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/Private Partnerships

Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, from ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018)

leave a comment »

Full Post Title:  Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, From ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018) [Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-8X8” and this post ends after about 9,600 11,000 words, sections of which may be moved elsewhere to shorten it!] [The “Read-More” link will also, in time, be moved closer to the top, making for a shorter lead-in section.]

**Explained more below in this post, and in a typical post. No apologies for failing to sugar-coat the news. Or for long sentences in the next few indented paragraphs, summarizing my understanding and explaining that comment. With additional “show-and-tell” relating to the rest of this post (and blog).

In my experience, (far) too many people, as for generations most of us have been conditioned, whether or not holding any number of white-collar professional jobs, whether or not possessing sufficient understanding of running a business to handle themselves, whether employee or self-employed, not only lack the functional vocabulary — financial literacy — to even acquire an understanding of the intersection of public and private finances, or on government and taxation itself — but also are so emotionally and financially invested in what works — at least tolerably — for themselves — they do not really want to (will not to the point of continually “cannot”) understand something different, that is, a different assessment.  Indicators and symptoms that something odd, that an ongoing, major economic “black hole of non-accountability” exists are thus sidelined, dismissed, and/or ignored, as are people who may broach the topic and point to it.  These fainter, less “in your face” indicators in some ways could be called “the canaries in the coal mines.” i.e., ignore at your own risk.

I have of course stood in the “too many people” category above until shocked out of it (in the context of family court), but unlike some, that shock didn’t eradicate all my curiosity, or my healthy respect for the value of ongoing observation and assessment of current surroundings as survival traits (which I also know are best utilized BEFORE in “fight-or-flight” mode).

The literacy and information (including functional vocabulary and its use) on certain economic matters and the operations of government as it is versus as it is portrayed to the public is where “first come + mutually organized = first served” and the rest of the population will be allocated to useful, functional positions within society* as organized by those more aware of just what public resources actually exist [1], and how to access them for private profit [2].  *That these positions may not look exactly like what they did centuries ago doesn’t mean they’re still not symbolically “Hewers of water and drawers of wood.”


[1] Key to understanding this is whether the public has been told the truth regarding the bottom line of (particularly) the federal government, and based on that, the legitimacy of all systems of taxation portrayed as beneficial and necessary for example, to balance that budget.  Bottom lines whether of both government and private sectors are expressed not just in terms of annual or bi-annual budgets — but of financial statements. AUDITED ones. Looking at a single entity or just a few entities within a field (OR at public only or private only) is inadequate because public and private constantly interact with each other. Both sectors frequently change names, consolidate, spin off or (for government departments) set up new offices within existing departments, etc.

[2] There’s far less competition in fields mutually controlled by those who pioneered them.

(Example: See blog search phrase:  Harvard/Bain/Bridgspan (as a business model) and click on the “Why Bother to Unravel” post [2.1] (its concluding paras) on that search result (2nd search result after this post).’ I concocted that phrase during a drill-down involving all three. I had discovered “Bridgespan” as a subcontractor on another foundation’s tax returns.  My fabricated phrase refers generally to commandeering the profits in NONprofit consulting, and as a NONprofit, which takes collaboration with others also so inclined.  Notice “Bain” is associated with well-known public figure from Massachusetts (who also ran for President not too long ago).[3, with two associated images]  Notice that an elite, private university (in that aspect, HBS — Harvard Business School) is integral part of the phrase, as it is of that model. Better yet, spell “Bridgespan” correctly in the search and read (scroll down towards the bottom for that section) what I published last year (March 30, 2017): Omidyar Entities: The Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan Consulting Model (Transform and Help Run — or own — Distressed Assets, LIKE U.S. PUBLIC SCHOOLS), Rebranded, on Steroids, and Gone Global).

[2.1] Full title and image from top of “Why Bother to Unravel” post (publ. June 16, 2018):

Why Bother to Unravel…Link provided nearby or see blog “Archives” for 6/16/2018. Bottom section of this post also summarizes key concerns in a few paragraphs, regarding social service delivery in the private sector, and the tax-exempt sector in general (from an accountability standpoint — not from a “service-delivery” standpoint).

[3] Bain Execs Spent Nearly $5M on Romney’s White House Run, Records Show (Anne Faris-Rosen in Center for Public Integrity, 2/7/2012 (let’s call this “about six years ago.)  Mitt Romney and John Kerry both referenced, in the article, but the image (excerpt shown here) mentions  Bain Capital LLC and Bain & Co., the latter being a consulting company. Note the timeframes and that Bain & Co. formed in 1984, a decade which is ON my radar below as to LBOs and major Tax Reform, and within the following decade (1986-1996) and with (Tax Reform Act of 1986) organizing personnel and nonprofits in common, welfare reform, which brings up right up to “the elephant in the room” when discussing why family courts are so conflict-ridden and economically, socially and psychologically devastating for so many. Romney, it says below, had continuing passive income after the fourteen years he spent at Bain & Co.  Note Bain & Co. LLC also did those leveraged buyouts which (for some of the bought-out companies’ employees) resulted in job loss through the heavy (i.e., “leveraged” with debt) burden the resulting setup provided.

Image #2 of 2, excerpted from Bain Execs Spend Nearly $5M on Romney White House Runs (2/7/2012 in Center for Public Integrity)”Click image to enlarge

Image #1 of 2, excerpted from Bain Execs Spend Nearly $5M on Romney White House Runs (2/7/2012 in Center for Public Integrity)”Click image to enlarge

 

Along the way (and on most posts on this blog), you’ll see that I continue to name and profile (economically) many organizations directly associated with and set up to affect custody proceedings, child support decision-making, and of course, defining what is and (especially) is not “domestic violence” or “child abuse” and is better described instead as, “high-conflict.”  Most of these address how to problem-solve any assessed condition  — typically through more trainings (some qualified under CEU or for lawyers CLE credits), certifications, and guidelines for those in the (existing and as we speak, more being created) professions involved. MOST of which will be supported, up front, or once in operation long-term, by public funds.  

This time (not most times) the image is the link to article. Click to access. It’s a short read — Please Do! (from Atlanta Business Chronicle originally).

McKinsey & Company copies Bain (2014)

This section/illustration may be moved (or may not) later! I added to it where McKinsey, already a global consulting company (for decades) connects also to the US-based National Governors’ Association., and the significance of the NGA among other similar associations in setting policies which obviously will affect US citizens due to size, scope and major corporations involved. //LGH.

While I’m on “Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan (The Bridgespan Group)” — it’s no secret that Bridgespan was a spinoff of Bain and involves consulting for nonprofits with positive spin on the social impact (benefits of course are featured) of doing so.  


On basic Google search again, among plenty of results on the first page, one is Nonprofit Quarterly reporting that the big consulting firm (multi-national) McKinsey & Co. (which I featured as a “Corporate Fellow” to “National Governors Association Center for Best Practices,” a pay-to-play status), reported in March 2015 that it has copied the model and spun off its own nonprofit.


Click nearby image to read more (see esp. para.3), however this next quote from it specifically acknowledges the “Bain’s Bridgespan” model being circulated — obviously among powerful corporations whose profits, otherwise, would be taxed — considerably if they weren’t moving revenues from nonprofit to nonprofit for better “social impact” and to help economic mobility of retail-level entry workers (!).

If you explore this example further, that’s exactly what they’re talking about.

Someone has to work for all the corporations who have so many profits they have to pour excess into tax-exempt foundations.

If you read further (on this post) for example, on the background of people like Grover Norquist (active in pushing for Tax Reform Act of 1986, and after that, “Contract with America,” which so dramatically (but in the “background operating systems”) impacted judicial decision-making in America’s (meaning here, the USA’s) family courts, it becomes clear that businesses organize in response to tax laws so as to reduce their corporate taxes.

There seems to be a connection between Tax Reform Act of 1986 and “Welfare Reform” (major restructuring) of 1996.

McKinsey & Co. Starts its own version of Bain’s Bridgespan Rick Cohen, March 27, 2015 in Nonprofit Quarterly.

…Some portion of McKinsey’s thinking on nonprofits is contained in the McKinsey on Society website, where there are essays and research summaries addressing topics such as how poor school systems can become good school systems and, not surprisingly, extolling the potential of social impact bonds. In other words, as a global management consulting firm, McKinsey has had a nonprofit practice carried out by some of its 19,000 staff in over 100 offices in 61 countries.

This looks a little like Bain & Company’s creation of the Bridgespan Group in 1999. Bridgespan started out strongly with a $1 million grant from Bain plus several loaned staff. Like McKinsey, Bain & Company is a wealthy parent for its nonprofit consulting spinoff, with sales of around $2.1 billion.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy suggests that the McKinsey Social Initiative will start life with a $70 million capital infusion from McKinsey & Company plus access to 25 of its consultants to work on MSI projects and advice from 10 McKinsey partners …

Well, I just looked up the Form 990s and found it’s already (since 2014 origins) changed its name AND its website, and the one linked to on the 2015 report (which is neither) isn’t what the 2016 tax return shows (latest year shown on a separate database — NONE are shown on the website) (EIN# is 471073442).
Read the rest of this entry »

SFFI – CFFPP – JustGive, Inc. – IronPlanet, Inc. – ZOPB – Texas DoT’s $1B GrandParkway Project – US Gov’ts Big Banks Bailout|SunTrust (while Fixing Fragile Families?) [First Publ. July 26, 2016. See also my ~>March 3, 2010<~ post].

leave a comment »

I’m referencing this topic again Nov. 2017.  Accordingly, here’s the post title (updated to show when published and referencing an earlier, March 2010, post also on the topic):

SFFI – CFFPP – JustGive, Inc. – IronPlanet, Inc. – ZOPB – Texas DoT’s $1B GrandParkway Project – US Gov’ts Big Banks Bailout|SunTrust (while Fixing Fragile Families?) [First Publ. July 26, 2016. See also my ~>March 3, 2010<~ post]. (blog-generated, case-sensitive short-link ends “-43Z”)

On doing this, I find it odd timing that CFFP apparently stopped filing tax returns the year or year after I first blogged them.

One type of 2017 Update: Notice that I exported a segment of this post making it now about 8,500 words (with “connective tissue”).  It was getting unwieldy and the information at the bottom of the post was among the most complex (bank bailout, and HUD-identified reinsurance kickback scheme, not to mention the $6B profits the US Government made when the bailed out banks paid back “TARP”). Look for this wording (and highlighting) below to see where it was extracted; there is 2016 material below that point:

Substantial Section removed here Nov. 25, 2017, to separate post or page. Either will show up on sidebar when posted again….Shortening the original post length which was (before removal) 12,400 words..by about a third….

The new home to the section repost, is: The Dark Sides (Bottom Line) in Web-based, Donor-Advised Funding: Donor Disclaimers, Buyouts, Emigration (JustGive [US], JustGiving [UK]) and Related Operations (IronPlanet: ZOPB Highway ByPass J.V.) and Bank Bailouts. [A July 26, 2016 section repost].

Another type of 2017 Update is the next comments (some images and even a tax return table are involved) which extend until you see this “Two Days of Updates” title and new background-color with a black-bordered box :

Two Days of Updates, Introduced, within this box.

This post is now 11,500 12,300 words. Not including these words explaining why..

July 27 and 28 [2016] I added a significant portion to the front part, including some images and more links on CFFPP, a short section on the irony of the California Attorney General having pursued “JustGive” — pretty quickly — on its failure to register as a charity, within about a year, but having let the Alameda County Family Justice Center (staffed in part by District Attorney’s Office, which is naturally under the Attorney General’s Office — which handles the “Registry of Charitable Trusts”) not register for several years after it started up….

…(And two more paragraphs of 2016 commentary in same color background)

Reviewing anything after a time-lapse (here, about 1-¼ years), you’re going to notice more about the original information and of course have an opportunity chance to check back on changes in it since then.

While I didn’t check much of what’s below (except for CFFPP), I did notice, on the exported section and in general, that I’d viewed the dramatically affluent and smart business model (if not the most ethical execution of it) of JustGive.org and said it had possibly become “JustGiving.org” after being caught soliciting unregistered in the State of Utah, Spring 2016.  So I’d viewed the one organization as having moved overseas, particularly after reading a California AG (Attorney-General) approved permission to dispose of most of its assets, probably in settlement of the Utah litigation.  There may be some evidence (for example in founding documents) I’d seen back then that do not remember just now, but I should add that…

However,…checking back now in 2017, I see no evidence that “JustGive” ever did that, although no question there has been a “JustGiving” based in the UK doing business in the USA since then. Regarding JUSTGIVE (on one hand) and “JG US INC dba in California as “JustGivING CA”…

Recent printout from California’s OAG for the JustGIVE entity:

JustGive.org, Calif OAG, viewed Nov. 2017, still current. EIN# is now displayed on these search results, and is: #943331010

And another (FY2016 which is FY205) tax return for JustGIVE has shown up.  Added to what’s in this post below, that’s now, all four years:
Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
JustGive CA 2016 990 448 $4,428,472.00 94-3331010
JustGive CA 2015 990 1291 $3,673,878.00 94-3331010
JustGive  **Actually this link now only has two pages uploaded to it, despite showing “56” in col. “PP” CA 2014 990 56 $3,512,788.00 94-3331010
JustGive CA 2013 990 56 $3,906,182.00 94-3331010

ABOVE, Page counts: It shouldn’t take long to figure out that a tax return with first 56, then 56 (exactly) again the next year, then 1,291, then 448 pages is doing something differently meanwhile.  That difference is mostly on the way its grants are reported — first, illegibly fine print (56pp, sample is in the post below), then ONE per page sorted not alphabetically, or by category, or by location, but by lowest-to-highest amount of pass-through donations, starting with about $5,000.  Alternating from too small to too dispersed across the pages, it then goes to one per page (FYE2015, 1,291pp tax return), then (if you think about 12 / 4 = 3) to “only” 448″pp when there are 3 grantees shown/page.


Meanwhile California Entity C3911707 “JustGIVING CA” (the London, England-based operation) dba as JG US Inc (see colorful next image taken from this post below) isn’t showing a tax return — because it’s not a tax-exempt entity (!)  How I connected one to the other is and to “Iron Planet” as referenced in this post title, is explained in more detail far below (look for section on “I do” website operated by JustGive which says the assets are held by JG US Inc.) [some links are broken but others exist saying the I Do Foundation merged with JustGive in 2009]. Links in other articles where provided went to a (i.e., cheap) “GoDaddy.com” website whose certificate expired (last week, 2017).

The other connection was through registered agents which have, I see, changed since then…

JG US Inc (Cal Entity C3911707) dba JustGivingCA Inc (Sec of State info as of July 26 2016 post)

Again, I couldn’t find any tax return on this one for a very basic reason — it’s a foreign stock corporation (not “nonprofit” — nonprofits by definition don’t issue stock; they are nonstock corporations).  Something you may notice the old version of the Secretary of State Business Search did not give up on its “detail” Page.  This one only registered 5/31/2016, as a Delaware Corporation with a London address.  See next two images, after which the July 2016 text starts as signaled above (light-green background color):

 

JG US Inc (Cal Entity C3911707) dba JustGivingCA Inc (SOState info as of Nov 2017 (cf to as of my July 26 2016 post) | Search Results (2nd page, after click on entity name) Updated SOS website now shows business category and includes pdf images

JG US Inc (Cal Entity C3911707) dba JustGivingCA Inc (SOState info as of Nov 2017 (cf to as of my July 26 2016 post) | Search Results (1st page)


Two Days of Updates, Introduced, within this box.

[This post is now 11,500 12,300 words.  Not including these words explaining why..

July 27 and 28 [2016] I added a significant portion to the front part, including some images and more links on CFFPP, a short section on the irony of the California Attorney General having pursued “JustGive” — pretty quickly — on its failure to register as a charity, within about a year, but having let the Alameda County Family Justice Center (staffed in part by District Attorney’s Office, which is naturally under the Attorney General’s Office — which handles the “Registry of Charitable Trusts”) not register for several years after it started up.  And whether or not this delay had anything to do with the CEO of that Family Justice Center (complete with soap opera life events) having been married to then-attorney General Bill Lockyer).  In an “Exclusive Interview” of 2012 of Nadia Davis Lockyer, some telling quotes on the attraction between public service women lawyers and convicted felons (let alone the life and habits of our local “enforcement” branch of government leadership) are included. …. Not to mention, she admitted to lying on a jail visitation card, and to having put faked emails to falsely accuse her spouse of supplying her with drugs.


I’m not a social scientist (obviously) but it seems to me that this type of behavior is just not typical of most people.  I don’t THINK most of the public is drug-addicted, lies when visiting people in jail, cheats on their spouses, and in general, live out-of-control lives and expect to be well-paid, with pensions, for it.  Many of us are more directly concerned with the short-term survival, and for homeowners (I’ve not been one, but I can see), not losing their homes.  Speaking for people who are even halfway as normal as myself, I would like to state that this woman does not represent my gender — or mothers, in general.


Lastly I also — because it came up in a search result on CFFPP — linked to a year 2010 post I wrote on the same, noticing the collaboration of fatherhood groups & DV professionals on the CFFPP board, however I notice still NEITHER field of practiced breathed a whiff of the existence of HMRF funding, or the word “HHS” although they did briefly reference “TANF.”  This withholding is tacit collusion to “NOT TELL” about these significant grants streams, which stack the decks for specific out-comes in the state-jurisdiction family courts.  Disgraceful, and we need to pull back the cover on this habit and understand what kind of personality and system is being dealt with when the DV organizations are covering up economic abuse of the public, big-time!

Original Start of this Post:

I thought about calling this post “Don’t Ask – Just Give!” which is obviously the general idea of such on-line funding platforms, but thought it would be more fun to give the preview of the string of associations causing me to seriously question “speed-of-light” online donation platforms, and notice the lack of quality control involved — because at least in this case, JustGive, Inc. was not set up to have any. 

(CFFPP.org. See also very bottom of this post for more info, and related posts in this sequence).

And among the many nonprofits JustGive has been passing on funds to through its “DAF” (Donor Advised Fund), one of them, CFFPP, has also demonstrated lack of basic compliance with business entity registration (in Illinois)  AND IRS filings (in Wisconsin), where the IRS “Pub. 78” searchable database (showing legit, revoked, and “filed a Form 990-N” postcard organizations)   reveals that CFFPP got its IRS# revoked in 2014.  Also, the FoundationCenter.org database shows that its filing in 2004 indicating a name change after some sort of reinstatement and moving to a new state, “Just so happened” to reverse the digit “6” for digit “9” and file under the wrong EIN#.

  • Were there “accidentally wrong” #s (digital transpositions) for any $$ figures reported, too?

The involved CFFPP Board of Directors individual attached to the wrong? EIN# filing showing address change and name change from Chicago, is their current Treasurer Daniel Ash.  This wrong EIN# is on the various Parts of the Return and on the Attachment pages. (Four years’ of CFFPP tax returns under two different EIN#s also shown towards the bottom of this post.)

This Year 2003 filing, Amended because they “inadvertently forgot to include Schedule B” (lists major contributors!) states Primary Exempt Purpose not on the blanks attached, for example, on Part III, Line 1, but as “See Statement 2”, which reads simply:

CFFPP CHALLENGES THE NEGATIVE PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF LOW-INCOME FATHERS, WHO POTENTIALLY HAVE MORE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR CHILDREN IN THE WAY OF SUPPORT

That was a 2003 Amended CFFPP tax return (delivered REAL late and under an accidentally odd EIN#) after the organization, on having been Dissolved or Revoked DEC. 2004, sought to get Re-instated (Feb. 2005) with a Wisconsin Street address and a name less overtly pro-Fathers.  Signatures of David Pate, Jr. (for Wisconsin) and Registered Agent Daniel Ash (showing what looks like a University of Chicago street address, no Suite# though).

p17 ONLY, IL (Form NFP112.45:113.60) Appl for Reinstatemt (not stamped %22Rec'd%22)@CFFPP's Amended FY2003 Return as EIN#394038873 (2nd digit should be %226%22) showing Req for Namchange Signed 2-24-2005 in WI (Certific of Diss:Revoc Dec1,20014 (19pp)p17 ONLY, IL (Form NFP112.45:113.60) Appl for Reinstatemt (not stamped %22Rec’d%22)@CFFPP’s Amended FY2003 Return as EIN#394038873 (2nd digit should be %226%22) showing Req for Namchange Signed 2-24-2005 in WI (Certific of Diss:Revoc Dec1,20014 (19pp) (<=click for image).

This was done with an “illustrious” (in several fields) Board of Directors from Chicago, Madison Wisconsin, San Francisco, Boston, and St. Pau Minnesota (Univ. MN), at least two representing the symbolic participation of the domestic violence fields (i.e., Esta Soler, Oliver Williams).

I’d already caught onto that hypocrisy back in a March 3, 2010 post, “CFFPP & FVPF – Where “families” really means “fathers but it took longer to navigate the tortuous tangle of economic/corporate chameleonship, a sense & gut instinct developed with a lot of practice over the years.  But even then, six years ago, I felt it appropriate to comment:

“I am tired and ornery today, and instead of blogging current news, I’m going to blog “vocabulary news.” Because I believe the gap between theory and practice in the courts is a vocabulary problem. Yes, you heard me right.”

And, even as far back as 2010, and regarding the systemic, organized and coordinated co-opting that language with a view to changing its meaning,

PIONEERS for sure, also ELITISM:

This is unbelievably elitist, and is co-opting the vocabulary in these fields, and transforming them, in part through grants giving them access to “technical aid” and spiffy websites, logos, conferences, and so forth — things single mothers, meanwhile stuck in the family law system fishnet, are often hard put to find.

Meanwhile, the family law system professionals ALSO collaborate, among each other, and again, not seeking litigant input. That’s AFCC and friends.

[[Post incomplete, portions were lost: to be finished later. FVPF is also, FYI, collaborating with AFCC: search the site for “family law” and a link will come up. Makes you think!]]

Again, Simple Solutions are often the best: I still think Jack Straton’s idea that abusive fathers just shouldn’t be around kid, is a great one. The whole concept of trying to reconcile “fatherhood” with “protection from violence against women and children” is just trying to straddle things that don’t belong together.

No room in this post for much elaboration on Jack C. Straton. Maybe another time….but FYI, Jack C. Straton of “NOMAS” and Portland Oregon wrote the well-known 1992 “What’s Fair for Children of Abusive Men?” (presented at Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs or [header info reads] “Duluth Domestic Abuse Project” conference).  Looking for that, I found an article (NO year given, and in a somewhat isolated context at “EuroFem” website) Don’t Create Custody Laws That Facilitate Abuse.  

NOMAS posted this “What’s Fair…?” article again on a 11/21/2015 “Latest Posts” section from the info of its webpages, currently looking like this:

…but (which is also unprofessional) undated, and out of context.  I eventually discovered from the footnotes they were quoting the well-known “The Liz Library(™)” posting of the article which itself  (see its header info here) cites a 1993 newsletter (fourth edition, 2001) originally from NOMAS.  While The Liz Library(™) posted the complete footnotes, the NOMAS (2015) version only had text up through footnote 30 (out of maybe 60) and didn’t show most of those anyhow.

See next image for what I’ll bet looks familiar to may protective mothers, and has been repeatedly reblogged by them (myself included, until I started learning more about the tax returns and federal grants in combo with AFCC — which, I noticed, Elizabeth Kates, Esq. doesn’t exactly bring up — nor does NOMAS. Professional courtesy?)

In the Table of Contents, it shows up right next to a “BMCC” promotion, on a link which ends “nomas.html.”  (Click to read header information more carefully).

JackStraton's 1992 %22WhatIsFairforChildrOfAbusiveMen?%22 @THE LIZ LIBRARY(™)- LIZNOTES research on family law politics and child custody

SO, in 2010, (back to my March 3 post CFFPP & FVPF – Where “families” really means “fathers”) …And after questioning the common usage of “fatherhood practitioner” and “domestic violence advocate” Even back then, I said:

Want to learn something more? (I finally did). Sign up for Guidestar.org (it’s free). ** Check out who’s who, and then check out the financials. In ANY nonprofit, we have a right to see the books. That’s right, folks. You have a right to look at the IRS 990s and demand an explanation of what ANY nonprofit (tax-exempt) organization is doing with its tax-exempt status.

For example, the Family Violence Prevention Fund, per USASPENDING.gov, has received over $32 MILLION in funding. You’d think that would have really reduced violence by now, right?

**Guidestar, since then, I found unwieldy.  I prefer (despite its penchant for mislabeling organization names, making EIN# searches also), 990finder.foundationcenter.org.  I also sometimes use Citizenaudit.org because, while it doesn’t generate handy-dandy tables of the last three tax returns, it does show returns going back more than 3 years, viewable through pdf, and also the ability for search results including organizations who gave TO an organization as well.


This 2010 post is not on the Table of Contents (it doesn’t go back that far yet).  On July 27, 2016, I added a substantial update, with some images and publications by CFFPP to this post.  It’s worth a bookmark: March 3, 2010 Let’s Get Honest post, “CFFPP & FVPF – Where “families” really means “fathers”  FYI, that was a particularly devastating time in my life, and housed-but-destitute.

Now…


Back to “Don’t Ask — JustGive!,” and, speaking of language transformations on the concept of charity, and giving….

Eventually it becomes clear that the “fast, on-line giving” part means you are contributing to a “Donor Advised Fund” (DAF) indicating a preference, but guess who controls that fund — the organization, not the advisors.

There is a major lack of concern for accountability of the fast-moving funds by such groups — and certainly with JustGive.org (now blended with a UK|London-based on-line platform anyhow, which runs the website).  The groups involved, I take it, just do not care that within the US (that is, NOT globally) we might just want to know how our public resources are being used because we contribute towards them through taxation, fees, fines, licenses, and in all manner of public support.

People who sprinkle (or I should say, “spray”) their resources electronically over a vast quantity of nonprofits each year, with lightening-speed electronic agility, and organization founders or website designers with venture-startup funding accelerators internet expertise ought to apply some of those electronic engineering skills to providing something “We the Public” might be able to handle with as much agility and flexibility as the donors are suggested to exercise.

They have forgotten that their own tax-exempt status is a privilege and a private public benefit courtesy the overall population and as such ought to be used with respect for the overall population, USA citizens, including respect for our right to know and our concern for representative government.  Not everyone has venture startup DNA in his or her makeup, and those who don’t, working regular jobs, have a need for government with boundaries.  As our government is consistently doing “public/private partnerships” not just for major infrastructures — but also for human social services — we deserve a responsible nonprofit sector. The capacity to monitor its ethics should not be further undermined.

Right now, we have nothing of the sort.  Part of my purposes in posting so much is to prove this conclusively so we will better understand that “philanthropy” and “charity” may provoke warm fuzzy feelings, but there are certain ways they operate which show, it’s not just love of mankind in operation here.

See Prior Post on SocialPolicySpeak, Middle Section “JUSTGIVE.org” (Some overlap with here). The first logo you see below and its website grabbed my attention amid a bevvy of funders of another Fatherhood-specific group (calling it “Families”).  Shown again at the bottom of this page. (or see their “About Us” dropdown menu under “Funders”).
Funding Resources - Center for Family Policy and Practice [http-:cffpp.org:funders: PAGE 1 of 2 only!]Funding Resources – Center for Family Policy and Practice [http-:cffpp.org:funders: PAGE 2 of 2 only!] ~ Funding Resources – Center for Family Policy and Practice [http-::cffpp.org:funders: PAGE 1 of 2 only!]##### Funding Resources – Center for Family Policy and Practice [http-::cffpp.org:funders: PAGE 1 of 2 only!]

Funding Resources - Center for Family Policy and Practice [http-:cffpp.org:funders: PAGE 2 of 2 only!]


See “https://www.justgive.org/about-us/index.jsp” and that in “…On July 18, 2016 JustGive joined with JustGiving, the world’s largest social giving platform. Headquartered in London, UK, JustGiving has helped 27m people in 165 countries raise $4bn for NPOs and grassroots projects since its launch in 2001. Both JustGive and JustGiving share an identical goal: to grow charitable giving by connecting people with the charities and causes they care most about. Kendall Webb conceived the idea for JustGive in 2000. She had worked in the Internet world for many years, and was a founding member of the successful start-up more.com, but became disillusioned by the focus on profits.”

 

 

 

 

 

The List of Foundations contributing to CFFPP includes JustGive. In approximate order by columns, it is (omitting the word Foundation for most):  Annie E. Casey (Baltimore), Ford (NYC), The Hill-Snowden (sic — it’s “Hill-Snowdon, at least the separate, $35M Private Foundation.”…wealth from Johnson & Johnson stock, currently into “Making Black Lives Matter” movement…(“The Band-Aid® Company & multi-billionarie global pharmaceutical whose fourth-and fifth-generations have been making scandal and tragedy pages for years) Foundation Fund of the Tides Foundation (SF), W.K. Kellogg, Madison Community Founda’n. Community Shares of Wisconsin, William and Flora Hewlett (Menlo Park, CA — as in “Hewlett-Packard” company), IBM Corporation (not foundation), JustGive, Charles Stewart Mott, Microsoft Corp. courtesy TechSoup Stock, Ms. Foundation for Women (Brooklyn), Open Society Foundation (NYC), Public Welfare Foundation (Washington, D.C.) Sociological Initiatives Foundation (Boston), US Dept. of Justice, Office of Violence Against Women (USDOJ/OVW) in Flint Michigan [??], State of Michigan DHS (Lansing), University of Wisconsin Public Interest Law Foundation (Madison, WI).



<== After reading the yell0w-highlit caption under “JustGive” logo, above left thereby understanding that it’s just merging with an even larger UK group, kindly browse the RAPIDLY accelerating REVENUES (and slower, but still accumulating ASSETS) of this lean, mean, on-line giving machine JustGive, Inc. — shown in the “Details” page of California Charitable Registry, next link:

JUSTGIVE.org EIN#943331010, CHARITABLE DETAILS pages (5pp) See the “Schedule” section… There is a chart, by year — and in each year, the top $$ figure is ‘Assets’ and the second, each year, is “Revenues.”  The rows are labeled well enough.  Watch the pace of change over time….

  • JustGive didn’t register as a charity until prompted to by the OAG Oct. 2000 (this material subsection added to post 7/27/2016).  Signature page of its Charity App or date-stamped “Rec’d” as I recall isn’t uploaded to the Calif. OAG website, either..

JUSTGIVE.org section, see this background-color and font

One of the Miscellaneous” labeled documents uploaded to the California OAG site shows JustGive.org, which incorporated 7/15/1999 (shown below on this post), had to be prompted to register as a charity, i.e., over one year later, and apparently as of 10/26/2000 — had not bothered. That’s odd, however, because the corporation’s website claims it only changed its name from “Justgive.COM” in, I believe it was 2009.  This letter is addressed to “JustGive, Inc.”  The letter below does not provide the official “Inc.” designation.

CA OAG 10-26-2000 to JustGive “Pls Send (Missing) Docts”  “You Must Comply With Nonprofit & IRS Laws – Check a Library…” 1pg <==click this link to read image full-size.

CA OAG 10-26-2000 to JustGive %22Pls Send (Missing) Docts%22 %22You Must Comply With Nonprofit & IRS Laws - Check a Library...%22 1pg
After being asked to confirm that their Fiscal Year-end date was December 31 (I guess the default), the company then chose February 28 as their Fiscal Year end….strange….

The first year uploaded Assets/ Revenues showing is YE 2002 (i.e., Fiscal Year 2001).  I can see why the state OAG might want to keep an eye on them**:

**[JustGive] Fiscal End: 28-FEB-02
Total Assets: $2,467,863
Gross Annual Revenue: $1,363,845
RRF Received: 17-JUL-02

Ironic that at the time (in 2000) career politician Bill Lockyer was State Attorney General.  About six years later, his (third) wife, Nadia Lockyer-Davis, Esq., was appointed (anointed?) first Executive Director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center (salary, paid from DA’s office, $90,000), which 501©3 then had to also be prompted to register in 2010 and explain themselves, although as such she was a direct employee of the District Attorney’s Office, which I’d presume is under the State Attorney General’s Office….(searchable under “Details” page on the Calif. Charitable Registry, like the one from JustGive.org I’ve just linked to above; on this blog; or if you want to see my write-ups, submit a comment and I’ll reply with a link from a different blog). (FamilyJusticeCenters are public/private partnerships, and a little tricky to track $$ on).

So together, both Lockyers were some of the criminal prosecution / domestic violence leadership over the county (for Bil Lockyer, the whole state) where my family court and DV case were, and from which my kids were stolen on an overnight visitation based on unproven allegations (several).   Exclusive Interview: Nadia Lockyer tells how affair, drugs, and deceit led to downfall; (<==hover-cursor for excerpt) (Omitted from that title:  how HER affair, drugs and deceit)….” 4/21/2012 by By Julia Prodis Sulek, copyright Bay Area News Group, posted in Mercury News.  READ, this also tells how they met, includes an admission she faked emails accusing her spouse of sending her drugs, and also reveals (this seems to happen in the field) how as a public interest attorney she bonded with a convicted felon, which became the start of that affair in the first place.

Meanwhile, the California OAG didn’t go after the Alameda County Family Justice Center until 2010 for ITS charitable registration– until her (his wife’s) last year working there, per her LinkedIn.

(Image from her LinkedIn) Consultant Previous Alameda County Bd of Supervisors (2011-2012) Ala’mda. Cnty Family Justice Center (1/2007-12/2010) Education: Loyola Law School, Los Angeles [Not on LinkedIn:]Mother of 3 with Mr. Locker incl. twins 12/2015]

Bill Lockyer (Image from his “Wiki”), Civil Service 1973-2014 incl. CA State Treasurer, CA Attorney General, President Pro Tem of California State Senate, and as of Dec. 2015, father of twins in addition to adult daughter from prev. marriage.

Exclusive Interview: Nadia Lockyer tells how affair, drugs, and deceit led to downfall;

She met Chikhani in 2010, while she was still working for the Alameda County Family Justice Center and was running for county supervisor, a campaign paid for by a $1.5 million donation from her husband’s political war chest.

She says the relationship didn’t become physical for months, but like being her brother’s caretaker, she was drawn to help Chikhani, an addict with a criminal record for fraud. And he provided something she had been missing in her marriage — “a peer.”{{See 30-year age difference with husband}}. ~ “People I’m sure wonder, why the hell was Nadia involved with this guy?” she wrote in her pre-interview memo. “It was more than just our mutual loves in nature, music, movies and food. It was spiritual.” ~ He promised to give her the second child she always wanted.

Affair unravels

But by last summer and fall, the relationship became explosive and traumatic, jealous and paranoid. Romantic pillow talk turned to screaming accusations, then tearful apologies. “Drugs and alcohol contributed to the drama and chaos of the relationship,” she said, refusing to disclose her drug of choice.
She visited him in jail over the summer, signing in as a defense lawyer, even though she wasn’t his attorney of record, saying Friday she didn’t know the jailhouse policies.”

FYI, for people NOT from here, the soap opera surrounding this marriage and couple never seems to end — but while it was ongoing, SOME more normal, less drug-addled and cheating on their husbands people, including MOTHERS and FATHERS, needed honest services from them, and specifically, Ms. Lockyer, in her official capacity, whether as CEO of the Family Justice Center, or Alameda County Supervisor.  We also need people in office who exhibit good sense and discernment, i.e., make better judgments; if they can’t handle their own lives, then why should they continue to be enabled to make judgments on others?

Charitable Registry Details (3pp) of AlamedaCountyFJC (EIN#261141080)thru FYR 2014 (YE is Apr30), Notice RRF Rec’d Dates. Its Doc’t links may be still active|see’FirstNoticetoRegister’

(Seeing the year 2000 Calif. OAG letter to “JustGive”under Lockyer’s Office from 2000 reminded me of the above.  “Search the Files of the Calif. Registry of Charitable Trusts EIN# 261141080, and/or see link to its Char. Details above.  Interesting as of FYr2014 Assets = double revenues. )

AlaCoFJC, May27,2010=FIRSTNoticetoRegister (under AttyGenl EdmundGBrown...) <==Image Link to Full-Size==> AlaCoFJC, May27,2010=FIRSTNoticetoRegister (under AttyGenl EdmundGBrown…)

[end section added 7/27/2016]

Exploring “JUSTGIVE” and related organizations = most of this post.

  • The contrast of the level of projects and financing (including federal $4.85 billion bailout of big-bank “SunTrust” in 2008, repaid 2011, consequences still being felt for years, but another syndicate for major ($55M) debt financing provided “IronPlanet” by 2015 — with a $1.04 billion Texas “Grand Parkway” infrastructure (develop, build, maintain) agreement 2012-2013 completed by 2015 — and in 2016 IronPlanet now has a “Holdings” corporation…  no question, we have some interesting intersections of groups and movement of money….

Meanwhile CFFPP concerned for the well-being of low-income noncustodial fathers (although it nominally mentions “mothers and fathers” the emphasis is clear) claims proudly to be sponsored by JustGive, and the other foundations, while itself not exactly staying business-registration compliant, or IRS-compliant.

Longer Post Title with parentheticals:

SFFI (Ford Foundation)+CFFPP (@1995 SFFI “Policymaking Arm”|EIN# Revoked|SMALL) JUSTGIVE.org (@1999 one of CFFPP’s MANY sponsors|BIG REVS) + IronPlanet, Inc. (@2000 Online Auctions for Heavy Equipmt|Global=BIG) + ZOPB (Tx/Brazil Joint Venture) + TexasDoT $1B Grand Parkway Project (@2012-15?)+ BAILED-OUT BANKS (Obviously@2008ff – see SunTrust)…

The “IronPlanet, Inc.” factor here as well as the ZOBP are interesting, and good types of information to juxtapose with why we seem to have so many fragile families when we have such major financing poured into hard construction projects that the public, besides funding, will then be asked to pay tolls to access.
Read the rest of this entry »

Re: CFCC and other Public Institution/Private Profit Partnering…The Public has already been Weighed in the Balance and Found (Dumbed-Down)

leave a comment »

I have several posts in the pipeline after a year-plus pause in publishing on this blog. They are lined up and will start coming fast and furious, shortly… Meanwhile, in the process of streamlining the pipeline and revisiting some of the more recent ones, I still find valuable information buried halfway down a 10,000-word post that I’d like positioned closer to the top.

I do keep my “ear to the ground” (actually to the on-line airwaves, and some telephonic) in ongoing developments within the family courts and beyond, and have a sense of what mainstream media is UNlikely to ever report, and too few private bloggers (it would seem) are reporting, in part because it takes more sustained attention to understand. In the light of current events, I decided to still take material from a two-year-old post to speak and teach about what I’m seeing in ever-accelerating, and unobstructed (because it seems largely unnoticed!) action.

[First post was not most recent version.  This one, similar, has a few more paragraphs in the Intro, bring it to just over  4,000 words. Feb. 22, 2pm PST/LGH]

So, this post is just over 4,000 words and lifted (verbatim, below this introduction, I’ll indicate the dividing line between intro and re-post) from about half of my 2/25/2014 post “The Stacked Deck, the Coups d’Etat, and the Fork in the Road,” which combined exhortation with some complex passages and quotes on consolidation of political clout, into business roundtables, about the history of CalPERS (as a major investment platform, as most institutional investment pools are), and more.

Not everyone wants to talk about all that! But we all can and should be able to talk about how public institutions — such as the California Judicial Council, with its Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), its websites, and its linked referrals from that website — are becoming turnstiles to the private-industry (often, nonprofit) outsourcing of government functions, and how this process only encourages the development and expansion of the PRIVATE sector setting up shop in PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS, by coordinated agreement that the public, half or more of the time, had little awareness of, and next to no participation in, into force-fed (court-ordered and court-website-advertised) consumption of services.

It is hard not to consent to things about which one is not fully conscious. That’s no secret to those who, starting (I’m learning and becoming increasingly convinced deducing from other evidence) at a minimum 100 years ago, at least by 1913, met privately in specific places and institutions, to plan in advance. Look at the major turning points and changes within US history, and on what did events and by what authorities, Presidential or Congressional, did they seem to hinge? I will be blogging on this in 2016 also…

So long as the public doesn’t figure out the basic power schematics (i.e., blueprints), we will continue being stripped down, outsourced, and at points determined no longer-exploitable, etc.

SPEAKING OF “BLUEPRINTS”: One clue, I should say, is the habit of using the term “Blueprint” or “Models” in talking about externally-planned system changes to government operations. Whatever happened to the concept of grassroots anything? What, exactly, is the relationship of those funding the debt to having any say in what blueprints are applied to their lives, remotely assembled and coordinated?

That’s INCREMENTAL, DELIBERATE, PRIVATIZATION/STANDARDIZATION of government (across jurisdictional lines):

This thinking (devising blueprints, models to apply nationally, etc.) obviously resembles more the corporate world than what we might like to think still exists of individuals having a voice in the institutions affecting their lives, as expressed primarily through state-legistlatures, i.e., the states where those same individuals pay, “through the nose,” DMV fees to drive, State (and other) taxes, Fees to get married, get divorced, file anything in court (unless waived), and in which they have to declare residency, and depending on which state, varying prices for gas, real estate, or potentially even (see “Flint, Michigan” recently) safe drinking water, let alone schools.

In fact, one of my draft posts “in the pipeline” (from early January, 2016), in stunned awareness, I had to introduce almost as a joke: “A Judge, a Lawyer and a Psychotherapist walk into a bar…”.. (for that particular blueprint, those professions were actually involved — but on closer scrutiny, the judge [as I recall] acknowledged the inspiration from a judicial membership association ((and HHS grantee, and key player in (Years 2000-2008) “The Greenbook Initiative”)) based at University of Nevada-Reno. This, so far, is the title:

Miami Child Well-Being Court(tm) Model, with its roots in “NCJFCJ” (also tm), part of the HHS-dedicated DV Cartel”

(My use of the word “DV cartel” is deliberate, based on extensive lookups of nonprofit organizations and how they are networked together, and the behavior of these nonprofits over time.  The word “cartel” has a commonly understood and negative meaning and a dictionary definition, and I am using it in this sense.

People who do not read tax returns, or read ENOUGH on who is conferencing with whom about which policies (over time) may not have a basis for using this term “cartel,” but I certainly do. I am a “DV” (domestic violence) survivor and am NOT using this term in the sense that, for example, some fathers’ (or mens’) rights groups might use it simply to discredit the existence of violence towards women, or the dangers of unchecked domestic violence to society at large.  OK? And the NCJFCJ is indeed involved in said DV cartel as a policymaker, and proud of it, too.

[Link describing the “MCWB Court()” Model, found at “cap.law.harvard.edu” uploaded there looks like on 7-22-2015, but referring to a 2011 publication]<=check out the description, and fine print on who-all was involved. Hint: “RTI” is one BIG entity)(cf. “Research Triangle International” in NC). Details included:

  • Work with the Children’s Bureau T & TA Network to carve out a national learning collaborative to support effective diffusion of the Miami model and related best practices in court, child welfare, and child mental health. The collaborative will foster shared knowledge and strategies related to funding challenges, organizational barriers and solutions, and discipline‐specific leadership.

Carve out ? Effective diffusion? Sounds like a chemical experiment….The proud leadership has already determined it should be nationally diffused, overcoming funding and organizational barriers. “Parent protests” isn’t apparently on the list because the average parent may not know, in advance, what’s coming, in such situations.



MEANWHILE, the PUBLIC has already PRE-FUNDED the PRIVATE MODELS. HOW?


The same USA public, some of which is being forced into consumption of all kinds of services (ESPECIALLY in anything related to families, children, and mental health/relationships/Behavioral modification programming), already through, for example, the long-standing Social Security Act(administered through the US HHS) and other Acts of Congress (such as the VAWA act administered through the USDOJ/OVW) has already pre-funded the establishment, “capacity-building” and maintenance of these services — encouraging a superstructure of professions, and then profession associations to keep it organized nationwide (actually, more often internationally).   The pre-funding comes simply because the public is, by and large, tagged for producing the tax revenues to keep the juices flowing through the federal agencies.

Now, consider that while these are all evolving over time, that HHS only came into being in 1980, the HHS/ACF (Administration on Children and Families) only in 1991, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) only in 1994, and a RADICAL restructuring of the 1934 Social Security Act in 1996, labeled (that version), “PRWORA”.  All that timing, coincidence?  You think?


Now consider who is going to be taking advantage of this “macro market awareness”, and who is going to be taken advantage OF, in any equation where the one, smaller (fewer members) “sector” IS aware of the pre-funding grants streams, and the other (the public at large, generally speaking) IS NOT.  Where one realizes that the public is going to be in more significant distress through their position on the tax spectrum, and the tax-exempt organizations (which typify who business is directed to) can expand operations and public relations simply because they are operating on a different basis when it comes to funding government itself, across the system (all levels)?


Hmm….

The older (February 25, 2014) post, further down, simply says what I want to be talking about:

The Stacked Deck = the Racket/eering= about the FEDERAL BUDGET = about TAXES.  

Because taxes produce revenues. They are taken from some, exempted from others, enabling them to consolidate power and preserve family (private) wealth with which to influence government, and they are simply evaded by yet others —  often characterized on websites as a nonprofit or charitable organization …

and, in referencing California Judicial Council’s “CFCC” site below (main reason I copied this post to a new one), it also summarized a subset of this situation:

So, when I say, again:

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

Each of those is an element in a system designed to steer and access federal money (grants, or contracts) into programs.  People involved have overlapping (vertical and horizontal) relationships among the whole.  In the above link:  Access/Visitation:  FEDERAL FUNDING (GRANTS CFDA 93.597) Social Security Law, etc.

And, just a reference (but I left most of it in the original post) to the VAST scale of wealth represented by institutional investment platforms.  I live in California and took CalPERS for an example, but quoting Walter Burien on this, as he summarizes the situation in plain terms, which I have yet to see anyone rebut based on the facts.  I have seen (and posted on) attempts to rebut based on “ad-hominem” (personality) attacks, which is perhaps an indication of a weak argument, if indeed there is an argument against the facts he presents which can be rebutted (sp?) by showing they are either (1) false or (2) irrelevant or (3) both.

(My Dec. 2012 EconomicBrain [“Cold,Hard.Fact$”] post combines several articles — I think pretty well — but see “Are You Ready for Real Change,” Jan./2012 therein, and towards the bottom):

Government has built their internal empires by and through selective presentation and utilizing taxpayer revenue systematically separated from the general purpose operating budgets to build power-bases of standing wealth outside of the “general purpose” operating funds. /// A large local government can be crying “Budget Shortfall’ under their selectively presented general purpose operating budget but upon review of the financial wealth power based funds held and “other” income, the same local government upon total and comprehensive review can be clearly in the black by millions if not billions of dollars.


There is nothing complicated here. If an individual or a government has established significant fund balances developed over decades, those funds balances are power-bases by investment that makes or breaks many individual fortunes by where those funds are invested.


If an individual or a local government thinks they can tag someone else to pay for shortfalls in other areas without tapping into their power-bases of funds under domestic and international investment management they will do so.

Read the rest of this entry »

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

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.

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: