Posts Tagged ‘some key Court-Connected or Court-Coordinating Nonprofit Trade Associations You Should Know About’
Women Judges still form Funky-filing Nonprofits to Run Fatherhood Programs | Men Judges still form Countywide DVCC’s + Obfuscate the Funding. Santa Clara County, CA (Six Years Later)
Women Judges still form (funky-filing) Nonprofits to Run Fatherhood Programs | Men Judges still form Countywide DVCC’s + Obfuscate the Funding. Santa Clara County, CA (Six Years Later) (short-link ends “-9YW” and about 10,000 words long. Post written May 20-25, 2019, updated May 26).
“PREFACE”
I’m publishing this post “as-is” because one cannot squish too much documentation into one place. There are more things I could say or links include, but this post “as is” says plenty.
I like to triple-check statements; there are one or two I haven’t yet, regarding research done six years ago. In double- and triple-checking, more information and more understanding of the existing connections comes into focus for me as a blogger, which I then naturally want to reference or summarize.
Without a more direct, immediate, known (and prospectively more interactive) audience for this blog, I cannot put more days into it.
Most people I know do NOT go around reading business entity filings and tax returns — I do. I do it ALL THE TIME. Over time this has also developed a general, mental database of key organizations, awareness (generally) of how they tend to spin off over time, or sometimes I can catch a new one as it’s forming, or has just formed.
The issue, however, is with whom to talk about it. Those involved, even if as volunteers or volunteer board members, in the networked organizations are generally already committed to their ongoing operations; those not involved and often not local (as the networks are coordinated nationally and at times internationally) in my experience (and with current connections) either not alert enough to even acknowledge the importance of reading business entity filings and tax returns as indicators of the values of the organization’s leadership, or are overwhelmed possibly with their own court cases involving still-minor children.
Those who’ve aged out if not already aligned with the (usual) family court reform group loose (or tight) coalitions tend to want their own lives back, or just not to be bothered. Those who haven’t directly experienced this firsthand (which is to say, those “on the sidelines”) generally seem to fall along the usual religious (religious or not), political (left or right persuasion) dividing lines and not about to cross them seriously, either.
Those involved, even if as volunteers or volunteer board members, in the networked organizations in many cases, (specifically, as mentioned on this post, as mentioned on most in the blog), will be also judges, or retired judges — and other court-connected professionals continuing to push programming put in effect in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, first decade of 2000s, and now in the second decade of the 2000s fast approaching its end. These programs will also be pushed, promoted and if possible perpetuated, regardless of which political party is in power, or who is U.S. President. It’s an ECONOMIC matter.
I could post more tax returns or charitable, corporate registrations on this post as simple links (without the images). I especially could post EVEN more on the connection between the “woman-judge-formed nonprofit” and “MACSA,” and recent findings on the (very much related) background and filing habits of the local (county) fatherhood collaborative, which I have seen and saved much of it as computer files or images, but it will not all fit in a single post. The connections between MACSA, the nonprofit, and the county probation department (and with it, under “fatherhood collaboratives” also county-based) speak loudly as to the origins of that nonprofit.
(MACSA = Mexican American Community Services Association: Bay Area News Group March 6, 2014 article describes its woes, most of them involving improper handling of financials, IRS-revoked nonprofit status for non-filing (with the local DA’s office having seized its paperwork possibly related). Notice the years..)
I have one or two statements I’d like to, and will try to, triple-check (specifically the fiscal agent connection between the DVIC and DVCC referenced below), but as a reminder, no matter how formal it may “feel,” a blog is an INformal medium, and I am a volunteer investigative blogger all these years. Last year I left one state and relocated to another for a fresh start, which requires major energy still, and I’m recently, technically speaking, a senior, and have always been a mother, whether or not permitted to function as one over the years.
MACSA (The Mexican American Community Services Agency) existed 1966-2013 | CalEntity C0512046, Status ‘Dissolved’ per California Secretary of State’s Business Entity Search, re-checked in May 2019
The situations I’m speaking of in this post are typical, present multiple red flags, and should be noted, and watched. It may take some time to become familiar with the setup, the terminology and where to look filings up, but that can be learned, and look-ups, up to a certain point, can be done.
I think the blog’s limits structurally on how it can deliver what I see needs to be delivered, is reaching its boundaries and think constantly about what other communication and message-delivery options exist that I could remain involved in — or find an ethically and intellectually (diligent fact-checker) responsible person or group of people to delegate them to. //LGH May 25, 2019.
Originally, my purpose on this post was to preserve the text and story within a sidebar widget on this topic; administratively I needed it removed from the bottom right sidebar. That text is below, in a narrower column, and beneath it a few footnotes from my substantial (extensive / long) updates on the top.
These topics are still relevant, and this is in part a re-statement of them (followed by the preserved text).
-
- MACSA (written out) in San Jose: The IRS tax-exempt organization search shows when it became “status revoked” (2012)
-
- MACSA (bottom row is the entity, top, the raffle only), Status “Revoked” (Details show, since 2014).
-
- MACSA tax returns by EIN# search only go up through 2009 (but look at the size in $$ assets) and be aware much of that was public funding.
(Above image gallery: I found a MACSA EIN# 941635200 from the IRS which also noted it was revoked in 2012. I see three tax returns from FY2007-2009 showing several million dollars’ worth of assets. It eventually registered as a charity in California; the “Details” page are full of demands for missing or incomplete information, and notices of ITS (Intent To Suspend). To view, you can repeat the search, or (for a snapshot as of several years past “Revoked” status, click “MACSA California Registry of Charitable Trusts | Details“~~>MACSA (TheMexicanAmericanCommunityServicesAgency) CalEntity 512046, EIN#941635200 CalifOAG Charity (Status ‘Revoked’ 2014ff) Details (RelatedDox Links Still Active) @ 2019May link added 5/26/2019. Note: for pdfs (vs. plain images) on this blog, you must first click the link to see page with blog & post title and beneath it a small blank page icon, then click on the pdf icon to load the document. Bonus Attached Info: When pdfs are printouts of California Registry of Charitable Trust “Details” (any entity), scroll down below ‘Schedule” to the bottom of the resulting document: any links under “Related Documents” for the filing entity should still be viewable by clocking on them.) (The California OAG RCT of course at any time may change how it loads or the user interface on this database in which case some of the above notations may not apply).
The latest charity renewal for MACSA (for FYE 2008) shows that about HALF its $10M revenues were from government sources. It was status “Revoked” since 2014 (as a California Charity) and as a tax-exempt organization, 2012 — however as late as June 2017 (see colorful image above) it was being positively referenced in association with a Santa Clara County Fatherhood Collaborative — from a University of Texas-Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs, Child and Family Research Partnership (CFRP) in a “Policy Brief.” That colorfully annotated image and link to it above comes up again soon, below.)
This post references Santa Clara County “Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative” (<~~DVIC is a nonprofit | “DVCC” is a named “Coordinating Council” under the county’s “Office of Women’s Policy” (OWP created in 1998)) and through it, at that level one of just two ex-judges* I just featured in the last post, Classic AFCC Combos, Collaborations, and Commonalities (Ret’d California Judge/Consultant Leonard P. Edwards, Texas Supreme Court Justice Debra H. Lehrmann) and What’s WITH Middletown, Connecticut? . *He’s ex-judge because he’s retired, she’s ex-judge now only because a state supreme court justice, is no longer called “judge.
That nonprofit DVIC wasn’t the main focus of this post but arose in connection with another nonprofit, referenced in the title which I am now reminded (through revisiting) originally framed its reason for existing as family violence prevention, too.
The relationship of the DVIC (nonprofit) to the DVCC (coordinating council) is a little complicated. I think that the DVIC was the fiscal agent for the DVCC, although with one being county-office-associated and the other not, that doesn’t even make sense.
The concept of “coordinating councils” isn’t complex, but I wonder how well the significance is generally understood; they’ve been around in reference to different subject matters, and when it comes to “DV” seem to take on a specific flavor.
The post title alone doesn’t reflect also how Judge Edwards’ “consultancy” was at the highest state level, but the post does. Before retirement in Santa Clara County, and again, he was and probably still is active in at least three very controlling and significant membership associations — AFCC, NCJFCJ and (as to child welfare), NACC.
That retired Judge Leonard P. Edwards founded the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Coordinating Council (DVCC) is stated in this glowing commendation from California CASA Association mentioned among other accomplishments: he was also the first juvenile court judge to receive a special award from (yet another nonprofit, PRIVATE, association, the “NCSC”) in 2004, as the NCJFCJ’s publication reminded readers in 2005 when reprinting a 1992 article from Judge Edwards on “the Role of the Juvenile Court Judge.”
NCSC = National Center on State Courts is not the major focus here, but I’ve posted on it (June 30, 2017, split off from Oct., 2014, “Do You Know Your: NGA, NCSC, NCSL, NCSEA, NCJFCJ, NCCD, NACC, and NASMHPD, not to mention ICMA?) and often call attention to it.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform, or Make Kids Safe WITHIN Family Courts STILL (Abusively, Territorially, and Intentionally) Limit Possible Answers by Censoring Terms Admitting Other Historic Evidence — About The Courts (not “Batterers!”) AND Government Itself — while Coaching (even Certifying) Others to Imitate. (Published May 2, 2018)
Welcome to my blog.
You are on the second from the top** post of the page which displays all posts.
**Seven posts are permanently (until I change my mind…) like this one, categorized “Sticky” = “Stuck to the Top.”
You probably got here indirectly from the Main Page “FamilyCourtMatters.org” Sidebar “Current Posts”
or having been given the case-sensitive short-link “https://wp.me/psBXH–8Ly” from social media (or me).
Let’s talk.
FamilyCourt Matters.org, this WordPress blog, has been available on-line now over nine years and as of today (Dec. 8, 2018) has 785 published posts and 45 pages. By posts, you’ll see quickly, I do not mean a few thousand words and quoting an expert, referencing a problem, and maybe including a link or two. These posts have (I feel confident to say) as much detail and background links as the average mainstream media journalism reporting on even one aspect of similar issues. The overall purpose of the blog differs from the purpose of mainstream media or even many blogs focused on similar topics.
I am calling out to concerned people to educate themselves— as I had to — on the structure and operations of the family courts which ties directly into other major topics — the structure and and operation of governments (plural) + the structure and operation of private corporations, especially in the nonprofit (tax-exempt) charitable, advocacy or “philanthropic” sector which has become the extra arm of government, not the altruistic, neutral mediator between government and citizens as it is commonly being characterized.
I keep blogging to name names and report developments (in this field) from an “outsider/consumer” point of view, while continuing to assert there are other places to look for more productive grounds from which to argue for or against specific agenda within and around the family courts
From June 2015 to Jan 2016, I took about one and a half years off from publishing posts, not off researching or writing, to handle urgent personal situations relating to the aftermath of years in the family courts. I had to focus on other types of writing and explored other ways of presenting this information off-blog, such as into pdf formats and page-length (8X11″) content.
In January 2018 I restructured the blog to have two static home pages (one introduction which typing in “FamilyCourtMatters.org” accesses, and which, along with the top right sidebar “Current Posts” widget, links to this one, where all posts — sticky ones first — display), like most blogs, the most recent on top.
In early 2018 I also worked to update and extend the table of contents pages. The blog doesn’t generate them automatically, and I feel the Table of Contents with my typically long post titles is good for an overview and browsing material for the field.
Even if the posts aren’t even read, the titles show I’m talking from a different perspective and about certain dynamically censored topics. Because such key topics have been censored, for some years, now, I documented and continue to publicize (post, Tweet, talk about and name) organizations, professionals, and blogs who have historical refused to report on, a.k.a., basically attempted to censor public discussion of THE basic infrastructures of either the courts, or the business involving the courts as referral mechanisms to private interests (i.e., in conflict-of-interest style) while simultaneously claiming a basis for nationwide reform.
Refusing to discuss the key elements of the basic infrastructures of the family courts also unnaturally deprives the public (at least the public relying on such sources and not their own investigations or analysis outside the usual population divides: religion, gender, race (of course!), and politics). At least for private organizations and individuals running or associated with them to engage in such coverups is legal, but immoral; individuals, including myself and others like me, who get fed up with coverups must go dig out the information them/ourselves.
Summer/Fall 2018, I relocated out of state but continued posting periodically and re-engaging in social media more and within a few months signed a lease. I am back here again, working to make the blog more approachable and navigating (finding) its various Tables of Contents easier both from the home page and from Twitter. Meanwhile, I continue to research – follow leads, investigate, put information together from various sources — and write as much as possible and engage more on social media — while working with new (cellphone) technology, an aging laptop and how to match capacity to handle software updates with device life expectancies, etc. including getting one to share data with the other without either one shutting down.
EXPANDING SPHERES OF ATTENTION: This past season I have begun looking more at parallels between US and other countries’ historic reforms of the family law system in the late 1900s and early 2000s. How these laws were passed, reigning paradigms (which differs by country) and how professionals organized (usually) at academic or private society (association) levels cross-collaborate, and in which journals.
{{INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL, about 1,000 words, MOVED Jan. 6, 2019: PLEASE READ IT then return to this post. Link to return to this post is provided at the bottom of that page.. }}
(That page is under 2,500 words {original 1K + transition text} and has a generated, case-sensitive short-link ending “-9qr”)
Let’s talk, but…
(Connect through Comments, or on Twitter, where I am @LetUsGetHonest)
.. If we are going to converse, let’s start with some solid, identifiable ground, identifiable facts in a common context. The largest one I find applies to so many is accounting by governments of their own expenditures (not just budgets, but also income-producing assets controlled), and the same goes for the private sector working in partnership with it to constantly correct course, solve problems, consult, and (etc.).
As harsh as it may sound, the common ground for conversation on-line about systems of this scope should not be experiences. For moral, social support, empathy, or friendships, yes, probably. But for solutions? Not in the public sphere. SOMEONE besides those running “the show” must talk about how that show is being run in terms with some “Lowest Common Denominators” that do not trigger constant debates to the point no conclusions are reached. WHY: WHILE the public is battling verbally on-line based on (personal experiences and social bonding) in this manner, the systems complained about continue operating, and generally, expanding.
There HAS to be a different type of language and focus of attention. I believe there is…I’ve been looking at it for years now…
I PAY ATTENTION TO GOVERNMENTAL (AND PRIVATE) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND I LOOK FOR TAX RETURNS OF NONPROFITS AND READ THOSE TOO. PATTERNS ALWAYS SURFACE, AND THESE PATTERNS OF ACCOUNTABILITY OR (MORE OFTEN, LACK OF IT) SHOW CHARACTER — ORGANIZATIONAL, AND OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE ORGANIZATIONS. IT HELPS CUT THROUGH THE [word deleted].
Screenshot of LGH’s Tags for May 2, 2018 post “In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform, or Make Kids Safe WITHIN Family Courts…” a.k.a. “Welcome To My Blog” 2nd to top sticky post (Jan. 13, 2019 revs), Bottom shows also previous and next post titles. NB: Some tag names are quite long.
This blog has about 10,500 words. The image of its tags is included here to encourage people, as time allows, to keep reading. I cover current and ongoing relevant topics in this post, too… not just the above complaints about censorship and so forth…See those Tags for terms that will continue to come up on this blog (and often on my Twitter account too).
This intro updated (and background-color changed from light-blue to light-yellow) Jan. 14, 2019: Blog Administrator’s prerogative)
SHARE THIS POST on...
My Posts, Just the List (June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012. From Jan. 23, 2016 forward now available @ “Table of Contents 2016 ONLY” Post)
Full post title with shortlink: My Posts, Just the List (June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012. From Jan. 23, 2016 forward now available @ “Table of Contents 2016 ONLY” Post)
Table of Contents
(June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012)
I started this blog in spring 2009. It is my continuous show-and-tell learning curve exposing, as the motto says, Family –and Conciliation — Court Operations, Practices, and History from the early 1990s and earlier.
Nothing was posted or added to this table of contents from June 29, 2014 (Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, Parade of Fools) throughout 2015. On January 23, 2016 (2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers)) I resumed publishing posts. My personal situation wasn’t particularly better at this time, it had just progressed, and I felt it urgent to continue this line of reporting, as I had not stopped investigating (or writing it up off-blog) meanwhile.
This BLOG has two separate Tables of Contents in two different posts, both near the very top of the blog: [Update: as of 1/8/2017, I’m starting one for the new year also…]
Read the rest of this entry »
