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 ‘Strengthening Fragile Families Initiative

Reviewing AFCC Joint Conferences with Others, Who Knew What and Since When about, say, FFI (“Fragile Families Initiative”), SFFI (“Strengthening Fragile Families Initiative”), and the Columbia-Princeton-Brookings-Ford/RWJF roles in the same? (AFCC, NAJFCJ, Wingspread, Nat’l Summit on DV, Edleson-Schechter et al.) [Written Feb 10, 2018; Publ. Dec 5].

leave a comment »

Reviewing AFCC Joint Conferences with Others, Who Knew What and Since When about, say, FFI (“Fragile Families Initiative”), SFFI (“Strengthening Fragile Families Initiative”), and the Columbia-Princeton-Brookings-Ford/RWJF roles in the same? (AFCC, NAJFCJ, Wingspread, Nat’l Summit on DV, Edleson-Schechter et al.) [Written Feb 10, 2018; Publ. Dec 5].. (Case-sensitive short-link ends “-8C8”)

This post is under 4,000 now about 5,000 words including an introduction and summary I added just today.   A footprint (some overlap) remains on the original, called “The Missing Link” and more regarding “FamiliesChange.CA.gov” website book list (undeniably heavy AFCC, but of course just not mentioned thereon).

THAT POST HAS MORE ON AFCC (AND RECENT ACTIVITIES, POSTED CHAPTERS, PERSONALITIES, AND HOW EVEN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA’S JUDICIAL COUNCIL WEBSITE HAS GONE “CANADIAN,” (JUSTICE EDUCATION SOCIETY OF B.C.) WHILE HELPING SELL MORE BOOKS BY AFCC PROFESSIONALS.  AND HOW IN SOME OTHER STATES OR COUNTIES (INCL. CUYAHOGA COUNTY — WHICH CONTAINS CLEVELAND — OHIO) SIMILAR RULE-DRIVEN MARKETING IS ENRICHING PEOPLE WITH CLOSE TIES TO JUDGES (AN INSIDE TRACK, APPARENTLY) AND IMPOVERISHING (BY THE SAME AMOUNT) OTHERS….

The Missing Link, Barely Buried on PAS.FamiliesChange.CA.gov (‘Resource | Publications | Books’), and where ‘CA,’ nominally, MAYBE still stands for California, but … (short-link ends: “-8zq” Post started (after the momentum of writing this up had already “emerged” on my part) Feb 4, 2018.

I’d already known about the Fragile Families Initiative and the Wingspread Conference and Greenbook Initiative (I make it my business to know), but this time went further back, having discovered some material from 1994.  I remember how it came up, but that’s incidental to getting it out, here for public awareness.


TIMING and AWARENESS OF WELFARE REFORM POLICIES UPON WOMEN WITH CHILDREN LEAVING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

In publishing this Dec. 5, 2018 (shortly after the late U.S. President George H.W. Bush died in his 90s and today being a proclaimed National Day of Mourning in respect of him), I am aware, unfortunately for my expressions of sincere empathy and patriotic respect for the Bush dynasty, of the damages done this century (by and in the wake of Welfare Reform) to women’s safety while the same government continues to proclaim ongoing concern about it — at the top level — by former U.S. President George W. Bush, 2000 – 2008).

In other words, funding continues along the premises of Fragile Families and that somehow families can be re-united — I guess with enough trainings, services, technical consulting and ongoing funding streams — in a national father-focused policy while keeping women and children who’ve already been harmed and are fleeing the same father’s presence — safe.  Enter “behavioral modification programming..”

Our — women’s, children’s, bystanders’ — lives and safety has been severely compromised by the dilution of definitions (right vs. wrong, criminal versus simply “unhealthy..”) — and it’s still hard to even get a conversation about this going in many circles even discussing the issue of domestic violence and the family courts.  People seem to prefer lower-hanging fruit; that that dangled in (our) faces constantly doesn’t feed a sound mind seeking an explanation for why the system functions as it does. It’s lacking key ingredients – -ingredients now easily found on-line; but not without the curiosity enough to seek them out!

For most people,  it seems to just take too much mental effort to digest the historic information and prioritize it too.

Regarding the Bush dynasty  & PRWORA: True, welfare reform passed in 1996 under a Democrat White House (though not Congress!), but it was further added to by the “faith-based initiative” Executive Orders of January 2001, the “Family Justice Center” model endorsed (again, under Pres. Bush Jr.) in 2003 (USDOJ OVW described in 2007), (2003 White House Press Release on this, from “Archives“) (some re-branding, and I HAVE tracked the originating grants on this one:  As described under “History” at the “Alliance for Hope International“) and continuation — without cessation — of HHS funding of “Fatherhood.gov” as though this is fair to half the U.S. population, and a half doing plenty of the work of the nation too. You can also find AHI (or under previous names) enthusiastic about batterers intervention, supervised visitation, lots of trainings (of course), co-located interdisciplinary centralized services and against anything “fragmented” or not centrally controlled…

https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/prwora/welfare.htm – Statement (2001, before reauthorization) of concern by US Commission on Civil Rights about civil rights violations in the delivery of welfare, subjection of women applying for help to “sexual inquisition” and discrepancies in treatment of white vs. women of color; assumption that there was a level playing field when it comes to work, etc.

(from Google search on “PRWORA”)

We are not just our demographics — and I intend to continue making younger generations of mothers (i.e., women!) going through things no one should have to or who in MY generation refused to acknowledge the impact of welfare reform, or the popularization of terms like “Fragile Families” to refer to households without an involved batterer father and forced-coparenting with forced consumption of services to make the impossible work and “Oops, that was just an exception” when it doesn’t work, i.e., when there is roadkill with the word “estranged” in the headline.

This post highlights the involvement of both the Ford Foundation and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in promoting theme and collecting data.  I’ve shown many images and named key players.  I suggest clicking on each image to enlarge and reading the captions, and making a note of the names (I know I did) and the publications (such as “The Future of Children.”).  While he’s not so much mentioned here, with “The Future of Children” one has to acknowledge Ron Haskins (former HHS) and his role in welfare reform (before, during and after…) as co-editor of That publication between a private nonprofit university (Princeton) and a private nonprofit (Brookings).

This article quoted below (several images and link provided below). Pls. make note of the names, publication (Future of Children) and use of “FragileFamilies” as part of a domain name at Princeton University.  Also combo of McLanahan, Garfinkel & Mincy; the latter two are at Columbia., and that (FN2) the fact sheet from Princeton came from a study published on the other coast, i.e., Stanford University Press (Palo Alto, CA 2011)

This article quoted below (several images and link provided below). Add  Brooks-Gunn to the “take note of the names” (I dnk Christina Paxson PhD) and how these professionals certainly understood that a famous PRIVATE foundation’s backing might help inspire more federal grants from HHS (NICHD is under HHS), i.e., provide leverage to get at those public funds.  It’s part of their professor, PhD lifestyle to run studies, write them up, discuss populations they are not personally members of, and use Public/Private resources to fund it — ongoing.

Wealthy families tend to have several – -not just one — foundations, sometimes separate their benefits/retirement plans, and have family trusts or inheritances separate from their more famous charities.  For comparison, here are the relative assets sizes of two big ones mentioned in this post:  Ford Foundation & Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.  Ford is also active in the sense of having sponsored the (1968ff) “Fund for the City of New York” which jointly with THE New York State UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM runs “Center for Court Innovation” which continues to feature “problem-solving courts” and particularly for domestic violence issues.  See their “integrated domestic violence court” movement, piloted in different places around the country. See also their intent to take the models: National and International.

“Searched today, Ford Foundation (primary) shows over $12 billion assets. Search again (by EIN# recommended) at: FoundationCenter.org for interactive results (where you can click through to read the returns).  Notice it’s filing as a PRIVATE foundation (990PF) not public charity (990)

Looking for quick references to “PRWORA” (after publishing this post), I ran across a website by  “Centre for Public Impact – A BCG foundation“** — where “BCG” stands for “Boston Consulting Group.”  I went into the Bibliography (Not shown here; go to bottom of that link) and am posting just title page (1996) and a page which references, pre-1996, the Ford Foundation’s sponsorship of Manpower Development Research Corporation (now ‘MDRC” and I’ve mentioned it repeatedly in this blog.  It was incorporated in 1974).  Professor Michael L. Wiseman has a page full of welfare discussions by “ardent conservative Peter {Germanis] the Citizen” I was getting ready to Tweet, among the reasons I’m referencing Wiseman’s older (1996) backgrounder on Welfare Reform now.  While the url reads “innovations.HARVARD.edu,” I accessed it from the other site.  It’ll be interesting reading:

Peter The Citizen’s self-description {fn1 to latest post there, Oct. 2018}:

The views in this document reflect my own as a citizen and do not reflect the views of any organization I am now or have ever been affiliated with. I am a conservative and worked on welfare issues for The Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, and the White House in the Reagan George H.W. Bush Administrations.


(Wiseman’s backgrounder references “MDRC” so I’ve added a link & some brief comments on that organization here).


(Click image to enlarge as needed) MichaelWiesman.com currently at GWU (in DC) but still affiliated with UWisconsin’s IRP (Institute for Research on Poverty), background also a UCBerkeley, UWisconsin and as “Visiting Scholar” at US HHS (ACF); make note also “The Urban Institute,” and his field is economics and urban planning (not social work).. Image added 12-6-2018 to recent LGH post under “Welfare Background” paper & MDRC discussion//LGH

Update/ a few paragraphs & Link to MDRC tax return Added Dec. 6: The IRS’s latest available (seems to have been posted only in 2018?) Tax return for MDRC representing FY2016 (Year End December) shows $52M gov’t grants out of $91M gross receipts.  Of those gross receipts, they also sold (Check, but I think it was) about $27M securities for “not very much” and failed to report (as required to) where they’re holding over $9M of “Other Investments” showing on their Balance Sheet on Schedule D Part VII.  Time to do another post on this organization? The column for description of purpose of grants reads “Restricted Purpose Grant” on ALL of them (i.e., tells readers not much).

… They appear to be donating back (sometimes quite a lot) to government entities on their “Additional Data Schedule I (for grants to gov’ts or other domestic organizations) and show EIN#s for all of them — and labeled all of them “501©3” and none “government” but by the names, several – -including school districts, and an “Authority” — are.  So is there some bounceback of that $52M, that not spent on surveys, independent contractors, and MDRC salaries?

Search by Name “MDRC” or its EIN# 23-7379473 at http://apps.irs.gov/app/eos (remember after results to click more for summary details and a link to the actual return).  Or (click for “More” (ways to search) see http://foundationcenter.org/find-funders/990-finder to see the last three years in a row of results for MDRC — use the EIN# for more accurate results.  Remember that those “Total Assets” shown are gross, not net. Also, its location is NY but the tax return says legal domicile is Delaware.

I note, around MDRC’s Tax Return’s and I’m sure website’s expressions of concern for the poor (and Gordon Berlin’s half-million-dollar salary (over $540K in 2016) and many others well over $200K, some over $300K a year) — particularly children, low-income noncustodial fathers and families — and the $20M spent on “Other Expenses — SURVEYS” — most of revenues are going to (a) Salaries and (b) other expenses (look at Part VIIB for a list of the top 5 only — out of 33 claimed — independent contractors, starting with Mathematica Policy Research (in Princeton) and Abt Associates, James Bell (consultants) and Bank Street College of Education.

— I’m posting in Dec. 2018 — where’s MDRC’s report to the IRS for FY2017? ???



re: “Centre for Public Impact – A BCG foundation“**

**Notice the spelling of “Centre” indicating, not likely in the US, although Boston Consulting Group is (with plenty of overseas offices also.  I later found and posted information on CPI at the very bottom of this post.  Boston Consulting Group, along with “Bain” and “Bain Capital” (& Bridgespan) have come up on this blog repeatedly.

Got it (just typed in the question:  “In what country is [CPI] registered?” and came up with a trademark infringement lawsuit by Public Impact, LLC (a North Carolina firm).  Which states that it was formed in 2014 by BSG as a Swiss not-for-profit. Which may explain the disclaimer on the website footer that it is NOT related to “Public Impact.”  It got sued!

(#2 of 2) Detail references Ford Foundation’s funding of the nonprofit [MDRC] but on condition that random experimentation with a control group (i.e., Social Science R&D) was employed…
Link to pdf from “Innovations.Harvard.Edu” (the author is Michael Wiseman at UWisconsin-Madison, published by “Fannie Mae Foundation”

(#1 of 2) Link to pdf from “Innovations.Harvard.Edu” (the author is Michael Wiseman at UWisconsin-Madison, published by “Fannie Mae Foundation”

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (“RWJF” searchable on this blog) has only $10B assets for the same year — if you read carefully, showing that over $7B is NOT in corporate but “Other” investments, and less than $1B in US Gov’t (none in state or local).  However it’s largest single “corporate investment,” understandably, is in Johnson & Johnson stock (over $1B).

THE ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON FOUNDATION’S MISSION IS TO IMPROVE THE HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE OF ALL AMERICANS AND TO BUILD A CULTURE OF HEALTH THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY -ENABLING ALL IN OUR DIVERSE SOCIETY TO LEAD HEALTHY LIVES, NOW AND FOR GENERATIONS TO COME TO HELP AMERICANS LEAD HEALTHIER LIVES AND GET THE CARE THEY NEED, THE FOUNDATION MAKES GRANTS TO IDENTIFY AND PURSUE NEW OPPORTUNITIES TO ADDRESS PERSISTENT HEALTH CHALLENGES AND TO ANTICIPATE/RESPOND TO EMERGING CHALLENGES FOR MANY YEARS, THE FOUNDATION HAS FOCUSED THE MAJORITY OF ITS GRANT MAKING IN SPECIFIC FIELDS SUCH AS HEALTH CARE COVERAGE, CHILDHOOD OBESITY, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND IMPROVING THE VALUE OF HEALTH CARE IT ALSO HAS SUPPORTED THE BUILDING OF LEADERSHIP AND SCHOLARSHIP IN THE FIELDS OF HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE, FUNDED INNOVATIVE PROJECTS THAT COULD ACCELERATE CRITICAL BREAKTHROUGHS IN HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE, AND INVESTED IN PROGRAMS AND IDEAS THAT SUPPORTED VULNERABLE POPULATIONS, FOSTERED HEALTH EQUITY AND STRENGTHENED CHI**

(**etc.  didn’t find a continuation of this paragraph on the tax return but it’s probably on their website.  No doubt the partial word “CHI” may be “CHILDREN’s _ _ _ _ “)

“Searched today, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (primary) shows over $10 billion assets and other RWJHospital foundations (by location) named after it: only FYE 2016 shown here. Search again (by EIN# recommended) at: FoundationCenter.org for interactive results (where you can click through to read the returns).

Naturally, the corporation behind the foundation (Johnson & Johnson) is much larger (same with “Ford Motor” last I noticed).  The use of 990PF rather than 990s seems to retain more private control over assets and operations.  But compared with either corporation, or both together, all involved certainly know that government itself (US federal) through access to a taxable population’s wages and control of basic infrastructure we inhabit simply by living here, is MUCH larger.  The tax-exempt sector absolutely influences the public and works closely with it.  The taxed sector (population) as these and many other studies show, are more likely to become the subject matter of those partnerships than equal players, or involved in the same round-tables deciding how to frame issues, like single parents or poverty.  Or whether marriage matters more than safety, or men more than women.

//LGH (Dec. 5, 2018 “Intro” to this post written earlier this year…)


Re: Joint Conferences with Others.. particular ones focused on how to deal with abuse within the family law system.

AFCC Summer 2006 Newsltr (Member News). Image references Czutrin at top, but included here for the center reference. It seems that a special “judge-in-residence” position was created, possibly for its first occupant, the (ret’d) Hon. Leonard P. Edwards. Not referenced — the AOC/CFCC and its predecessor agencies (under the California Judicial Council) has had long-term AFCC members in key staff positions, making me wonder who nominated, and who made that decision, which has had negative consequences for abused women with children in their care ever since..

…(Such as the 2007? Wingspread Conference with the Family Violence Department of the NCJFCJ, which is characterized, in this viewpoint, of somehow representing the “Domestic Violence Advocacy Community” .  (Andrew Schepard in NYLaw Journal summarizing here). (Summary only unless you have Lexis-Nexis® access…)

I see also from “Mediation in Time of Limited Resources CD,” sold under “AFCC-CA 2011″ (though from diff’t website) for only $9.99 notes three individuals, one bio (Judge Leonard P. Edwards) which says he was head of the NCJFCJ at one point, and another (Susan Hanks) which says she was at that Wingspread conference.”

Judge Leonard Edwards (ret.)

Judge Leonard Edwards (ret.) is a Judge-in-Residence with the California Administrative Office of the Courts. In that capacity he provides technical assistance to the courts of California, particularly in areas involving children and families. Judge Edwards served for 26 years as a Superior Court Judge in Santa Clara County, California. He sat as a domestic relations judge and as a juvenile court judge.

This together with the judge’s known consulting relationship at the California Judicial Council AOC, puts him as associated with and obviously a member of BOTH those two 2007 Wingspread Conference nonprofits (AFCC + NCJFCJ)  AND the government at the state level. As the Schepard NYLaw Journal summary above described, and other places, this conference was supposedly helping smooth over differences of approach between AFCC +NFCJFCJ/FVD on the topic of domestic violence especially.  See that link.  Meanwhile, about 8 years previously another invitation-only National Summit (not “Wingspread”) conference between NCJFCJ and FVFP (Major DV advocacy nonprofit, now “Futures without Violence) around a 1999-published (by NCJFCJ) “Greenbook” took place; I’ve blogged it.

Aug 1994 Rept to Pres of the ABA, The Impact of DV on Children (Preface cited to 1994 Wingspread Conference to which Susan Schechter had invited the reporter here)

Looking for when was a previous Wingspread conference on this topic, I found a reference to it in the preference of an August 1994 report “The Impact of Domestic Violence on Children: A Report to the President of the ABA” by the sections shown on the cover page, and as described in its “Preface.”  There, column 2 of the p.2, Preface names the previous Wingspread Conference and indicates that the late, and well-known in the DV field, “Susan Schechter” had invited the reporter (for this report) to it, although it was invitation-only and privilege, which had an impact as to both contents and feedback on the above report written just within two months of said conference (nearby image, light-yellow caption, annotated).

I found a briefing paper FOR this 1994 Wingspread conference, prepared by Edleson & Schechter, with notes that the Ford Foundation was a partial sponsor.  Thus the Edleson/Schechter (at the Wingspread Conference of 1994) material would’ve been and was carried forwards into a national summit on the (same general topic) in I believe 2000:  In the Best Interest of Women and Children: A Call for Collaboration Between Child Welfare and Domestic Violence Constituencies. (found at “www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeffrey_Edleson…”) (two images):

 

Meanwhile, in the 1990s (and thereafter) both Ford Foundation (under the leadership of Ronald D. Mincy) the Fragile Families Initiative had been focused on fathers, specifically and marriage promotion. Other major foundations (such as RWJF) got involved, including in grants to the center at Princeton which produced the Future of Children publication. (Virginia Family & Fatherhood Initiative,* which Mincy bio shows him coming from the Ford Foundation to Columbia in 2001; Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study Program Results Report (Jan. 28, 2014, re $3M+ grants 1998-2011 for three specific RWJF grants, but as shown at Princeton)  — see footnotes, incl. FN4)

Click image to enlarge, or here for the web page. Included because it puts some timeline to Dr. Mincy’s (2001) transition from FFI at Ford to Columbia Univ, and his program focus in both places, in brief form.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 5, 2018 at 1:03 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Do You Know Your Social Science PolicySpeak? Can You Name Some University Centers|Key Professionals |BIG Foundation Sponsors|Related Networked Nonprofits| and A Basic Timeline Since at least The Moynihan Report?

leave a comment »

If you don’t, this post shows several of the terms, the centers and associated professionals, the foundations (coordinating with each other), at least a few of the associated nonprofits, and where HHS funding fits in.

Do You Know Your Social Science PolicySpeak? Can You Name Some University Centers|Key Professionals |BIG Foundation Sponsors|Related Networked Nonprofits| and A Basic Timeline Since at least The Moynihan Report? (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink to the post title ends in “-42P”).  This 11,000 word post is is well worth reading; if you do not agree on my connections between the various organizations and personnel, at least become aware of them — they are still influential today, as are the programs they’ve initiated and/or administered, in general.  Call it the “Dewey Decimal System” (at least a labeling system by time, and some of the lingo) for Federal Family Design, the public/private-funded way. Call it what you like — it’s a good start a historical roadmap. [Other than adding this post title & link, a habit I adopted later, and this paragraph, I haven’t changed the post from it’s July 26, 2016 details.  LGH/June 21, 2017]

It’s Show-and-Tell time, we’ll start with the “Ford Foundation’s influence in sponsoring the Strengthening Fragile Families Initiative

THIS POST came from the middle of the following sequence.  It is a large section extracted from “Re-Organizing The World through International Institutes….” after publication.  In case you haven’t noticed, that’s how I work —  I write, I post, I review, I continuing considering and writing on the subject matters, which results in posts extracted from the middle.

The fabled “some day” maybe I’ll get a blog laid out differently so will not need to rely on the “One Main Page, Linear / Serial Installment” features of a blog.   And/or, get this into proper book format, maybe online, and hit the road with it (?? Maybe I’ll even catch up or run across some of the personnel I’ve been blogging who do this for a living — only on the public dole with private supplementation….).

Related posts:

JUST PUBLISHED 7/23/2016:

“Re-Organizing” The World through International Institutes, Strategies, Dialogues, Peacemaking and Programs Targeting Fragile Families, Communities — and Countries... and, Part 2 of it, UNESCO’s IIP Rutgers|”Partners” + ISD and the Strong Cities Network (Reorganizing the World through International Strategic Institutes, cont’d.)

Extracted from the middle of THIS post:  SFFI – CFFPP – JustGive, Inc. – IronPlanet, Inc. – ZOPB – Texas DOTs $1B GrandParkway Project – US Gov’ts Big Banks Bailout|SunTrust (while Fixing Fragile Families?) and to be published simultaneous on 7/26/2016.  The starting point for this one was JustGive.org as a CFFP funder (one of many).

UPCOMING:   “Munich,” and the Strong Cities Network [ISIL/ISIS aren’t the only ones who want to control the World] upcoming)

Also, a shortlink (if you copy the url) to THIS one, Do You Know Your Social Science PolicySpeak? Can You Name Some University Centers|Key Professionals |BIG Foundation Sponsors|Related Networked Nonprofits| and A Basic Timeline Since at least The Moynihan Report? …If there’s any mixup on the shortlinks, go to main blog, Sidebar “Most Recent Posts” or simply to Archives by date.

As this post is basically almost complete, I’m putting it before publication of the third post in the other sequence,  “Munich,”  and the Strong Cities Network although that one’s just about ready to go as well.


Since “FRAGILE FAMILIES” is such a key phrase and policy, let along strengthening them (“Strengthening Fragile Families Initiative”) I start there, for the most part. …. which pretty much brings up the Ford Foundation.  But, it’s hardly operating solo in the overall cause — this is a COORDINATED Public/Private effort, with the end-game completely outsourced and privatized government, and what’s left looking like a legal system, pretty much in name only.

While that’s kind of obvious (if one pays some sustained attention to various centers, or nonprofits), a simple and interesting example below in the funders of a 1995 nonprofit that calls itself “the policymaking arm of the Strengthening Families Initiative“** does tend to crystallize the “many coordinated into one purpose” funding that larger philanthropies do.  They pick causes, and then target midsized (including community) funding by cause, and get public funds involved too.

**Minutes before hitting ‘PUBLISH’ on this post, I checked the IRS “Exempt Organization Select” website to clarify a contradiction in EIN# show for this organization (the one filed 2003 and associated with a state and namechange showed an EIN# off by one digit from the subsequent one).  I found that they were just revoked in November 2014, which was not published for a full year.  Results below).

Maybe it’s felt that as this policy is now so firmly entrenched, the organization is no longer needed. I noticed that its tax returns are basically showing mostly private (but some) government-supported salaries for people to write on the topic.  On the other hand, their website is still up and soliciting Donations.


I also ran across an HHS conference with a (kazillion) speakers, that now meets every two years, called “RECS” (Research and Evaluation Conference on Self-Sufficiency). This conference just took place last month: June, 2016. Link below, and you can see the Social Science PolicySpeak in the Conference Agenda. It seems to be HHS/OPRE (“Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation) which hosts it.

I’ve been looking at the interlocking pieces of this things for some time now (the strangely inbred role of centers at Columbia and Princeton with Fragile Families studies with the Brookings Institution, MDRC (formerly Manpower Development Research Corporation, until year 2003), not to mention “the Urban Institute,” for at least a year.  This might have been in part from the 50th Anniversary of the 1965 Moynihan Report, although I was already aware of many of these centers simply because I track Marriage and Fatherhood Funding from the TAGGS.hhs.gov level outwards, at a minimum.

This is not the first reference to them in my writings, or my first run at a summary write-up, in combination with references to the 1965 Moynihan Report and pointing out that, as controversial as it was then, and is now, its basic tenets are now mainstream welfare policy, as evidenced by influential welfare spokespeople referring to it.

I blurted this out, with the details, post-publication in the post “Re-Organizing the World….”   That post already had a pale-yellow section labeled “PREVIEW” (of the same post).  I started adding explanatory sections to it today Sat. July 23, 2016, further reflecting on the subject matter, and finally decided to just rip the whole section out, brutally, and hang it out to dry on this post.

On Sunday, July 24, 2016 (as of now) as explained at the top of the original (in this sequence of posts) “Reorganizing the World” post — and for good cause, I still say…  I have expanded that middle section of that original post, again,   All of it is food for thought about how Public & Private sectors interact, and what, exactly, has been the practice and remains the overall agenda.


I hope this doesn’t get me in too much trouble (telling the truth, that is); I noticed the CIA was on this blog recently.  I’m hoping probably because I simply reported recent international news and for no other scary purpose.

Following the Financing of the well-fed and well-equipped (at least for their chosen tasks of publishing, proselytizing, conferencing and influencing legislative policies) Armies of Experts Studying the Poor for the Purpose of Reducing Poverty and Inequality, Outposts by Outpost– no simple Task.  It seems that either the money is buried in university budgets, or sometimes when it’s NOT, it gets “lost in transition” for smaller nonprofits.

There is a LOT of money floating around “under the table” and showing how this happens doesn’t make many friends with those engaged in moving it.  In the matter of how HHS Marriage/Fatherhood programming (plus the organizations tag-teaming with revolving door court, and/or prison policies) fits in at a significant scale, overall, and I’m sure it bothers some people involved to have a ‘nobody’ (unaffiliated with a nonprofit, university, or government entity) blogger such as myself, “Let’s Get Honest” simply exposing by posting it what sociologists say about poor people in places where they don’t expect poor people to actually look, and pointing out just how arrogant — sexist, racist and elitist — the material is (when it’s not busy being condescending — same thing) … or at times ridiculous. I’m also exposing, which we aren’t really supposed to think too hard about, where it’s being said, and more recently, identifying by label, name, and subject matter, some of the key networks. What’s worse, I make a consistent attempt when labeling any group (for purposes of keeping them all straight!) to, where $$ figures and age of corporation IS available, making it known, alongside any screwy business on their tax filings. Such as “The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven” moving assets to the Cayman Islands in 2015, while continuing to NOT post proper grantee details on Schedule I when a significant purpose of the foundation is grantmaking in the first place — and the Year-end 2015 amount was declared to be $29M!… and more “missing info” filers where that came from.

I mean, one of the main things that separates these people from normal people is the use of jargon meaningful among themselves to elevate the “scientific, rational objective” in the sexist, racist and elitist policies” which always seem to require diverting wealth FROM the poor unless they come under a designated, favored program, prefers operating tax exempt, then acquiring assets and paying subcontractors hefty fees to crunch some of the data, and whether operating from private OR public universities (also supported by the same public being population-categorized, sorted, labeled, analyzed, and designated by who gets what interventions) these same professionals’ careers are typically marked by both government and private grants to start with. So, in comparison with the amounts exchanged, who, really, is on “welfare”?


I’m not saying I can quantify the numbers (that’s the purpose of ANYTHING being “under the table” to start with — that it’s NOT tracked), but I can see, and can document so others may recognize other situations where this happens, potential cracks in accountability that don’t seem accidental.

The more attention to detail, and comparing websites to tax returns to (where possible) where “government grants” are all lumped on one single line, to available records on the grants databases (themselves not comprehensive, or always reliable) the more questions arise.

I have no respect for “don’t ask don’t tell” when it’s about public funds and telling is part of just the right thing to do.  

Chameleon/State-Skipping Business Entities (Organizations) — not my main point here, but it came up. When an organization is involuntarily dissolved, thereby losing its right to operate legally in one state, and decides to move to another: State, Name, AND EIN# — what’s with that?


The final detail in deciding to move this post was when I noticed a smallish nonprofit which let its corporate status slip — in Illinois — and then when seeking re-instatement did a name-change, and moved to a Madison Wisconsin address, obtaining thereafter, looks like, a new EIN#.

Any EIN# could be associated with an existing bank account, and unless the associated bank account (NOT just the business entity with which it’s associated losing legal status through failure to file annual reports, or tax-exempt status for failing to file tax returns) is ALSO shut down — which the average person, especially out of state, wouldn’t have any convenient way to tell, then potentially that same entity might be maintaining multiple (or at least in this case, two) separate bank accounts, in different states, with different EIN#s, while the MANY foundations then showing up on the website get to claim tax deductions (which, due to their size, they need) while donating to either EIN#.  Or, as it may be, not donating but just saying they did.

State-skipping and business entity registrations which are let slip (and it’s so easy to maintain, I believe that most organizations which let themselves be involuntarily dissolved, simply chose to let this happen.  Intentional dissolution by the board leaves more of a paper trail as in, where did the assets go TO?  So those types of behaviors are red flags.

Total results: 4Search Again.
(Click on the column headers to sort.)

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Center for Family Policy and Practice WI 2015 990 10 $299,210.00 36-4038873
Center for Family Policy and Practice WI 2011 990 20 $245,922.00 36-4038873
Center for Family Policy and Practice WI 2010 990EZ 14 $213,921.00 36-4038873
Center for Family Policy and Practice WI 2004 990 19 $401,353.00 39-4038873

It took me too long to recognize this was only a single-digit difference. (“36-” vs. “39-“).  I checked the IRS website for 36-403883. and found this (first quote explains the process of posting revocations):

Exempt Organizations Select Check Exempt Organizations Select Check Home

Automatic Revocation of Exemption — Search Results
The federal tax exemption of each organization listed below was automatically revoked for its failure to file a Form 990-series return or notice for three consecutive years. The revocation date listed below for each organization is historical; it reflects an organization’s effective date of automatic revocation for not filing a Form 990-series return or notice for three consecutive years, but not necessarily its current tax-exempt or non-exempt status. The organization may have applied to the IRS for recognition of exemption and been recognized by the IRS as tax-exempt after its effective date of automatic revocation. Click on an organization’s name to see more details on that organization. To check whether an organization is currently recognized by the IRS as tax-exempt, call Customer Account Services at (877) 829-5500 (toll-free number).

Look at that chart above, one more time — notice the gap of filings between “2015” and “2011”?   

EIN Sorted Ascending Legal Name
(Doing Business As) Sorted Ascending
City Sorted Ascending State Sorted Ascending ZIP Sorted Ascending Country Sorted Ascending Exemption
Type
 Sorted Ascending
Revocation
Date
 Sorted Ascending
Revocation
Posting Date
Sorted Ascending
Exemption
Reinstatement Date
 Sorted Ascending
36-4038873 CENTER FOR FAMILY POLICY & PRACTICE MADISON WI 53703 US 501(c)(3) 15-Nov-2014 13-Jul-2015

Their fiscal year end 6/30/20##, therefore the “2015” IRS filing seen above is for the FISCAL year 2014. Meanwhile (?? no real times shown) all the famous foundations below seem to have been contributing to them (only a foundation-by-foundation check on grants they claim to have distributed would show, without further research) to what looks like a NONCOMPLIANT well-known in this field organization.  First time in recent posts this has come up ??? How about in Connecticut, New Haven Family Alliance stopped filing around the same year….Yet continued getting grants.

I checked whether the 36- number, from same basic IRS website, was “eligible to receive contributions” and yes, it was. So, we have this issue of a year’s delay on the IRS’ part of publishing who was revoked, or when it was reinstated.  See tel# above, maybe they will tell, but as of 7-25-2016, this is the record for an “ELIGIBLE?” search:

EIN Sorted Ascending Legal Name (Doing Business As) Sorted Ascending City Sorted Ascending State Sorted Ascending Country Sorted Ascending Deductibility Status Sorted Ascending
36-4038873 Center for Family Policy & Practice Madison WI United States PC

Something in this mix, and more than, is just not credible.

Written by Let's Get Honest

July 26, 2016 at 11:46 am

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: