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 ‘RICO

Now, the “Find,” About NCJFCJ (Nevada), its Pittsburgh-based NCJJ, and so-called NCJJ’s E.Hunter Hurst III (d. 2012)’s multi-million-dollar, NASDAQ-traded (“PRSC”) Providence Service Corporation (and, its Board Members’ background companies)[Publ. March 16, 2016]

leave a comment »

Post title: Now, the “Find,” About NCJFCJ (Nevada), its Pittsburgh-based NCJJ, and so-called NCJJ’s E.Hunter Hurst III (d. 2012)’s multi-million-dollar, NASDAQ-traded (“PRSC”) Providence Service Corporation (and, its Board Members’ background companies)[Publ. March 16, 2016] (case-sensitive short-link ends “-39r” and post is about 18,800 words!)

If you haven’t read the previous (3/10/2016) post — go back and read it, for the context and significance!  Thanks (it took about two days to compile and write up).

“Post-Publication Preview:”  Section titles in this post include:

  • Was “Kids-For-Cash” just “The Tip of the Iceberg”?
  • What is, and is not, RICO? (Jeff Grell Interview).  For example, BCCI)
  • Pre-Game Pep Talk (on Why we all should understand RICO, and “Models for Change”)
  • The “FIND” and Questions It Raises: 
  • SOME (not all!) INFORMATION on PROVIDENCE SERVICE [singular, not “services”] CORPORATION, its SOLD-OFF SUBSIDIARIES, and SOME (not all) of its BOARD MEMBERS and their PRIOR COMPANIES
  • How I found this one (the NCJFCJ / Providence Services Corporation connection)? (I read tax returns, cont’d.)
  • More on NCJFCJ and NCJJ (Including some of its donors)
  • “Gratuitous Posting” (not essential to the post) and some more Food for Thought on Moelis & Company (Providence’s Financial Advisor for latest subsidiary sell-off):   [[aka what hard work (and your family’s three generations of Wharton School of Business, plus strategically choosing work likely to produce multi-million-dollar fees) can do]]

My eyes were crossing towards the end of this, but I still question what kind of positive juvenile justice reform is likely to take place under the watchful (?) eye of a nonprofit judicial membership association (NCJFCJ) claiming a subsidiary “NCJJ” which neglects to mention the NASDAQ-traded multi-million-dollar business one of its devoted employees has been directing since 1997 apparently, or that some of the subsidiaries are getting in trouble at the state level for, oh, racketeering (South Carolina-based subsidiary) and coverup of sexual abuse at one of the institutions at least two board members had ties to (Florida-based Youth Services International)?  Meanwhile NCJFCJ is primarily government funded, but also takes donations.

I just found after publishing last night, that the IPO (Public Offering Registration with the SEC)  on The Providence Service Corporation (found at “NASDAQ.com”) took place only in 2004.  This link also reveals, I think, who backed it when it was still private.  I’m setting up a separate page to show it off as an example of how centralized control of the “diversionary services” nationwide was attempted by a for-profit corporation.

As familiar and conditioned as we are with the for-profit / not-for-profit tax sectors throughout this country, I still say that income-taxing “all” (except those who file for or are tax-exempt) HAS created (perpetuated) a caste system,  an administrative nightmare, and an inherent imbalance of power between government and people because the people cannot fully see or monitor what government is doing with revenues they help provide.  It has driven revenues underground and work opportunities into the nonprofit and government sectors. Let alone it creates a statistical impossibility — it is impossible to track all the nonprofits, and that impossibility sets the stage for crooks vs. IRS (actually, IRC, Internatl Revenue Code)-compliant to the DISadvantage of the IRS-compliant.  And transparency/accountability to the public supporting all this?  Forget it.  That system has been around now for just over 100 years (1913-2013), and we are reaping the consequences…..some are reaping profits, but most, consequences.

That Prospectus Summary starts:

(From 2004 IPO (Public Offering Registration with the SEC)  on The Providence Service Corporation)

Our business

We provide government sponsored social services directly and through not-for-profit social services organizations whose operations we manage. The recipients of our services are individuals and families who are eligible for government assistance pursuant to federal mandate. The governmental entities that pay for these services include welfare, child welfare and justice departments, public schools and state Medicaid programs. Our counselors, social workers and mental health professionals provide our services primarily in clients’ homes and communities, instead of in institutions. Our delivery method reduces the government’s costs for such services while affording the clients a better quality of life. As of December 31, 2003, we served, directly and through our managed entities, 13,371 clients from 99 locations in 17 states and the District of Columbia.

Our services

Among the services we deliver are:

Home and community based counseling.     We provide counseling in clients’ homes and help schools manage at-risk students through training and counseling programs on school grounds. Our counseling services address such social problems as marital and family issues, depression, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, chronic truancy, hyperactivity, and criminal and anti-social behavior.
Foster care.     We recruit and train foster parents and license family foster homes. We also offer therapeutic foster care to emotionally disturbed children and adolescents who might otherwise require institutional treatment.
Provider managed services.     We manage the delivery of government sponsored social services by multiple providers on behalf of the not-for-profit entities we manage. Management services we provide include intake, assessment and referral services, monitoring services and network and case management services.

Our contracts and revenues

Our revenues are derived from our provider contracts with state and local government agencies and government intermediaries and from our management contracts with not-for-profit social services organizations. Under the majority of our provider contracts, we are paid an hourly fee. In other situations, we receive a set monthly amount. Where we contract to manage the operations of a not-for-profit social services provider, we receive a management fee based on the number of clients enrolled with that entity or a percentage of its revenues. As of December 31, 2003, we and our managed entities operated pursuant to 202 contracts. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, our revenues grew to $59.3 million, an increase of over 42% from our $41.8 million in revenues for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2002. Additionally, during the same period we increased the revenues of the social services organizations whose operations we manage to a total of $62.8 million from a total of $46.1 million.

(End of “Post-Publication Preview”)


In fact, here are the first 9 posts of 2016 in a table (or see Table of Contents page for the blog).

Post# (2016)


Sticky?

2016 Posts (only), in Chrono Order. Published
 1 2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers) Jan. 23, 2016
 2 Re: CFCC and other Public Institution/Private Profit Partnering…The Public has already been Weighed in the Balance and Found (Dumbed-Down) Feb. 21, 2016
 3 Ignorance — about Privatization, Reorganization of Government within the USA– Ain’t Bliss! Feb. 23, 2016
 4 What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually) Feb. 25, 2016
5 Milton H Erickson (Clinical Hypnosis), The Gottmans, The HHS of Course, and Psychoeducational Interventions for Situational (not “Characteriological”) Violence..and California’s “Mental Health Oversight and Accountability Commission” — REALLY??  Yes…. Feb. 26, 2016
 6 Credentialing and Schooling Psychologists (speaking of MN and the Grazzini-Rucki case) Feb. 28, 2016
 7 Still Caught up in DV/Custody Drama? For 2016, What about Catching up on OVW Discretionary Grants (2013) and these SIX, ah, “Groups”? March 2, 2016
8 Dumpster Diving in the Credibility Gap (While We Were Being Battered or Seeking Safety, These PhDs were Debating Batterer Typology for PsychoEducational Treatments and, of course More Forensic Clinical Research with (AFCC) Colleagues) March 6, 2016
 9 About UNevada-Reno-based NCJFCJ, its Pittsburgh-based NCJJ, and NCJJ’s E.Hunter Hurst III(d.2012)’s Tuscon-based, multi-million-dollar, NASDAQ-traded company (“PRSC”): First, the Context March  10, 2016

Read the previous post, #9, get the juicy details on this one, and by the end of both posts, didhope readers will start to comprehend the size of the problems generated by having public/private partnerships run government institutions, and be persuaded to do further research on NCJFCJ, Providence Service Corporation (and maybe even the organizations run by some of its earlier board members, as shown below)!

Then, in another post, I will (I hope) raise my concerns about how Models For Change, through its constant focus on “diversionary services” actually may have helped set up RICO, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and by way of the Juvenile Law Center (location: Philadelphia), although that center then became even so the organization filing a class-action suit on behalf of victims of the similar type of RICO (Kids-for-Cash Scandal in Luzerne County, ca. 2008) in the juvenile justice system within the state. (see their website for the full account.  There’s actually a menu item (link) for the Luzerne County scenario on the top banner, but it’s no longer current.  I found the description under “Legal Docket” paging back by year, to 2009:

FEBRUARY 26, 2009
H.T. et al. v. Mark A. Ciavarella, Jr., et al.Filed a federal class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on behalf of the children and families of Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, who suffered significant harm as a result of ex-Luzerne County juvenile court judge Mark A. Ciavarella and the “kids-for-cash” scandal.

Was “Kids-For-Cash” just “The Tip of the Iceberg”?

Read the rest of this entry »

Operating Systems Analysis for Family Law System — see the RICO Act

with 2 comments

A recent post from a blogger friend of mine focuses — as we are taught to do– on the PSYCHOPATH/SOCIOPATH characters of litigants.

As with “Whacko in Wisconsin” post (subtitle  “No, I’m NOT talking about the litigants…) I propose that it’s less

“The Tactics and Ploys of Psychopath Aggressors in the Family Law System

as written by a reputable “Independent Advocate for Children and Families,” Dr. Charles Pragnell.

than.

The Tactics and Ploys of THE Psychopath Aggressors OF the Family Law System (including those who designed it!)

as proposed by me, an Independent “Devil’s Advocate” for my fellow-blogger, above, and practically anyone selling “solutions” for the crises (plural) in the courts which have any mental-health, jurisprudo-therapeutic-jargon-DSM-centric psycholinguistic talk

ANokYWHERE ON ANY PROPOSED ANALYSIS.

WHILE TRUE THAT THERE ARE PROBABLY PLENTY OF PSYCHOPATHS AND SOCIOPATHS WHO LOVE TO DOMINATE OTHERS WITH IMMUNITY — AND ARE SMART ENOUGH TO SET UP AND RUN SYSTEMS TO LEGALIZE THIS ACTIVITY — I HAVE A DIFFERENT ANALSYSIS.

This paradigm is closer to the rock-bottom truth (and will offend almost anyone I’ve been dealing with in these matters in past years), and is not a jest.

  • The analogy of Family Law System as a Giant Squid, while it did ring true for me, and seem a valid paradigm, was obviously my joke, to relieve the pressure (by mocking the danged thing).
  • The Alice in Wonderland analogy (shared — or was it co-opted?) by others is also truthful — normal English words (for example, “Child Support Enforcement!”) take on new and strange applications.  So yeah, for those who know Lewis Carroll’s book (or, an imitation — a recent movie about it) — that might ring true.
  • RICO analogy is no joke.  It’s in earnest, and I think in its rock-bottom quality, that’s what the family law system IS.  One has to look at the interrelationship of parts — not just the ones at the front and public storefront segments of this system.

I do believe this one is closest to its heirarchical structure, extent, and purpose.

SO, today, below, I post link to an explanation of RICO by Mr. Grell — whose qualifications are stunning to explain this concept:  Georgetown University School of Law, magna cum laude, 1990, Assistant Attorney General ,Minnesota (2008-2010), plenty of court practices, he teaches or has taught it as at Univ. of MN, but most telling to me — he has been prosecuting and defending RICO cases quite a bit, and teaching on it as well.  Some say “those who can, do, but those who can’t -teach.”  It obviously doesn’t apply, here.   So check it out…

WHY STUDY RICO TERMINOLOGY?

— the terms are a primer of understanding the interrelationships between the court entitites, the involvement of the US Federal Government’s grants to states, and the BEHIND CLOSED DOORS DEALS made to dupe and extort parents (and taxpayers) in so many matters.

WHY AM I POSTING IT NOW?

Well, I have already begun reporting on these things, and once one begins to “squeal” the best thing is to probably keeping on reporting — and in public — for self-protection, if nothing else.  If people have questions about this “take” on the courts — I think the analysis holds, and without the emotion-based, cognitive-activity-curtailing rhetoric of PAS / anti-PAS (true or false, it’s the heartbeat of the courts, in the bottom line) or gender talk.

What gender, again, is money?

RICO — Check it out!

(if the shoe fits, wear it…)

COURT PRIMER 101:  RICO

“When it was passed in 1970, the RICO act was intended to eliminate the influence of the Mafia in the nation’s economy.”

RICOACT.com LLC JEff GRELL

In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968. At the time, Congress’ goal was to eliminate the ill-affects of organized crime on the nation’s economy. To put it bluntly, RICO was intended to destroy the Mafia.

Throughout the 1970’s, RICO’s intended purpose and its actual use ran parallel to each other. Seldom was RICO used outside of the context of the Mafia, and it is not an overstatement to say that civil claims under RICO were simply not brought.

In the 1980’s, however, civil lawyers noticed section 1964(c) of the RICO Act, which allows civil claims to be brought by any person injured in their business or property by reason of a RICO violation. Any person who succeeded in establishing a civil RICO claim would automatically receive judgment in the amount of three times their actual damages and would be awarded their costs and attorneys’ fees. The financial windfall available under RICO inspired the creativity of lawyers across the nation, and by the late 1980’s, RICO was a (if not the most) commonly asserted claim in federal court. Everyone was trying to depict civil claims, such as common law fraud, product defect, and breach of contract as criminal wrongdoing, which would in turn enable the filing of a civil RICO action.

RICO’s broad application was the result of Congress’ inclusion of mail and wire fraud as two crimes upon which a RICO claim could be brought. Given the breadth of activities that had historically been criminally prosecuted under the mail and wire fraud statutes, it was not difficult for creative civil attorneys to depict practically any wrongdoing as mail or wire fraud.

During the 1990’s, the federal courts, guided by the United States Supreme Court, engaged in a concerted effort to limit the scope of RICO in the civil context. As a result of this effort, civil litigants must jump many hurdles and avoid many pitfalls before they can expect the financial windfall available under RICO, and RICO has become one of the most complicated and unpredictable areas of the law.

Today, RICO is almost never applied to the Mafia. Instead, it is applied to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations. In short, a RICO claim can arise in almost any context.

The purpose of this website is to simplify this very complicated area of the law and to articulate and make more predictable the legal standards that govern such claims.

My “Disclosure” — I have no business relationship or in fact, any relationship, with Mr. Grell and have never met or spoke with him.  I search the internet for things that make sense of the family law experience and which I believe will help others.  I just posted the intro text on this site’s home page and exhort — encourage –admonish — highly recommend– suggest — and (no, I do not beg) — that readres who are “baffled” by the courts issue, start to “get” that this is the best parallel of how it works around.

Mr. Grell appears to be an expert in this (check bio / CV) and teaches the concepts well, including glossary, and what the terms mean.

JUST FOR A LITTLE REMINDER:


In Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scheme, there were RICO elements, as I recall.

In a much older case from Chicago area, involving a woman (who was murdered, and her body driven into a canal, and the investigation covered up by multiple parties — who later got caught) — the Dianne Masters Case, at least three individuals were prosecuted under RICO.

I have blogged both these.

Attributes of such racketeering activity seem to include fraud, bribes, extortion, and money-laundering (front groups).  I am basically proposing that it seems this is the essence of some operations currently central to the court systems.  People talking about “reform the courts” and “train the judges” either are pretty gullible — or in on this, given the information that’s already out there.

THinking about it, if The Mafia was an extended family, who are the ‘FAMILY” members in FAMILY LAW and why are accusations of child-trafficking, sex abuse ignored, and why such a HUGE proliferation of profitable industries springing up around this system, when an existing set of laws says, anyone with a custody dispute comes under the court’s jurisdiction?

You need to know.  This was my first “hint” and more to come.

THINGS OF NATURE:  The closer you look, the more amazing power and beauty, and detail you see — it’s healing, awesome, and refreshing to look out, or be in.  Even when nature does a Earthquake/Tsunami an “Act of God” (so-called) destruction and population wipe-out.  People sit atop some powerful forces.  But inbetween earthquakes, it’s serene, exciting, sustaining, and in general, does something GOOD for the human psyche (as well as providing food).

THINGS of THIS NATURE:  The closer you look, the more disgusted, shocked, incredulous, and concerned (if not downright traumatized) one becomes, particularly if a close friend is involved, or in its grips.  It becomes hard to continue to find hope to persist — but a transfixed horror with the actual state of affairs.  It’s mesmerizing, soul-stopping, and then the after-response is often renewed righteous indignation and commitment to change it.

(That is, unless one is involved and sustained by the system, in which case the sentiment might be — what are those nutty parents complaining about ?  We are helping, rescuing, saving them from themselves!  We are child-rescuers…. Societal cleansers, “Therapeutic Jurists,” etc…)

[[yeah?  well the word Iatrogenic comes to mind also…  The cure is worse than the {alleged} sickness….]]

In short they are opposites.  The psyche’s response to the system, or examining it, is a huge clue as to what the source is.

So read up on RICO, and understand that the “psychology” is the rhetoric (and/or describing the EFFECTS) of the system.

NOTE:  One reason I post this now — after two weeks on and around the SFWEEKLY article (last post or so), I’m in a bit of shellshock (when not amused, or participating) at how tough a sell it is that the organization of the courts actually has an organization — beyond feuding viewpoints and people.  It’s as if most people simply cannot and will not move beyond their emotion (generally anger) and into reason/research other than research used to justify the anger, and then hurled into the “ranks” of the opposing gender.  It gets tiring.

The model is RICO — not “Psycho.”    READ THAT SITE!

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: