnews.com/Nature-Community/1978-09-01/Subliminal-Messages-From-TV.aspx?page=6#ixzz1kzN6ryMx

 

DO YOU SEE THE ISSUE?   As Michael Moore was heard recently (on Tavis Smiley show, a panel with several people on it, including Suzy Orman.  I only caught a snippet, but for once this made perfect sense).  What we fail to acknowledge is that the poor serve a purpose to the wealthy to keep (he said, as I recall) the middle class in line.  If the wealthy were really so concerned about the poor, they’d give away the wealth, they certainly have enough! (or, I say, change policies that stop creating the poor generation after generation unnecessarily).

I also believe that the wealthy need the middle class to keep working the jobs (whether white collar or blue collar) which keeps them too busy to analyze what the corporations are doing with their wages, i.e., it takes a lot of time to hold down a professional career.   Also, the middle class must be taught to buy into the concept that their taxes (withholdings, etc.) actually DO provide social services (even though we know well enough when they don’t) to keep the rabble of poor off their doorsteps, and away from their sons and daughters.    While they may not totally buy the concept, that doesn’t stop people on that track, usually, from staying invested in it, and hoping that they are not bounced off into the realms of the poor, THIS round.

So, what I see (now that I’ve been bounced around so much — though for different systems) is that you CANNOT, just CANNOT answer this question without handling the money system, the income tax system, and the federal reserve issues, which are key.  It’s that simple.   The nonprofits are hostage to their funders, and cannot vary policy too far from it.  The foundations are key players, and the largest ones drive social policy at a national (and international) level including through work at think tanks from Harvard (including JFK School of Government), Princeton, Yale, Columbia, you name it.  Cornell . . . . and in general at the University level.      They fund institutes, “centers of excellence,” and so forth — entire schools of study.  So I call this level of professionals (often Ph.D.’s) the Sheepdogs.  Their careers are made from grants provided by some of these foundations and connections to schools of higher learning, “Think Tanks,” and so forth.

 

I’ve looked, studied, and reflected on this for several years, because I deserve answers, my kids should they ever want the information, deserve answers, the people who supported this and other families as they underwent custody or other system nightmares, deserve some explanation.

The people best situated to analyze systems are those who have moved from one segment to another — and ended up at either the top, or the bottom, of the “class” section of society.  Whether or not you like it, this class section is defined in large part by tax laws, and education (or lack of it) on how to profit from them, as well as how money actually works, let alone how business works.

 

Understand the role of language and framing, and why conservatives are so great at it:

We see (or you should by now!) how far AFCC got with its policy of transforming language — and how it did so.

 

I want you/ us / people to read this report — at least the introduction!

It’s from “CJCJ” which is probably how I ran across it, as CJCJ itself appears to be a nonprofit formed through Model legislation spearheaded for implementation at the state level, through connecting a nonprofit (CJCJ happens to have been formed by an about-to-retire Washington Judge, a very active one, Bobbe J. Bridges) with someone in state government, in this case Susan N. Dreyfuss came along neatly in 2009 to head up the state health and human resources department (funding $20 billion).  It is now coming back to me that I ran across Dreyfuss on an AHA (That’s American Human Association) collaboration of some sort — the usual kind you know, stopping child abuse by putting more men back in their offspring’s lives.  As I researched her background — even scratched the surface — and looked at the associated nonprofit — (meaning, at its TAX RETURNS and PROGRAM PURPOSES/ACCOMPLISHMENTS) it became clear that every single one tied directly to a major foundation with an agenda.

Pam Roach Report: Susan Dreyfus To Head DSHS

pamroachreport.blogspot.com/2009/…/susandreyfus-to-head-dshs.ht…

Mar 31, 2009 – OLYMPIA – Gov. Chris Gregoire today named Susan N.Dreyfus, a Wisconsin executive with more than a dozen years of leadership experience

 

And that agenda was to reform justice, in a sweeping manner, according to anational model. And, I saw the blueprint discussed AS a national model.  Washington was a “Demonstration” state.

Hmm,  see this http://www.opd.wa.gov/Reports/Other%20Reports/2011_OPD_Proposal-SVP-Defense.pdf

NO, actually, that was a different group, CCYJ:

The Hon. Bobbe J. Bridge

CCYJ President and CEO, founded the Center for Children & Youth Justice in 2006. She served on the Washington State Supreme Court from 1999 to 2007 before retiring to lead the Center full-time in January 2008. She was a King County Superior Court judge from 1989 to 1999, served as Presiding Judge of the 51-member Superior Court for two years, and was the Chief Judge of King County Juvenile Court from 1994 to 1997. Before joining the bench, Justice Bridge was the first female partner at the Seattle law firm of Garvey Schubert Barer.

Recognized statewide and nationally as a leading advocate for foster care reform, domestic violence victims, truancy prevention, juvenile justice reform and a host of other issues, Justice Bridge also serves the community as a dedicated volunteer and philanthropist. She has been a member of the Boards of many nonprofit organizations, including YouthCare and the YWCA.

CCYJ is basically a mouthpiece of a variety of foundations (incl. Bill & Melinda Gates) with their ideas on how to reform criminal and juvenile justice, etc.  The phrase “out-come based” is welcome here, and shows up a lot.

 

CJCJ is a different group and based in a state South of Washington, like California

Here’s CJCJ “About Us”

Overview
Established in 1985 as the Western Regional Office of the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives (NCIA), the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ) is a nonprofit nonpartisan organization promoting a balanced and humane criminal justice system through the provision of direct services, technical assistance, and policy analysis.  CJCJ maintains a professional staff with diverse backgrounds and expertise. Our senior staff members possess over 30 years of experience in the criminal and juvenile justice field that includes program operations, policy development and analysis, technical assistance, nonprofit management, program evaluation, and organizational reform.  Headquartered in San Francisco, CJCJ is among the leading criminal justice agencies in the nation.

 

ANYHOW, at some point, it becomes impossible not to see how the pieces of the puzzle fit together.  We have corporate/foundation interests running our country, rewriting laws, and altering justice systems, too — to suit themselves, and without running it by the can’t stand up to them piddly state legislatures.  For a reminder, see my posts on MDRC, or go see it’s site again, look up “about us.”

 

The states also, including their budgets, are so radically tied to federal funding — particularly of welfare — that they can hardly be called independent any more.  And if the states are not independent from the Federal Government, neither are the citizens living in those states, which in fact, is proving to be so.

Here’s an excerpt to get you interested (I hope):

ABOUT THINK TANKS — and why conservatives are SO interested in forming lots of them.

 

Conservative think tanks have been successfully disseminating their message. The linguist George Lakoff has noted that:

Over the last 30 years their think tanks have made a heavy investment in ideas and in language. In 1970, [Supreme Court Justice] Lewis Powell wrote a fateful memo to the National Chamber of Commerce saying that all of our best students are becoming anti-business because of the Vietnam War, and that we needed to do something about it. Powell’s agenda included getting wealthy conservatives to set up professorships, setting up institutes on and off campus where intellectuals would write books from a conservative business perspective, and setting up think tanks. He outlined the whole thing in 1970. They set up the Heritage Foundation in 1973, and the Manhattan Institute after that. [There are many others, including the American Enterprise Instituteand the Hoover Institute at Stanford, which date from the 1940s.]

And now, as the New York Times Magazine quoted Paul Weyrich, who started the Heritage Foundation, they have 1,500 conservative radio talk show hosts. They have a huge, very good operation, and they understand their own moral system. They understand what unites conservatives, and they understand how to talk about it, and they are constantly updating their research on how best to express their ideas (Lakoff, 2003).

Think tanks are indeed powerful in today’s society. ALEC is one among many examples.

 

From the top of this report by the “CENTER ON JUVENILE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE” by Randall G. Shelden, M.A, Ph.D Senior Research Fellow, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice — this is a research brief from April 2011 on the AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL.  Please read this intro, which then segues into the Lakoff quote, above:

It is important to state at the outset of this report that conservatives tend to be significantly more punitive than liberals (Shelden, 2011). Since virtually all members of ALEC are conservatives it is only logical that their legislation would be punitive, which has been historically demonstrated by this organization.

ALEC is one among several hundred think tanks in the United States (plus many more in foreign countries). According to Source Watch (2011) “There are twice as many conservative think tanks as liberal ones, and the conservative ones generally have more money.” Indeed, as one writer stated “there is a big imbalance in the amount of cash that goes into left and rightwing think tanks. Over the past two years, [-] think tanks pushing the conservative agenda had received $295 million, while leftwing institutions were given just $75 million” (Teather, 2005). Most think tanks, both left and right-leaning, have “resident experts” with titles such as “senior fellow” or “adjunct scholar.” However, in the case of right-leaning think tanks this does not always indicate that they have an academic degree in their claimed area of expertise. While it is certainly true that outside funding can corrupt the integrity of academic institutions, this is even more prevalent with think tanks.

A problematic aspect of think tanks is that they “are like universities minus the students and minus the systems of peer review and other mechanisms that academia uses to promote diversity of thought. Real academics are expected to conduct their research first and draw their conclusions second, but this process is often reversed at most policy-driven think tanks” (Source Watch, 2011). One writer has noted that the term “think tank” is really a misnomer, saying “They don’t think; they justify” (Source Watch, 2011).

 

 

 

 

And an earlier one:

 

Corporate America’s Trojan Horse in the States 
The Untold Story Behind the American Legislative Exchange Council
Chapter One — OverviewThis report examines the history, finances, and activities of the American Legislative Exchange Council, a 501(c)(3) organization with headquarters in Washington, D.C., that bills itself as �the nation�s largest bipartisan, individual membership association of state legislators.�

As this report shows, however, ALEC is little more than a tax-exempt screen for major U.S. corporations and trade associations that use it to influence legislative activities at the state level. ALEC allows these corporations to do what they couldn�t attempt directly or openly without risking public criticism. They funnel cash through ALEC to curry favor with state lawmakers through junkets and other largesse in the hopes of enacting special-interest legislation � all the while keeping safely outside the public eye.

The organization�s national meetings appear to be mostly window dressing for policy decisions that have already been made, either within the organization�s offices in Washington, D.C., or in closed consultations with the corporations and other like- minded interests that finance virtually all its activities. Indeed, the state legislators who attend ALEC meetings are joined by the platoons of lobbyists, corporate executives, and representatives of assorted trade and professional associations who pay to have the lawmakers as their captive audience. 

The tie that binds is money, and ALEC�s major underwriters have included the now-disgraced Enron Corporation, as well as the American Nuclear Energy Council, the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco, Chevron, Coors Brewing Company, Shell, Texaco, Chlorine Chemistry Council, Union Pacific Railroad, Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America, Waste Management, Philip Morris Management Corporation, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and many other of the nation�s major corporations and trade associations. 

Founded in 1973 by conservative activist Paul Weyrich, ALEC occupies prime office space in downtown Washington, operates on an annual budget of roughly $6 million, and employs a full-time staff of around thirty. In its early years, reflecting Weyrich�s vision, ALEC focused almost exclusively on the hot-button social issues on the right-wing�s political agenda � anti-abortion, anti-feminist, anti-voting rights for the District of Columbia. In the late 1980s, however, ALEC abandoned most of these issues in favor of those that had the benefit of attracting substantial corporate donations.

Less talk from me = I hope more reading from you.

Child Support-TANF “The Emperor Has No Clothes.” Part 1: Rise and Expansion (“Spinning”)

leave a comment »

SOME OF THIS MATERIAL & MORE DETAILS ALSO AN EARLIER POST

Someone sent homeless through child support garnishments after custody switch sent me the following.  This person was not merely working “poor” but for a long time working FT middle class CS-garnished wages homeless.

This person is a mother, and having trouble getting “Access Visitation” services from organization whose names say “Father,” while the supporting legislation, however, says “parents,” which she is.  By “having trouble” I mean, there has been no help whatsoever, and there is no mother-child contact at all.  the case is typical.  As far as I know this person is not a welfare caseload, though probably would qualify easily.  If the purpose of these funds is to reduce poverty, it has backfired.  However, that’s not my main argument.  That homelessness was a direct result of the supporting legislation for putting welfare funding to groups like this:

10/03/11 – ACF announces over $119 million in Grant Awards for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood

What grandiose and beneficial sounding words:  “Healthy Marriage & Responsible Fatherhood.”  What makes us think this can be purchased, and that by increasing centralization, then distributing without oversight, poverty and “unhealth” will somehow result?   Unfortunately the thinking is more like this:   I work, my wages are taxable, I don’t want to go to jail, don’t rock the boat too much.  Too much radical change is too much social unrest. ….    We don’t want riots, so I will continue to be obedient to the powers that be, rather than run up against them and risk losing even more..

But the closer I look at these grant awards, and the grantees themselves, the more shocked I am at the Take the Money & Run element.  And at another disturbing one.  Not including funds LOST in the system (through grantees that don’t file, states that don’t distributed funds they’ve collected, etc.), the profits are increasingly going simply to very much FOR-profit organizations that are good with PR and Media.  Three examples that come to mind are:

  • PREP, from two professors at UDenver, withlongstanding relationships with grants-funded investigations.  They incorporated to form “PREP, Inc.” which your tax dollars are helping market, and I can show how and where.  These professors are both also Advisory to  the huge “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative”
  • BOOT Camp for New Dads (Originating from a California professional, being marketed to hospitals, who must pay a “licensing” fee, around $3,000)
  • TWOGether corporate affiliations (I’ve found so far in TX & PA, but probably all over by now)
  • Dibble Marriage Institute Curricula (The Dibble Marriage Institute basically IS an off-loadable set of curricula & toolkits.
These groups take the Kids’ Turn model one step farther– it’s more automated curricula, and it’s being distributed through more federally (usually HHS) supported avenues.  Businesses contracting with the federal government (and states) is nothing new — but we are talking about what has to be immoral — businesses using the theme of protecting children, and saving America, eliminating poverty (etc.) — and using that to form new businesses along the MLM or Direct Marketing Model, dispensing trademarked boilerplate material — and doing it through nonprofits.
The organization and collaboration of the marketing plan is definitely with HHS involvement.  Here’s an example on a “CHILD WELFARE INFORMATION GATEWAY.”  Keep in mind that to this administration, child welfare and father involvement are synonymous, due to federal policy. EXAMPLE:

The Importance of Fathers in the Healthy Development of Children

Child Welfare Information Gateway
Author(s): Office on Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S. Children’s Bureau Rosenberg, Jeffrey., Wilcox, W. Bradford.
Year Published: 2006

Section II
8. Fatherhood Programs

Nationally and locally, there are numerous fatherhood programs that strive to meet the various needs of the many different fathers and families. These programs fill the gaps left by social service agencies, which have limited funding, suffer from case overloads, and are unable to offer activities beyond the scope of their responsibilities.

8.5 Examples of Fatherhood Programs

As the manual has shown throughout, there are numerous needs and reasons to strengthen the roles of fathers. A wide range of programs exists to meet many of the needs of fathers and their children. The following were selected as examples of programs that span the fatherhood initiative spectrum.

“The Fatherhood Initiative Spectrum,” I love it….

  • {{LGH note:  My post “Footloose in Tuscaloosa” needed followup, which points to this Trust Fund}}
  • The Dads 101 Program and Male Involvement Campaign
    Working to prevent shaken baby syndrome
    • This, if anything, would seem to be a vital program.  Even so, my last post (before this one) shows how a black father spent a year in jail improperly, on accusation of in part having shook his baby.  Turns out a Shaken Baby Syndrome type group had just been funded; within one month or so from formation of the Child Safety Program at Penn State, they had two children in foster care and Dad in jail, and what looks like suppression of contrary witnesses (i.e, there was another cause of the symptoms) from the same Child Safety Program team! The couple sued.  See also “Courthouse news” which reported on this one.
  • Dads Make a Difference Program
    A school-based program led by teens
  • Family and Community Violence and Prevention Project and 50/50 Parenting
    Working to prevent family violence and to improve couples’ relationships
  • Fathers and Children Together (FACT)
    Working with incarcerated fathers
  • The Fathers Network
    Working with fathers of children with special needs
  • First Things First
    Strengthening families through public education campaigns
  • Golden Dads
    A national campaign to promote responsible fatherhood
  • Great Beginnings Start Before Birth
    Working with fathers-to-be and their partners
  • Leading by Example
    A faith-based fatherhood initiative and mentoring program
  • Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP)
    Enhancing and supporting healthy marriages
  • Project Fatherhood
    Helping at-risk fathers learn how to parent effectively
  • Project MECCA and Another Choice for Black Children
    Supporting children and families during and after adoption
  • Shalom Baby – Bootcamp for New Jewish Dads
    Working with fathers prior to and immediately after birth
  • Stay-At-Home Dads
    How to start a playgroup or local dad-to-dad chapter
  • BootCamp for New Dads is a trademark, goes back to this corp. & person.
    Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
    C2004518 02/14/1997 ACTIVE DADS ADVENTURE, INC. GREG S BISHOP
    Gregory Bishop wrote a 1994 article praising Optima, which oversees 5% of Orange County’s $10 Billion health care system.  He has a connection to the hospital system, and markets BootCamp for New Dads.  As described on “Dads Adventure” site:
    Dads Adventure, Inc. Provides Major Funding & Outreach
    Formed to reach more new fathers and help fund Boot Camp for New Dads, Dads Adventure, Inc. publishes Hit the Ground Crawling: Lessons from 150,000 New Fathers. Crash Course for New Dads: Tools, Checklists and Cheat Sheets and Dads Adventure magazine, and operates DadsAdventure.com. Together, they take full advantage of emerging media technologies to meet the various learning styles of the younger generation of men. Dads Adventure, Inc. also financed the development of Boot Camp for New Dads, and provides major funding for ongoing operations through sponsorship fees and royalties.
    Maybe it’s a great product. However, this is definitely a “emerging media technology” with some of these funders — as they fund the expansion of “Boot Camp for New Dads.”

    In addition to our partners Boot Camp for New Dads is fortunate to have a strong network of local supporters who share our mission and goals. They include:

    • Boot Camp Coaches who month after month lead our workshops and prepare men to be fathers.
    • Program Coordinators who champion Boot Camp within their sponsoring organizations and work to obtain the resources each program needs.
    • Veterans dads who return to Boot Camp with their baby to pass on what they have learned to the next group of rookie fathers.
    • New moms who encourage their spouses to participate in Boot Camp and appreciate the critical role they have in raising their child together.

    Funding Support
    Funding for the expansion of Boot Camp for New Dads has been generously supplied by the following organizations

    • Annie E. Casey Foundation  {{funds other marriage/fatherhood projects, in a big way}}
    • Irvine Health Foundation
    • Johnson & Johnson Foundation
    • Orange County Commission on Families and Children
    • Pacific Life Foundation
    • Windgate Charitable Foundation

    In addition, Revolution Studios has supplied substantial funding to BCND for movie rights to Greg Bishop’s life and Boot Camp for New Dads.

    I’d heard of “BootCamp for New Dads” before, but actually tracked who it belonged to and where it came from (California) in the process of trying to locate the actual corporate status (if not income) of someone on another group, “Ohio Practitioners Network for Fathers & Families” and correlate its self-description with the State of Ohio record.  As often happens, the records do not tell the same story, with the website typically claiming a longer corporate history than it has.
    Below, I also took a quick review of the DIBBLE INSTITUTE (which is ALSO not filing its charitable registry in California, where it resides)

    It’s time to say NO! to the off-roading of public expenses into private profits based on, we’ve always done it this way, at least since the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, which is when the child support system (principal funding & enabling institution got underway).   Mainstream Media discussion of these awards is nearly ZERO, although interagency, association-specific, and conference-based discussion of these awards is how to get more of them and justify getting more.boiI looked at some of the grantees, and recognized several.  Top Group:  “HEALTHY MARRIAGE”:

    Healthy Marriage Grantees

    Legal Name Organization City
    State
    Award Amount
    Auburn University Auburn
    AL
    $2,489,548
    Healthy You, Inc. Dothan
    AL
    $681,956
    John Brown University Siloam Springs
    AR
    $724,428
    Arizona Youth Partnerships Tucson
    AZ
    $634,536
    Creciendo Unidos Phoenix
    AZ
    $359,796
    Cambodian Association of America Long Beach
    CA
    $570,000
    The Dibble Institute for Marriage Education Kensington
    CA
    $794,846
    Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project Sacramento
    CA
    $798,825

    “Kensington, CA” is a wealthy part of Berkeley.  Dibble is a Distributor (as I understand it) and many of the other grantees are dabbling with their materials.

    Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
    THE DIBBLE INSTITUTE FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION 114381 Charity Current BERKELEY CA Charity Registration Charity
    1

    The pattern they follow is similar to many grantees.  Big Talk, Big Claims on Website, Major co-collaboration, and short shrift when it comes to complying with local LAWS that charitable organizations (in CA) have to actually register ANNUALLY as charities, and as corporations.   Why is our government continuing to give major funding to groups that don’t?  Is there more than meets to the eye, is it more than just “we’re understaffed and overwhelmed,” that the Office of Attorney General never seems to catch up with these groups who don’t file — at ALL??

    Dibble address is a PO Box in Berkeley, they began in 2002 (says this record) and rapidly increased both assets and income (probably through HHS and foundation grants).  NO founding documents are available on-site, no tax returns (at least in California) and unless their returns are sitting at the OAG, and there’s a shortage of data entry clerks, they are doing so illegally, from what I can see (note disclaimer).  I think I see just fine — because other groups in the similar situation, and with less “failure-to-file” history DO get scolding letters from the OAG:  “Where’s our $75 fee for registration?”

    iscal Begin: 01-OCT-09
    Fiscal End: 30-SEP-10
    Total Assets: $758,255.00
    Gross Annual Revenue: $1,337,654.00
    RRF Received: 19-MAY-11
    Returned Date:
    990 Attached: Y
    Status: Accepted
    Related Documents
    No Related Documents
    Prerequisite Information
    No Prerequisite Information
    IRS Return Data

    See that “No Related Docuents”?    That ought to be full, so public can look at where that $1,337,654 allegedly came from and (in the process) seeing Program Accomplishments (and costs), and how much the Board of Directors are getting paid.  Now, because this income shows, we CAN go look it up with the comforting knowledge that they probably paid federal (and probably not state/local) taxes.  If thats comforting…  And that the institutions receiving privileges and pay, charged with fixing the unhealthy marriages that (allegedly) cause poverty and trouble the public at large, because of the noble cause they are in, don’t have to play by the rules, or obey normal laws regulating corporations (for public safety from scams), although if an individual behaved like this, s/he would be at risk of jail promptly.

    So, WHAT I WILL DO, on individual organizations (and you might consider doing):

    Check the 990 finder:

    ORGANIZATION NAME

    STATE

    YEAR

    TOTAL ASSETS

    FORM

    PAGES

    EIN

    Dibble Fund CA 2009 $537,324 990 23 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund CA 2008 $874,877 990 18 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund CA 2007 $696,077 990 18 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2006 $161,204 990 16 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2005 $94,274 990 14 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2004 $78,488 990 16 68-0435573
    Dibble Fund for Marriage Education CA 2003 $92,429 990 18 68-0435573
    Dibble Institute for Marriage Education CA 2007 $721,321 990 18 68-0435573

    TAGGS LISTING, meaning how much HHS grants have they gotten. Does not include contracts, just grants:

    Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
    THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  BERKELEY CA 94707-0881 ALAMEDA 948592779 $ 3,679,498


    At least $1 million has been Healthy Marriage// an ongoing one (above) is reaching Teens, and another 2011 grant, “Building Brighter Futures,” use “Discretionary”

    FY Award Number Award Title Budget Year of Support Award Code Agency Action Issue Date DUNS Number Amount This Action
    2011 90FM0010  BUILDING BRIGHTER FUTURES 1 00 ACF 09-27-2011 948592779 $ 794,846 
    Fiscal Year 2011 Total: $ 794,846

     

    WELL, WELL, WELL — another Grant Series includes grants to several of the I-failed-to-file/we changed our name/ OOPS! category of grants recipients, nationwide – – the “90FM” series.     There are 70 grants including $2,500,000 to “California Healthy Marriages Coalition,”  which does not exist as a corporation (or nonprofit) any more.

    Before this (Probably leading up to the renamed “Building Brighter Futures” is the 20065-2010 grant award 90FE0024, a total of $1.7 million.  Shouldn’t this group have to send off an RRF from time to time (like ever?).  ALthough we, the public, cannot view this, it’s my understanding they have to tell the OAG their Schedule B of donors (or donors over $1K) so someone is keeping track of any improprieties, i.e. donations correlating to legislation being pushed, or to at least PRETEND to avoid conflicts of interest when, for example, someone running the local grants allocation in the county determines who gets the contract.  Or when there’s a judge on a board — or a custody evaluator — and a judge is driving business to the nonprofit, or contributes to it as well.

     

    Interesting, The Dibble Operation has two different 990 filings with two different revenues for 2007 (Plus a few different names entered):

    address 728 Coventry Road, Kensington, CA a modest (for these parts) single-family residence.  Nearby streets are named Stanford, Oberlin, Beverly, etc.   Coventry possibly named after a Cathedral in England.

    What they are doing with this grant described here — teaching that cohabitation is bad to Los Angeles Teens, and other skills.  http://www.dibbleinstitute.org/

    The Dibble Institute has been awarded a $794,000 grant for up to three years to teach youth and young adults in the Los Angeles Unified School District healthy relationship skills. The grant is from the Administration for Children and Families. …

     

    THIS IS HOW IT WORKS:  Become a Nonprofit.  Get a grant, hire a curriculum designer, get more grants, and market it, helped with gov’t funding, in gov’t funded institutions.  This need not be necessarily limited to the divorce arena — why not go for the public schools, too?

    The website has a store, plus some free resources, and a log-in for “Grant Instructors” (only) to access their materials:

    Grant Instructor Login

    Welcome! Thank you for participating in The Dibble Institute’s Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant.  Access resources to help you

    • Teach the relationship skills program you selected — or —
    • Report back to us on how well you did and get your benchmark payment

    Login Here:Password:  Are you interested in changing the world and getting paid to do so? Then, The Dibble Institute wants to talk with you! We are looking for qualified instructors or youth workers who will teach healthy relationship skills to teens. Our program provides FREE curriculum, student materials, and a benchmark payment to you upon successful completion of the teaching and reporting. To learn how to apply and participate, please contact Natalie Middleton by phone 877-435-8033 or email:Natalie.Middleton@publicstrategies.com. Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant Number: 90-FE-0024/03.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.

     

    Notice that PUBLIC STRATEGIES is a *.com, not a *.org — it’s a FOR-profit, and I’ll bet a very good profit, too.  The grant series “FE” is pretty evidently “Fatherhood Education.”  Not exactly gender-neutral, eh?  “PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC.” is Oklahoma-based, and if you use my “search” field on this blog, I have elaborated upon who they are. Or google “Mary Myrick.”  The HHS appears to have “made” this PR firm, very few of their clients are NOT somehow related to the major Oklahoma Marriage Institute. (OMI) and the originators of some of the product above (for example, “PREP”) are Advisory to, as I recall, OMI.

     

    ABOUT US:  The Dibble Institute:

    The Dibble Institute for Marriage Education, a nonprofit organization, helps young people learn how to create healthy romantic relationships now and in the future.
    It is indeed a nonprofit organization, and even has an EIN#.  However, according to the OAG website it CERTAINLY is not in compliance as to filing, and doesn’t seem likely to any time soon.  Too busy moving product and finding new markets, I guess, to fill out a one or two-page form and send it the registration fee.

    We offer tools for teaching the practical skills essential for enhancing friendships, dating and love.  Just as important, we assist teens in creating the personal vision that keeps them on a positive path.

     

    It’s an unreporting to the state of California nonprofit organization, and as such has to be I believe operating OUTSIDE the confines of the law, while marketing materials to Los Angeles schoolchildren, as enabled by this grants system.  Charles Dibble (itself) was an aircraft engineer.  Now his Institute is designing web pages and curriculum, lots of them — perhaps young people can be taught to operate like aircraft engines, predictably, fail-safe, and perhaps all the parts of them can be organized, coordinated, and fine-tuned with attitude adjustments.  Is that desirable?  Look at the panorama of programs from this one group.  I sincerely doubt the founder was hurting for a retirement income (more likely something to do with his retirement), but certainly it’s got to be a good one.  PARTICULARLY IF NOT PAYING STATE TAXES AND ACCOUNTING PROPERLY FOR MONIES RECEIVED.

    The Dibble Fund itself appears to be a curriculum which other grantees, such as TWOGether in Pittsburgh, PA, utilize:

    Curriculum & Program Credibility: The TWOgether Pittsburgh High School Education Module for Healthy Relationships meets the requirement for the Pennsylvania Department of Education Academic Standards for Family and Consumer Sciences. The selected curriculum is The Dibble Fund for Marriage Education, which includes two components: Connections: Dating & Emotions and Connections: Relationships & Marriage.

    (I was aware of a TWOGether in Texas, and gather they have now expanded):

    TWOgether Pittsburgh is a coalition of like-minded agencies and individuals who believe in the strengthening of marriages. The coalition includes Family Guidance, Inc., as the lead agency, the Center for Urban Biblical Ministry, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Women’s Center and Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh, Smith Brothers Advertising, and a team of Evaluators led by Dr. Stanley Denton.

    TWOgether Pittsburgh is the most intensive marriage support initiative ever in the greater Pittsburgh area. It is a five-year, $8.35 million federally funded project to strengthen marriages and families in the region. (Healthy Marriage Initiative Websitehttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage )

    Apparently this is a baby corporation — only 2 years old.






    Twogether GP, LLC 3916468 Limited Liability Company Active 11/10/2009
    Twogether, L.P. 3916633 Limited Partnership Active 11/12/2009
    Rec

    Based out of a 3-bedroom, 3-bath home in Allentown, PA, whose (or which area’s) market values took a nosedive in Nov. 2011






    FAMILY GUIDANCE, INC. 399002 Non-Profit (Non Stock) Active 2/13/1964
    Re

    FAMILY GUIDANCE, INC. is overtly evangelistic Christian, and hooked into the HHS/ACF terminology and grants system.

    This about us page is unusually detailed and admits that in 2005, it was very much involved in ACF funding.

    STATEMENT OF MISSION

    Family Guidance, Inc. exists to bring hope and a future in Jesus Christ to vulnerable children and families of all cultures throughout western Pennsylvania. 

    . . .  (Note federal funding, religious influence, and Fatherhood Emphasis throughout — although both men and women pay taxes that help support this, not to mention, and atheists and people of non-evangelistic-Christian religions)

    In October 2000, the Manhood Mentoring program was launched to reach high-risk fatherless teenage boys, and  DADDs (Dedicated and Devoted Dads), was born in 2001. Dr. Leckie retired on December 31, 2001, and became Founder and Retired Chairman.

    In 2004, Family Guidance embarked on a dramatic initiative to expand and improve the quality of the ministry’s camping program.  Check out the progress of our Camp Capital Campaign.

    In 2005, Family Guidance embarked on a exciting initiative called the Learning and Mentoring Program (LAMP.)   In conjunction with the Gang Free Schools Project run by the Pittsburgh Board of Education, Family Guidance is helping to reach and mentor kids who are at risk for Gang-related activity.

    In the Fall of 2005, The Marriage Works was introduced.  This is a program funded through the Administration for Children and Families which is a partnership between Family Guidance, the Center for Urban Biblical Ministry and the National Fatherhood Initiative. The program provides marriage enrichment, couple mentoring, and fatherhood and parenting classes to couples who reside in the East End of Pittsburgh.  This became a springboard for the TWOgether Pittsburgh Initiative, launched the next year.

    This is a narration, step by step, of how federally-supported (faith-based) organizations collaborate and form new little babies.  As it says in Genesis, “Be fruitful, and multiply, replenish the earth.”  Only they are doing corporations & curricula, not babies.


    In the Fall of 2006 TWOgether Pittsburgh was introduced.  This is a coalition comprised of Family Guidance, the Center for Urban Biblical Ministry, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Women’s Center and Shelter of Pittsburgh, Smith Brothers Advertising and project evaluator, Stanley Denton.  This initiative, unprecedented in scope in the Pittsburgh area, seeks to partner with 30 local congregations to provide marriage enrichment, pre-marriage preparation, couple-to-couple mentoring, and divorce prevention. TWOgether Pittsburgh will also provide education on marriage and families in high schools and a media campaign regarding the benefits of marriage. The program is funded through a five-year grant from the Administration for Children and Families.

    TWOGether Pittsburgh contains a name that sounds familiar to me, but notice the phrase:  “Parents, Fathers, or Blended Families.”  Talk about “the invisible mother….

    Ken MacLeod
    Program Director, Marriage Preperation for Couples and
    Marriage Enrichment for Parents, Fathers, or Blended Families

    California Secretary of State search on “DIBBLE” Corporations.  Two pagers

    HOW DID WE GET TO THIS POINT?  OF SUPPORTING PR COMPANIES AND OTHER WEALTHY FIRMS AS A WAY TO REDUCE THE WELFARE CASELOAD, ABUSE, ETC.?  HOW DID WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE MONEY GETS COLLECTED, THEN LOST, BUT WHAT IS DISTRIBUTED, GETS DISTRIBUTED FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT, LIKE STREETWALKERS, LINE UP THEMSELVES AND SOLICIT BUSINESS WITH THE HHS/ACF, LOOKING FOR A “JOHN”?

    CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT:  RISE & EXPANSION.

    I think I have evidence we need an overhaul of the HHS — not just the OCSE part of it.  Collectively, it is behaving like this, and the figure at the front of the pack does not represent a present or former President.  But it does represent some REALLY bad executive orders, and eventually, laws.  My evidence is not in this post, which is simply reminding us of some of the HOW of the expansion of the welfare state — through the child support system expansion to include non-welfare cases.  ALL of these reforms appear to have come after the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) finally was (forced?) to register with its own EIN# and incorporate, well over a decade after it apparently began operating (illegally, tax-dodgingly) in the Los Angeles County Courthouse at 111 Hill Street.   (Beware AFCC post summarizes some of this)

    Everybody cheer and look to our leaders…..

    On October 17, 2003, a U.S. Senator Robert Byrd  used this fairy tale for an analogy.  He is indignant and saying it’s time to stop — referring to a different topic.  I am not nearly so eloquent, so here is his, as posted the next day at “commondreams.org”:

    by US Senator Robert Byrd
    Senate Floor Remarks
    October 17, 2003

    In 1837, Danish author, Hans Christian Andersen, wrote a wonderful fairy tale which he titledTheEmperor’sNewClothes.  It may be the very first example of the power of political correctness.  It is the story of the Ruler of a distant land who was so enamored of his appearance and his clothing that he had a different suit for every hour of the day.

    One day two rogues arrived in town, claiming to be gifted weavers.  They convinced the Emperor that they could weave the most wonderful cloth, which had a magical property.  The clothes were only visible to those who were completely pure in heart and spirit.

    The Emperor was impressed and ordered the weavers to begin work immediately.  The rogues, who had a deep understanding of human nature, began to feign work on empty looms.

    Minister after minister went to view the new clothes and all came back exhorting the beauty of the cloth on the looms even though none of them could see a thing.

    Finally a grand procession was planned for the Emperor to display his new finery.  The Emperor went to view his clothes and was shocked to see absolutely nothing, but he pretended to admire the fabulous cloth, inspect the clothes with awe, and, after disrobing, go through the motions of carefully putting on a suit of the new garments.

    Under a royal canopy the Emperor appeared to the admiring throng of his people – – all of whom cheered and clapped because they all knew the rogue weavers’ tale and did not want to be seen as less than pure of heart.

    But, the bubble burst when an innocent child loudly exclaimed, for the whole kingdom to hear, that the Emperor had nothing on at all.  He had no clothes.

    Always make sure to have some children without tact (or Ph.D.) or conflict of interest, or fear — in your life.  Fear or public embarrassment makes for stupid behavior, and ignorance of what is a more realistic danger, to be handled.   . .. .   Is that a beautiful analogy or not?  The rogues completely understood the social order — but they forgot the kids.

    Senator Byrd was talking about the war in Iraq, and how it was rushed through the Senate; I will shortly compare it to another “rushed through” legislation that has cost us dearly also, over time.  His next statement:

    That tale seems to me very like the way this nation was led to war. . . .

    We were told that we were threatened by weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but they have not been seen.

    We were told that the throngs of Iraqi’s would welcome our troops with flowers, but no throngs or flowers appeared.

    We were led to believe that Saddam Hussein was connected to the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, but no evidence has ever been produced.

    We were told in 16 words that Saddam Hussein tried to buy “yellow cake” from Africa for production of nuclear weapons, but the story has turned into empty air.

    We were frightened with visions of mushroom clouds, but they turned out to be only vapors of the mind.

    There have been some so-called, in fact self-called, “prominent thinkers” many years ago, but they have turned out to be “vapid thinkers”  — or rogues.  I believe, rogues.  What I’m about to show is too outrageous for mistake, and certain characteristics show a similarity with the weavers in the fairy tale.   Like a recent Harry Potter movie, a swish of the hand, a little vapor, and a protesting dwarf gladly let the imposter into the vault.   Eventually, looking daft and with a silly smile on his face, he was vaporized by the resident dragon, having forgotten how to cow the beast with noise.  …. In addition to weaving wonderful tales, there was a strong-arm rushing through of the legislation:

    Those who have dared to expose the nakedness of the Administration’s policies in Iraq have been subjected to scorn. Those who have noticed the elephant in the room — that is, the fact that this war was based on falsehoods � have had our patriotism questioned.   Those who have spoken aloud the thought shared by hundreds of thousands of military families across this country, that our troops should return quickly and safely from the dangers half a world away, have been accused of cowardice.  We have then seen the untruths, the dissembling, the fabrication, the misleading inferences surrounding this rush to war in Iraq wrapped quickly in the flag.

    The right to ask questions, debate, and dissent is under attack.  The drums of war are beaten ever louder in an attempt to drown out those who speak of our predicament in stark terms.

    Even in the Senate, our history and tradition of being the world’s greatest deliberative body is being snubbed.  This huge spending bill has been rushed through this chamber in just one month.  There were just three open hearings by the Senate Appropriations Committee on $87 billion, without a single outside witness called to challenge the Administration’s line. ***

    Ambassador Bremer went so far as to refuse to return to the Appropriations Committee to answer additional questions because, and I quote: “I don’t have time.  I’m completely booked, and I have to get back to Baghdad to my duties.”

     

    ** that is EXACTLY how some of the marriage/fatherhood legislation, and in particular the access/visitation portion of welfare reform, got passed.

    In 1996, as part of welfare reform, some legislation was rushed through (this is hearsay, but credible given how accurate the rest of her work has been, from Liz Richards of National Alliance for Family Court Justice) at the 9th hour by (none other than) Ron Haskins, creating the “access visitation” loophole to welfare reform.  I do not think even those of his party knew about it.   This legislation expanded the purpose and intent of the 1975 Child Support Law — TItle IV-D of welfare – based on a theory which has yet to be proven true.  A quick summary, I don’t want to be too pedantic, just to review the expansion:

    Excerpted from the 2000 House Ways and Means Green Book, “Child Support Enforcement Program

    In 1950, when only a small minority of children were in female-headed families, the Federal Government took its first steps into the child support arena. Congress amended the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) law by requiring State welfare agencies to notify law enforcement officials when benefits were being furnished to a child who had been abandoned by one of her {{interesting….}} parents. Presumably, local officials would then undertake to locate nonresident parents and make them pay child support. From 1950 to 1975, the Federal Government confined its child support efforts to these welfare children. With this exception, most Americans thought that child support establishment and collection was a domestic relations issue that should be dealt with at the State level by the courts.

    Note:  “Dealt with at the State level by the courts….”

    By the early 1970s, however, Congress recognized that the composition of the AFDC caseload had changed drastically. In earlier yearsthe majority of children needed financial assistance because their fathers had died; by the 1970s, the majority needed aid because their parents were separated, divorced, or never married. The Child Support Enforcement and Paternity Establishment Program (CSE), enacted in 1975, was a response by Congress to reduce public expenditures on welfare by obtaining support from noncustodial parents on an ongoing basis, to help non-AFDC families get support so they could stay off public assistance, and to establish paternity for children born outside marriage so child support could be obtained for them.

    Well, like most institutions, why limit a good thing to the original purpose?

    The 1975 legislation (Public Law 93-647) added a new part D to title IV of the Social Security Act. This statute, as amended, authorizes Federal matching funds to be used for enforcing support obligations by locating nonresident parents, establishing paternity, establishing child support awards, and collecting child support payments. Since 1981, child support agencies have also been permitted to collect spousal support on behalf of custodial parents, and in 1984 they were required to petition for medical support as part of most child support orders.

    So here begins the Federal INCENTIVE influence . . . Federal AFDC already existed….     Now read the next paragraph carefully, and if you remember any of my former posts about missing in action “Undistributable Child Support” (already collected), and/or the outsourcing to private companies which then sometimes end up defrauding the public, being sued for the fraud, and paying multi-millions in settlement, then going on to get more contracts where they can do it again — then listen to this (2000) description:

    Basic responsibility {{translation:  If parents ask, your screwups ain’t our fault}} for administering the program is left to States, but the Federal Government plays a major role in: dictating the major design features of State programs; funding, monitoring and evaluating State programs; providing technical assistance; and giving assistance to States in locating absent parents and obtaining support payments.

    So, when the Government began to give matching funds, it also began to demand more of a role in designing the systems – – removing the center of control further from the states:  “Federalism” — but for a good cause, to reduce welfare and make the world a better place by reducing poverty .  . .  except for ONE thing:  the addition of clientele — I’ll bold the wording:

    The program requires the provision of child support enforcement services for both welfare and nonwelfare familiesand requires States to publicize frequently, through public service announcements, the availability of child support enforcement services, together with information about the application fee and a telephone number or address to obtain additional information. Local family and domestic courts and administrative agencies handle the actual establishment and enforcement of child support obligations according to Federal, State, and local laws.

    Actually, by 2000, the process had been removed from the courts and required (by the Federal Emperor Government) to be handled in a statewide distribution unit.  In short, it wanted more CONTROL.  I can see some sense to the idea that a parent who flees to another state to avoid supporting his offspring might require some federal coordination — BUT — that’s not what was written into the 1996 Welfare Reform law…

    Alternately, the states could forfeit the federal funds to help collect. . . .The child support program generally does not provide services aimed at other issues between parents, such as property settlement, custody, and access to children.

    As of the year 2000, that statement was false.  The Child Support program as a net to haul in individuals perhaps behind on it, or to help them abate arrears, also encourages (fathers) to take advantage of some new improved programming:

    In 1996, Public Law 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, abolished AFDC and related programs and replaced them with a block grant program of TANF. Under the new law, each State must operate a CSE Program meeting Federal requirements in order to be eligible for TANF funds.

    The states did not have the option of the former AFDC programs, which were abolished.  THey have populations needing help — and they could either line up (see graphic above) and toot the horn, soliciting more clients for the child support program — including NON-welfare parents — or they could personally deal with hungry people, including single parents — themselves, after they had gotten used to federal help.

    In addition to abolishing AFDC, Public Law 104-193 made about 50 changes to the CSE Program, many of them major. These changes include requiring States to increase the percentage of fathers identified, establishing an integrated, automated network linking all States to information about the location and assets of parents, requiring States to implement more enforcement techniques, and revising the rules governing the distribution of past due (arrearage) child support payments to former recipients of public assistance.

    Note:   locating the assets of parents.  If one is going to have a good court case, finding out where the assets are is real important.    Anyhow, “many of them major” is an understatement.

    In 1998, almost $3.6 billion was spent by State child support programs to collect $14.3 billion in child support. The combined Federal-State program had 55,300 employees.  (HIRING 55,300 people– including attorneys and no doubt computer specialists — to reduce the public expense of welfare…..)

    REMOVING CHILD SUPPORT PROGRAM DESIGN FROM THE COURTS, AND GIVING IT TO AN APPOINTEE BY THE HEAD OF HHS, WHO IS A PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTEE.  As it says, government By, Of, and For the People, as dictated by ONE person in authority.  Note:  Formerly it had been in the courts.

    THE FEDERAL ROLE

    The Federal statute requires the national child support program to be administered by a separate organizational unit under the control of a person designated by and reporting directly to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Presently, this office is known as the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE).The Family Support Act of 1988 required the appointment of an Assistant Secretary for Family Support within DHHS to administer a number of programs, including the Child Support Enforcement Program.  {Wonder what other programs . . .. .}

    Currently, this position is entitled the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Tell your grandchildren how we got the OCSE.  They should know.

    As of 1996, this article shows up, Child SUpport Enforcement (CSE) officially got into custody matters –but those are matters at a state level, right?  NO matter, the centralized system had a better idea — and $ 10 million was allotted to it.

    Child Support Enforcement and Visitation — Should There Be a Federal Connection?  (WIKILEAKS, “CRS REport for Congress” updated June 20, 2000)  (read at least the gray inset at the top).

    In recent years, Congress has moderated its position against using federal CSE funds to promote enforcement of visitation rights. In 1988, it authorized CSE funding for child access demonstration projects in six states, and in 1996 it (1) permitted the Federal Parent Locator Service, which is under the direction of the Administrator of the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, to provide information on the location of custodial parents and children to noncustodial parents and (2) authorized an annual $10 million entitlement of CSE funds to states to establish and operate access and visitation programs. Some view these recent steps as too intrusive on state and domestic court authority, while others contend they are long overdue and do not go far enough.

    OBVIOUSLY not — these are now heading up towards $1.7 billion, thanks to those profiting from the $10 million and programs set up and enabled by this.

    The same author, and type of report, in 2007 (spanning the years 2002-2005) has a lot to say, but I’m reporting the “OTHER” factor, which crops up only on page 9 — interesting, becasue the intent of child support enforcement is allegedly to get it to the children.  This talks about where it wasn’t happening:

    Child Support Provisions COnsidered but not Enacted

    Congressional Research Service Report RL33881

    Child Support Provisions Considered But Not Enacted During the 2002-2005 Welfare Reauthorization Debate Carmen Solomon-Fears, Domestic Social Policy Division February 15, 2007

    Abstract. This report provides a brief discussion of 12 child support provisions that were considered during 2002-2005 within the context of welfare reauthorization but not enacted in P.L. 109-171 or any other federal law. To the extent that some of these provisions had broad support, they may be considered again in the 110th Congress. The Administration has included several of the provisions in its FY2008 Budget.

    (NOTE:  This was only Wikileaked in 2/2009 – not being I supposed broadcast too widely).  From page 9:

    In recognition that custodial parents rely heavily on child support to meet their children’s basic needs, both House and Senate bills over the last several Congresses have included a provision that would have required the Secretary of HHS to submit to the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee a report on the procedures states use to locate custodial parents for whom child support has been collected but not yet distributed.

    At least our Congressmen seemed to understand that sometimes money is collected, but not distributed, in any business, and possibly was being in this system also.  The thought that that Secretary of HHS ought to show some accountability for the huge amount of control given him/her.  Obviously the measures didn’t actually PASS though, to do this.

    According to the proposal, the report must include an estimate of the total amount of undistributed child support and the average length of time it takes undistributed child support to be distributed. Also, to the extent the Secretary deems appropriate, the report must include recommendations as to whether additional procedures should be established at the state or federal level to expedite the payment of undistributed child support.

    Although data are available from FY1999-FY2005 on undistributed child support collections, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has stated that during much of that period the amounts may not have been accurate because state CSE agencies had different interpretations of what constituted undistributed collections.22

    Possibly because the system was too complex, possibly through CSE obfuscation or poor communications.

    In 2002, a former Commissioner of the Office of Child Support Enforcement, Sherri Heller, said that the problem of undistributed collections has always existed. However, the Commissioner stated, “automation is helping us to quantify the problem that has always been there. I don’t think that automation or state disbursement units created the problem of undistributed collections. I think it’s shone a spotlight on it.”23

    Undistributed child support collections increased from $545 million in FY1999 to a record $738 million in 2001, and dropped to $479 million in 2004. In FY2005, nearly $497 million in child support was collected but was not distributed to custodial parents; 60% of that amount was in the process of being distributed24 and 40% ($201 million) was considered unresolved,25 and thereby had a lower probability of being distributed to custodial parents.

    Because I’ve picked up this image, let me quote the article too, Posted on September 26, 2011 by Bryan Thomas in “NOMIZO.com

    (posting it doesn’t mean I’ve analyzed the author’s position and agree with it — it means that, in addition to the illustration, a few choice phrases suited my purpose today…)

    The emperor has no clothes, cash, credit, or credibility

    Emperor is being used here as a synecdoche, a figure of speech in which a part is used to represent the whole. In reality, the entire U.S. government is in danger of losing the confidence of the American people and the world. In all of the debt ceiling news coverage during the past few months, one major element seems to be missing. It is the simple conclusion that our government has forgotten what leadership is and what leadership does.

    Well, too many of us have adopted a “we need an emperor” mentality, forgetting who helped create the many problems that supposedly such a strong leader might rescue us from.  We also have DEFINITELY forgotten that this country came out of revolutionary thinking in the history of the world — the concept that religion should be put under restraint, and monarchs, and that certain unalienable rights — the right to live, to have liberty, and to pursue happiness, was granted to the people not by monarchs, but by a “Creator”   And that their purpose in existence is not to furnish someone else’s wealth, gotten by treachery, deceit, or force, OR abusive taxation without representation.

    Fourthly, our government leaders are operating by a “Double Standard” and are not following the financial principles that all American citizens and businesses are expected to obey.  . . . Somehow, our government has developed a spirit of entitlement that enables them to operate above and beyond these financial laws and principles. In the process, they have forgotten that the money they are spending is not theirs, but it belongs to the American people. . . .

    Does it?   Well, for one our leaders have put us in permanent and impossible to get out of hock to the Federal Reserve Board, and then pretend that if (the rest of us — not the leaders) tighten our belts, we might just be OK — which is called lying.    We bought our currency at interest, then took it off the gold standard, then made sure that in the local schools, most people are taught values, not math, history, literacy, or how to become financially independent in the way that people who are running the place did.  That old trend to replace law with monarchy is always there — it’s human nature when power is handed over. 

    Fathers, Mothers, Nonparents, Taxpayers :  WHO are you working for?  And if you pay taxes where are they going?  What’s happening to the grants distributed, largess to the largest and smallest companies who dance to the tune set long ago from Washington, D.C.?   

    I’ll tell you who cannot tell you where your taxes went, as the dollar declines in value hurting the most people who have nothing BUT dollars (no land, no assets, no offshore bank accounts, and in fact, little grasp of the economic system, just of how to last til the next paycheck and try to make sure there is one.)

    My ridiculous title reflects some states a single trail led me to, these past two days, when I learned about the October 3, 2011 announcement of $119 million more in Healthy Marriage and Fatherhood Grants went.  Here’s the list:

    News and Media Releases:

    2011

    Oct-Dec

    10/05/11 – ACF awards $28 million to improve well-being for children in child welfare

    Let us not forget that this version of improving well-being = putting more fathers back with the babies, and selling programs like “Boot Camp For New Dads,” or “PREP,” plus of course abstinence education material through “faith-based community organizations.”

    10/04/11 – ACF announces $2 million in grant awards for Tribal TANF – Child Welfare Coordination

    10/03/11 – ACF announces over $119 million in Grant Awards for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood

     

    I am under 8,000 words, and not finished with this topic yet.  “To Be Continued . . . . .  ”

    I am going to post the 70 recipients of the new grant series starting “90FM” (but it’s still CFDA 93.086, which is Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood category).  I am angry about the dishonesty in a number of grantees previously researched, in particular the chameleon “California Healthy Marriages Coalition.”  I sense money laundering — otherwise, they could pick an incorporation, FILE, and stick with it.

     

    Also reprehensible is the amount and style of self-referrals; it’s basically the country-club atmosphere feeding off welfare funding, while the public at large figures someone is actually doing something about welfare, or that this money is going to help feed, clothe, house, or provide health care to needy children and families.  It ain’t.  It’s getting diverted & lost in the system, and NOT being tracked from those distributing it, or another arm of government, either!!!  If you’re not angry enough to act after some of this, you’re probably either numb from some other cause, or on drugs in order to think about it.

    The AFCC recently has on their site a pretentious declaration styled after the Declaration of Independence, rather than a straight religious creed (which it, in effect, is).  They state “WHEREAS” (yada yada yada), emphasizing that there is a “CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER” from lack of resources to the courts.

     

    This group is not unionized and doesn’t need to be — they are running the judicial system nationwide, and get activist judges in high places, and help pass legislation favorable to their particular groups.  I have caught them repeatedly at this (SB 557, Family Justice Center Alliance, or an attempt to actually write “Kids’ Turn” into the California Law — (Gov. Gray Davis vetoed it).  In Ohio, a similar action was able to write the spinoff group, “Kids First” into the Procedures and get its name on to the court from for ANY custody modification.  Citizens of Pennsylvania are onto this and have been reporting it, but I believe it’s still there.  How is this not a form of racketeering, with the exception that this group has enabled to get their activity (along with domestic violence and child abuse, kidnapping, stalking, etc.) DE-criminalized by  lobbying for laws to legitimize professional niches they have created  (Parent Coordination, and pushing Parent Education, Counseling, Supervised Visitation, etc.).

    MANY of these groups including the one I just showed above, are not just “faith-based” but outright evangelistic.  What they want is your money and access to your children, for mentoring purposes.  I have dealt extensively with religious circles, and know how this works.  It comes from the conviction that a theocracy is certainly better than limiting religion to the restraints that Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, and others realized it HAD to be if the republic, and the country would stand.

     

    BUT — and don’t forget this — NOT all the Marriage/Fatherhood grantees are in it for evangelization.  Money, itself (and access to young children without their parents around for “transformative” group therapies) are equally potent motivators.  And I have to acknowledge that this must be so; if they were as values-driven as they claim to be, we would see more corporate status-maintained, charitable-registrations-kept-up-to-date grantees.  WE aren’t.

    Does the HHS care?  I don’t see that it does — they are still doling out the largess, as is the Ways & Means Committee and whoever rubberstamps this legislation — away from the public radar — year after year.

    (GRrrrr!   !!)

    What’s Money got to do with it? This is about love, helping kids, protecting gender expression, right?

    with 2 comments

    Yesterday, I almost got lost among AB 887 (redefining gender) and the backgrounds of its sponsor, after my recent post about the attempted (in 2002) AB 2263, suggesting that our top Judicial organization in the state (California Judicial Council) get paid — assuming it could also find other funding — to judge the mental health efficacy of Kids’ Turn, excuse me,  (this is the sanitized version)”

    projects or programs that provide services to assist children and their 
    families while the parents are in the process of obtaining a divorce or legal separation... [[not mentioned -- this process can and does often take years -- like 10, 15, 18...]]

    and which measures, among 5  standards, 3 which deal such hard data as “degree of conflict,” “mental health of children,” and “change in (parental) attitude”:

    (1) Any decrease in conflict between the parents regarding custody issues, as reported by the parents.

    (2) The mental health of the children, as measured by their attitudes before and after participating in the project or program.

    (3) Any change in the attitude of the parents who participate in the project or program.

    Conflict is obviously bad — this is why, the US never engages in wars abroad or at home, such as on terror, drugs, homelessness, poverty, or fatherlessness.  Conflict is Bad.  Having the Judicial System involved in receiving public monies to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral modification programs (run by family law professionals and supported by millionaires and billionaires — see my posts, it’s true!) — is, per our Legislators (in 2002) Good.  All they wanted was $50,000 — plus matching funds. In the cleaned up version…

    Original version was more direct – but someone thought better of that and reworded it from the original, as reported May, 2002:

    AB 2263, by Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, which would require the Judicial Council to study the effectiveness of expanding the Kids’ Turn program, which assists children while their parents are in family court obtaining a divorce or legal separation. The bill was approved by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a 23-0 vote May 15, passed the Assembly on a 72-2 vote May 23 and was sent to the Senate.

    I think we should know who those 23 people sitting on the Appropriations Committee that said YES were:

    FYI, for a perspective Assemblypersons in 2011 have salaries ranging from $95,291 (most) to $109K (one) and a few $102K.  Judges outrank them by ca. 50% as to salaries.  Kids’ Turn is a judges project (if not slush fund..)  Judge are always being so helpful, because they love kids.

    One legislator (Atkins) had previous been chief staff of the other former assemblyperson, now Senator legislator (Kehoe), it turns out and both were “out” lesbians (hardly unusual for California, but sometimes even I forget).  Another Sunburst Youth Housing Project has Atkins & Partner/Wife’s name on it.

     January 2005, after more than 3 1/2 years of hard work, The Center announced the creation of an innovative youth supportive housing project. This cutting-edge program is one of the first projects of its kind in the United States. The Youth Housing project provides 23 units of affordable, supportive housing for youth between 18-24 years of age, with a special focus on LGBTQ+ youth. These high-risk youth were living in the streets or in public spaces after having been ejected from their homes because of their sexual orientation.

    This project has been made possible by the leadership and vision of Rev. Tony Freeman, Dr. Heather Berberet, San Diego City Councilmember Toni Atkins, Jennifer LeSar, The Center and its project collaborators — YMCA Youth and Family Services, San Diego Youth and Community Services, Metropolitan Community Church, Walden Family Services and the Chadwick Center at Children’s Hospital.  We opened our doors to youth at the beginning of February 2006.

    Oh yes, and the AB 887 sponsor’s wife was caught — well reported — exploiting the homelessness problem in San Diego to turn a nice penny as consultant for herself ($225/hour) by farming out the work to others, while her wife (Assemblyperson Atkins) was photographed with the volunteers counting the homeless.

    2011, SanDiegoReader seems to be keeping tabs on these conflicts of interest:

    Why Was Toni Atkins Consulting for Developers Vying for Redevelopment Dollars After She Was Elected to State Assembly?

    By historymatters | Posted January 27, 2011, 3:51 p.m.

    Why was State Assembly Majority WHIP Toni Atkins working for LeSar Development Consulting firm as the Senior Principal of Housing Policy and Planning even after she was elected to State Assembly? Toni was consulting with developers and helping them lobby to get these redevelopment tax dollars for their projects. So how in the world can she vote objectively as a State Assembly member let alone State Majority WHIP to freeze this redevelopment money and return it to schools and other state resources when she has a definite financial stake in seeing that the money remain in the pockets of developers like her wife and their clients.

    How is it that Atkins and her wife Jennifer LeSar are continually allowed to financially benefit from the affordable housing gravy train. Affordable housing is a multi million dollar issue with a multi million dollar bounty at stake to the most cunning and shrewd land developers and Atkins is voting on this issue despite her personal financial stake. LeSar served as a CCDC Board Member for years while Atkins simultaneously served on City Council and voted to approve millions in redevelopment funds.

    Meanwhile, Hunting for the Homeless (2011 Feb. Press article)

    State Assemblymember, 76th District, Toni Atkins uses a flashlight to look for people sleeping in a canyon as she participates in the Point in Time Count in Hillcrest. This year's numbers were up.

    State Assemblymember, 76th District, Toni Atkins uses a flashlight to look for people sleeping in a canyon as she participates in the Point in Time Count in Hillcrest. This year’s numbers were up

    I’m starting to like this blogger, “historymatters” — who seems to be on top of the issues — not that anyone seems to be stopping this flagrant wearing two hats at once while selling projects (contracts to cronies — or partners (nepotism?) — which are to help the public, allegedly).  San Diego is not my area — except for the reputation they have in messing with parents around family law, and the infamous “Family Justice Center Model” (Casey Gwinn retirement program), same general idea.  Our public servants are I guess to busy working on (and dreaming up, or expanding) projects to help the rest of us that it slipped their minds to report who was getting the contracts for those projects.  During an era of increasing unemployment, skyrocketing gas prices, closing libraries, thousands of California prisoners being released due to overcrowding, and such — it’s very important to sell educational programs to parents undergoing divorce (and measure whether they worked) — and of course SOMEBODY has to go hunt up the homeless (while, during the daytimes, they are encouraged to keep moving….)

    In “I’ve Got Issues” (I’m starting to like this blogger):

    Jennifer LeSar was on the Board of Directors of the Centre City Development Corp. (CCDC) from 2002 to 2009. She started her development consulting business in 2005 consulting many of the same developers she was working with on CCDC. http://lesardevelopment.com/about-us/ CCDC recently asked the City Council to approve the contract extension with redevelopment money, yes that same redevelopment money that Atkins as State Assembly WHIP will vote on in Sacramento….sound like a conflict of interest?

    2009 Article stating that Kehoe is going to back her former staffer, ex-City-Councilwoman Atkins for State Assembly( which we can see, she obviously got).

    2010, January — The GayandLesbianTimes protests politicking by this duo (Kehoe & Atkins) (control of a nonprofit board? stacked — under threat to the organization if it didn’t comply?)

    Former board resigns, San Diego Democratic Club appointed by Kehoe to take over Pride
    The reconstituted Board of Directors of San Diego LGBT Pride met Wednesday, Jan. 27. The first order of business was to accept the resignations of board members Philip Princetta, Co-chair and Mike Karim, Treasurer. According to Pride, the new board members are fully committed to transparency and will honor the duties and responsibilities of the organization and continue the mission of San Diego Pride. However, the first meeting was closed into executive session soon after it began.
    At a special meeting held last Saturday, attended by City Councilmember Todd Gloria and former San Diego deputy mayor Toni Atkins, State Senator Christine Kehoe demanded that San Diego LGBT Pride board members Chair Philip Princetta, Treasurer Mike Karim, Secretary Carl Worrell either resign or she would place the organization into receivership – a court action that places property under the control of a receiver during litigation – according to an anonymous source at the meeting.
    Kehoe, Atkins and Gloria packed the San Diego Pride Board with a crossover of supporters, donors, and endorsers of their political campaigns – appointing the San Diego Democratic Club to take over Pride.
    Community members are questioning if they have legal authority to take such actions under the Brown Act….
    In a letter, obtained by the Gay & Lesbian Times, Worrell said, “I don’t know that I have ever before found myself in a situation where every alternative solution is wrong. But, in my opinion, that is the situation now. After the unconscionable bullying we took from Christine Kehoe, Todd Gloria and Toni Atkins; it is obvious that my involvement in shaping the future of Pride must end.
    In addition to demanding that the three current board members resign, Kehoe also stated that all Pride board meetings would be attended by a representative from both Kehoe’s and Gloria’s offices. She ordered a hiring freeze and said all Pride business must go through her office before any actions were taken, according to the anonymous source.

    One reason I steer clear from nonprofits.  Another reason is that I learned the hard way that they are answerable to their funders more than the clients they serve.  I would NEVER deal with a nonprofit (If I were you) anymore without knowing who is on the board of directors, and who is footing the bills.   Moreover, nonprofits can have their boards taken over and start firing staff, totally change the character of any organization which may have started out well.

    So, I’m interested why these people would be so interested in controlling the nonprofit here San Diego LGBT Pride and looked it up.  “Year Founded:1974 Ruling Year:1995” (meaning actually showed up as a nonprofit 21 years after it started…  Wow, kinda like AFCC, which took forever to incorporate properly and start reporting income and paying taxes…).   Income they deal with listed at $1.47 million…   Purpose:

    Foster pride in and respect for all Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,

    and Transgender communities locally and globally.

    (See yesterday’s post on the gender expression bill.  Guess some real progress has been made there.)

    Guidestar’s IRS form 990 for the year 2009 shows only the 3 ousted officer, plus Exec. Director Ron deHarte earning $113K, and the main activity rallies, festivals, etc.  (and operating in the whole).  The income is mostly “program service revenue.”

    Whether or not this type of behavior and leadership qualities is played out in the LGBT community or not, it seems common in these combos, I have noticed:

    • Legislator Connection
    • City level control (Councilmen, Councilwomen), and  County Level Supervisors
    • Redevelopment Connections (real estate developers, or those financing it)
    • Favored nonprofits controlled by one of the above to provide services
    • Cronies getting the contracts, or cronies/spouses getting to be Exec. Director of the favored Nonprofit/agency  (Example:  “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys — Attorney General Bill Lockyer’s (3rd) wife gets coveted $90K job over a $3million-grant-initiated “Alameda County Family Justice Center” (I think was the title) whose actual benefits to the public are questioned (if ever proved).    The process by which this Executive Director was appointed took the cooperation of County Supervisors, helped by the early resignation of a (as I recall) District Attorney (rather than waiting out is term to let the appointment happen normally:  i.e., From Orloff to Nancy O’Malley.
    For an example, here’s a quick summary (I also blogged it — but it was someone else who researched it):
    SEPT 2009 (article shows an Oakland City Council person deluged with protests about constituents being whammed with parking meter increases, and slammed with violations…which is affecting business for the local retailers…   So the City Councilperson is often between a rock and a hard place, meaning the collaboration between other already tightly bonded parts of local govt:

    Case closed: One big reason the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to name retiring District Attorney Tom Orloff‘s handpicked successor, Nancy O’Malley, to the plum job was her role in helping launch the Alameda County Family Justice Center – a federally funded program that helps victims of domestic violence.

    Not only are Supervisors Gail Steele and Alice Lai-Bitker big supporters of the program, but its executive director is Nadia Maria Davis-Lockyer – the wife of longtime East Bay pol Bill Lockyer.  Nadia is also running for supervisor.

    Both Steele & Lai-Bitker have a reputation for being really concerned about domestic violence, and Steele, even for this crisis in the courts.  HOWEVER — has that justice center actually helped as many people as it says it did?  And if they’re so concerned about the bottom segments of society (and kids, of course….) — why not set a better example, and let the heads of major nonprofits receiving a FAT federal grant – be picked legally, instead of voting to minimize public awareness, and public comment ?  A “Steve White” (Indymedia) blogged this in 2006.  I can’t see that the practices have changed much, over time.  I blogged it, too:
    There’s a certain truth (though not as intended, I’m sure) in the testimonials from this Justice Center’s site:

    This is really changing the way the system is responding to victims.”
    -Nancy O’Malley, Alameda County Chief Assistant District Attorney

    “We use business principles to address social problems and build lasting solutions.”
    -Nadia Davis-Lockyer, Esq., Executive Director

    Well, well — the Sneak Peak of ACFCJ finds out that Ms. Nadia is going to take retiring County Supervisor Gayle Steele’s place — very appropriate, because Supervisor Steele probably could have — but like Lai-Bitker, chose not to — protest the improper propelling of this woman to the head of the ACFCJ to start with (see the articles i’ve linked to).  TWO county supervisors protested swishing the appointment past the public improperly.  THREE County supervisors (including those two) did not.  So here we are —

    Congratulations and Thank You, Nadia Lockyer

    On November 2, 2010, Nadia Lockyer was elected to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to fill the seat vacated by retired County Supervisor, Gayle Steele. Nadia’s last day as the Executive Director of the ACFJC was December 31, 2010. We wish to thank Nadia for all she did for the ACFJC and we wish her well in her new position. We know she will continue advocating to ensure the safety and health of all children and families in Alameda County.

    Senior Deputy District Attorney, Kim Hunter, will be the Acting Director of the ACFJC. She and Cherri Allison of FVLC will work together to provide leadership until a new director is installed.

    And of course a blurb in this ACFCJ newsletter celebrates the inauguration of Nancy O’Malley, who helped get this ACFCJ started:

    District Attorney, Nancy O’Malley, Sworn in at ACFJC

    The Inauguration Ceremony of Nancy O’Malley, Alameda County District Attor- ney, took place at the ACFJC on January 3, 2011. Approximately 250 people gathered on the 2nd floor to hear an introduction by Chief Assistant District Attorney, Kevin Dunleavy, and the Oath of Office administered by Cali- fornia Supreme Court Associate Justice Carol Corrigan. Nancy ended the ceremony with a touching speech that thanked her mentors and family. A reception immediately followed at Z Café.

    Congratulations Nancy!

    While most Centers & Units  under this County’s DA’s office have addresses basically at the courthouse (1225 Fallon St most common address listed), “Child Abduction” and “Domestic Violence” have been exported to a different address, or “Center” here — 427   27th Street, Oakland.  (I developed a recent habit — looking up street addresses of nonprofits to see who else is there).
    Convenient for the providers, not necessarily the best for the clients.
    While I’m here (on that Alameda County Family Justice Center) — FYI
    Guidestar, the address shows a nonprofit “Bay Area Women Against Rape”BAY AREA WOMEN AGAINST RAPE

    Also Known As:

    Physical Address:
    470 27TH St
    Oakland , CA 94612 
    2008 IRS Form 990 (contains warning notice on potential errors in this version)
    EIN# 942300454
    This group’s budget is small fry among big fry (Grants $650,000) and its Executive Director, Marcia Blackstock has something worth hearing about this group and practices in general:

    If you’ve got ears, listen up to this one:

    Biography

    Blackstock is the Executive Director of Bay Area Women Against Rape, which was founded in 1971 and is recognized as one of the first three victim assistance programs in the nation.

    Initial Involvement in the Crime Victims’ Movement

    Marcia Blackstock became involved in Bay Area Women Against Rape (BAWAR) as a volunteer in 1978. BAWAR had been formed in 1971 by an outraged foster mother whose high school-age daughter had been treated badly both by the police and the emergency room staff after she was raped.

    Context of the Era

    BAWAR had a “huge adversarial relationship” with law enforcement, hospital personnel, mental health professionals, and the judiciary in the early days. Blackstock remembers that BAWAR’s views were not trusted, nor did BAWAR trust anyone in the system to appropriately assist sexual assault victims. “It was a lot of upheaval, a lot of anxiety, and frustration,” Blackstock recalls. On the other hand, there was substantial community support from the local universities and other collective groups such as the Berkeley Free Clinic and the Women’s Health Collective that were also working and organizing to see that people were treated with dignity and respect and that their needs were met.

    Greatest Challenge

    Looking back, Blackstock believes that the greatest challenge was establishing credibility among professionals in the various fields that dealt with rape victims. The therapists, law enforcement officers, judiciary, and hospital personnel considered themselves the “experts” and maintained an adversarial relationship with BAWAR mainly because of its grassroots origins. The BAWAR advocates were not considered to be “professionals.”

    “We were coming from a peer-support, community-based, grassroots organization that brought in a huge variety of people from a variety of backgrounds and education and ideas, but all coming together and focusing on a common goal. But we were considered ‘peer’ and not ‘professional’, at best paraprofessional and rarely that.”

    One of the problems that BAWAR faced was that licensed counselors who felt that they were more knowledgeable had no experience at all working with sexual assault victims.

    Or course, professionals and experts know better than grassroots advocates (or victims of crime) what’s best for them, and should be paid accordingly.
    In looking up another Board of Directors of BAWAR, (Candace Archuleta)  the “Rakheem Bolton” case (Dallas, Texas) comes up, in which a cheerleader who was held down, locked in, raped — and whose rapist got off with a handslap — took a real stand.
    In fact when she was supposed to be jumping up and down and shouting encouragement to him, she just stood.
    She refused to cheer for him when he was back on the basketball court.  She didn’t call names, throw things, threaten, or anything.  She just stood, silent.  And for this, was punished
    (WHY does this remind me of battered mothers who have some resistance to co-parenting with identified abusers or child molesters?  Family Courts have a hey-day with that obstinance….) 
    Oh boy — none of that lack of “spirit” in the school! — and she was kicked off the cheerleading squad.

    A high school student who refused to cheer on her “rapist” has been ordered to pay $45,000 for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit. Where’s the justice in this?

    By Cord Jefferson
    Posted: 05/05/2011 02:54 PM EDT

    I didn’t want to have to say his name and I didn’t want to cheer for him,” she told reporters in 2009. “I just didn’t want to encourage anything he was doing.”

    To that end, HS refused to cheer for Bolton when he stepped up to take some free throws during a game in January 2009, four months after he had pleaded guilty to the attack. When she folded her arms and stood silently, however, her school’s superintendent, Richard Bain, ordered her outside and told her she had to cheer for Bolton. When she refused again, HS was kicked off the cheerleading squad.

    (How much money, fame, press does a good basketball team attract to a school?)

    HS later sued the school for kicking her off the team, but the results of that lawsuit have time and again gone terrifyingly against her.

    (What’s Gender got to do with THAT situation?  Or, money? –or Justice?  The rapist paid $2,500, and she has to pay the school district $45,000 for protesting —  not with violence, but with silence?)

     

    Now — think about it.  BAWAR is at this area, and getting small amt. of funding compared to the larger scope, yet rape and assault is a major part of domestic violence.    Yet Guidestar shows this “Alameda County Family Justice Center” at the same address — which we know is a major project — it has a physical, building presence — and yet it’s listed on Guidestar AS IF a nonprofit, incorporation 2010 (we know, formed much earlier) same address:

    ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC   [EIN#  26-1141080]

    Also Known As:

    Physical Address:
    470 270TH StOakland , CA 94612
    At A Glance
    Category (NTEE):
    Human Services / (Victims’ Services) 
    Year Founded:
    2010  Ruling Year: 2010 

    I’m looking at a 990 signed this past February by Harold Boscovich.  (You can too — it’s free).  There are no officers, no income, and no officer, it says, was paid.    Now THAT’s an unusual tax return!   “The purpose of this corporation (not nonprofit?) it “to provide comprehensive collaborative professional services to victims of domestic violence and their children, to victims of sexual abuse, sexual assault, and sexual exploitation; to victims of elder abuse, and to victims of child abuse, at no cost.

    WAIT A MINUTE!  Aren’t these the legitimate functions already of governmental (not nonprofit) agencies?  Such as the District Attorney’s office?
    The books of this corporation are in the possession, it says, of D.A. “Nancy O’Malley, 470 270th Street, Oakland 94612″ (deliberate typo?  Oakland has no 270th street; see address) and the corporation’s contact# is the same.”
     We already know that Ms. Nadia’s salary was paid by the DA’s office (per indymedia blogger & local commentator, Steve White — see links)  It is classified as a “community trust” (line 8, Part I, of “Schedule A”) I guess IRS Section 170 (b)(1)(a)(vi).
    Huh?
    I’m a novice and maybe you are.  A SF Law firm summarizes / explains (Thank you, Adler & Colvin, a Law Corporation, 235 Montgomery, Ste. 1220, for this link and information):

    QUALIFYING FOR PUBLIC CHARITY STATUS: The Section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and 509(a)(1) Test and the Section 509(a)(2) Test

    Tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code permits a charitable organization to pay no tax on any operating surplus it may have at the end of a year, and it permits donors to claim a charitable deduction for their contributions.

    There is a further division in the world of Section 501(c)(3) organizations, classifying them into private foundations and public charities.

    The private foundation laws impose a 2 percent tax on investment income, limit self-dealing and business holdings, require annual distributions, prohibit lobbying entirely, and restrict the organization’s operations in other ways. Also, large donors to a private foundation have a lower ceiling on the amount of deductible gifts they can claim each year. In most circumstances, public charity status is preferable to private foundation status.

    And it appears that this Alameda County Family Justice Center (“ACFJC” as I might refer to it again), started by District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, hand-picked by the retiring one TOm Orloff as a shoo-in (or to be the incumbent shortly before he retired) whose connections I’m sure helped get the $3 million grant to start this particular ACFCJ — and who then helped get another connected individual, Nadia Davis-Lockyer, Esq. become Executive Director and at once get a 50% increase in salary, to just below what a California Legislator (Assembly) typically gets ($90,000 / $95,921)….

    Well, back to our IRS stipulations / qualifications link:

    To determine the charity’s support base, (we might as well look at this….)

    Gifts, grants,(Footnote 3) contributions, and membership fees received.

    Gross investment income (e.g., interest, dividends, rents, royalties, but not gains from sale of capital assets).

    Taxable income from unrelated business activities,4 less the amount of any tax imposed on such income.

    Benefits from tax revenues received by the charity, and any services or facilities furnished by the government to the charity without charge, other than those generally provided to the public without charge.

    {{Hmmm….Does this rule have anything to do with why a new location was needed for the Center?}}

    Footnote 3 In some limited circumstances, an unexpectedly large grant may be excluded from both public support tests as an “unusual grant” described in Regulation § 1.170A-9(e)(6). These technical rules are beyond the scope of this memorandum.

     

    Not becoming a Private Foundation — Well, if there’s a whole lot of wealth involved, this could be annoying.  Also, if you want very large private donors to support you, they deductible for those donors is also lower, which may make them wish to contribute instead to  501( c)3s as “Public charities” — like the Kids’ Turns of the family law world?

    A Section 501(c)(3) organization can avoid private foundation status, and thus be classified as a public charity, in any of three ways: (1) by being a certain kind of institution, such as a church, school, or hospital; (2) by meeting one of two mathematical public support tests; or (3) by qualifying as a supporting organization to another public charity. In this memo, we discuss the two mathematical public support tests.

    The Public/Governmental Support Test of Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and 509(a)(1)

    This public support test was designed for charities which derive a significant proportion of their revenues from donations from the public, including foundation grants, and from governmental grants. The test has two variations. If an organization can satisfy either of the two variations of this support test, it will qualify as a public charity under Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and 509(a)(1).

    The first variation is known as the one-third test. A charity can satisfy this test if public support is one-third or more of the total support figure. Nothing more is needed if this mathematical fraction is attained.

    The second variation, known as the 10 percent facts and circumstances test, has two requirements. First, the charity’s public support must be at least 10 percent of its total support. Second, the charity must demonstrate, with reference to facts and circumstances specified by the IRS, that it is operated more like a public charity than like a private foundation.

    For “Program Accomplishments” it says “See Schedule O.”  One year, the return simply had the organization’s title in there; the next year, it again restated the organization’s purpose.  These are hardly “program accomplishments.”
    As it’s a certain kind of public charity, I’d like to see the IRS letter of Determination
    Now — When I googled this Inc’s name (ACFJC) 3 and 3 groups only came up.  This (also Oakland-based) is the second one.     (The third is the Bill Wilson Center in LA? area).  This is where the money seems to be recorded — the Family Violence Law Center  (EIN# 942527939)
    Income: $3,250,900
    Also known as: FVLC
    Oakland, CA 94623
    Category: I71 (Spouse Abuse, Prevention of); P43 (Family Violence Shelters and Services); P62 (Victims’ Services)Physical Address:PO Box 22009 Oakland , CA 94623Web Address:www.fvlc.org  Telephone:(510) 2080220 Facsimile:(510) 2083557 Contact:Ms. Cherri N. Allison, , Esq.cherri@fvlc.orgExecutive Director(510) 2080220 x32
    This amount seems closer to the grant mentioned for the spanking new ACFJC a while back.  NOtice different address (like a PO Box….) and although ACFCJ actually has a web address, Guidestar doesn’t list it for some reason.
    2008 Tax Return says that
    GRANTS — Prior Year, $318,322,
    THIS year $1,386,008
    Program Service Revenue  — last year:   1,680,748,
    THIS year $1,867,703
    Given that part of domestic violence is economic abuse — the victims are not usually flush with funds — I’m going to hazard a guess that they are selling trainings and products to other nonprofits, or to agency professionals whose trainings are paid for by public funds.  That’s just a guess.  Unless you know a slew of domestic violence survivors that can pay this kind of money to help support the group.
    I’d say collaboration works, eh?
    Here’s a current job advertisement for “youth program director” — will earn perhaps a bit less than half what the former ACFCJ Exec. Director did, at $42K – $48K per year.  Children are being born daily (hence no shortage of Youth in the area) and the former clients that ran through ACFCJ are probably dealing with high-conflict custody cases, wondering where their child support went, and figuring out how to co-parent with whoever this group helped them get a protective order on earlier.   Meanwhile, their lives having first justified grants to this organization, will now be justifying grants for “access and visitation,” a cause which essentially undoes what the first round did — protection.
    Their mission statement, history, accomplishments, and who they collaborate with is listed clearly here:

    Mission Statement

    Family Violence Law Center (FVLC) has been working to end domestic violence in Alameda County since 1978, when a small group of abuse survivors founded the agency. To advance our mission of ending domestic violence, FVLC employs a holistic approach that integrates a comprehensive service model with dedicated efforts to address and change institutional barriers for domestic violence survivors within the legal, health, education, and criminal justice systems.

    Yeah, “holistic” and “comprehensive service” are definitely the keywords these days.  Please notice carefully (underlined) which systems it tries to address and change “institutional barriers for domestic violence survivors” within — it specifically does NOT mention within the Judicial system, and it most definitely does not mention anything — at all – about the “FAMILY LAW SYSTEM” although it’s title says ‘Family Law Violence Center.”

    Go figure, huh?  And how telling.  The most critical information people coming through “stage one” of leaving domestic violence, assuming kids are involved, is what is coming up next — which IS the “family law system.”.

    After looking at the 990 (as usual, I often go straight to the officers’ page), and notice the Executive Director is being paid a modest (for this size of operation) salary of $90K year, and her name is:

    ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT TEAM

    Cherri N. Allison, Esq. is the Executive Director at FVLC. A lifetime resident of Oakland, Ms. Allison has more than 7 years of legal non-profit management experience. Ms. Allison also has over 12 years of experience as a family law attorney.

    Prior to coming to FVLC, Ms. Allison was the Director of Programs at the Alameda County Bar Association. In addition to Ms. Allison’s expertise in non-profit management, she has experience in board development, program development, grant writing and investments. She currently serves as the President of the Board for the Women Lawyers of Alameda County, is a former member of the FVLC Board, and is a member of the California Alliance Against Domestic Violence and the Charles Houston Bar Association.

    In 2008, she is (not inappropriately, I’m sure) awarded by the Bar Association for the work with this Community Organization, along with other judges, attorneys, etc., as it says (tickets, $125),

    2008 Installation and Distinguished Service Awards Dinner

    Join us on Thursday, January 17, 2008, as we swear in our Officers and Directors and honor the recipients of our Distinguished Service Awards while we enjoy a delectable dinner buffet and cool jazz. The festivities will take place at the Claremont Hills Resort & Spa, majestically resting on 22 acres of beautifully landscaped gardens in Berkeley.*

    (*starting to sound like some of the wonderful AFCC, or for that matter, Kids’ Turn promoting retreats and seminars.)

    (the “California Alliance Against Domestic Violence” is a grants recipient, from my understanding, through HHS and is where CPEDV went….).   WELL, I guess that FAMILY LAW EXPERIENCE may tell us why this group doesn’t seem to educate its clients about the family law process, and what’s happened to it since, say, 2001 (Bush, faith-based), or even 1998, 1999 (US Congress passes resolutions on fatherhood).  However, it’s clear Ms. Allison must be informed about the intersection of DV & Family Law; she has written about it:

    Domestic violence remedies in California family law cases, 2008. Cherri N. Allison, et al. (CEB, 2008)  KFC 115 D664  not accessible to general public, unless you are in L.A.?

    Get this (2009)

    Women Lawyers of Alameda County (WLAC) honors Exec Director  of ACFCJ, District Attorney (who helped fund and start ACFCJ) who also honor a retired woman judge (Hon. Peggy Hora., Ret’d.) who pushed “therapeutic jurisprudence”  – a VERY problemmatic practice in the judicial field, and also endorsed by AFCC.

    How sweet — aren’t these professionals all close friends with each other then?  (Except the women driven homeless through family law system and twice-thrice-and ongoing-abused (Legal abuse syndrome) through its practices, or while (out of state — MD — another state pushing Therapeutic Jurisprudence through Univ. of Baltimore School of Law “CFCC”) a pediatrician mother (is that professional enough?) lost 3 children, drowned in a bathtub on a scheduled visitation, although she warned, pleaded, and asked for visitation to be curtailed based on the prior mental health history and state of the father.  (“Cabrillo”).

    WLAC “Honor Roll”

    This Issue’s Honor Roll:

    Cherri N. Allison, Executive Director of the Family Violence Law Center of Alameda County, was recently named “Woman of the Year” for the Justice Category of the Alameda County Commission on Status of Women and will be inducted into the Alameda County Women’s Hall of Fame on April 25, 2009.

    I think that instead of professionals honoring and decorating themselves in nice ceremonies (Sun Myung Moon and the U.S. Senate mock coronation ceremony comes to mind) instead some of the women who DIED because of stupid family law rulings, sometimes along with their children or in front of them, in scheduled exchanges with the father for co-parenting purposes — THEIR names should be honored.

    I do not live in this county and so am not familiar with which is most dramatic, but how about honoring the mothers who, having left an abusive relationship (or possibly separated because of the abuse) thereafter, by complying with family court orders to fork over their children to an ex-batterer or abuser, ended up dead.  

    If this is too many low-income people to consider at once, then why not go for someone closer to the legal profession’s social class — Hans Reiser.  Why not honor his wife, Nina.   I’m not sure which county this case was in, but sounds like her body was unearthed Alameda County.

    And whoever is recommending Batterers Intervention Programs gets my “dunce award of the year; here’s why from “Sagaria Law” — they don’t complete the programs anyhow!  Or, (in one high-profile case) they complete the programs and then walk back and kill the woman anyhow (Scott McAlpin).

    The programs draw funding  — is there something too hard to spell about that?

    I started this blog to warn others!   after years of the rollercoaster (downhill slide, overall) of the family law system that no one who was involved warned me about when I separated from the abuser.  In retrospect, it might have been better to ask for self-defense lessons, mace training, and just utilize it, so I could communicate directly to this person that was is and is not acceptable is, in marriage, a two-way street, and wives are people, too.

    FVLC’s services include both protection initiatives for people currently experiencing abuse and prevention initiatives to eliminate future abuse. Today, FVLC is recognized as a leader in the community in both delivering exceptional services to abuse survivors and in advocating for long-term social change for victims.

    Maybe I should go find these people  — a list of clients with children who then went into “high-conflict custody battles”– and start interviewing them to see if the perspective holds — and if they then lost their kids to the abusers, because doing something about that issue is not, er, under FVLC’s 501(c)3 goals….  Abuse survivors with custody cases need not apply — go see your local family law attorney….
    Well, I recognize that someone else has to tell about the Access Visitation Factor, the Child Support Incentives, and that that whatever groups like these WILL instruct people about, the functioning of the family law system is not on the curricula.    We had to learn the hard way that if our problems were not going to attract major funding, we could just go deal with them ourselves.  THESE types of programs, however do get the moulah:
    How much easier to teach, coach and (allegedly) prevent — than to scrutinize, analyze, and dis-assemble destructive institutions which result in family wipeouts — but which are already entrenched…

    During FY 07-08, FVLC achieved the following accomplishments [(accomplished the following)]:

    1. Provided legal services (representation, paperwork preparation, and advice and counsel) to 525 clients, for a total of 2,250 contact hours and 692 court orders.
    2. Provided crisis counseling and safety planning to 2,823 clients, for a total of 3,250 contact hours.
    3. FVLC’s HEAL (Healing Emotions and Loss After Domestic Violence) Program provided intensive parent/child psychotherapy to 31 children and their primary caregiver, for a total of 900 contact hours.
    4. FVLC’s RAP (Relationship Abuse Prevention) Program provided intensive leadership training to 56 youth and violence prevention education and outreach to 1,008 youth.

    FVLC has set the following goals for the current year (FY 08-09):

    1. Continue to strengthen collaborative relationships with other agencies co-located at the Alameda County Family Justice Center with FVLC.  This includes the Oakland Police Department, Alameda County District Attorney’s Office, and numerous other community-based agencies.
    2. Engage in policy work around domestic violence by playing a leadership role on several state and countywide task forces, including the American Bar Association’s Commission on Domestic Violence, California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, Alameda County Family Violence Council, Domestic Violence Advisory Council for the Social Services Administration of Alameda County, and Alameda County Teen Dating Violence Task Force (formed and led by FVLC).
    (As you can see, it’s now fashionable to say the words “domestic violence” and form task forces to do something about it, allegedly.  Look at the variety of groups that do:  The ABA, CPEDV, and something from Alameda County itself I can’t even find (yet), as well as a SSA “Domestic Violence Advisory Council.”   How many of these talk to victims they helped 5 years down the road or so?
    1. With our collaborative partners Youth ALIVE! and Youth Radio, expand leadership training and policy work around teen dating violence at Oakland middle schools through various classroom, after-school, and summer activities, effectively reaching approximately 1,600 adolescents.  This is made possible through a generous four-year, $1 million grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

    (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is very big into funding fatherhood materials. )

    These are recommended reading to pick up on the patterns, and alliances.  It almost gives one a headache (for non-politically-minded individuals who just do their jobs, obey the law, pay taxes, volunteer locally, probably contribute locally, etc.) to conceive of the extent of deceit and collaboration that is simply government.  And then all the public press about how poor we all are, and how it’s time to tighten our belts — and cut back on the social service infrastructure.  And (in California) release from 30,000 to 40,000 prisoners.

    This is simply taxation without representation, and totally unacceptable in my book.

    And I’m not a Tea Partier.

    It sheds a whole different light on the “social contract” that most of (what remains of) the middle class has bought into.  If they stick to their jobs, neighborhoods, kids, and planning for leisure & retirement (and don’t ask too many questions about the top layer) — then the top layer will structure society so as to kind of leave them alone, and of course (this goes without saying) make sure the rabble doesn’t get out of control.

     

    FAMILY  JUSTICE CENTERS, per IRS search (on the name):

    Name City StateSorted Ascending Country
    Code
    ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. Oakland CA USA
    ANAHEIM FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. Anaheim CA USA
    FRIENDS OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Riverside CA USA
    NATIONAL FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER ALLIANCE San Diego CA USA
    SOUTH BAY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Torrance CA USA
    STANISLAUS FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER FOUNDATION Modesto CA USA
    FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY INC. Tampa FL USA
    FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER FOUNDATION OF IDAHO Nampa ID USA
    FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY INC. South Bend IN USA
    THE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF BOSTON INC. Boston MA USA
    ESSEX COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. Roseland NJ USA
    CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE Albuquerque NM USA
    TRI-COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF NORTHEAST NEW MEXICO INC. Las Vegas NM USA
    FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF ERIE COUNTY INC. Buffalo NY USA
    YOUTH AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. New York NY USA 4
    FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF GEORGETOWN COUNTY Georgetown SC USA
    KNOXVILLE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Knoxville TN USA
    BEXAR COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER FOUNDATION San Antonio TX USA
    FRIENDS OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER San Marcos TX USA
    RESTORATIVE JUSTICE MINISTRY FAMILY SERVICES CENTER Woodville TX USA

    to Be Continued…

    %d bloggers like this: