Posts Tagged ‘The Smaller Nonprofits Cloud Coordination Promotion (and Financing) of the Bigger Foundations’
To Identify and UNDERstand is To Know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (The Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order). [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/18/2017]
Post title reflects both the subject, and part of the originating (updated) post title from which it was taken to shorten the original:
To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (The Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order). [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/18/2017] (case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”) (That post’s full title shown next…).
Like many of my posts, it will undergo some post-publication editing, usually for clarity or layout (how images display). [[In fact, this next segment added post-publication update, on 7/19/2017. I’ll mark where the added segment ends.]]
[[Segment added post-publication update, 7/19/2017]]
The ongoing theme has been …”DO YOU KNOW YOUR NGA, NCSC, NCSL, NCSEA, NCJFCJ, NCCD, NACC, NASMHPD, not to mention ICMA?” that is, do you know? about the network of private nonprofit associations named after public offices or officials who are networking together to function as government without being government entities? In this theme, drafted October, 2014 under basically that title, I split it into three basic parts, with the last (“Part 3”) about the ABA (Bar) and APA (Psychological). I also wrote at length and an extra post about the pushing of the mental health/illness theme when it came to the NASMHPD (National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors) which is operating under a cooperative agreement with the “NGA.” (National Governors’ Association).
The NASMHPD is problematic through: (a) involvement with the objectionable TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project), a way of getting around failed clinical trials to promote excess and more expensive types of (unsafe, injurious it turns out) medication for use statewide, an area over which, obviously, groups like the NASMHPD would have some influence as its members are state-level heads of “Mental Health Programming.” (b) in general, taking funding from some of the same “Big Pharma” (Rx) companies developing and pushing some of the drugs, including several who are now being sued by state attorney generals and others for their responsibility in current very unhealthy (except for business profits) opioid abuse epidemics and ===>>> (c ) patterns of networking AS nonprofits with a specific theme intended to go national, which brings it into an area I have now researched as to several different fields (including marriage/fatherhood, domestic violence prevention, child abuse prevention, supervised visitation and related, and more recently, school reform initiatives (public/private liaisons with big foundation money behind them). I believe that the extent of such networking when it comes to mental health (and related Rx possibilities = major financial incentives to at times inappropriately control population, and bill the public for it) is pervasive and should not be ignored. However, it’s the organizational tactics in the nonprofit sector (regardless of “theme”) to also be aware of, and how organizations copy other organizations’ successful models.
Another factoid is that many of these same pharmaceutical companies can ALSO sponsor or get to government officials more easily ( for membership or Corporate Donor/Partner fees — which they can certainly afford to pay) — which brings us back to the NGA, NCSC, NCSL, etc. list above. The fact that the organization (as to that list) is in the private sector makes it legal, and because these organizations themselves are not usually in the headlines AND on Forms 990, donations are aggregated, at least as far as public gets to see (i.e., contributions are lumped together into a single number on the return), harder to follow. The collective influence is also harder to see simply when it is dispersed among many entities. This influence is not less for being less seen — it still is there, but when results are showing up inappropriate, specifically WHERE to resist or protest should be known. My point is, the nonprofit sector PER SE sets the stage for this. The nonprofit sector understood as a factor of everyone else (incl. corporations) getting taxed, brings it back to the point of taxation, specifically the income tax.
That’s also WHY the “CAFR” material is so important to grasp!
re: (a) TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project) (just a reminder):
Two screenprints, one from TMAP Wiki (part not shown describes whistleblower Alan Jones’ experience, including being fired from his state’s OIG after reporting on this). You can see readily how it would intersect with politics and government:
Annotation bottom right actually comes from p.2. Click image to access the 2-pager document (but p1 w/o annotation) as found at BHRM.org (in IL)
Texas Algorithm Project “wiki” (click image to see) also references the whistleblower and “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health” connections (i.e., from Texas governor George W. Bush to U.S. President George W. Bush (pls. read if unfamiliar with it!) [NOTE: WIKI References insufficient: 2 link to CCHR, one to AHRP (which quotes an Oct. 2005 Alan Jones interview w/ Rutherford Institute (VA, John Whitehead), link broken and no search site there. AHRP doesn’t post its financials (which I looked up to verify its statement that whistleblower Alan Jones was on its board) and I found a tiny and irregularly-filing NY entity, no Forms 990 [vs. 990EZ] showing (which’d show date founded) before ab. 2008, no return found readily before then either (perhaps filed Form 990-N). A 4th Wiki “Reference” viewed, it said, 2006, and not well framed, misdirected to a site MHC on “trucks” and the one to “Texas Dept. of Health” lacked specifics, leading readers to flounder (there are algorithms for many different diseases, not just the psychiatry-related ones for which TMAP became so (IN)Famous.
At least they post audited financials and Form 990s. Mission description from a recent 990. (EIN#680005541):
THE CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (CCHR) IS A NON-PROFIT, NON-POLITICAL, NON-RELIGIOUS MENTAL HEALTH INDUSTRY WATCHDOG WHOSE MISSION IS TO ERADICATE ABUSES COMMITTED UNDER THE GUISE OF MENTAL HEALTH. WE WORK TO ENSURE PATIENT AND CONSUMER PROTECTIONS ARE ENACTED AND UPHELD AS THERE IS RAMPANT ABUSE IN THE FIELD OF MENTAL HEALTH. IN THIS ROLE, CCHR HAS HELPED TO ENACT MORE THAN 150 LAWS PROTECTING INDIVIDUALS FROM ABUSIVE OR COERCIVE MENTAL HEALTH PRACTICES SINCE IT WAS FORMED OVER 48 YEARS AGO.
re: (c ) patterns of networking AS nonprofits with a specific theme intended to go national (just a reminder):
I also looked at, if you read these (my) posts, other mental health/illness-named nonprofits, which have “umbrella” or “parent” organizations (Mental Health America, National Association on Mental Illness, now branded as “NAMI”) and “DBSA” (Depression Bipolar Support Association), including in “Even More Considerations on NASMHPD (and DBSA, and NAMI), and MHA.…” Each of the above associations has spawned, launched, inspired, and helped support (including sometimes through direct grants ) the creation or organization of many — several dozen similarly-named (after originating nonprofit) for each, or more, for some, as I recall — but I did post sample screenprints showing the list– fiscally independent (filing their own tax returns, not under a group membership) and “unrelated” (NOT referenced as “related entities” on the main group entity’s tax returns — MHA, NAMI, or DBSA) nonprofits also, typically named after a state, metropolitan region, or county.** Each entity may have different by-laws on how this works (for example, I believe it was NAMI which allowed only ONE state-level affiliate per state). In other words, networks of “kinda/sorta related” organizations, but not really when it comes to the IRS.
**So does CCHR (look at its organization-posted FY20015 Form 990, Schedule C (Schedules come after all Roman-numeral identified Parts of the Return, That is, I, II, III etc.), which provides a two-page list of affiliated entities all named “Citizens Committee on Human Rights” — and add a geography identifier (i.e. state or city name, etc.). While there look at its Schedule B named contributors and see that one couple gave $886K and other individuals over $70K each such that ⅓ of its contributions/donations (See Pt I and Pt VIII) came from just a few people. Advertising (Pt IX) occupied about ⅓ of its functional expenses, while a pittance (Sched I) was returned to affiliates and some to the Church of Scientology, nearby on the same street. There were some membership fees and there was some (Schedule F) recorded international activity.
The APA and the ABA are also so organized, which I also gave in sample screenprints in previous posts. My point is become aware of the networking in the private, nonprofit sector as organized nationally (or, internationally) targeting specific functions or services provided by government, with the purpose of controlling in which direction they are moved. Also become aware of them as a financial force if and when their assets and investments are collectively pooled. This happens in both the private and the public sectors, which also interact (trade, buy, sell, etc.) with each other. This type of information isn’t “journalistic” and doesn’t tend to sell newsprint and may lack social media “curb appeal”– but it’s part of how our country operates, and has its core basis in WHERE one falls along the tax spectrum or continuum (exempt, or not). It’s essential to know and come to terms with!
[[This ends a segment added post-publication update, 7/19/2017]]
I have been putting out some long posts recently. But this one is shorter at about (with above addition, now) 8,800 words. It introduces the concepts from and links to some of my key prior posts on the same (I picked out five specific ones), then continues on a post that references them, published 07/12/2017, called Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update). That continuation post has more substance on the Five Vital Posts. This one (that you’re now looking at) serves as an introduction, and has some extra material not on the continuation post (in light-blue background section).
The originating post itself actually I see reflected three major subject matters, although that length of title also reflected what was actually covered in the post three years ago. The three subject matters are reflected in the post title’s three sentences:
Do You Know Your…ABA, APA (Founders, History, and via their Forms 990/O and Financial Statements, As Nonprofits?), Or How the ABA from its start maneuvered around Membership Admission for “men of color” despite existing suffrage and qualified men until long after women also got the vote? If Not, Then You Also May Not Yet Know Your [the Public’s] Assigned Place in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order. (Oct 2014 update, Pt. 3A) (Post title with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-76j” generated by WordPress) (Bold – Italics – Bold to indicate the three subject matters, or three sentences).
THIS POST CAME FROM THE MIDSECTION OF A POST on the MIDDLE SUBJECT MATTER, BUT REFLECTS THE THIRD-SUBJECT MATTER IN THE LONG TITLE ABOVE — OUR PLACE ON THE TAX CONTINUUM PECKING ORDER, AND THINGS ABOUT TAX RECEIPTS, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET FUNDING, AND CONSEQUENCES TO ONGOING TAXATION IN THE CURRENT SETUP (AS REFLECTED IN CAFRS, AND THESE NETWORKS OF NONPROFITS INTO “PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS” I KEEP SHOWING OVER TIME….SIMILARLY, the material for SECOND SENTENCE of the TITLE actually was towards the BOTTOM of the originating post. So, some re-arrangement of sections was called for.
I have now published parts 1, 2, and 3 of the original, and, separately, an extension of this post (link appears again at the bottom) as Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update) (with short-link ending “-7bR”). <==almost 13,000 words, contains about 50% update and addition of images to explain concepts.
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Get Smart about “ALEC” (American Legislative Exchange Council)! [Publ. Jan. 30. 2012, Re-formatted Mar. 16, 2022].
with 3 comments
Get Smart about “ALEC” (American Legislative Exchange Council)! [Publ. Jan. 30. 2012, Re-formatted Mar.16, 2022]. (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-ZG” | About 6,700 words See my (new, 2018) Front Page to interpret “shortlink” if needed).
(**in 2012 I didn’t put dates on post titles, add short-links, or include post full titles (with dates published and shortlinks) within the body of the text, generally, use specified width (my default is “700px” FYI), or add borders to my posts. I was self-taught at all points, still “going through it” in many ways, didn’t always have proper internet access, etc. When I in later years run across some really early posts I feel summarize something well enough to re-post (or link to), I’ll go back and add this type of formatting.
This post, (reformatted March 16, 2022, briefly only) I’m re-posting because it references ALEC (I saw featured on an upcoming film in 10 Episodes based on New Hampshire corruption, specifically. If people can comprehend what ALEC does, they should be also able to comprehend what many more nonprofits also do, by subject matter categories, to smooth out differences by states (USA) in standards, and — in the process — continue to nationalize things under state control — like these family courts.. I’d forgotten this post (I don’t often browse “2012” posts!) but it’s short enough I’m going to Tweet it. ALEC is not the only one around — if what it’s doing is “bad,” by definition, others doing the same thing are also “Bad” — but certainly self-characterized as “good.” Good or bad, they tend to operate tax-exempt (or below the radar), something we’d better start understanding.
This post (unlike most) actually has a comment (One person at the bottom, I replied, but please see as it deals with Jerry Sandusky (remember Pennsylvania Abuse scandal, the one involving him –not the Luzerne County “Kids For Cash” RICO ?) charity). //LGH March 16, 2022.
ALEC is, of course, a nonprofit. I was surprised to see a photo of it on TV the other day, and attempted a short and sweet post on the dangers of allowing this level of private planning to write model legislation to be delivered to state legislators BY state legislators — who are a good portion of the ALEC membership.
One good summary of how ALEC operates came from another nonprofit** dealing with juvenile justice disparities; I researched this nonprofit and its background and got a good lesson in how & why the very real racism inherent in America’s Incarceration practices tends to lead to a conflicts between diversionary justice programs for youth, commissions and focus on “The African American Male” (etc.) – — and the fact that the fatherhood program as practiced in the custody system prejudices women of all color by definition, thereby breaking down whatever neutrality may have (potentially) existed in those courts.
It’s a highly appropriate topic for January 16, 2012, Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday. However, this post was too complex to post, really. Even I hesitated to hit “Publish.” It needed an introduction.
Today’s post may be a little different, and requests visitors to dedicate a little time to reading about ALEC. It’s such a hard sell to get even parents with severe family court issues to consider even AFCC and CRC (for the most part) and how it ties into public welfare law (1996 and following revisions). . . ..
This would be far more important. ALEC makes AFCC look like amateurs when it comes to pretenses, purposes, and intent to dominate the landscape for personal corporate profits.
At the bottom of the post, I’ll link to perhaps four links to “ALEC,” and save the narrative (plus more explanation) for tomorrow.
ReFLeCTiONs from Years of Tracking This Trail:
I usually am blogging about subterranean behaviors by nationwide nonprofits affecting, mostly, the family court system. This is fairly specific and under-reported, but it turns out to be woven into the very fabric of of our country from top to bottom.
I simply looked and kept following the trail, which often led upwards to HHS and from there to “Institutes” “Task Forces” and “Think Tanks” — and naturally, it got round to the corporations funding the various studies. I came to the conclusion that the entire “nonprofit” system was set up not to help the poor (which is probably what it was sold as) and for public purposes, but more likely to benefit the already wealthy, for tax write-offs, helping hide income, and influencing government favorably to accumulate more wealth and make sure that competition for jobs remains keen enough to keep wages down and profits high.
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Like this:
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
January 30, 2012 at 5:54 pm
Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)
Tagged with ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Bloodhounds, BMCC, BMCC = 'Battered Mothers Custody Conference" (2003ff a non-entity so far by 2022), Bobbe J Bridge, CCYJ, CJCJ, Jerry Mander, National Models for Legislative Change, Non-Entity means not filed (that I can see) as a nonprofit or for-profit business (Corp or LLC) etc. Hence no Financials Shown...//LGH tag new 2022, Public Servants Private Profits Nonprofit Charities, Robert Frost, social commentary, Susan N Dreyfuss, tax-exempt foundations, The Smaller Nonprofits Cloud Coordination Promotion (and Financing) of the Bigger Foundations, The Tracker, Tom Brown, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., Wealth poured into tax-exempt foundations to influence public policy, Weyrich