U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work. | Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Posts Tagged ‘U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.’

Interlocking, Dysfunctional Definitions, Cont’d: “NJII, a NJIT Company,” and (how, exactly, NJ became) “the State of Innovation.” [“Incorporated” March 17, 2019]

Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline Pre-Thanksgiving 2017, Yet I See I’d Outlined the Same Basics One Year Ago (Nov. 2016) [Published 11/21/2017].

Title:Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline, Pre-Thanksgiving 2017 (looking back, looking forward…), Yet I See I’d Outlined Nearly the Same Basics One Year Ago (Nov. 2016) [Published 11/21/2017]. (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7ZH”). Published initially with tags; about 9,500 words including the “navigation” section with its outline of subtitles near the top, which I felt would help process the many images and references found in the middle. And an extended section on previously-blogged JPA (multi-state, i.e., “regional” government entity) WestEd, which now has a revamped website (which still neglects to post its financials and mis-states its date of origin by 30 years…).

On the bottom of this post I’ve been updating the status of the referenced posts while publishing them, one by one over the past ten days (Nov. 22 – Dec. 1: see post archives for November 2017 for dates). Once published each post is then re-viewed, clarified, sometimes extending it, sometimes just correcting layout. I’m posting more frequently now, but it’s still an intense process which ALWAYS uncovers more information to blog, OFTEN further illuminates my own understanding of some situations (typically, organizations placed in the intersection between public and private — and the board members’ ownership of, or investment in, subcontracting organizations) I may have been aware of for years, which I look forward to explaining as I can. Maintaining the anchor (mental commitment) to those already in draft, shown below, sometimes provides conflicting currents as a writer. I write best typically while most focused on the present research in the overarching context of my own learning curve and desire to communicate clearly what I am seeing and hearing, and watching continue to evolve over the years. //LGH, Dec. 1, 2017.

Just in case, Title Terminology: “In the Pipeline” is a common phrase (school-to-prison pipeline, cradle-to-career-pipeline), but here’s how I use it referring instead just to posts.

Posts in the pipeline or “spin-off posts” are portions of some writing in process* with a blog “street address” but still in draft status, felt to be significant enough for more attention under their own titles. *Typically they come up as I am writing some post, and are related but I feel they may seem extraneous to a reader covering the subject matter for the first time. Other times, less often, I start them from scratch on their own post when I realize the topic should be handled before it almost writes itself on some other project I want published sooner.

Sometimes these off-ramped finds, like my more consistently noticing the presence of independent subcontractors as major part of some charities, are a key which puts the larger picture together, i.e., opens double-wide doors to understanding. Examples: Bridgespan as a subcontractor (and its relationship to “Bain”); or, further back in its corporate existence (and in my blog’s history), NCCD (National Council on Crime & Delinquency) as an Oakland, California-based subcontractor taking government grants from around the world, or I should say, around the “Commonwealth Nations” and around the USA, on a “Children’s Rights, Inc.” charity based in New York.

There is a recent example also on these blogs, too, although it’s not as a subcontractor of some charity, but a listed partner among others in on certain website offering multi-state filings for charities. One of the listed partners was bought out within six years of its creation, leading to my better understanding of a (different) company historically significant to the practice of corporate law in the United States (!), and as we have (already) turned the century into the digital age and the professionalization of services to and “software AS a service” companies to the philanthropic / nonprofit sector.

Typically also posts in the pipeline were nearly complete before I moved them under their own titles, with “nearly” still meaning “not yet..” in blog administrator terms. Parallels to baking bread, or, (to borrow from my more familiar, experiential points of reference), preparing and rehearsing a musical ensemble for a concert, may help explain a sense when 90% “done” isn’t good enough. It’s not about complete perfection, it’s about having enough vital components to complete the course and “deliver the goods” for better understanding of the evolving”playing field” in which this blog became necessary.

About This Post:

This post is shorter than most. It serves a review and blog administrative function for my use, but I’m publishing it in the belief it will also help readers see the FamilyCourtMatters blog continuity and understand that while it may seem like widely disparate groups I’m investigating and reporting on, in fact the investigations and reports together circle around some core, basic themes. [This thought continued below the next “Navigation” section]

Navigation: Blog sections, by Subtitle. It seems there are six main sections. Any section may contain text in a variety of formats, and/or images. I only posted one table of Forms 990 (for a change!). The longer Sections 2 and 5, especially, set up the Posts in the Pipeline as being along the same concepts but just applied to different organizations. There is overlap of type, and (future posts will show) also overlap of entities and personnel involved — hardly surprising because I’m looking at some of the more powerful foundations around, and major causes with public policy in transition…There is also some overlap of material below between some of the sections.

I don’t want us to lose sight of what some of these influential groups have themselves lost sight of — the requirement of holding to some real ethics, reason, and at least an attempt to keep their collaborating colleagues honest, instead of just “going for the jugular” on some groups which might be in competition for the same audiences. Which I say happened in the recent prosecution of a sham (fake) cancer charities. Not that they weren’t sham (I read — seems like they certainly were) — but they ALSO were in competition with the tobacco mega-fund money coursing triumphantly through government and the philanthropic sectors both, and often in partnership.

That last comment will make more sense in the context of reading up on “NAAG” and “NASCO” (see Outline here):

About This Post (you’re in it…)
Concentric Circles of Investigation, Common Themes – To Review
1. WestEd (MIA financials on both old and new websites; see prior posts on this).
2. AISR at Brown and Annenberg Foundation-Related
3. NGA
4. NAAG, NASCO (current project and research themes)
5. Multi-million-dollar MIA grants (overlaps with some of the above and below groups)
6. Multi-million-dollar Grants not MIA, but it sure seems the projects are, and don’t look remotely that classy when parts of them show up, either…
7. NCALP at Capital University (Columbus, Ohio) (transformed into) Family & Youth Law Center / and its IPV Collaborative personally assisting David Mandel’s career path through curricula marketing.
  1. Basic conclusion to the “Concentric Circles / Review” section: “The more you look, the more of such situations surface. How much is acceptable? It is really something which is subject to being controlled and monitored — or not?”
“The Same Basics One Year Ago, ” (brief, only one image)
More Recent Discoveries (contents include BizFilings, Guidestar, short section — but Guidestar info cont’d in another section)
Brief Recap of the recent Nov. 18 post and Nov. 11 page significance, and more images from “Guidestar, Inc.” (formerly “Philanthropic Research, Inc.”) and a bit on (Paul) Newman’s Own Foundation, Inc. (versions 1 & 2, based in Connecticut), also referenced as involved, or to be involved, in the MRFP and Single Portal Initiative…
1. Contains narrative and many images, plus a Form 990 table for GuideStar USA, Inc.
2. Summarizes the most recent post and page, obviously.
IN GENERAL (barely a section, but it is a heading)
Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline, Pre-Thanksgiving 2017 (looking back, looking forward…)
1. In image format (not interactive)
2. In texts (bulleted, with titles, links and some surrounding descriptions from the context where they were first referenced).

As you can see above, the actual list of posts is on the bottom in two formats: Images (from my WordPress Admin site showing titles of post started in November and still in draft) and, for later convenience, text & titles with active links. And some surrounding abstracts or reminders of the context. And it’s at the bottom of the post. FYI there were ~~nine~~ ten (10) in all, not six (6). One more showed up which hadn’t been imaged (on the historic basis of “Sovereignty” concept, from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).*

*That is, after all, a big question (despite it having become a “dirty word” and negative- or positive-only values-laden descriptor for certain people with certain beliefs in the USA — the question in any form of government is “Who’s the boss?” (legally, and effectively/administratively which will often show up economically). So, national “sovereignty” as a concept has origins in contrast to, it seems the Holy Roman Empire. Worth thinking about in the historic sense. This post just provides some resources (links) for further reading.

An image looks like this (the example only has one title showing, though).

#3 of 3 (My Blog Posts Started Nov. 2017 in Draft, by when last modified (not originated). This one more of a study project from recent headlines on Puerto Rico debt and hurricane recovery 2017, transferable info.

A title with link looks just like what you see at the top, or will see if you scroll to the bottom of this post, below the images, to see those in the pipeline listed in bullet format, with some nearby fine-print summaries for most of them. Why? Because with enough memory pegs for the months or even possibly years of writing ahead (further down the FamilyCourtMatters road), I expect my head may be buried either deeper into this theme, or into a related one. I sometimes even dream about material I am currently working; it gets under one’s skin…Once it’s published, a previous multi-post project is buried less deeply in my psyche (so to speak), but is better available for mental recall when there’s enough surrounding context. As with advertising, to a degree also with teaching (and learning): repetition helps comprehension, but better that the repetition is also tied to context.

…These concentric or overlapping circles are just getting wider and further back in time, and the drill-downs on the available financials (or searches when they are not available) deeper. I am also considering more parts of a typical Form 990 when I do look, and more internal comparisons and looking more consistently at change over time (i.e., looking for earlier filings). So while some may wonder what “Education” or “Big Tobacco” have to do, really, with “Family Courts” or “Domestic Violence Prevention,” as a whole, they are dealing with and justified on the basis of financial matters, and involve similar vehicles and organizing tactics (networking) over time in pursuit if any national or international cause.

Developing overwhelming weight and influence (to stack the odds towards success) in pursuit of a privately chosen cause (public policy, message, results or outcomes) also regularly shows ongoing symptoms, often showing up after the fact or after the infrastructure is already entrenched with matters of control, secrecy, of sequestering of total government entity (collective) AND total corporate (collective, when it comes to the networks) size of assets and investments (income producing, whether through dividends and interest as held, or when sold) from public awareness, and on this basis, demanding more and more compliance, conformity, and personal concessions from the population as a whole.

Many aspects of this resemble tactics of batterers and coercive control when at the individual level which we might now simply call “abuse” or “domestic violence.” It’s the behavior of terrorist mentality, not of a personal subjection to law, and deep respect for others of differing economic, social, racial/ethnic, citizenship OR status. Or of a different gender. Talk to women or, I’ll bet also men, who have been held captive to this kind of intimate or family control, coercion, and long-term intimidation, not to commonly-accepted laws, standards, or with regard to rights — but to simply what the abusers want. The difference is just of scale and primary venue, and the bystander audiences addressed. What I’m talking about here is when the bystander audiences are the entire country not “in on it,” and international participants, too.

Concentric Circles of Investigation, Common Themes – To Review

… … …To review, remember the “where’s your tax return?” status of certain major-cause-collaborating, well-financed (and public, private, or public-private in concert) groups I’ve blogged on? such as (just a few examples…):

WestEd (I notice the website has been, it seems, completely reformatted since I reported on this. A horizontal timeline slideshow now exists. While this probably relates to a 50th Anniversary (since 1966), I note there are STILL no Financials (CAFRs — it being a JPA, a government, not private, entity which crosses state borders, though domiciled in California), despite posting an impressive list by type of “Our Clients and Funders” (no amounts or years, and not distinguishing “clients” from “funders.” It’s just a single page which links to nothing else). So are the pages within the timeline, that I saw so far.
- I posted on it Nov. 18, 2016, as “ConnectED + MPR Associates Inc. + Gary Hoachlander, WestEd, and the US Dept. of Ed, with help from James Irvine Foundation, shortlink ends in “-4LK”) (It is currently 16,000 words long, and a bit complex! Then again, so are the networks I am discussing and exposing…)”
- I posted again on this situation the following May, under the theme “Disconnected,” which too many of us certainly have been from following our own government agency operations and financials, even those running school systems as massive human behavioral modification and teaching laboratories: “DISCONNECTED!” — More on ConnectEd (2006ff nonprofit) and WestEd (1995ff JPA claiming to be since 1966). Can YOU Follow the Connections, Find and Correlate the Financial Statements, and Name the EndGame(s)? [Publ. May 2017, updated twice since]. {short-link ending “-6k7”.} This post proves that WestEd is government in part by looking up its designation on some of its various trademarks (which also, helpfully, provides years too).
- See more below on this one, including images from its updated website, and key points from the above two posts…
AISR (The Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown) + CES (Coalition of Essential Schools) network, the Ted & Nancy Sizer et al. Plenty posted before, enough said for now!
- Except I recall some MIA grants involving a Chicago Entity, and later CPS Schools Chief being ousted for fraud in grants administration. (See posts in below images)
- Nearby “Broad Institute | Academy | Center | Foundation (versions 1 versions 2) possibly related. Had to do with training for urban school system supervisors.
- And, one post title with active link, and all those posts (in image form with dates published dates):

My Annenberg-related posts published so far; The names speak loudly. Click image to enlarge and see. Only one has tabs (and not all shown on this image)

An Annenberg-related FamilyCourtMatters post + publication date (but no tags), title also shown with link nearby (Nov. 21, 2017 new post)

Challenging the Annenbergs’ Public Education Challenge Grants, Still Searching for AISR@Brown as a Form 990 filer, Still Scrutinizing Why We Accept that Privately Controlled, Synched, Billion-Dollar, Tax-Exempt Foundations Care about the Public as Much as About Controlling Their Collective Assets (and the Public, Lest We Start Demanding a Better Look at the Books!) with case-sensitive short-link ending “-6yC”

The first several paragraphs here overlap from the originating post, before I “get into it,” scrutinizing some of the Forms 990PF and relationships between various Annenberg projects and their main foundation. *** [see below next para. and link]

As previously explained (on the last post, above), this is a large family foundation (well, at least one) whose primary wealth came from ownership of publications/media field — the sale of “Triangle Publications,” by a second-generation business success, Walter H. Annenberg.

The NGA (National Governors’ Association) which controls its foundation (501©3) thereby allowing direct corporate “Fellows” concentration, with privileged access, to its conferences that normal citizens cannot attend (i.e., Pay-Us-To-Play in the “major leagues,” but for which no financials are shown, that I can see (view tax returns of the supporting “NGA Center for Best Practices” for more details). The ‘NGA” is one of the “Big Seven” associations coordinating efforts before the Congress on their own behalf. [no reminder text or images provided here; it’s more distant blog history…]
…and now, more recently, I see the NAAG (National Association of Attorneys General) and NASCO (National Association of State Charity Officials), the NAAG’s “Mission Foundation” (formed in 2002? with funds from MSA Tobacco Settlement), and I haven’t yet explored in depth, but there are plenty of visuals showing a “NAGTRI” (Training and Research Institute) said to have been created in 2007 (logo below, accessible through main NAAG.org website). Then again, it’s hard to explore what one can’t even access yet.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

November 21, 2017 at 8:30 PM

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

Tagged with "Posts as footnotes", "Posts in the Pipeline", AISR - Annenberg Institute for School Reform (RI Bus ID# 000087858-EIN#NF at time of publication], domestic violence, Education, Famous Nonprofit Databases (and the corporations behind them), Guidestar, Guidestar USA Inc (formerly Philanthropic Research Inc) 1995ff in WmsburgVA (DE corp), MRFP Inc, NAAG, NAGTRI, NASCO, NCALP, Newman's Own Foundation (versions 1 & 2), NGA, pre-Thanksgiving 2017 vs. 2016, Public Servants Private Profits Nonprofit Charities, Puerto Rico's Hurricane and Financial Devastations (PROMESA - PREPA etc (only as Post-in-the-Pipeline), SimpleCharity.com - BizFilings - CT.WoltersKluwer.com, The Broad Foundation (“TBF”) (dba of Eli & Edythe L | post-2007 | in Los Angeles) EIN# 95-4686318, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work., WestEd

Federal Designer Families: How Californians got their “CFCC,” CRS Year 2000 Report on Access Visitation

with 4 comments

This post is about 10,000 words. Enjoy!

I have about six posts in the pipeline, all of them timely to some recent indicators (developments) in the “protective mothers” field. All of them, as usual continuing to emphasize a functional vocabulary in discussing the family courts, and pointing out a few significant historical developments affecting them that those IN them rarely point out to clients, which I find strange.

By contrast, the developments in the “responsible fatherhood” field seem to be moving ahead with the usual momentum, and under-reported among “the commoners,” i.e., the general public and most family-court reform groups, who, apparently, don’t consider worthy of notice that this network even exists, or is a priority to understand.

However, it does. In fact, if you check some of the post-PRWORA-propped up nonprofits, centers, institutes, programming and the “same old, same old” hotshots, there is apparently nothing more important to talk about than what they have done, are doing, and how much HHS is going to pay them this time (sometimes that refers to a five-year, multi-million-dollar grant) to further strengthen and extend their communications, technical support, outreach/ recruiting and funding pipelines already set up in the “Fatherhood” network. (Recent example) Using federal funding to a university. One of team members historically associated with AFCC, another thing family court advocacy groups are averse to talking about.

There are also certain chronic weaknesses and vulnerabilities within this “HMRF” field (but also present, to a degree, in the domestic violence prevention field also), which would be excellent leverage to address some of the problems protective mothers are having in the courts, and I have yet to hear any legitimate (if indeed any) explanation why no significant protective mothers organization, or their featured professionals, has seen fit to raise the topic seriously with a view to DOING something about it, for at least the past dozen years, even when after a certain point, the leadership surely became aware that “outside” information on the responsible fatherhood field, HHS grants and AFCC was somehow “leaking” into the field of vision of some of the “fix the courts” promoters. One whitepaper did come out over a year after I, literally, did several posts (on two blogs) naming names of the “Let’s JUST not talk about it!” groups and proving which personnel at least knew the whole time.

Nearly two days of technical (keystroke processing speed almost at a standstill) problems with my computer slowed getting them published. Meanwhile, working out that situation, and concerned about output at this time, I decided to re-publish a 12/5/2009 FamilyCourtMatters post which is STILL more relevant than the average conversation I see on the family court reform in 2016, original title “While You Were Sleeping,… How Congress got into the Family Law Business.”

I have not yet extended the “Table of Contents” back to 2009, so “While You Were Sleeping” was probably missed by most people who may read or follow this blog. It is not the kind of information one tends to stumble across in general search terms on the family courts or its handling of situations and allegations of criminal behavior such as domestic violence or child abuse. Last month, I felt this post was important enough to clean up (formatting) and link to it, now I am actually re-posting.

It references by name key elements in networks I am blogging consistently on — public/private partnerships, and HOW does the federal government got its hand in into the state-level cookie jar without quite getting caught at it, and vice versa, while the courts themselves contribute to an ever-expanding and increasingly dependent on social services population.

**Mostly, these posts-in-the-pipeline again review some basic vocabulary with which we can talk about things which both the protective mothers’ perspective, and definitely in the fathers’ rights perspective have for years resisted discussing on-line in anything approaching a coherent manner, using accurate and relevant terms to describe the infrastructure and how it networks to promote either their own perspective, or the perspective for which they want “systemic changes” or “a paradigm” change for [divorce law, family courts, child support] because it’s: unfair to fathers, unfair to mothers, dangerous to children, or gender-biased against men (or women), is destroying the American family, human rights,civil rights, etc.

We who are concerned, afflicted by, or discussing the problems in the family courts, should ALL know and talk what top-level state institutions (such as the California Judicial Council), federal deliberations courtesy of CRS (Congressional Research Service) (“Should the Federal Government get involved in Family Matters which are under State law jurisdiction?”) (unsaid: “HOW can we get our fingers into family and divorce courts without getting caught on it, or held responsible for any negative effects after we have?”) ….. (And “WHO will help us do this?” some of which this post shows who actually did) are actually involved, or, for example, just how one state ends up copying the court (privatization and outsourcing) practices in another.

For example, I had years of personal encounters through the courts before I became aware of the information in just this excerpt from that 2009 post below. The publication talking about it came out in the context of a state-level, state-wide evaluation of the ruling body of the courts published around May, 2012. Take a look at this excerpt, which will be repeated below, without the olive-green background:

THE REPORT on the AOC, with its section on the CFCC Division IS RECOMMENDED READING for understanding many things which may relate to complaints about the family courts nationwide. Information on the AOC’s/CFCC begins on page 81:

(from a 2012 “SEC” CALIFORNIA-SPECIFIC REVIEW Of the Administrative Office of the Courts)

Division Description

The Center for Families, Children and the Courts (CFCC) was established in February 2000 through the merger of the Statewide Office of Family Court Services and the Center for Children and the Courts.

A Statewide Office on Families was merged with a Center on Children and the Courts. Consolidation, Year 2000

The Statewide Office of Family Court Services was created by a 1984 legislative mandate to provide leadership, development, assistance, research, grants, education, and technical support to the state’s family court services programs through direct services and community partnerships.

…

(Report on the California AOC/CFCC Division, p. 81ff, cont’d. Link above…)
The Center for Children and the Courts was created by the AOC in 1997 in response to the results of a state-wide needs assessment of California juvenile dependency proceedings conducted by the National Center for State Courts.

Notice input from the National Center for State Courts [NCSC] in 1997, a “needs assessment” and that it was first aimed at JUVENILE DEPENDENCY — not the entire family law system. Notice the title in 1997 didn’t yet include the words “Family.” Anyone that is running (sponsoring, calling for) a “needs assessment” may very well already have an intended “solution/fix” in mind. These are rarely 100% neutral. [[The National Center for State Courts is a 501©3], technically speaking, in the private sector, despite its name. It files a Form 990]]

From its inception, the CFCC’s mission has been to improve the quality of justice and services to meet the diverse needs of children, youth, parents, families, and other users of the California courts. The division provides a wide range of services to family, juvenile, and collaborative justice courts.

Collaborative Divorce has been an ongoing theme promoted by AFCC members. This can be seen in some of the nonprofits formed, by looking at who formed them. Not the topic of this post….

Did you know that in apparently about Year 1983 (but not continuing, I think), the NCSC also served as the “Secretariat” for the organization AFCC? I believe it’s on my sidebar in one of the AFCC newsletters of that year.

The formation of a specialized center within AOC’s administrative structure institutionalized judicial branch commitment to improving outcomes for children and families. The CFCC is the only division of the AOC that is dedicated to a substantive area of the law. The multidisciplinary model has since been recommended to other states.

If you’ve gotten this far in this dense post –and are even reading my blog — do I need to spell this out further?…

SUMMARY: The Courts in the State of California have increasingly centralized control and operations over time, other parts of the report also show. The timing of some of the special divisions seems to correlate to increased federal funding for programming that these divisions seem to control — from the administrative sector…. Good to keep in mind…

But notice, they first set up two separate elements — a division within the AOC, and a Statewide Office. Then, they combined them. Then within the State-level office are links to the private, tax-exempt sector encouraging business with it. Any entity (which is to say anyone running an entity) which wants excellent, authoritative, advertising then is helped by connection to a state-level promoter within (here, as an example) the CFCC section of the Administrative Office of the Courts. “Coincidentally,” it appears that key members of the CFCC (such as Charlene Depner, and I believe, Shelly LaBotte as to the Access Visitation grants management) are also long-time, loyal members of AFCC. AFCC as an organization has certain interests that not all Californians, or Americans, may necessarily agree with, and in its own website claims responsibility for many so-called positive innovations in the family court field.

They are also pretty good at setting the stage for creating new professions at the expense of the courts (the public) and parents (also, the public), one of the earlier ones pushed was mediation, one of the later, “parent coordination.”

Another reason I would question any advocacy group who, knowing about this organization, didn’t talk — and keep talking — about it.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

May 26, 2016 at 9:43 AM

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

Tagged with "CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AND VISITATION: SHOULD THERE BE A FEDERAL CONNECTION?" (CRS Rpt 97-590 updated 6-20-2000), "Outflanking the Nation-State: David Mitrany and the Origins of Functionalism", AFCC, AFCC CFCC AOC Judicial Council, Carmen Solomon-Fears, CRS Rept 97-590, CRS-Congressional Research Service, Due process, Elements of the Network, fatherhood, Global Pound Conference of the IMI, HHS-TAGGS grants database, History of Access and Visitation Legislation, House Ways and Means-Human Resources Subcommittee (Jurisdiction - Titles I ~IV ~VI ~X ~XIV ~XVI ~XX and related provisions of titles VII & XI of the Social Security Act per 112th Congress rules), IMI - International Mediation Institute (Dutch/UN Consultative NGO), men's rights, murder-suicides, obfuscation, social commentary, Statewide Office of Family Court Services (in Calif in 2000 merged into a "CFCC"), Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet].

with 9 comments

This post title with a “shortlink” attached is:

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet]. (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-JR”. Note: for normal URLs (web addresses), upper or lower case alpha doesn’t seem to matter, but I’ve learned that within this domain (WordPress) and in such short-links, it does.

LGH UPDATE NOTE: My current table of contents only goes back to Sept., 2012; this is a June 15, 2011 post (early on in this blogger’s learning curve!) so would only be found by search, some other link reference to it, or by Year/Month/Date through the “Archives” (by month) on this blog.

I added some quick (not thorough) updates on Overcoming Barriers at the bottom in response to a comment submitted March, 2016…including tax returns, California corporate registration (Massachusetts could also be searched).

For a December 2017 Update (which at first I thought might fit in here), see:

Revisiting Reunification Camps and Treatments, The good Clinical Psychologist Just Want to Help Traumatized People and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), the Good, Ole Court-Ordered (and of course (™)’d Service Model) Way. Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC” and this was written Dec. 16, 2017, starting as a post update to [another] one for which I wanted to cite to this older post on reunification camps for “estranged” families, but from different angle of approach, as that one explains in the first few paragraphs. After that, on “Revisiting Reunification Camps,” above, I get into looking at what isn’t apparently a large operation, but one with connections in more than one state to the family court system. It’s in draft, but will be a short post and out Dec. 16 or 17, 2017. [Published Dec. 21 + (additions/clarifications) 22nd] //LGH.

I expect to publish (shortly) a follow-up to the Reunification Camps post above, some information I came across recently which connects the AFCC-drenched providers of at least three camps (Two mentioned here, one featured in my recent post above], the new one trademarked only 2016 (described in the above post) whose lead psychologist apparently was on-call from the NCMEC (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children) who shortly after Jaycee Dugard (and the two children born to her 18-year-long kidnapper rapist and herself) were rescued, was put in touch with Dugard who then (2009/2010) got a $20M settlement from the State of California and set up the JayC Foundation (of very modest size, but it seems in part supporting the reunification camps used ALSO to force-feed alienated children back in to the parent’s life, particularly in cases where the alienation is connected to litigation around the issues of abuse/domestic violence by the “targeted” parent (the one the kids don’t want to see).

(TRANSITIONING FAMILIES, STABLE PATHS (Abigail M. Judge (“clinician”) Boston, S.Florida, with involvement from Transitioning Families clinician R. Bailey. who has a recent book out co-authored with one of the co-founders (mentioned below in THIS older post) of “Overcoming Barriers.” In addition, in the context of a recent case (2015) of Judge Gorcya and 3 children aged 9-14 ordered into “juvie detention” for refusing to have lunch with their father then, at last check, attempts to get them for aftercare into some Reunification camp — the Detroit Free Press (now part of USA Today franchise) reporting said the Judge was hoping to get them into Warshak’s “Family Bridges” or one modeled on it — in Toronto, Canada!!, while Dr. Bailey was quoted in the context). I’m taking bets (just kidding) on how long Gorcya has been (if she is) an AFCC member and how much of that county’s system the association controls. Michigan is also long home, at least by organization name, to a batterers’ intervention coalition (BISC-MI). //LGH 12/22/2017.

I was just going to add a very short update (that comment, it seems, in March 2016), but instead added a section on renewed Parental Alienation discussions, and the socialist “re-education camps” in Viet Nam after South fell to the North, in 1975. Similar in other countries. Major quality and scope difference — but force is force, and at some levels, it’s also a form of psychological, personal violence. In my opinion. So, the original (written/published in 2011) post begins in maroon font and below a double-line after the following paragraphs and a few quotes:

Speaking of how to continue keeping “Parental Alienation” conversation going — and ordering services to undo it through the family courts — I recently noticed that a “Dr. Craig Childress” (Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.) is resurrecting parental alienation under a different theory; I have some comments on it over at Red Herring Alert (a wordpress blog). “Same old, same old” with new window dressing and tactics (Childress recommends pressuring providers who do NOT recommend IMMEDIATE, safety-for-the-child total separation from the alienating parent (i.e., “mom” typically) through their licensing board, if this could be categorized under some existing DSM-defined disorder.

You cannot really argue with self-referencing, self-congratulating circles of experts on this matter which is why I recommend a more interesting angle of approach: If they incorporate, find tax returns and corporate records; if they get contracts with the courts, or government grants to run “reunification camps” and similar therapy for parental alienation (in its old or new classifications), pay attention to the details!

The technique and ability to re-indoctrinate people in groups, as well as children, was also in common use in socialist countries; I believe the term used was “re-education camps,” referring to those in South Viet Nam after the fall of Saigon in 1975: Search “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps: A Brief History” (that’s supplemental reading, from a man’s father’s oral history — he lived through such camps — from “Choices” program at Brown; see website) or “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.”

The second link introduces and describes the various levels. I wonder, in the USA, why the country is so heavily invested in a class of professionals whose purpose seems to be behavioral change and keeping up-to-date with tactics and strategies for re-indoctrinating children, women and men into their proper social relationships with each other and particularly after one or more of the same has spoken out about some prior injustice, or sought to escape being subjected to abuse by a family member. These camps apparently went on from 1975 – 1986 until people still being held were allowed to emigrate to the US.

“Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.” Posted 4/17/2014 by “kubia”

Following the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vietnamese Communist government began to open hundreds of “re-education” camps throughout the country. Those camps, as Hanoi officially claimed, were places where individuals could “learn about the ways of the new government” through education and socially constructive labor.

In 1975, it was estimated that around 1 to 2.5 million people1, including former officers, religious leaders, intellectuals, merchants, employees of the old regime, and even some Communists, entered the camps in the hope that they could quickly reconcile with the new government and continued their peaceful life. However, their time in those camps did not last for ten days or two weeks as the government had claimed.

Re-education Camps Levels

The re-education camps were organized into five levels. The level-one camps which were called as study camps or day-study centers located mainly in major urban centers, often in public parks, and allowed attendees to return home each night. In those camps, some 500,000 people2 were instructed about socialism, new government policy in order to unlearn their old ways of thinking. The level-two camps had a similar purpose as the level-one, but attendees were not allowed to return home for three to six months. During the 1970s, at least 200,000 inmates entered more than three hundred level–two camps2.

The level-three re-education camps, known as the socialist-reform camps, could be found in almost every Southern Vietnam province containing at least 50,000 inmates2. Most of them were educated people and thus less susceptible to manipulation than most South Vietnamese in the level-one and two camps. Therefore, the inmates (or prisoners) in these camps had to suffer poorer living conditions, forced labor and daily communist indoctrination.

The last two types of camps were used to incarcerate more “dangerous” southern individuals – including writers, legislator teachers, supreme court judges, province chiefs – until the South was stable to permit their release. By separating members of certain social classes of the old regime, Hanoi wanted to prevent them from conducting joint resistances and forced them to conform to the new social norms. In 1987, at least 15,000 “dangerous” persons were still incarcerated level-four and level-five camps2.

Camp Conditions and Deaths

In most of the re-education camps, living conditions were inhumane. Prisoners were treated with little food, poor sanitation, and no medical care3. They were also assigned to do hard and risky work such as clearing the jungle, constructing barracks, digging wells, cutting trees and even mine field sweeping without necessary working equipments.

Although those hard work required a lot of energy, their provided food portions were extremely small. As a prisoner recall, the experience of hunger dominated every man in his camp. Food was the only thing they talked about. Even when they were quiet, food still haunted their thoughts, their sleep and their dreams. Worse still, various diseases such as malaria, beriberi and dysentery were widespread in some of the camps. As many prisoners were weakened by the lack of food, those diseases could now easily take away their lives.

Starvation diet, overwork, diseases and harshly punishment resulted in a high death rate of the prisoners. According to academic studies of American researchers, a total of 165,000 Vietnamese people died in those camps4.

The End of “Re-education” Period

Most of the re-education camps were operated until 1986 when Nguyen Van Linh became the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He began to close the harsher camps and reformed the others5. Two year later, Washington and Hanoi reached an agreement that Vietnam would free all former soldiers and officials of the old regime who were still held in re-education camps across the country and allowed them to emigrate to the United States under the Orderly Departure Program (ODP). As of August 1995, around 405,000 Vietnamese prisoners and their families were resettled in the U.S6.

– See more at: thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/..

The forced “Reunification Camps” (far less harsh, but still forced, and still designed to produce an attitude change) have their professionals willing to engage in these practices.

I think it must take a certain kind of mentality, if not personality aberrancy, to believe in this and what’s more preach about it and take in business to engage in it.

For some reason, those “Re-education camps” remind me of, though lesser in degree, the same idea as, for example, “overcoming barriers.” It’s still based on force — and who knows how many similar programs are operating around the country. As I write this, the Grazzini-Rucki runaway teens were reported (in 2016) to being re-indoctrinated to like their father (who they’d run away from as young teens), while the mother, until recently, was incarcerated for parental interference. See my more recent 2016 posts).

Here’s a sample. I see he’s from Pasadena, California (Los Angeles area). To see it in better formatting (the “copy” function sometimes removes all spaces between words!) click on link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394444/Dr-Craig-Childress-DSM-5-Diagnosis-of-Parental-Alienation-Processes#scribd.

C. A. CHILDRESS, Psy.D.LICENSED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, PSY 18857

547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398

Page 1 of 10

DSM-5 Diagnosis of “ParentalAlienation”

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

June 15, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, History of Family Court, Mandatory Mediation, Metaphors for Family Law, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids

Tagged with Access-Visitation, AFCC, BenjaminGarber PhD, Child Molestation, David Medoff PhD, Demosthenes LorandrosPhD, domestic violence, Douglas Darnell PhD, Due process, Family Bridges tm, Isolina Ricci, LSOTP=Licensed Sex Offender Treatment Provider, obfuscation, Overcoming Barriers (Mass Entity also reg in California), Parent Education promotion, PCANH, Peddling Reunification Programs, Peggie Ward PhD, Piled Higher and Deeper in NH, Pruetts, Reunification Camps, Richard Warshak PhD, Robin Walton Brown TX, Ron Haskins, Studying Humans, Supervised Visitation, Terr L. Bauer LCSW LSOTP, The Hon Debra Lehrmann TX Supreme Court AFCC, The Hon Sean Dunphy MA judge, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.

CA SB 557 — Just say “NO!” or at least “Whoa!! (Show me the money!)” to Scandalous San Diego’s One Stop Justice Shop Pyramid Scheme. [[First Publ. May, 2011, Format Fixes March, 2017; Some Updates/Broken Link Fix, March 31, 2023].

with 3 comments

Post Title:

CA SB 557 — Just say “NO!” or at least “Whoa!! (Show me the money!)” to Scandalous San Diego’s One Stop Justice Shop Pyramid Scheme. [[First Publ. May, 2011, Format Fixes March, 2017; Some Updates/Broken Link Fix, March 31, 2023]. Shortlink with case-sensitive ending: http://wp.me/psBXH-HG. [click on either title or that link]

About 8,800 words with 2023 updates including to add the Dates Published/Updated to the title, replace a certain missing image, and in general make it more readable.

Versions: First published [Spring] 2011. Format updates (for quoting in a 2017 post) 3/30/2017. I cited again on Twitter and for this purpose replaced or eliminated a few broken links and one missing image with a version from The WayBack Machine on 3/31/2023.

FYI, my short-links now (2023 and for the last several years) have had 3 final characters. Shortlinks with only two ending characters represents much earlier posts on this blog. WordPress generates them., not me //LGH

A Family Justice Center (like a Family Physician?) — what a warm and fuzzy concept!

The ‘California Initiative” (per graphic) has a motto: “Bringing Hope to Hurting Families Across California.”

Hope of what? I didn’t ask for hope. I would’ve settled long ago for simple enforcement of existing court orders!

How warm and fuzzy is it? Was the public asked whether it’s a good idea, before, during, or after its conception, the labor ($3 million grants, etc.) to bring it forth, and the subsequent cloning actions?

Let’s consider (and then, I’ll get to the colors and graphics part, don’t worry….)

First, the “Family Justice Center Initiative” in San Diego (#1 site) is the project and brainchild of a City Attorney whose handling of the City’s pension funds (see below) has been labeled “negligent” and eventually brought the FBI and US Attorney’s Office investigating the corruption. In Alameda County (#2) it is a District Attorney Dubious Doing (see my post) and was pushed by this person to get a founding grant, and promptly install a crony, that, improperly.
Second, the concept of combining “services” and “collaborating” is questionable — I question it, for one. It has a dark side.

My post is long, but don’t forget to read THIS site (hover, I’ve copied text of Obstacle #4 (relevant here) onto the URL description) from Sonoma County, where another proposed Justice Center is to start (or has already, perhaps). “Mapping the Obstacles to Criminal Justice for Women” :

The six principle obstacles to protection and justice for women in the criminal justice system are:

1. A near absolute police and prosecutorial discretion to pick and choose which crimes the system will treat seriously and which they will ignore, and to do so with impunity. The exercise of this enormous discretionary power is virtually outside the rule of law.

2. An intractable, deep-rooted sexism and racism that remains institutionalized throughout the criminal justice system. This sexism and racism, combined with the system’s absolute discretion to ignore crimes whenever they wish, means that violence against women cases are the cases most often ignored, dumped, or given short shrift.

3. Society’s failure to answer the question of who polices the police, and the failure to even ask the question in regard to district attorneys, means the criminal justice system is not only legally unaccountable when dumping cases of violence against women. In addition, there is also virtually no other viable social mechanism by which the public can make the system implement its powers on behalf of victims of violence against women.

4. The repression of effective victim advocacy due to increasing criminal justice system controls over the funding and functioning of rape and domestic violence centers.

5. The invisibility of denial of protection and justice to victims of violence against women to the public, often to the victims themselves, and even to the officer’s supervisors who review the officers reports.

6. The failure to target the district attorneys.** Advocacy groups, social justice groups, and civil rights groups that aim to correct abuses in the criminal justice system usually do so by focusing on the police, while completely ignoring the District Attorney. This is monumental and puzzling mistake, since the District Attorney is the most powerful law enforcement official in your community.

(**for more on DA’s role, see this site)

[Below]. Does its pretty purple-bordered website with vivid graphics look nice? Sure.

See? http://www.familyjusticeinitiative.com/

[Images could be looked up and replaced I’m not going to do that just now, trying to get some current posts at — LGH/2017] [Six years later, I decided to look it up again:…] (Former Image html pointed to: “www.FamilyJusticeCenter.org/…/fjcinstitutessmall.jpg”)

(Updating Broken Link, MARCH 31, 2023; I am still referring to this and nearby posts on Twitter):

I took the above link to Archive.org (the Internet Archives or “Wayback Machine” and among the options to search, one of them showed how (seldom) it had been crawled (by the archives “bots”) — only twice. Once in February, 2011, I then posted as above, May, 2011, and again later in that year…). If possible, I’m going to insert two images showing (though in far less focus, they are fuzzy snapshots in Archive.org) what I was looking at then, with this quote from the main text on the page: Text First, then Image Upload, if I can pull it off on a different device now…]

FamilyJusticeInitiative.com ℅ WayBackMachine (Archive.org) — saved 15 times between Feb. 2, 2011 and August 1, 2015. For 3/31/2023 reference to post http://wp.me/psBXH-HG (May, 2011) In two images..

(The main content on this page reads (copied from Internet Archive page, as shown above. I added some check marks, a link to this post and other markings, but this text is a select, copy & paste action. //LGH 3/31/2023)

This exciting new Initiative has been funded by the Blue Shield of California Foundation and involves the development of six “learning laboratories” across the state where multi-agency, co-located service delivery models will be supported and expanded. Three regional training sites have been created to assist expanding and developing multi-agency service delivery models around the state including the six new sites.

The three regional training centers are: Alameda County Family Justice Center; Anaheim Family Justice Center; and the San Diego Family Justice Center. The six communities selected to participate as “learning laboratories” are: Shasta, Sonoma, South Bay (San Diego), Stanislaus, Valley CARES, and West Contra Costa County. The Initiative includes a learning collaborative model with teams from each selected site, grant funding for each selected site in the second year of the initiative, and technical assistance and strategic planning support for two years for the participating sites.

The California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, Blue Shield of California Foundation, and the Family Violence Prevention Fund are represented on the Initiative’s Advisory Committee along with representatives from each of the regional training sites.

For more information, please call (619) 236-9402.

Do (and should?) public stamps of approval from:

a former San Diego City Attorney, a current Alameda County District Attorney, Verizon, Blue Shield of California Foundation, at least one prominent Domestic Violence Professional** — and in 2003, even former U.S. President George Bush

earn OUR stamps of approval? Because we will be helping to pay for it….

(And, should we encourage our local CA legislator to vote “YES” on SB 557, which seeks to legitimize and expand these, naming specific cities)

**Domestic Violence Professionals should be clearly distinguished from Domestic Violence Victims, although in some cases, the latter have become the former. The way you can tell them apart – DV Professionals generally have a paycheck, DV victims are often losing theirs.

The Professionals profess things at conferences, and sometimes even interview each other on TV. The steady stream of DV victims, new, and ongoing, provide ample material to practice on (practice makes expert, right?) and talk about. …

Another way you can find domestic violence professionals, is going to TAGGS.hhs.gov and looking up the CFDA category relating to “Family Violence Prevention and Services” which often has the word “discretionary” attached. Or, it goes to a [statewide] coalition. If you [i.e., your organization that you run, founded, and work or volunteer for] get a grant or two, you are viewed as (and may be, but the grant sure helps lend authority) a professional. So Here’s a TAGGS.hhs.gov summary (from 2005 forward, only, nationwide) of two types of violence prevention grants:

Showing: 1 – 2 of 2 CFDA Programs

[CFDA#] 93591 [CFDA#] 93592

CFDA Prog. No. OPDIV Popular Title Number of Awards Number of Award Actions CAN Award Amount

93.591 ACF Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Grant to State Domestic Violence Coalitions 219 271 $50,573,527

93.592 ACF Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants 324 624 $165,460,776

Page Total 543 895 $216,034,303

Report Total 543 895 $216,034,303

CFDA Prog. No.	OPDIV	Popular Title	Number of Awards	Number of Award Actions	CAN Award Amount
93.591	ACF	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Grant to State Domestic Violence Coalitions	219	271	$50,573,527
93.592	ACF	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	324	624	$165,460,776
Page Total	543	895	$216,034,303
Report Total	543	895	$216,034,303

Ellen Pence compatriot Denise Gamache, for example, shows up on a similar search, with more fields. Last time I looked at this, the amount was only $1.78 million,

I see that there has been great success in stopping violence (either that, or failures) hence, more funding to prevent it in the same manner — conferencing, and figuring out best practices, and of course collaborating and training. See? Also note this is a “Social Services” (not legal, criminal) activity, preventing violence.

[UPDATE: NOTE re: this chart: The report could be re-run at TAGGS.HHS.Gov (Advanced Search) and should be; it would generate a url link to share. I have recently (2017) blogged on these CFDA Numbers and this topic for further information). I see the column headings do not match the contents. A re-run would present an easier to read format; fixing it from this stage is not a good use of my blogging time… I also learned that some of these categories were, at least by year 2010, written into the FVSPA Act, which is under CAPTA (Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act). See my later posts for more info. //LGH]

At some point the “MPDI” (Minnesota Program Development, Inc.) I see below was renamed “Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs” or whatever TheDuluthModel.org says its current name is.

Program Office

Grantee Name

City

Recovery Act Indicator

State

Award Number

Award Title

CFDA Number

Award Activity Type

Principal Investigator

Sum of Actions

Award Abstract

FYSB	MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC **	DULUTH	NON	MN	90EV0375	FOUR SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE	93592	SOCIAL SERVICES	DENISE GAMACHE	$ 2,407,624	View Abstract
FYSB	MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC	DULUTH		MN	90EV0248	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	93592	SOCIAL SERVICES	DENISE GAMACHE	$ 2,686,366	Abstract Not Available
FYSB	MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC	DULUTH		MN	90EV0375	FOUR SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE	93592	SOCIAL SERVICES	DENISE GAMACHE	$ 3,536,432	View Abstract

OCS	MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC	DULUTH		MN	90EV0104	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES – SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTER	93592	SOCIAL SERVICES	DENISE GAMACHE	$ 3,925,981	Abstract Not Available
OCS	MINNESOTA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, INC	DULUTH		MN	90EV0248	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	93592	SOCIAL SERVICES	DENISE GAMACHE	$ 3,957,873	Abstract Not Available

The “93591” category is grants to “domestic violence coalitions” which must be how everyone gets their terminologies, communication lines, and practices nice and coordinated. Meanwhile, others who have worked at street level (but had less backing), take a different point of view than “Constant Collaborations.”

Here’s a San Antonio, TEX Family Justice Center (2010) Conference List of materials one can purchase. After all, these are professionals… I missed that conference — somehow are not on their email alert “cc’s” and at the time, didn’t have airfare, either….

As to BUSH:

I think I made my feelings known about former President Bush, and his concept of “Family” in my last post. The actual “Families” in this case are the associations and collaboratives of people who get the funding.

If Bush had required that all — without exception — STOP VAWA grantees inform ALL — without exception — female clients with children where the perpetrator of violence against them was the father of the FATHERHOOD.GOV infrastructure, and that this was actually enabled by the federal office of child support enforcement (OCSE) — then it would’ve been OK. There’s no question that fatherhood groups know about VAWA, they are constantly complaining about it.

If all grantees would’ve been required to alert women of pro-VAWA and anti-feminist (feminists are destroying the country, of course) “family” courts lay ahead between them and freedom, that’d be one thing. But apparently, the two sets of untraceable grant expenditures go along side by side quite nicely, watching the genders war it out themselves on-line, in the streets, and lobbying legislators to change the law sin their favor.

Well, now, let me think a moment on that last one…. in fact, let me ask Josie Clark:

Statement of City Attorney Casey Gwinn re: Family Justice Center Lawsuit:

September 28, 2004

“The Clark lawsuit deals with personnel matters, involving employees who are on my staff. The courtroom is now the appropriate place to respond to these allegations where I believe my office and staff members will be cleared. Therefore, I decline to be interviewed. I am referring your call to our outside legal counsel, Kathryn Bernert, who is handling the case. Here is her phone number which was provided to you last Friday morning by Maria Velasquez.”

Statement by Kathryn Bernert
Outside Legal Counsel for the City of San Diego
Partner with Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP
Sept. 28, 2004

?? What Lawsuit?

This Family Justice Center isn’t even that old….

Lawsuit Alleges Cover-up at Family Justice Center

September 29, 2004

Clark is suing the city and Gwinn, not for what happened to her co-worker, but for the way she said she was used to cover it up. Official records show that police responded to numerous calls at the victim’s former home on Armacost Road. Several workers at the City Attorney’s Office and the Family Justice Center told 10News that the victim came to work with broken bones, bruises, cuts and black eyes.

“If Casey Gwinn didn’t notice that on one of his own — seeing her every single day — then what is he doing at the Family Justice Center?” questioned Clark. According to the lawsuit, a long history of severe abuse against a Family Justice Center employee was going to be made public when the woman threatened to kill her husband and was arrested. Clark was then assigned a special project to quietly help the woman.”(Gwinn) said that my job was going to get her into rehab, because that was the only way she was gong to be able to keep her job,” Clark said. The assignment came from Gwinn, (pictured, [below]), 10News reported.

[Missing image/broken link deleted]

Clark took on the new responsibilities that lasted more than two months. She said the woman called her seeking help day and night — once every half hour at work and at home at 3 a.m. and 5 a.m. Late last year, Clark said the woman’s estranged husband threatened her life.

“Her husband basically said I was going to regret it for interfering and said he was going to come after me and that he was going to kill us both,” Clark told 10News. After her arrest [and obviously, release], Gwinn had the woman working as a receptionist on the 16th floor near his office. But when the death threat allegations against Clark surfaces, the woman was moved to the 11th floor, just 30 feet from Clark.

“She still comes to the office beaten up, and Casey Gwinn has done absolutly nothing to help her,” Clark said. The lawsuit itself, the plaintiff’s attorneys say, is about how Clark was forced into the mess and then discriminated against after she had nervous breakdowns and clinical depression. Conditions, they say, came directly from her “special project” to basically act as a drug, alcohol and abuse counselor for a co-worker.

If what she says is true (and there seems some backup corroboration), then why didn’t such a highly connected individual so concerned about Domestic Violence as Casey Gwinn is, talk with some of the District Attorneys — or the abused woman — about getting some criminal prosecution of her husband’s behaviors, rather than wait til the situation got to death threats, and then watch his own employee be arrested for someone driven to threaten back to get free from ongoing broken bones and beatings? I mean — is this who you want spearheading nationwide, nay, global, justice centers? Charity begins at home, brother….

Here’s the self-report of how great this justice center is:

At least they acknowledge it’s a personal narrative: ”

Acknowledgements

This story focuses on the evolution of the criminal justice system’s response to domestic violence in San Diego. It does not develop the entire history of the battered women’s movement in San Diego. We should also note that “The San Diego Story” in this book was written primarily from the recollections of Ashley Walker, Casey Gwinn, and Gael Strack. Many others in San Diego County have played powerful roles and would clearly highlight other aspects of San Diego’s criminal justice system journey based on their own experience.

I have a little more background on this than some, including how the justice center followed Mr. Gwinn from his role as City Attorney, out to an exterior location (I think originally at the Y). You can also see here, Task Forces, a Council and some heavy funders who are thinking in terms of Collaboration that did not come right from within San Diego City Attorney’s Office. (Just for a little background):

Philanthropists and funders like Joan Kroc (wife of Ray Kroc, the Founder of McDonalds) also played a powerful role. They encouraged members of the domestic violence, child abuse and substance community to work together. As a substantial funder of these programs, in 1990, Joan Kroc made collaboration a part of her granting process.{{i.e., you want our money? You will collaborate!}} She paid all expenses for twenty community activists in these fields to spend a week at the family program at Hazelton in Center City Minnesota. She also held special fully-funded trainings at her ranch at Santa Ynez Valley to encourage collaboration.

During this same time, Dr. David Chadwick, a pediatrician, at Children’s Hospital, also dedicated major resources by creating the Family Violence Program, under the leadership of a social worker named Sandy Miller. Dr. Chadwick too had a strong vision for focusing on the co-occurrence of child abuse and domestic violence. Sandy Miller developed a close partnership with Deputy City Attorney Casey Gwinn and even housed a portion of her staff in the City Attorney’s Office in the early 1990’s.

Pause. Because later on, I have a post from the succeeding City Attorney, Mike Aguirre, who had to clean up a lot of the accounting (over-billing) from Mr. Gwinn’s office, and wrote an interim report in the practice of over-billing (for work that did not happen) as part of the “SLA” (Service Level Agreements) and “MOU” (Memo of Understanding). This July 28 2006 this report on “IMPROPER BILLING PRACTICES BY THE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICEmentions the Justice Center a few times. For example, ”

Gwinn ran unopposed for City Attorney in 1996 and 2000. Prior to assuming office in 1996, Gwinn was allowed to put his leadership team in place and begin making policy. It is around this time that billing to SLAs was modified (Exhibit 5), and as time went on the program was expanded to increase staff and services.

In 7-21-06 phone contact was made with Investigator Brendan McClory at the Family Justice Center. The following is a summary from a statement taken from McClory:

During 2002 – 2004 McClory worked for the City Attorney’s Office Civil Division. He was assigned to bill 60 hours per pay period to MWWD due to the fact that he was assigned to Kelly Salt, Ted Bromfield, and Tom Zeleny. McClory noted that he was directed to bill 60 hours to the enterprise Department even though in actuality he only worked on average 10 hours per pay period for these individuals. The vast majority of his time was working for Trial Unit attorneys. He noted that he advised Robert Abel that this was the case, and Abel responded that he should bill the hours anyways per office policy.

In 2004, soon after Aguirre took office, this policy changed and McClory was directed to only bill for hours worked

or, ….

Maria Velasquez

On 7-28-06 personal contact was made with City Attorney Director of Communications Maria Velasquez at the Offices of the City Attorney. The following is a summary from a statement taken from Velasquez:

Velasquez was hired by the City Attorney’s Office as Casey Gwinn’s Press Secretary in May of 2001. She was assigned to handle community and media relations for the Office. Her daily responsibility was to handle all calls from community members and press regarding the Civil and Criminal Divisions. She was responsible for coordinating and responding to community events. In 2004 she worked almost exclusively on developing the Family Justice Center by educating the public, attending community functions, and media events. She billed all her time to the City Attorney’s general fund.

These key steps helped lay the groundwork for the Family Justice Center and for the close working relationship between the Center for Child Protection, the local child advocacy center (now the Chadwick Center), and the domestic violence community. [sic]

The Domestic Violence Council was created in the November, 1991. A number of key events occurred in those early years.

In 1992, the Council became part of the Mayor’s Office under the leadership of Mayor Maureen O’Connor

In 1994, the Council was asked to leave the Mayor’s Office by Mayor Susan Golding and soon re-established itself as a private, non-profit organization housed in the San Diego City Attorney’s Office

In 1996, the Council suspended its non-profit status, electing to return to a grassroots approach consistent with its beginning in 1987…[[Continued below next comments..]]

[[March 2023 interjection/commentary: “whatever that grassroots approach means.” Status is one thing (entity, or not. Part of local government or not). “Approach” is not relevant in comparing status (a) to status (b). The description above (from what I can see) doesn’t reference “1987” beginnings, but it DOES 990 funding by McDonalds/Kroc family wealth, and a 1990 conference OUT OF STATE (in Hazelton, MN) to rehearse the “let’s combine three causes” concept.

Between the lines, it might mean that the State of California suspended it, i.e., SOS/FTB suspended for failing to file. I thin, it would take more than three years too get IRS-suspended… Key concept here (I’m speaking in 2023): nonprofits housed in public offices and run by public officials. Reminds me in several ways of how AFCC had operated for years… “under cover” and in and out of entity integrity… That’s why it’s so essential, regardless of what any thing (or, non-entity) CALLS itself: Council, commission, initiative, institute, etc., to find and identify the legitimacy (if as a nonprofit, from its filings, as part of some government operations, from relevant government reports, too). The concept of “Domestic Violence Coordinating Council (fashionable later?) seems related. Those “Coordinating Councils” forms of centralized control of programs which, ultimately, will impact people’s personal safety and ultimately, at most points, will be public-funded one way or another.]]

Casey Gwinn led the Council until 1999 and hosted the Council out of the City Attorney’s Office. His secretary, Jean Emmons, provided the administrative support to the Council and handled all mailings, meeting notices, and coordination of all committee meetings. The Council did hire an Executive Director, Denise Frey, for some of the early years of its development. Denise worked at the City Attorney’s Office and played a very significant role in helping to organize the committees, the structure, and the advocacy agenda of the Council.

In 1999, Assistant City Attorney Gael Strack became the President and Gael’s tenure for two years played a critical role in the early planning stages of the Family Justice Center. The entire Domestic Violence Council and all member agencies endorsed the vision for a “one stop shop” Center and much of the focus of the Council in 2000, 2001, and 2002 was on the development and opening of the Center. Subsequent Council Presidents, Verna Griffin Tabor and Diane McGrogan, made the Family Justice Center a high priority during their tenures.

There are more than two serious red flags in this Family Justice Center Alliance (starting in San Diego) concept. I’d say one indicator that the guy didn’t help someone in his employee is a huge one. The second one, Alameda County, another author believes seriously exaggerates their “people served” figures (see my “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys” post), and I would have to tend to agree, as I am local to the area and courts. Moreover, these nonprofit 990s need to be scrutinized better in ALL the little reproduced family justice centers which are taking, for example, public (government) employees, forming nonprofits and then where, exactly is the funding coming from and going to?

Fiscal (dishonesty) in San Diego was not limited to the Water and Sewer Departments, but also the Pension, which (among other reasons) is why I sarcastically refer to this collaborative as “Casey Gwinn’s Retirement Plan.” (Someone has to do it!) His city attorney’s salary was $175K (it says below) — like a CA judge. His “measly” pension, only $79K (a great perspective from which to understand domestic violence issues). He’s canvassing all over for this model and so are like-minded individuals, as we have seen.

My question is, are they like-minded in (1) failing to actually provide service to victims; (2) overbilling (3) over-reporting the impact of the services provided?

NEGLIGENCE IN CITY PENSION FUND SCANDAL REPORTED :

THE KROLL REPORT
Ex-City Attorney Gwinn called ‘negligent’ in pension fund mess

By Mark Sauer
STAFF WRITER

August 16, 2006

Past and present city officials cited last week for acts ranging from malfeasance to mischief in the long-awaited report by Kroll Inc. on the city’s pension mess are ranked according to culpability.

NADIA BOROWSKI SCOTT / Union-Tribune file photo

Then-City Attorney Casey Gwinn (right), with former Mayor Dick Murphy at his side, was criticized in last week’s Kroll report on city finances.

In the top tier are those who acted with “wrongful intent,” a violation of civil law, in hiding from bond investors the pension fund’s severe underfunding and the city’s twisted sewer-rate structure.

One step down are those found to be “negligent” in carrying out their responsibilities. It is in this section that former City Attorney Casey Gwinn appears.

The report is blunt: “The City Attorney’s Office failed the City.”

In singling out Gwinn, the report said, “As the top official in the City Attorney’s Office – which certified to the accuracy of incomplete and misleading disclosures – City Attorney Casey Gwinn negligently performed his disclosure responsibilities to the City, and failed to supervise other attorneys” under him.

Among the lapses by Gwinn’s office cited in the Kroll report:

Its certification of the city’s financial disclosures to the “investing public” without independently verifying the accuracy of the information.

It kept quiet about the city’s potential obligation of up to $370 million for breaking “grant and loan covenants” while in violation of the federal Clean Water Act. (“the city” is supported in part by taxes from wages of its residents, right)

Gwinn’s deputies failed to identify “the central illegality” of underfunding the city’s pension plan as officials made those decisions.

Like it seems he also “failed to identify” that an employee showing up with bruises and broken bones and her husband calling her constantly at work is a domestic violence victim . . . . . .

It also chastised Gwinn’s office for years of falsifying billing records to the city’s water and wastewater departments for legal work.

Kroll, a risk-management firm based in New York, spent 18 months investigating the city’s financial practices. Kroll was paid $20.3 million for the report.

Who pays for that? This is starting to add up — $370 million risk, $20.3 to audit something that shows up as needing an audit….

The company’s investigators didn’t get to query Gwinn about his actions during his 1996-2004 tenure as city attorney. He was among 53 city officials and employees who refused to be questioned.

“But he was not known around town as a good attorney. He didn’t want to get bogged down in pensions and water rates and all that confusing stuff,” Stutz said. “It was, ‘Let me deal with guys who smack their wives and I can get on TV.’ ”

The description does seem to hold. Some people just love the limelight….

After term limits forced Gwinn out as city attorney, he has devoted himself to his anti-domestic-violence cause.

I have been trying to tell us — this is a personal retirement project of what now looks like a negligent and dishonest City Attorney, who became City Attorney running unopposed, partly because his predecessor (John Witt, who seemed to favor him) delayed announcing his departure so long it was hard to prepare a campaign against him. I”m remembering how it seems Alameda County’s Tom Orloff, similarly, handed over the reigns to Nancy O’Malley by retiring early and assigning her as interim D.A., thereby skirting the open election process neatly. She then stacked the decks (per “Steve White” of indymedia report) to make sure another crony, Nadia Davis-Lockyer, Esq., got the plum job as Executive Director of THEIR Family Justice Center. The question comes up — who is in “The Family” here ???

In addition to being a trustee for the San Diego Family Justice Center, Gwinn works part time on special projects for District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, who stands behind him.

“I hired Casey because he is a well-known and respected expert in domestic-violence matters,” Dumanis said. “He’s doing a great job in that area for us.”

She said Gwinn, who began working for her in December 2004, originally was a manager for the victim-restitution and crime-prevention programs, but now is a contracted employee.

“He works on special projects, mainly the regionalization of family-justice centers,” Dumanis said. The main Family Justice Center in downtown San Diego is a one-stop facility for domestic-violence victims, with police officers, social workers and medical personnel available.

Well, it’s in on the VAWA grant streams, so there’s some potential financial reward in the model. It’s an identified VAWA “purpose model.”

There’s more, but probably too much for one post. Casey Gwinn’s negligence as City Attorney was not limited to water and sewer matters, but also — well this NYT article says it much better, and SHOULD be read if we want to begin to understand family justice centers, their originators and promoters, and get a sense of how they’ve handled previous, smaller, responsibilities — like heading up the City Attorney Department and reporting honestly what was going on in it:

Sept. 7, 2004 NYT article (notice, around time of Josie Clark lawsuit)

Sunny San Diego Finds Itself Being Viewed as a Kind of Enron-by-the-Sea

By JOHN M. BRODER

Published: September 7, 2004

Correction Appended

SAN DIEGO, Sept. 1 – In the summer of 2003, Diann Shipione, an investment adviser at UBS Financial Services in San Diego and a trustee of the city’s employee retirement system, was scanning a prospectus on a proposed San Diego sewer bond issue when alarm bells began to ring in her head.

Important financial information was missing. The prospectus did not mention that the city had for years been shortchanging its public pension fund, leading to an unfunded liability of more than $1.15 billion, or that the city owed nearly $1 billion more in health care benefits to retirees and did not have the money. And it implied that the pension fund’s actuary had approved the underfunding when Ms. Shipione knew that he had not.

In a letter to city officials, and in a commentary in the local newspaper, Ms. Shipione blew the whistle.

“I had completely lost confidence in the city’s financial decision making,” she said in an interview on Wednesday. “I just couldn’t let this go forward.”

Jack Smith for The New York Times

Diann Shipione did not like the way San Diego was handling its employee pension system, and let the world know. Mike Aguirre calls the situation “a powder keg.”

Well, I”m suggesting (and blowing a whistle) on the thing that came OUT of this department, called the “Family Justice Center Initiative” and all things associated with it. Just because things are central, doesn’t mean they are honest. Moreover, would you buy a used car — or program — from someone who’s last time in office was marked by having the FBI and US Attorney’s office investigating your city’s finances? That’s why I’m posting a lot from this article:

And the Securities and Exchange Commission and the United States attorney’s office in San Diego opened investigations this year into possible fraud in the city’s financial statements and potential political corruption. Subpoenas were served on a number of city offices and several people confirmed that they had been interviewed by the F.B.I. in connection with the inquiry.

“This is a powder keg, a major, major problem,” said Mike Aguirre, a securities lawyer and former financial fraud investigator for the United States Senate and the Justice Department who is running for San Diego city attorney.

Mr. Aguirre said that the city’s inability to produce a credible financial statement made it impossible to know just how severe the crisis was. He said that a corporation that behaved like the City of San Diego would be delisted from the stock exchanges. He suggested that the best solution might be reorganization under Chapter 9 of the federal bankruptcy law to allow the city to rescind pension benefits.

Mr. Aguirre blamed San Diego’s laid-back civic culture in which a handful of influential businessmen, union leaders and political figures called the shots while issuing reassurances to the public that everything was on the up-and-up.

“The basic story is that San Diego has become a thoroughly corrupt community in which the power players cut the deals, you don’t ask any questions, and everybody gets what they want,” Mr. Aguirre said. “People don’t realize that one of the largest cities in the United States is on the verge of bankruptcy, and it’s on the verge because of a massive amount of local corruption that has resulted in the thorough mismanagement of city finances.”

I realize Aguirre also was running for City Attorney — however look at his background. He’s qualified to say this. And the more I look at it (and I am a California resident, domestic violence survivor and family law veteran, I have been looking a LONG time, locally not just nationally) — would you buy a bridge from these guys? Corruption cannot bring forth justice, and if these centers are multiplying and expanding, I have to ask, just WHAT is being disseminated in the model?

A GREAT measure of how honest a person (or organization) is — is its financial statements, and their accuracy. Particularly when it’s public money.

NOW is the time to say “HALT!” — and not when it’s too late. Stop, Look, & Listen.

Oct. 2004 article:

San Diego now ‘Enron by the Sea’

By John Ritter, USA TODAY

SAN DIEGO — This laid-back city seems to have it all — stunning beaches, best weather this side of Honolulu, a national image as a vacation playground and top convention destination.

Nearly a decade of fiscal shenanigans came to light when Diann Shipione, a pension board trustee, blew the whistle. But it took some doing. She wrote letters to the mayor, city officials and fellow trustees. She spoke up at City Council meetings. She wrote opinion columns in the San Diego Union-Tribune. [“Diann Shipione says her many warnings to the pension board were ignored.” photo by Robt Hanashiro, USA Today]

By Robert Hanashiro, USA TODAY

Funny how often it’s women noticing and blowing the whistle, and how often they are just not heard, til it becomes a crisis…

But the City Council and the trustees ignored her. At one point the pension board bought an ad in the Union-Tribune that scoffed, “Chicken Little Would Be Proud.”

Only in September 2003, when Shipione alerted a lawyer handling a municipal sewer bond sale to facts the city hadn’t disclosed, did Wall Street pull the plug. The bond issue was canceled. Soon the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FBI and the U.S. attorney were asking questions. In January, the city admitted errors and omissions in its financial statements.

“The city’s conservative image is completely false,” Shipione says. “It’s reckless, it spends wildly and lavishly, it saves nothing and it hides the truth.”

SPEAKING OF WHICH REGIONALIZATION EFFORTS: — from the FamilyJusticeCenter.com website on “The California Initiative.” This is about as much purple-framed plain text as you are going to get anywhere on the site, perhaps there just wasn’t a desire to really pull attention to this page. Read it, though!

The California Family Justice Initiative (CFJI) is funded by the Blue Shield of California Foundation under the leadership of the National Family Justice Center Alliance. {{headed by guess who…}} The Initiative aims to create shared learning, shared expertise, shared capacity building, shared on-line resources, and shared technology to achieve a statewide network of Centers using model protocols, best practices, and innovative strategies to meet the needs of women, children, men, and families exposed to trauma and abuse.

What has happened to the concept of “justice” here? However, one of the critical areas of need these populations still have, is understanding the FAMILY law system — about which little seems to be said here. OK, here comes that expansion — like it or not — and

CA SB 557 INTRODUCED BY Senator Kehoe
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Atkins and Fletcher)

FEBRUARY 17, 2011

An act to add and repeal Title 5.3 (commencing with Section 13750)
of Part 4 of the Penal Code, relating to family justice centers.

will certainly help this personal retirement plan of some key public figures. No wonder it’s catching on..

[Back to the FJC site….]

The CFJI consists of two 2-year phases. Phase I operated from March 2009-March 2011 and Phase II will operate from March 2011-March 2013.

You know why the “Crisis in the Courts” people aren’t paying attention to this and letting mothers know (nor do the justice centers, naturally, report on the Crisis in the Courts when women come on for restraining orders — which are certifiably insane, potentially lethal, … [Incomplete sentence in 2011, a dozen years later, I do not remember what the rest should’ve read, except to emphasize that these should’ve been reported on by the “Crisis in the Courts” people, several organizations of which came from California and were around when this model was being propagated. WITHOUT QUESTION they knew about it, and did not feature in either mailings, or websites.]

In Phase I of the Initiative, five communities were selected from across California to participate as “learning laboratory sites” where multi-agency, co-located service delivery models for victims of domestic violence were supported and expanded. The five founding centers from Phase I are: Shasta, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Los Angeles (San Fernando Valley), and West Contra Costa County. The Alameda County Family Justice Center, Anaheim Family Justice Center, and San Diego Family Justice Center served as Regional Training Centers, assisting sites in expanding and developing multi-agency service delivery models around the state.

I.e., if you weren’t in the loop, you just missed the roots spreading and establishing a presence in 3 California Counties — one north, one south, one Anaheim.

Phase II of the California Family Justice Center Initiative will maintain and expand a network of Centers across California.

Not if I have anything to do with this!

I suggest that they be forced — with supervised visitation monitors paid for from their last set of royalties or anywhere but a federal or foundation grants stream — to sit through classes from the “California Healthy Marriages Coalition” whether or not they have faith

(This $2.4 million/year grant from HHS was to establish a coalition of coalitions on the other side of the issue of DV _- i.e., it’s just a “family” matter, you guys should work it out…. stay (or get) married, marriage is good!).

Make everyone wanting to expand these centers take time (Get off a plane! Skip a conference!) and sit through a session of KIDS’ TURN SAN DIEGO at their own expense, and then publish narratives of it.

This (my proposed, hypothetical) meeting of the Family Justice Center Alliance staff with the Faith-based abstinence and marriage/fatherhood promoters should definitely be live and You-tubed, so we can see one trying to convert the other. OR, if they set up another mutually profitable “collaboration” we can catch them in the act and tweet it.

OR, have them hire Diann Shipione to audit Kids’ Turn books, too! There are a number of alternatives I can think of which might free up some public monies in these troubled times….

Where there’s a will, there’s a way.

Ongoing support to the five founding centers created during Phase I will be provided. Five additional California communities will be selected to receive technical assistance and planning support for expanding multi-agency, co-located service deliver models for victims of domestic violence.”

[Good grief, read the language….]

Here’s SB 557 as of now, and an AROUND THE CAPITOL BILL TRACK link to it:

Existing law provides for various services and programs to assist victims of crime, including grants to proposed and existing child sexual exploitation and child abuse victim counseling centers and prevention programs, and the establishment of a resource center to operate a statewide, toll-free information service consisting of legal information for crime victims and providers of services to crime victims.

This bill would authorize the cities of San Diego and Anaheim, and the counties of Alameda and Sonoma, until January 1, 2014, to establish a multiagency, multidisciplinary family justice center to assist victims of domestic violence, officer-involved domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, stalking, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, and human trafficking, to ensure that victims of abuse are able to access all needed services in one location and to enhance victim safety, increase offender accountability, and improve access to services for victims of crime, as provided. The bill would permit the family justice centers to be staffed by law enforcement, medical, social service, and child welfare personnel, among others.

Good grief — some of the hardest times women have is reporting to police officers or sherriffs, or DA’s offices, and getting a response. This is already documented in SONOMA COUNTY-based: “Women’s Justice Center.”

Increasing Women’s Numbers and Influence in Policing

Breaking and Entering the Thick Blue Line ~ Where is the Women’s Movement?

Law Enforcement Opportunities NOW!

More Sexism than Ever at Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department

The police and enforcement profession historically has been rough on women — in 2000s, and ongoing.

Sexual Harassment at
SRJC Police Academy

March 17, 2001

Mr. Robert Agrella, President
Santa Rosa Junior College
Santa Rosa, CA

Dear Mr. Robert Agrella,

We’re writing to express our concerns that months of unchecked sexual harassment at the SRJC Police Academy this past year resulted in the loss of five promising female cadets from the evening academy.

We are especially concerned that, according to a number of cadets, this harassment went on for months and that the director of the evening academy, Deputy Peter Hardy, repeatedly ignored or minimized cadets’ reports of the harassment. In fact, according to cadets, Director Hardy protected the perpetrator at the expense of the cadets, and allowed the perpetrator to graduate in December. The perpetrator is now eligible to become a police officer in California. The careers of the female cadets have been lost to the community.

Here’s some more from this public letter, although this is not my only concern about having “JUSTICE CENTERS” (which as we can see are nonprofit organizations, or foundations set up (ACFCJ) to channel $$ to nonprofit organizations) but sometimes staffed and working by public employees, as with Mr. Gwinn.

In fact, it could be said if anything, these centers might specifically have been designed to NOT allow the independence women need to protect themselves,

and later, their children, by demanding equal treatment by officers as well as in the family law systems (although, the family law system was set up for “wide discretion with judicial immunity” and nothing approaching equality. ). Read on:

Here are just some of the indicators of the problem:

The national average of female sworn officers on police forces is 14%. The percentage of sworn females among the sum of police in Sonoma County is less than half the national average.

In the last four years, at least ten female sworn officers have left the Santa Rosa Police Department, five of whom stated to us that they left because of the hostile work environment in that department against females. Santa Rosa Police Department has never had a female in any position of rank, not even a female sargent. As of August 4, 2000, Santa Rosa Police Department had only 13 sworn female officers (7%) out of a total of 173 sworn officers.

In the same time period, Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department has had at least 10 female deputies and corrections officers file sexual harassment complaints and lawsuits. As of August, 2000, the Sheriff’s Department had only 17 sworn female officers (7%) out of a total of 218 sworn officers.

Sebastopol Police Department has never had a female sworn officer until this year,

Sonoma State University Police two years ago paid off a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by a female officer who was sexually assaulted by one superior, and ordered by another to falsify a domestic violence report so that the report would favor the male suspect.

In addition to the gross injustice to the women in these situations, what’s equally disturbing is the intolerable cost to our communities. Two decades of research on women police is conclusive. Women officers exceed male officers on many of precisely the skills that are so sorely needed to correct chronic problems plaguing our police. The research shows that women officers have much lower rates of excessive use of force, they better handle rape and domestic violence, and they excel at de-escalating volatile situations.

Feel free to photocopy and distribute this information as long as you keep the credit and text intact.
Copyright © Marie De Santis,
Women’s Justice Center,
www.justicewomen.com
rdjustice@monitor.net

The bill would prohibit victims of crime from being denied services at a family justice center solely on the grounds of criminal history and would prohibit a criminal history search from being conducted during the client intake process.

The bill would require the family justice centers to submit a report to the Office of Privacy Protection for review and comment, and then submit the report to the Assembly Committee on Judiciary and the Senate Committee on Judiciary, no later than January 1, 2013, as specified. The bill would require each family justice center to maintain a formal training program with mandatory training for all staff members, volunteers, and agency professionals, as specified.

Training doesn’t ensure compliance. At what point in time can a litigant — any kind of litigant — actually read the laws, and codes of procedures, AS they exist, and expect elected or appointed city, county (or state) employees to simply follow them. We have to obey traffic signals or get fines, and have our licenses revoked or suspended if we can’t pay (see “SF Pre-Trial Diversion Program,” under some comments on “Ron Albers” recently, I posted on this one).

This bill is PASSING — fast: Yet who has really followed up on what the first two have actually been doing? Or looking at the books?

Remembering the comments form “Women’s Justice Center” of Sonoma County (here, and at top of post), which I feel are very close to reality (and this grandiose talk about helping hurting families is just sales talk….), let’s take a look at the personnel in the “California Family Justice Initiative” from the site. Notice the titles — who is whom (top left & bottom right are Blue Shield, California)…

[BROKEN LINK MISSING IMAGE SPACE DELETED 2023]

I have expressed my opinion on the “Family Violence Prevention Fund” plenty on this post (searchable on this post). They are a major player, and receive funding from very conservative big-players (Annie E. Casey, as I recall) and highlight “Fatherhood.”

A post in January 2011 (I think) quoted their preventing violence by encouraging fatherhood theory (whatever it was called). We have two Lts. [?] heading up two family justice centers, and two of the originators (Gwinn/Strack), both attorneys, on this project. CPEDV (Shabazz) would be on the CFDA 93591 grants stream (grants to domestic violence coalitions) and formerly I believe it was called the California Alliance (not partnership) Against Domestic Violence, which also shows up in the FVLC Executive Director’s background.

Sandra Ramos of “Strengthen Our Sisters” article

describes board ouster

“The bureaucracy had lost its heart“

This person started safe houses and advocacy in the 70s, watched it change, had some struggles with her own organization. I met her. I heard how there was a move to get her group out of the “Coalition” membership on a technicality, which affected grants they could get. Yet, at Battered Mothers Custody Conference 2011 (my first — and probably last — attendance, as it’s primarily DV professionals and Family Court Professionals marketing their wares to some very, very distressed mothers) (and they tell less than I do about the system…..) . . . ..

Sandra Ramos’ “StrenghtenOurSisters.org” image from a link on my May, 2011 post, http://wp.me/psBXH-HG. (Undated news article)

(In 2011, and left in 2017, I had only links. The links are still active, so in 2023 I am uploading the images. Probably didn’t know how to add images in 2011; I was and am a self-taught blogger in all aspects.. Second news article shows that Sandra created a spin-off organization after perceiving that the first one had “lost its heart”. Bergen County, FYI, is in Northern New Jersey.).

Goes with (near the bottom of) Post http://wp.me/psBXH-HG, that is a May 2011 expose protesting the rapid expansion of the Family Justice Center model (Case Gwinn/Gael Strack) but this group was present at a Battered Mothers Custody Conference the same (January)…//LGH 2023 update.

This woman (I believe it was her I spoke with) brought the women with her (being geographically within range) and sold nothing. http://www.rbrw.org/RBRWblog/?p=651. Their solutions are local and not forever trying to change the world at public expense — but really help real people (from what I can tell). The women had a strong spirit of unity. As you can see from this article, she also acknowledged the custody struggle, sexual abuse allegations issue and was involved in helping women deal with it. That is a FAMILY law issue….

(My personal statement):

SB 557 is a personal project of politically connected people from Enron-By-the-Bay [San Diego County is Southern California, the very southern tip] and a county with some of the highest homicide rates in the country (Oakland, Richmond) [Alameda County is in Northern California, San Francisco Bay Area]. I have suffered for years in this county** and experienced multiple problems with honesty among law enforcement. Never during the years of severe abuse in one of those cities did anyone inform me of laws or legal options to have the batterer arrested for assault & battery (it was my husband). Then when I became independent and “off the system” the real troubles began — probably for those reasons. Again, police were called to help at times, and finally, in what the California calls a felony — but family law calls a “dispute” — and law enforcement, I learned later, calls a “wobbler” — meaning, the D.A. exercised HIS option not to prosecute — my children were illegally and permanently removed from my custody (as so often happens) with no judge, anywhere — giving a legal OR factual basis for doing so. This was done knowing that the method of removal was itself an act of violence and blatant violation of about 3 types of codes (Educational, Family, Penal) at a time — and that was just the beginning.

It was done around the issue of child support (which pretty much eliminated child support from my kids). ALL of this happened with clear knowledge — and what sure seemed to me like complicit acceptance — by the county sheriffs, various police (not Alameda County) and eventually, the DA District Attorneys in two different counties, as initially I didn’t know which one had jurisdiction.

**(As the statement says, my case was in more than one county, but both were in the San Francisco Bay Area, generally. The Family Violence Prevention Fund (now, “Futures without Violence” .. the rebrand was just taking place in 2010 probably as I was writing this post…)

THIS INITIATIVE IS PASSING REAL SOON IF NO ONE PROTESTS — please get involved, and I ask for feedback, and help investigating the various nonprofit (form 990s) for the many justice center initiatives already involved. It’s time we got some answers why justice will not happen without more nonprofits.

[Update comment on that last. I think “without” should read “with.” Plenty of nonprofits around already, I believe was my point. Perhaps I meant “different kinds of nonprofits” but I believe in 2011 I had figured out that adding nonprofits (or justice centers) wasn’t going to help much…

Here’s a narrative from this SOSDV.org about a woman who, like the woman at Casey Gwinn’s office, felt she had to defend herself form an incident. It talks about how the evidence was handled. She is alive — but now in jail, per this. Can you imagine the situation?

We don’t need more law enforcement supervising or running “family justice centers.” We just need them to do their jobs. (The link broken now, 2023, but the statement remains true).

05/26/11 – Sen Appropriations: 9-0 (PASS)
05/10/11 – Sen Judiciary: 5-0 (PASS)
03/29/11 – Sen Public Safety: 6-0 (PASS)

To go back to the top of this post, Click on either link:

About 8,800 words with 2023 updates to add the Dates Published/Updated to the title, to replace a certain missing image, and in general make it more readable.

This under-reported phenomenon continues. Family Justice Centers continue to exist and to regionalize, and new ones still are being created. Therefore the HISTORY of some of the originals -— and believe me, this early post was only a taste of their origins and design problems —- is always appropriate.

I have much deeper write-ups (off-line) which might not hold the average person’s attention (drill downs of the many entities and name-changes). Unfortunately too many of these also incidentally (in header or footer) reveal my legal name, which I don’t really want publicized, given how “to-the-contrary” my blogging has been all these years. I also have specific personal safety issues (still….) as my Twitter account my indicate in its profile: I FLED California in (summer) 2018 for good reasons. As a senior. .. I’d love to take full credit for my own work under my own name, but until that time comes, a lot of revising (painfully long) would have to take place both off-line and on (too bad!) a very few images, perhaps, still even on this blog. //LGH 4/15/2023.

Today I spent nearly a half hour making some specific copy editing and a few formatting changes to clarify the opening passage by “Women’s Justice Center” (six bulleted points). The input device is behaving differently, and after about a half hour of repeated “Updates” (and times when “Update” button was de-activated), removing excess font codes from the html, I gave up. I did manage to correct the title tor dad, “Broken Link Fix, March 31, 2023” which had read “2017” as recently as last week. Perhaps this post should be parsed out and re-published (minus the extra formatting) again. File it under “What the Coercive Control” (Evan Stark, author) forgot (?) to mention”…

Kicking salesmanship up a notch: the nonprofit “Kids’ Turn” and my California Legislature (Sept. 2019 title update: Calif. Legislature 2001-2002 Session, A.B. 2263, 2002, C. Kehoe tries to legislate KT as a standard and order funds to study and expand it)

with 10 comments

Post Title: Kicking salesmanship up a notch: the nonprofit “Kids’ Turn” and my California Legislature (Sept. 2019 title update: Calif. Legislature 2001-2002 Session, A.B. 2263, 2002, C. Kehoe tries to legislate KT as a standard and order funds to study and expand it) (Shortlink url: https://wp.me/psBXH-G7, published May 19, 2011, this title update added Sept. 29, 2019, about 7,661 words. Original title as seen only in bold. I added explanatory phrase, and nowadays I add “date published” to the title where possible.//LGH.

From this post (tongue in cheek, my voice, after reading about it):

…Everybody who’s anybody in the family law fields (whether attorney, judge, or psychologist/family therapist, etc.) should take a turn at running Kids’ Turn.

From that bill, before amended to ask for generic help, not specifically admitting that what was meant was “our baby, Kids’ Turn”)…operates as a franchise sold only to nonprofits (not mentioned: started and run by, see previous quote):

Kids’ Turn is a private non-profit organization that provides workshops for children and their parents that are intended to teach skills to cope with the difficulty of divorce and separation….

Fees for workshops range from $75 to $600 (on a sliding scale). Kids Turn conducts programs in San Francisco, Marin, Alameda, and Contra Costa County. The organization has sold its curriculum and licensed affiliates located in Sonoma, Napa, San Diego, Shasta, and Yolo Counties (in addition to Dayton, Ohio and Hillsboro, Oregon. Although sold only to nonprofits, the program effectively operates as a franchise. Kids’ Turn currently is conducting its own study, in consultation with the California School of Professional Psychology. This bill would require the Judicial Council to duplicate, at least in part, the current study.

Among the objections raised, and possibly why (last I looked) it wasn’t passed SPECIFICALLY naming Kids’ Turn as the California (NB: Large state!) recommended parent education curriculum:

…According to the Judiciary Committee analysis, the author states that the bill is needed so that Kids’ Turn will have state approval as evidence of credibility and will allow courts to “recommend Kids’ Turn as a resource to the community.”

[[On the organization’s website, five-year strategy, this analysis continues]]

…Specifically targeted for consideration is: “Enhanced marketing strategies in order to increase the number of Kids’ Turn affiliates and sales of Kids’ Turn Curriculum.” This bill may create the appearance that a State study and Judicial Council recommendations are part of a marketing strategy..

In fact they are. The workaround was to delete specific references to the corporation name and limit the dollar amount for the study to $50,000, from the phrase amount “necessary.”

Author’s amendments: The author proposes amendments (LCR# 0216385), which (1) delete the specific reference to Kids’ Turn and, instead, study projects or programs that provide services to parents and children undergoing divorce, 2) to delete reference to program expansion; and 3) to delete the language requiring the Judicial Council to allocate the amount “necessary” to conduct the study, to limit the State’s obligation to $50,000. The third staff recommendation to authorize, but not require the study, was rejected by the author.

Shameless! I do not know what became of the bill; I was just discovering it at the time (and my second child was turning adult around the time I discovered it). The continued use of state government positions, websites, and affiliations (especially AFCC’s) continues in the second decade of the 21st century and as we are approaching the third decade, I expect unless someone develops the means and courage to stop it, will continue to do so.//LGH

BELOW THIS LINE: AS WRITTEN May 2011 (except as I may later return here to clean up formatting, which is seriously in trouble at this point, but for a snapshot in time, you can see the basic content is still here and was then/still is now, solid on the business model in play…//LGH 9/29/2019):

I was just casually searching on “Kids’ Turn Affiliates” and even I was surprised at how far proponents would go to push this judge-originated nonprofit.

To the California Legislature?

Yep. The original version was written specifically to this one organization that is probably something of a slush fund to start with.

Makes you wonder about some of our legislators. (posted below).

It was already mentioned 2001-2002 (at a minimum) in the Calif. Judicial Council’s Report to the Legislature on Access and Visitation Fundings, as a sub-grantee. In fact, looks like it was the first one that popped to their mind:

The following are some of the parent education programs funded by the grants that help promote and encourage healthy parent-and-child relationships.

Kids’ Turn (San Diego, Napa, and Shasta Counties): This is a nationally recognized educational program that offers workshops and counseling for families with separated or divorced parents. Kids’ Turn teaches family members the skills that can improve communication between children and parents and help parents understand their children’s experience during and after divorce.21

The San Francisco (founding org.) Kids’ Turn apparently gets some direct help from the City & County, and wants more:

We submitted our first grant to the Administrative Office (AOC) of the Court in November, 2011. This grant was submitted in a partnership with the Rally Project. If awarded, the AOC will fund low-income, noncustodial parents and their children to attend Kids’ Turn services.

6. The City and County of San Francisco initially reduced our 1011 grant award by 10%, but the amount was re-instated in September, 2010 raising our contract award to the original $50,000. This funding is for our very specialized, Nonviolent Family Skills Program for Juveniles.

If you’re actually still earning money, while in the custody process, the Sliding fee Scale does not seem to have an upper limit (?):

FEE TABLE

Pre-Tax Income Tuition with 1 Child 2 Children or More

0 — $14k $50 $60

$15k — $19k $65 $80

$20k — $24k $90 $120

$25k — $29k $175 $225

$30k — $39k $250 $300

$40k — $49k $325* $375*

$50k — $59k $450* $500*

$60k — $74k $625* $725*

$75k — $99k $750* $850*

$100k — $124k $900* $1000*

$125k — $250k $1075* $1175*

$251k — $500k $1400* $1550*

$500k+ $1700* $1900*

Pre-Tax Income	Tuition with 1 Child	2 Children or More
0 — $14k	$50	$60
$15k — $19k	$65	$80
$20k — $24k	$90	$120
$25k — $29k	$175	$225
$30k — $39k	$250	$300
$40k — $49k	$325*	$375*
$50k — $59k	$450*	$500*
$60k — $74k	$625*	$725*
$75k — $99k	$750*	$850*
$100k — $124k	$900*	$1000*
$125k — $250k	$1075*	$1175*
$251k — $500k	$1400*	$1550*
$500k+	$1700*	$1900*

For parents receiving child support (often the mother), this is counted in the “pre-tax” income to determine fees.

(I wonder if this includes child support that’s not being paid……)

Parents paying child support, however, can deduct that from the “pre-tax” income to determine fees….

WHO & WHAT IS KIDS’ TURN?

(well, see my recent post on this)…(or figure it out yourself):

What is “Kids Turn?” — it’s a nonprofit started by a family law judge in about 1987, with help later from some family law attorneys, one of who was called a Northern California “Super attorney.”

Kids’ Turn

THE HISTORY OF KIDS’ TURN

From 1987 to 1990, Judge Ina Levin Gyemant presided over the family law department of the domestic relations court, noting that while lawyers filed motions and parents sought orders regarding custody, visitation and other diputes,[sic] children and their needs were almost completely ignored. Mediation services were mandated for parents in California in 1980, but no educational program was available for children, who are often the people most vulnerable and confused during separation or divorce.

It’s perhaps a training ground on how to promote parental alienation and get paid for it.
It’s a debtor to the San Francisco Superior Court (figure that one out — because somehow, we found that the “SFTC” has a lien on this group).
It has tons of donors on its roster (many of them judges or attorneys), gets apparently some of California’s share of the Access/Visitation funding (which is $10 million per year, nationwide, and California, being so large, gets close to $1 million/year for this source of funding).
Foundations & Associations help it continue & expand:

This is the listing from the San Diego Kids’ Turn (only) website:

Foundations

2009

Linda Brandes Foundation CFLS
California Bar Foundation
Boys & Girls Foundation
Cuatrecasas Family Foundation

The Samuel I. & John Henry Fox Foundation at Union Bank

Sempra Energy

Lions Club of San Diego

Stensrud Foundation

JAMS Foundation

Lawyers Club- Fund for Justice

Leroy and Claire Hughes Family Fund

Mary and John Grant Foundation

American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers- National

American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers

2010

Ellen G. & Edward G. Wong Family Foundation

JAMS Foundation (This is a foundation of Mediators. Pushing Mediation is central to Family Law….)

Lawyers Club- Fund for Justice

Cuatrecasas Family Foundation

Price Charities

Qualcomm

Linda Brandes Foundation (This wealthy couple never had any children….)(See photo of her 67 yr old ex, “Charles Brandes” with new 42 yr old wife — and Bill Clinton in between.. . )

Carlsbad Charitable Foundation, an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation

Fieldstone Foundation

Wells Fargo Foundation

WD-40 Company

Comerica Bank

The Samuel I. & John Henry Fox Foundation at Union Bank

2011

Leichtag Foundation

Linda Brandes Foundation

HD Supply

CFLS **

Cuatrecasas Family Foundation

Stensrud Foundation

AAML- Southern California Chapter

{{** {{CFLS, 2011 donor: Why isn’t this ACRONYM (not found on the web) specified? It apparently stands for “{Association of} Certified Family Law Specialists,” such as Linda Pabst de Leon here, speaking at a CFLS seminar and listing herself as a Kids’ Turn Board of Director (& Event Committee 2006) and “Featured guest speaker at CFLS’ Spring Seminar, “Nov-DV Restraining Orders” (2005))} “CFLS” is not an organization (I think) but a Designation that individuals can reach: }}
{{At least 2 of the “Corporate Donors” listed on same page are the firms that a Kids Turn Board of Directors member works on… meaning, not that the project is so great, but that someone already at the firm managed to finaigle, or sell, a donation ….}}

San Diego Foundation, 2010:
Kids’ Turn San Diego, Expansion of Kids’ Turn Workshops into Carlsbad $20,000Kids’ Turn San Diego plans to bring no less than four, 4-week psycho-educational workshops into Carlsbad, serving 100-120 families who are divorcing or fighting over custody of their children. The workshops will show families how their conflict is negatively impacting their children and teach them to communicate more effectively, manage their anger, focus on their children and create a healthy two household environment for all involved. Furthermore, Kids’ Turn San Diego will help children make a successful adjustment to challenging family changes.
2008 Donations
The Southern California Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyer supports the following organizations: . . .
- Kids’ Turn – San Diego – This is the only program in San Diego County working for te whole family to achieve a child centered and healthy divorce. It provides a low cost solution for families experiencing the pain of divorce or separation no matter how great the conflict.
A former Pro Tem Judge, Attorney Alan Edmunds, promotes Kids Turn through a link, at “SanDiegoDivorceCenter.” (services provided by The Edmunds law Firm).

It showed up in the San Francisco list of nonprofit organizations providing services to the City and County of SF, as a vendor. From what I recall, for 3 years in a row the billing was around $45,000.

Report 1234a
Data As Of : 05/15/2011

City and County of San Francisco
Vendor Payment Summaries Website

Page 1 of 1

Search Results by Vendor, Department, Type of Goods and Services and Document

Payments

Vendor Names

Non
Profit

Departments

Types of Goods and Services

Documents

FY 2008-09

FY 2009-10

FY 2010-11

In
Process

Remaining Balance

KIDS’ TURN

x

CHILDREN; YOUTH & THEIR F

CITY GRANT PROGRAMS

DPCH1000014101

$0

$10,063

$937

$0

$0

DPCH1000014102

$0

$35,679

$3,321

$0

$0

DPCH1100003001

$0

$0

$34,926

$0

$9,574

DPCH1100003002

$0

$0

$5,500

$0

$0

Totals:

$0

$45,742

$44,684

$0

$9,574

Far more than, say, “Fathers and Families Coalition” which only got a pittance (recorded here, at least) under “child Support” department. Wonder what for, though:

Search Results by Vendor

Payments

Vendor Names

Non Profit

FY 2008-09

FY 2009-10

FY 2010-11

In
Process

Remaining Balance

FATHERS & FAMILIES COALITION

x

$470

$865

$740

$0

$0

Totals:

$470

$865

$740

$0

$0

It’s apparently a model judges and attorneys love, because a spinoff “Kids Turn” is in San Diego; in fact a group called “Kids First” (There are a number of “kids’ Firsts” around, but indeed there was one which claims to be modeled after Kids Turn). The beauty of these programs is that the curriculum/curricula is designed, perhaps ONCE (with maybe occasional updates) — and can be marketed endlessly to families going through divorce court who can’t agree on the custody of their children. Which is usually what brings them to divorce court to start with, so obviously the market is right.
Everybody who’s anybody in the family law fields (whether attorney, judge, or psychologist/family therapist, etc.) should take a turn at running Kids’ Turn. Some of these people did and at least one is a Super-Attorney. Some even go on to create look-alike programs for other client sectors, such as Dr. Delisle…. PLUS, you can work there, if you have a BA (recent job listing, $35-38K/year. (Can a person who survived divorce court and a custody battle apply? Because such people include those with BA’s who are probably hurting financially… Of course, you’d have to buy parental alienation theory, which this group promotes.…)

The Founder of Kids’ Turn San Diego in 1996, Dr. Delisle received the 2001 Peacemaker of the Year Award from the National Conflict Resolution Center. In 2005, She was honored by Channel 10 news for its Leadership Award. She was also recognized by the San Diego County Bar Association for the “Distinguished Organization Award”. In 2008, Dr. Delisle transferred responsibility for Kids’ Turn to new leadership

In the Spring of 2010, Ms. Kalemkiarian was Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of San Diego School of Law, teaching a full semester course in Family Law. From 1993 to 1996, she served as the Supervising Attorney of the Child Advocacy Clinic at the University of San Diego School of Law. An active community leader, she has served as the President of the Kids’ Turn San Diego Board for over ten years, and is a longtime Board Member of the Environmental health Coalition. (Ms. Kalemkiarian is also an AFCC presenter) As a leading voice for children in San Diego County, she oversaw the design and implementation of a new system of care for children’s mental health, as the Director of Project Heartbeat. She is a frequent author of opinion editorial pieces regarding public policy and children. … {{CHILDREN MUST BE SPEECHLESS & NEED LOTS OF INTERPRETERS}}Honors 2007-2010 San Diego Super Lawyers®

Alexandra M. Kwoka – Attorney at Law

Alexandra M. Kwoka has been practicing law since 1974, and Family Law for 20 years. She is not only certified as a Family Law Specialist but also holds a LLM/Masters in Tax Law….Association; Certified Family Law Specialists – San Diego & North County; founding member of the Collaborative Family Law Group of San Diego; SDCBA – Carmel Valley; Kids’ Turn – Board Member. She has published a number of articles and has been nominated and selected for a number of awards, including the Ten Top Attorneys in Family Law by the Daily Transcript, San Diego in 2006 and was listed as one of the top Family Law attorneys in San Diego Super Lawyers, 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Barbara is president of the board of directors of the Legal Marketing Association, Southern California Chapter. She is also a former member of the boards of directors of Kids Turn, San Diego, the San Diego Chapter of the Association of Legal Administrators and the Professional Women’s Roundtable. Barbara is a graduate of Coach University and has a BS in business Management with an emphasis in marketing

Ms. Milligan is a member of the San Diego County Bar Association, and is on the Board of Directors of the Foothills Bar Association. Ms. Milligan is also on the Board of Directors of Kids’ Turn, San Diego, a non-profit organization devoted to promoting the well-being of children who are experiencing the challenges of family separation….Ms. Milligan dedicates her practice to the area of Family Law. She is a Certified Family Law Specialist, certified by the California Board of Legal Specialization.

Specialties

Mr. Renkin has focused his practice in Family Law since 1991 and is a Certified Family Law Specialist. He has expertly handled all phases of Trials, Mediation, and Negotiation in areas including Marriage Dissolution, Property Division, Spousal Support, Child Support, Child Custody & Visitation, along with the complex issues of mental health and drug and alcohol dependency. High-asset and high-conflict cases have been settled both through negotiation and litigation. Mr. Renkin has the honor of acting as a Settlement Conference Judge Pro Tem for Family Courts. Member Board of Directors Kids Turn (Present) Fundraising for Hannah’s House and Kids’ Turn

Oh Yeah — Hannah’s House, Supervised visitation place, I remember. The founder was caught operating without a license., there were unsanitary situations, and the owner is having to pay back contracts…

Hannah’s House faces trouble

San Diego Area Licensed Psychologist / Marriage Family Therapist Dr. Simon lists this among his professional associations:

Professional AffiliationsMember, American Psychological Association Member, American Psi-Law Society Member, California Psychological Association Member, Ethics Committee of the California Psychological Association Editorial Board, Journal of Child Custody Member, Collaborative Family Law Group of San Diego,Board of Directors, Kid’s Turn San Diego Founding Member, San Diego Family Law Council for ChildrenMember, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (“AFCC”)Member, Program Committee, Association of Family & Conciliation Courts Member, Awards Committee, Association of Family & Conciliation Courts Member, International Association of Collaborative Professionals Associate Member, San Diego County Bar Association; Associate Member, Los Angeles County Bar Association

You noticed that many are AFCC members? So did I. Here’s another person, a judge, being honored posthumously and Board of Directors, Kids’ Turn is among her accolades:

Judge Grant’s many years as a family law judge and a probate judge during her tenure on the San Francisco Superior Court gave her ample opportunity to pioneer judicial change. Most importantly, Judge Grant became an icon for young female externs, paralegals, attorneys and judges for nearly the entirety of her long career. …

Following her appointment to the San Francisco Municipal Court in 1979, Judge Grant dedicated her life to public service. She was appointed to the Superior Court in 1982, serving as the Presiding Judge in the Family Law Department and later as the Presiding Judge of the Probate Department. She retired from Superior Court in 1996 but continued to work with the American Arbitration Association. She is a past President of the California Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and of the Northern California Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. (AAML Southern chapter donated to Kids’ Turn San Diego)…

She served on the Board of Kids’ Turn Honorary Committee for many years, an organization offering assistance for children impacted by divorce, including psycho-educational workshops for children being raised in two households. She also pioneered the first Guardian Mentorship Program for children being raised in alternative homes.

JUDGES, JUDGES, JUDGES are on the Boards of this organization:

Barbara W. Moser, SF Attorney, AFCC member, (in fact, a presenter at one COlorado conference), Judge Pro Tem, Family Law Bench Bar Program, Marin County Superior Court… SEttlement Judge Pro Tem, SF Superior Court — was “former secretary, Kids Turn”

IT’s NOT NECESSARY TO EVEN BE IN THE FAMILY LAW FIELD TO BE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

Mr. Semmer is also actively involved in the San Diego community. As a Board Member of the Cornell Club of San Diego, he has organized charity fundraisers to endow the Willie Jones Jr. Scholarship. He has volunteered for and assisted with fundraising efforts for Kid’s Turn San Diego, a San Diego non-profit organization helping children and parents whose lives are impacted by parental separation. He serves on the programming committee of the San Diego Receiver’s Forum and is a member of the San Diego Bankruptcy Forum.

(CLICK ON THE LINK. HE DEALS WITH COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE, ETC.)

So what IS it, anyhow?

It’s not quite Avon, Amway, or McDonalds, but basically the same idea only using legislative loopholes and opportunities to promote it, and charging clients to consume the services (court-ordered), for people to be trained to run the courses, and taking federal grants to states money (and foundational support also) — in fact, where DOES all that money go, anyhow? ….?

Such a great organization obviously deserves some extra, extra legislative help…

I searched “Kids Turn affiliates” and came up with real interesting California Assembly Bill 2263. Other than it cuts down our fresh-air exercise activity, ya gotta love this Internet, sometimes….

http://www.metnews.com/endmomay02.html (This is 2002)

•AB 2263, by Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, which would require the Judicial Council to study the effectiveness of expanding the Kids’ Turn program, which assists children while their parents are in family court obtaining a divorce or legal separation. The bill was approved by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a 23-0 vote May 15, passed the Assembly on a 72-2 vote May 23 and was sent to the Senate.

Wow, the Assembly sure loved the concept of funneling divorce education to ONE nonprofit started by a family law judge…..

 BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                    Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary

                                           2263 (Kehoe)

          Hearing Date:  8/22/02          Amended: 5/8/02
          Consultant:  Karen French           Policy Vote: Judiciary
          4-2
          ____________________________________________________________
          _
          BILL SUMMARY:   AB 2263 requires the Judicial Council to
          allocate, from funds appropriated to it in the annual
          Budget Act, the amount necessary to study the Kids' Turn
          projects.  The bill also states that up to $50,000 shall be
          allocated only if the Judicial Council receives non-state
          source matching funds.   The bill requires the Judicial
          Council to report to the Legislature by January 12, 2004,
          on the results of the study and propose guidelines for 
project expansion, if Kids' Turn is found to be effective.
                              Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions        2002-03             2003-04               2004-05 
           Fund 
          Judicial Council
            Study              --          $100                   --General &
                                                            Other
            Court funding                 --       ---Significant, cost
          pressure---              General    

          STAFF COMMENTS:  SUSPENSE FILE.

          Kids' Turn is a private non-profit organization that
          provides workshops for children and their parents that are
          intended to teach skills to cope with the difficulty of
          divorce and separation.  Workshops are six weeks long with
          one 90-minute meeting per week.  Fees for workshops range
          from $75 to $600 (on a sliding scale).  Kids Turn conducts
          programs in San Francisco, Marin, Alameda, and Contra Costa
          County.  The organization has sold its curriculum and
          licensed affiliates located in Sonoma, Napa, San Diego,
          Shasta, and Yolo Counties (in addition to Dayton, Ohio and Hillsboro, 
Oregon.  Although sold only to nonprofits, the program effectively operates as a franchise.  Kids' Turn
          currently is conducting its own study, in consultation with
          the California School of Professional Psychology.  This
          bill would require the Judicial Council to duplicate, at
          least in part, the current study.

          According to the Judiciary Committee analysis, the author
          states that the bill is needed so that Kids' Turn will 
have state approval as evidence of credibility 
and will allow courts to "recommend Kids' Turn 
as a resource to the community." On its website, the organization states that
          this Fall, its Board of Directors will be planning a
          five-year strategy to determine course direction of the
          organization.  Specifically targeted for consideration is:
          "Enhanced marketing strategies in order to increase the number of Kids' Turn affiliates and sales of Kids' Turn Curriculum."  This bill may create the appearance that a State study and Judicial Council recommendations are part of a marketing strategy.

(WHICH THEY ARE..... Better amend the bill so this is less obvious....)

          Author's amendments:  The author proposes amendments (LCR#
          0216385), which (1) delete the specific reference to Kids' Turn and,
           instead, study projects or programs that provide
          services to parents and children undergoing divorce, 2) to
          delete reference to program expansion; and 3) to delete the
          language requiring the Judicial Council to allocate the
          amount "necessary" to conduct the study, to limit the
          State's obligation to $50,000. 

          The third staff recommendation to authorize, but not require the study, was rejected by the author.
          .

HERE’s an AMENDED VERSION (attempting to conceal the blatant effort to legislate parents to consume this product in particular to “help” their kids deal with divorce):

AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 22, 2002 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 8, 2002 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 1, 2002

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—2001–02 REGULAR SESSION

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2263

Introduced by Assembly Member Kehoe

February 20, 2002

An act relating to family courts.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST AB 2263, as amended, Kehoe. Family courts: ~~Kids’ Turn~~ family assistance. Existing law governs the procedures for obtaining a dissolution of

marriage or a legal separation. This bill would require the Judicial Council to allocate, from funds appropriated to the Judicial Council in the annual Budget Act, the an amount ~~necessary~~ not to exceed $50,000 to conduct a study regarding ~~the effectiveness of the Kids’ Turn projects, which~~ projects or programs that provide services to assist children and their families while the parents are in the process of obtaining a divorce or a legal separation, as specified. The bill would provide require that ~~an amount not to exceed $50,000 shall~~ these funds be allocated only if the Judicial Council receives matching funds appropriated from sources other than the state.** The bill would require the Judicial Council to report to the Legislature by January 12, 2004, the results of the study ~~and to recommend guidelines for expanding the projects if the study indicates that the projects were effective.~~

**The California Judicial Council just so happens to be the single designated state agency receiving the access and visitation federal funds (“SAVP”) to enable programs such as (but not exclusively!) this one, as I have reported before here. Check it out at TAGG.hhs.gov — there’s a CFDA number referring exclusively to this grant series (“93597,” or similar)(marriage/fatherhood promotion is 93086)( and related ones).

In fact, a great exercise would be to go HERE: http://taggs.hhs.gov/AwardsList.cfm

You’ll have to redo the search — search by “CFDA Program Numbers” (take 2011 year) and get the 50-state list of all 93597’s. Then you’ll have a panorama of which agency, in every state, gets these funds, and can click on the other funding they get. I recommend clicking on Texas (after all, the President who put some of these policies into full swing came from there). You can see that OCSE (collecting child support) is a major expense. Then learn how to do advanced searches (with more fields) and figure out which way the wind is blowing.

Again, TAGGS is your friend, in part. Especially if you are an employee these are your taxes, right? part of each hour you work … it’s collected, assembled, and distributed later by the IRS, along with distributing favors called “tax-exempt status” to certain corporations, and of course foundations….

KIDS TURN:

It is ever so important that everyone (parents, federal government, City and State of San Francisco (I guess for the SF Kids’ Turn….) and foundational donors, plus of course individual donors focus on THIS one program to help, to measure levels of conflict, mental health and attitude change on parents . . . . well, let me just quote the leginfo record. Our state was then and is now in budget crisis, so obviously measuring parental stress levels is an urgent public need:

2)Requires that JC's study include an assessment of all of the
            following:

             a)   Any decrease in conflict between the parents regarding
               custody issues, as reported by the parents;

             b)   The mental health of the children, as measured by their
               attitudes before and after participating in the project or
               program;

             c)   Any change in the attitude of the parents who
               participate in the project or program;

And of course, who better to help children navigate the difficult shoals of divorce than:

           AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY  , this bill was limited in its scope to the Kids' Turn project.

Apparently these entities supported it ( Senate Floor link on “leginfo” site):

SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/23/02)

          Kids' Turn (This link lists San Diego Bd of Dirs./SF, Here)
          Cope Family Center  (See Kids Turn "Affiliates" list....)
          California Coalition for Youth
          Private Dispute Resolution of San Diego** (=Judge Geary D. Cortes)
          California Judges Association
          CARE Children's Counseling Center
          Gregory M. Caskey, Supervising Judge, Superior Court,(SEE **)
          County of Shasta (There's a Kids' Turn in Shasta County)
          Thomas Ashworth, Judge of the Superior Court
          San Diego County Office of Education
          Professor Janet Weinstein, California Western School of Law (Kids' Turn donor)

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author, this bill
          is needed because it is imperative for organizations to
          have state approval in order to provide evidence of
          credibility and efficacy to the community.

**I had no idea who Judge Caskey is, but linked to his 1998 Admonishment by the Commission on Judicial
Performance!   So he got this slap on a wrist, in part for:

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND REASONS

In November 1997, Judge Gregory M. Caskey was regularly assigned to handle juvenile dependency matters. On the morning of November 6, 1997, Judge Caskey sent a message by electronic mail to an attorney who regularly appeared before him on those matters. The e-mail message concerned a case then pending before the judge, in which the attorney was appearing. The message read in part:

I am considering summarily rejecting [the father’s attorney’s] requests. Do you want me to let [the father’s attorney] have a hearing on this, or do we cut [the attorney] off summarily and run the risk the third DCA reverses? . . . . I say screw [the father] and let’s cut [the attorney] off without a hearing. O.K.? By the way, this message will self- destruct in five seconds…

Later that morning, the attorney sent the following e-mail reply:

Your honor, I don’t feel comfortable responding ex-parte on how you should rule on a pending case.

Two hours later, the judge sent an e-mail response which read: “chicken.”

 
"Private Dispute Resolution" appears to be one retired San Diego Judge, although obviously
working (in dispute resolution) in Southern Calif (3 offices, so I guess he still has a license).
The site "noethics.com" says he made the cut of the top Judicial Misfits under this title:

Judge Geary D. Cortes – San Diego

“She deserved it! – Pugilists – p. 281

 
I don't know much about this Judge, although he's mentioned as being overturned on appeal
on First Amendment issues here:  He was overturned on appeal (I think) in an elder abuse case,
and was involved in the high-profile Prop 21, trying juveniles as adults, matter, described in
The Adult Boys of Rancho Penasquitos  (hover cursor for relevance)...Same case as the First
Amendment Issue...  More likely, he's probably been on that KT Board during some of its years.

Assuming I have the right Judge Thomas Ashworth, he doesn't sound much better:

Case Against Judge Should Remain in San Diego, Court Rules

January 23, 1990|ALAN ABRAHAMSON | TIMES STAFF WRITER

A lawsuit that claims a San Diego family-court judge committed fraud and legal malpractice before he took the bench should be heard in San Diego County, a state appellate court ruled Monday.

The 4th District Court of Appeal ordered the case against Judge Thomas Ashworth III returned to San Diego Superior Court, saying it was improperly ordered out of the county

 
Judge Ashworth also ordered a mother living in Utah, whose child was born after separation,
to send the 5-year old to her paternal grandparents for four, week-long visits (to San Diego).
Report is from 2002:

In Harris, the Court of Appeal held that substantive due process limits a court’s authority under the state’s grandparent visitation statue to cases in which there is clear and convincing evidence that the child will suffer harm if visitation were not granted.

The panel reversed a 1999 order requiring Karen Butler, a remarried Utah resident, to send her daughter Emily, then 5 years old, to San Diego for four week-long visits with the child’s paternal grandparents. Emily was the product of Butler’s brief and stormy marriage to Charles Erik Harris and was born after the couple separated.

The order by San Diego Superior Court Judge Thomas Ashworth III was based on Family Code Sec. 3104, which allows a court to order grandparent visitation when the parents are living separate and apart or the child is not living with a parent. The statute applies a best-interest-of-the-child standard, with a rebuttable presumption that grandparent visitation is not in the child’s best interests if the custodial parent objects.

Here’s another one reversed on appeal, where the paternal grandparents of a father who died after divorce took the mother to court to force more visitation (in San Diego). Ashworth granted them (and got the girl a counsel of her own), but was reversed on appeal, citing Troxel v. Granville:

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION (Punsly v. Ho, No. D036025 (Cal.App. Dist.4 03/16/2001)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Thomas Ashworth, III, Judge. Petition for writ of supersedeas. Judgment reversed. Petition granted.

Manwah Ho, the mother of Kathryn Punsly, appeals an order granting visitation to Kathryn’s paternal grandparents, Marilyn and Bernard Punsly under Family Code *fn1 section 3102. *fn2 Manwah contends section 3102 is unconstitutional, as applied to her, in light of the recent United States Supreme Court case of Troxel v. Granville (2000) 530 U.S. 57 [120 S.Ct. 2054] (Troxel), a case concerning the constitutionality of a nonparental visitation statute, and Troxel’s appellate progeny. Manwah also contends the court’s ancillary orders attached to the visitation order, independently, violated her constitutional due process rights. We conclude section 3102, as applied in this case, unconstitutionally infringed on Manwah’s fundamental rights. Accordingly, we reverse the order in its entirety.

There was a "Day" named after Judge Ashworth:

Honors, Memberships, and Professional Activities

City of San Diego Proclamation of January 31st as “Thomas Ashworth III Day“

Judicial Lifetime Achievement Award, San Diego County Bar Association’s Certified Family Law Specialists, November 2002

Family Law Person of the Year, American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, Southern California Chapter, 2001**
 (**who donated to Kids' Turn.....)

Then again, The Ashworths themselves also donated to Kids' Turn. Wish I had a year on this
brochure, but readers should check out the judges & attorneys on the INdividual Donors lists.
(Found at California Men's Center website...)

WITH REPUTABLE PROMOTERS SUCH AS THESE, WHO COULD FORBID SIMPLY LEGISLATING A STUDY
TO GIVE IT STATE CERTIFICATION AS JUST THE BEST-EST PARENTING EDUCATION COURSE (COURT-ORDERED)
AROUND, IN FACT, WHY NOT HAVE IT BRANCH OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY, JUST IN CASE THEY ARE
THINKING ABOUT DIVORCE?  (On the other hand, with all those supporters, why does it need
more promotion???? SOmething doesn't look right about this....)

THANKFULLY GRAY DAVIS VETO’ed it with this message:

BILL NUMBER:  AB 2263
  VETOED	DATE: 09/29/2002

SEP 28 2002

To Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 2263 without my signature.

This bill would require a study of projects or programs that serve
children and their families while the parents are in the process of
obtaining a divorce or legal separation.

Under this study, the Judicial Council would be required to assess
the results of, among other things, changes in the mental health of
children and any change in the attitude of parents.  The Judicial
Council, however, may not be well suited to conduct this type of
study.

For this reason, I must return this bill without my signature.

Sincerely,

GRAY DAVIS

In 2003, the same assemblywoman comes up with a Gay Fathers' Day proposal, which met some resistance.

What normally is a legislative slam-dunk – a resolution honoring dads for Father’s Day – turned into a debate on “alternative lifestyles” in the California state Assembly.

According to a report in the Stockton Record, Republicans this week either withheld their support or voted against the resolution because it focused on “nontraditional” dads, including families with two fathers.

“It didn’t belong on the floor,” said GOP Assemblyman Alan Nakanishi. “It was a homosexual bill in the sense that they wanted to make a point out of two fathers” in a single household.

The resolution, sponsored by lesbian Democratic Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, mentions stepfathers, foster fathers, single fathers and families headed by two fathers, the paper reports. However, it fails to cite traditional fathers who are married to the mother of their children.

Republican Assemblyman Greg Aghazarian, as a traditional father, noticed he wasn’t represented in the proposal.

” Where is the (part) talking about a husband and a wife who have kids?” he said, according to the Record. “I mean, where is the love?”

“CRISPE,” A group for Shared Parenting was pretty upset about her also, although for different reasons and supplied a photo:

Senator Kehoe Plans if she has her way, will steal the SD Fairgrounds for HER greedy self interests!

However, it’s primarily a simple affiliate marketing operation — only with governmental connections.

Did I mention, “NONPROFIT”? Because of the public service it provides, obviously.

I just missed a March, 2011 conference — that’s what I get for falling behind on my FaceBook operations:

Gerard

Kids’ Turn Spring, 2011 Retreat and Training Conference

Theme: Welcome to the Future (of Kids’ Turn)

Dates: March 4-6, 2011 Location: Asilomar Conference Grounds, Pacific Grove, California

Take a deep breath and settle in for a time of serene relaxation, reflection and rejuvenation. Celebrated as Monterey Peninsula’s “Refuge by the Sea” – Asilomar State Beach and Conference Grounds is a breathtakingly gorgeous 107 acres of ecologically diverse beachfront land. www.visitasilomar.com

Who should attend: Kids’ Turn Leaders, Staff, Board Members, Volunteers, Affiliate
Representatives

Conference Goals:

1. Familiarize participants with the future direction of Kids’ Turn
2. Broaden exposure to contemporary issues affecting Kids’ Turn families
3. Refine skills to deliver The Kids’ Turn Way
4. Eight CEU’s awarded
5. R & R in a beautiful, tranquil setting
6. Enjoy camaraderie with Kids’ Turn colleagues
7. Explore the communities of Pacific Grove and Monterey (on your own)

Dr. Gladys Ato, Vice President of Academic Affairs, Argosy University
San Francisco Bay Area
Communicating the Kids’ Turn Message

Dr. Allison Thorson, University of San Francisco
The Impact of Marital Infidelity on Children

COST: (Must be why they need all the donors, and access to the “Access/Visitation” federal support).
Single Occupancy:
$350* (two nights, six meals, training, ECU’s, taxes, all inclusive)
$400 single occupancy AFTER 2/15/11
Double Occupancy (participants must self-select roommate):
$250* (two nights, six meals, training, ECU’s, taxes, all inclusive)
$300 double occupancy AFTER 2/15/11

Kids’ Turn is also an arts supporter, in fact partnered with an upcoming San Diego show, don’t miss:

26 MILES

by Quiara Alegria Hudes
Sept 29 – Oct 23, 2011
The time is 1986. Olivia is a half-Cuban, half-Jewish ‘zine-writing teen. Join us for our next full production written by award-winning Quiara Alegria Hudes (In the Heights), and in partnership with Kids’ Turn San Diego. (“Eight years after a Cuban mother looses [sic] custody of her Jewish daughter, she gets a second chance. At 4:30 in the morning she kidnaps the sick teenage girl and the two drive west in search of a remedy and their divergent American dreams.”)

In Washington County, Oregon, a nonprofit called YOUTH CONTACT features Kids’ Turn (and a pop-up indicates that Kids’ Turn is supporting their work also: See for yourself: )

Registration form shows it’s $230 per parent per 4-session class:

The enrollment fee for Kids’ Turn is $230.00 per adult. Children (ages 5-16) are free with a paying adult. The fee must be paid in full before a spot in the workshop can be reserved. This is done on a first-come, first served basis until each workshop is full. Acceptable methods of payment are Visa, MasterCard, debit card (with a Visa or MasterCard logo), or money order. We do NOT accept checks.

YOU MUST COMPLETE ALL FOUR SESSIONS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION. IF YOU DO NOT ATTEND ALL FOUR SESSIONS YOU WILL HAVE TO RE-REGISTER FOR ANOTHER WORKSHOP AND RE-PAY THE $230.00 ENROLLMENT FEE. THERE ARE NO MAKE-UP SESSIONS AND THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS!

Serves the parents rights for divorcing in the first place, eh? Domestic violence survivor parent concerned for your life? what kind of excuse is that!?

In fact, generally speaking, REALLY FAMOUS PEOPLE SEEM TO JUST LOVE “Kids’ Turn” — for example, Halsey Minor, founder of CNET:

Community programs for Children and Parents

experiencing separation or divorce. Featuring The Kids’ Turn Way© Curriculum

“Kids’ Turn has leveraged its resources*** and the progressive nature of San Francisco to become a global leader in addressing the problems children face when their parents separate.” Halsey M. Minor, Kids’ Turn Board Member; Founder, CNET

Oh, I forgot — he was on 2010 list for tax evasion, found auctioning off his art collection.

Found via LA Observed, the California Franchise Tax Board has released its list of the state’s biggest delinquent taxpayers. This year, the honor goes to Cnet co-founder Halsey Minor and his wife Shannon, who owe a whopping $13,120,479.39 in personal income tax.

They also maintained the #1 California ranking for tax evasion, for 2011 .

***resources such as connections to the legal/judicial community…..

I would love to see an audit of this organization’s books, all California operations.

The nonprofit directory “Guidestar.org” notes that Kids’ Turn San Diego started in 1996 with a grant from the “Seuss Foundation”…. 2009 form 990 lists only $151K net revenues, and Expenses include $124,424 salaries, plus $30,452 professional fees, and that they are running about one salaried position ($38K) in the hole. They ran a $50K ARt & Wine auction, but donated $36K of that, leaving revenue of $12K. Expenses, however, were $18K, so That event was a deficit, I guess…..

Lots of Directors (which my “select-copy” tool worked on the PDF) including what appears to be the infamous (or honorable) Honorable Thomas Ashworth’s wife? (also an attorney), Kathryn — in fact, eighteen (18) individuals listed, none drawing a salary. The Executive Director, however, is taking applications for a FT program director

One of these 18, “Patty Chavez-Fallon” just so happens to be (or have been) Director of Family Court Services at San Diego per this article (critical of) Supervised Visitation:

Patricia Chavez-Fallon, the director of the Superior Court’s Family Court Services in San Diego County, said people who want to be paid monitors submit documentation to the court showing they have attended a training class and meet the other state standards, which essentially require that monitors be 21 or older and free of any legal trouble in the previous 10 years. Chavez-Fallon then adds them to an alphabetical list of supervised visitation monitors that the court provides.

and she’s been there a good while (1991-2008): Kids Turn San Diego started in 1996. So did the Access Visitation Funds that help facilitate things like this (with PRWORA Welfare Reform). Must’ve been a coincidence, that timing. It was a very busy time, after all….

Patti Chavez-Fallon is an expert in alternative dispute resolution. Both as a counselor and Director of Family Court Services, she has served parents and children going through the process of defining and developing a cooperative sharing plan that benefits everyone involved. Her background includes:

Seventeen years as Director: Family Court Services, San Diego Superior Court

Four years as a mediator of Custody and Visitation disputes

Ten years of other child related social work services

She is also listed on the Federal HHS/ACF site for “Access and Visitation” grants as a California “State Access Program Contact:”

9. Superior Court of California , San Diego County
Contact: Patti Chavez-Fallon (619) 557-2100
Services: counseling, parent education

Subcontractor:
Kids’ Turn, San Diego
2136 Newcastle Avenue, suite 150
Cardiff, CA 92007
(760) 634-0280

Remind me again how this is NOT a conflict of interest? She is the program contact — on behalf of the Superior Court — for the federal funds, and a nonprofit where she sits on the board of the directors is the listed subcontractor…. There’s another one in Shasta County…..

. Northern California Center for Family Awareness
Kids’ Turn Shasta Cascade PO Box 991473
Redding, CA 96099-1473
(530) 244-5749

What’s in it for them, altruism? The art & wine auction factor?

Ms. Chavez-Fallon is even quoted in a “johnnypumphandle” review of a high-profile San Diego case (Morse v. Morse) where the papers featured the abducting ex-wife, the court had transferred custody to the father after finding allegations of abuse “inclusive” and Stephen Doyne (Note: also a Kids’ Turn donor, see link to their brochure, above) played a factor. It noted:

Robert and Eugia Morse divorced in 1994 after 10 years of stormy marriage.
Robert Morse remarried almost immediately and shared custody of his three
children with his ex-wife.

The battle over the children was contentious, McIntyre told jurors. In
January 1996, Robert Morse spent a night in jail after his former wife
accused him of hitting her when she came to pick up the children after a
visit. He was not allowed to see his children for two months.

After a psychological evaluation, Robert Morse received full custody in
October 1996. On their children’s first weekend visit with their mother,
the older girl contended that her father had molested her.

The Corruption Exposed

Before the custody battle even took place, we have learned that Eugia Morse was in the Family Violence Program sponsored by Children’s Hospital. Her records show a multitude of evidence of violence in the form of photos and documents detailing injuries at the hand of Robert Morse. In addition, the children had records of therapy for abuse alleged to be perpetrated by Robert Morse as well as records documenting the abuse. When the custody case went to court, this evidence was suppressed in favor of the court assigned evaluation team which recommended that custody of the children be transferred to Robert Morse.

Apparently Family COurt Services had a role in this case, one that ended up with the mother feeling she had to flee. YOu can read for yourself. While Chavez-Fallon was incidental (in this report), she was director of the same family court services that pushed a certain evaluator and psychologist on the family. Responding to the news article someone wrote:

I saw the news report about Morse v. Morse on T.V., we recognized the modus operandi, and in unison wesaid “LINDA HIRSHBERG.” Next time I was in court, I looked at the file. We
were right. It was LINDA HIRSHBERG and STEPHEN DOYNE working together again.
Later, I heard from the “victims of Family Court underground” that Eugia was
networking with others who had been exploited by these two. She was desperate
to get the evaluator changed. She was not successful. No doubt, this
evaluation was arranged by Family Court Services, because that is what FCS
does. They are brokers, not mediators.

The “Cope Family Center” (APparently = ‘Kids’ Turn Napa County) (found supporting the Legislative Action in 2002) states (falsely) that:

Kids’ Turn is supported entirely by generous contributions from individuals and foundations in the San Francisco Bay Area. Workshops are held in San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa and Marin counties. Kids’ Turn requests that each participating parent contribute a sliding scale fee to help cover the cost of the program. Any family wanting to help support the program to a greater extent is encouraged to make a tax-deductible contribution at any time.

This “Cope Family Center” also runs Supervised Visitation:

Cope Family Center provides

Supervised Visitation

Monitored Exchange

Parent Education, including Kids’ Turn and Cooperative Co-Parenting

Coincidentally(?), the legislative purpose of the Access Visitation funding (in California), is:

Assembly Bill 673 expressed the Legislature’s intent that funding for the state of California be further limited to the following three types of programs:

Supervised visitation and exchange services;

Education about protecting children during family disruption; and

Group counseling services for parents and children.

This family center has an Assembly member, a State Senator, and a District Attorney among its honorary board members.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, MUCH?

Courthouse Forum (a place one can bellyache about court players) writers also noticed the phenomenon of family law judges referring business to nonprofits they sit on the board of. THis one notices a judge who was even Treasurer of Kids’ Turn. These 2006 entries are web-cached:

Contra Costa County KIDS TURN & Berkow

If this J Berkow is a Corporate Treasure of Kids Turn Inc. a organization that is often court ordered by Contra Costa County Family Law. This appears very improper to me doesn’t this violate the judicial standard to “avoid appearance of impropriety” I know in my business this would be considerd a conflict of interest, and the SEC would have a field day with a trader who was conducting there business like this judge

This is appalling I live in Contra Costa County and this judge is notoriously bad she has raped more fathers in this county then I can even list. Calling her the Monster of Martinez is not a understatement. It is common for father to be so severely financially raped by this women that they do actually end up living in a car with there children. Now she is runningKids Turn!(i.e., this is not my own comment!)

Below is the link to Kids Turn is you scroll down you will that Berkow is a Director. This is not a proper postion for Berkow she is ordering people from the bench to keep her company going. What a way to capitalize your company!

Apparently, they rotate membership in and out (of Judges, Attorneys, etc.). Here’s a 2010 new President, Greg Abel, who has been on the board a few years, and is quite active in family, appellate and other courts:

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, October 11, 2010 – Kids’ Turn, a San Francisco-based non-profit organization today announced the election of Greg Abel as president and CEO succeeding Steven Kinney, who remains on the board of directors of Kids’ Turn. Mr. Abel is a Partner with Whiting Fallon Ross & Abel, LLP, Walnut Creek, Calif., which represents parties in complex family law and matrimonial matters.

In making the announcement, Steve Kinney, outgoing president of Kids’ Turn said, “We are pleased that Greg Abel has agreed to assume the leadership mantel of Kids’ Turn. He has been a very proactive member of the board since 2008. Greg will provide important leadership as Kids’ Turn moves to the next level of service to customers in the five county region of the San Francisco Bay Area and extends Kids’ Turn curriculum reach to other parts of the U.S. and around the globe.”

Well, since they are going global, I suppose it was worth a try to get the California Legislature to pass a law standardizing this judge-initiated project, just in cases judges who sit (or sat) on the Board previously, or the Director(s?) of Family Court Services, etc. who donate to it (and sit on its board) aren’t drumming up enough business, or foundational support. As a little reminder, this has been operating IN THE HOLE according to its own 990, at least the San Diego One.

What a lesbian State Senator (in 2002, State Assemblyperson) is doing promoting that bill, Lord only knows. Guess it’s politically advantageous (do they donate to her, too?)

How can any organization with so much foundation support, a ton of volunteer Directors (with judicial, therapy, and attorney association connections) AND a guaranteed source of court-ordered referrals end up with a negative cash flow?

And what about that $45K in vendor services to the City of San Francisco, recently?

And what about that Lien that the San Francisco Superior Court has (or had) on this group?

. . . . This isn’t THE major question of the family law system, but it sure does make one go “Huh???”

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

May 19, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, History of Family Court, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids

Tagged with Access-Visitation, AFCC, California Judicial Council, Christine Kehoe, Conflict of Interest, Kids' Turn, Super-Attorneys, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.

Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit.. [First Publ. Oct. 24, 2011, updated Mar. 25, 2017].

with 10 comments

~ ~ ~

Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit. [First Publ. Oct. 24, 2011, updated Mar. 25, 2017]. Short-link ends “-Ev”. About 9,200 words and this post has several comments. Title and shortlink notation added Sept. 29, 2019 as I’m intending to reference it in a new post.

First published Oct. 24, 2011, I would consider Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit.. among key posts early in the blog (from a 2017 perspective). In wishing to quote this (for one of its passing references to Kids’ Turn donor “Halsey Minor” (founder of CNET), and because a blog-upgrade has for some reason turned the base post color to a sort of sickly mixture of greenish-white, I’m adding also a font-change, border, and a few other things I didn’t know how to do in 2011. Kids’ Turn has since submerged itself into (if I remember it right) San Francisco Child Abuse Prevention Center (SF CAPC) which “CAPC” is something of a serial curriculum-peddler (through a series of nonprofits to run the curriculum). That’s a general recall, and anyone is free to do a more detailed check on the Secretary of State, or Attorney General (Charitable Trusts Registry) as I do throughout this blog in case I mis-remembered exactly WHERE Kids’ Turn decided to submerge its identity into another nonprofit with classes to sell.

This may have happened anyway in the organization’s process of growing up and not wishing to call attention to the conflicts of interest it would sure seem to represent for anyone with a divorce case and likely to be added into forced co-parenting education, when the entity routinely has family court connections, family court judges, attorneys, or administrators on its board, and as this post references, contracts with the City and County of SF regarding the court.

Or, I like to think this blog may have had SOMETHING to do with their decision to go further underground and (apparently) otherwise continue business as usual…//LGH 3-25-2017.

Per an Annual Report, 2010, on this organization which sheds light on how the courts work:

The following representative results definitely affirm the efficacy of Kids’ Turn’s 2010 services:

• 50% of Kids’ Turn families are Court ordered

HALF THE CLIENTELE OF KIDS’ TURN ARE ORDERED TO GO THERE BY THE COURTS. Notably, this Nonprofit also was started by a family law judge, and by the end of this (LONG) blog, you should know much more about the interrelationship between the Profit in Non-Profits and how judges order litigants to attend services provided (fee-based) for organizations that MANY of them have sat on the board of.

Not just for US. Nope, the UK is going to help out this “charity” (started by family law judge…)

Kids’ Turn will soon complete a partnership with two charities in the United Kingdom (Relate and National Family Mediation) leading to implementation of Kids’ Turn throughout Great Britain.

Amazing….they write:

The UK govt has pledged a new pot of funding to help families. Here is a link to an online article about it which we posted on the KT Facebook Fan Page:

• Our partner agencies will submit funding requests in three categories, one of which is to implement Kids’ Turn throughout the UK

• They will received the funding award notices by March, 2011 and when awarded, the funds will be in place for four years

• The two agencies have settled their partnership challenges and worked out their respective roles re. the implementation of Kids’ Turn

UNbelievable… Some families stuck in the courts (beCAUSE they are stuck in the courts) can’t afford internet, and “Kids’ Turn” has its facebook page…

I am simply throwing out some greens here, about a gleam in a judge’s eye (1987-1990) that is going global. Not exactly in the free market — it is subsidized as a sub-grantee THROUGH the California Judicial Council, under “Access Visitation Grants,” and as such, you probably can’t get out of some facet of indoctrination once you file a motion in any family law court, anywhere, for any reason. You might, but it’s kind of like what I hear of slot machines, gambling, etc. — the House always wins.

KIDS’ TURN,” INTERNATIONAL” — and is CLOSELY Associated with AFCC:

International Conference Presentations (cached article…)

Kids‘ Turn Executive Director, Claire Barnes, had the privilege to co-present this summer at the International Commission on Couples and Family Relations’ 2002 Conference held in Sydney, Australia. She collaborated with Claire Missen, Teen Between (Dublin, Ireland) on the topic of Divorce and Teens. The respective papers, where cultural commonalities and differences specific to gender differences were discussed, are available for review.

Additionally, Susanna Marshland, former Kids‘ Turn Program Director, participated in a panel presentation at this year’s AFCC Conference in Hawaii. The topic of Best Practices was a perfect venue for Susanna’s information on the Kids‘Turn Early Years Program. Susanna’s remarks are also included
for review.

1. Statistics: a presentation by Claire Missen, Teen Between (Dublin, Ireland)

2. Presentation by Claire Barnes, M.A to the 2002 International Commission on Couple and Family Relations: Distance Diversity Dislocation, June 2002, Sydney, Australia

3. Summary of Presentation for the ‘Best Practices’ workshop
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Annual Conference, presented by Susanna Marshland, LCSW, June 7, 2002, Waikoloa, Hawaii

How nice to belong to more than one organization for which conferences can involve transcontinental and transoceanic travel to exotic locales to talk about “healing family relationships.” OF note — this organization is funded in part as a sub-grantee from US Federal funds, including diversions from WELFARE to enhance CHILD SUPPORT collection for needy families. ….

But what caught my interest — what is KIDS’ TURN doing on a notice of lien to the SFTC, which is the San Francisco Courts? (Source: CRIIS.com, recorded documents)

Record Date Document Number GrantoR GranteE Name Cross Reference Name Document Type

14-DEC-2010 J09891700 R KIDS TURN SFTC NTC LIEN

14-DEC-2010 J09960500 R KIDS TURN SFTC NTC LIEN

11-DEC-2009 I88704700 R KIDS TURN SFTC NTC LIEN

27-JAN-2004 H64725800 R KIDS TURN SFTC NTC LIEN

Someone should look into this — what’s THAT about? From what I understand, “SFTC” is the San Francisco Superior (or Trial) Courts — pls. submit comment correcting me if I’m wrong. And its GRANTEE, i.e., Kids’ Turn is granting something to the courts, while receiving grants from the Cal. Judicial Council through the courts.

I could write on anything — of course — but have noticed this particular group (out of SF and San Diego, originally) going international, Hawaii, Illinois, you name it. They say they are really successful — read it on the website here, a study done in 2009 (it began around 1988) “Our programs work….”

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

February 27, 2011 at 9:08 PM

Posted in "Til Death Do Us Part" (literally), AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids

Tagged with *Comments: This post has several comments with more info., Access-Visitation, AFCC, Claire Barnes, Designer Families by Court Decree, Education, Halsey Minor, HHS-TAGGS grants database, ICCFR - International Commission on Couples and Family Relations, ICCFR - International Commission on Couples and Family Relations | 2002 Conference (Sydney Australia), Jeanne Ames - Dorothy Huntington - John Sikorski (Kid's Turn Curriculum Authors), Kids' Turn, KIDS' TURN San Diego (EIN 33-0724932), KIDS' TURN SF (EIN# 94-3112621) [Merged out ca. 2016 or 2017], LGH|FCM Oct 24 2011 post 'Let's Get Honest About Kids' Turn & Judges' Profits' (w|updates 2017+2019-more tags), mediation, Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work., UK running Kids' Turn Curriculum

CFFPP and FVPF, where the word “families” really means “fathers..” [First publ. March 3, 2010 with July 27, 2016 update, and Nov., 2017 related posts referencing this one].

with one comment

Post title (updated to identify later posts referencing this one):CFFPP and FVPF, where the word “families” really means “fathers..” [First publ. March 3, 2010 with July 27, 2016 update, and Nov., 2017 related posts referencing this one]. ( With case-sensitive, word-press generated shortlink ends “-pG”).

This background-color and box (text inside borders) is a 7/27/2016 Update

(see related post “SFFI- CFFPP – JustGive...” Published 7/26/2016; see also, same day, “Do You Know Your Social Science PolicySpeak?”

Both those posts have details on CFFPP (the second, more where it fits in the larger picture), but the “SFFI” one is more focused one of its listed “Funders” — “JustGive.org” as a substantial ($32M or so) on-line funding platform — and who THEY are related to.

FORMATTING: This short statement (post) I wrote March 3, 2010, a VERY tough time in my life personally. I see I was not too “html-competent” at the time (it may have to do with input equipment also, which wasn’t a laptop as I recall). Apart from that, CFFPP is a LITTLE (size-wise) nonprofit with famous people on its board (mostly unpaid) but somehow two pages of famous foundation funders also. The corporation/tax return history of this organization reveals some oddball (although not for the field of “fatherhood practitioner” sponsoring 501©3s, I’ve learned since). Also, several of the links to documents quoted on this page are, as happens, “Page Not Found” over at the CFFPP.org website. Here in this update are some similar, if not necessarily, identical links:

In the “Technical Assistance Series” — on Fatherhood Promotion: {{2017 update: both these next two links became broken sometimes between it seems July 26-27, 2016 (my posting this) and late Nov., 2017 (my revisiting this for follow-up information.) lhe website has been updated, so that’s not too surprising. Large portions of them are quoted below, however.}}

http://cffpp.org/publications/TA_Father_PubPolicy.pdf co. 2003, Technical Assistance Series Author Jacquelyn Boggess:

Please notice Esta Soler and Tangir Mangat, as well as Board of Directors CFFPP — and their organizational or university affiliations — as well as Staff. Which (unformatted) for this document is:
- Board of Directors Esta Soler • Interim Chairperson, Family Violence Prevention Fund /Tanvir Mangat • Treasurer, Private Consultant /Margaret Stapleton, J.D. • Secretary, National Center on Poverty Law /Adrienne Brooks • Private Consultant /Carole Doeppers • Consumer and Health Privacy Consultant /Earl S. Johnson, Ph.D. • California Health and Human Services Agency / John Rich, M.D., M.P.H. • Boston Public Health Commission / Beth Richie, Ph.D. • University of Illinois at Chicago /Gerald A. Smith • IBM /Oliver Williams, Ph.D. • University of Minnesota {{See “IDVAAC.org”}}
- CFFPP Staff Jacquelyn Boggess, J.D. • Senior Policy Analyst / Rebecca May • Policy Analyst /Louisa Medaris • Office Manager /David Pate, Ph.D. • Executive Director / Marguerite Roulet, Ph.D. • Research Associate Scott Sussman, J.D. • Legal Analyst

http://cffpp.org/publications/TA_Fthd_DomViol.pdf by Marguerite Roulet, also C. 2003, and about “two meetings held in Madison 2001 and 2002.” Slightly different Board of Directors lineup, starting with “Wendell Primus, Ph.D.” of Center on Budget and Policy Priorities listed first, and Esta Soler, J.D. of FVPF second.

THIS report is based on two meetings held in Madison, Wisconsin in May 2001 and July 2002. The Center would like to thank the Public Welfare Foundation, the Hill-Snowdon Fund of the Tides Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, whose generous support made these meetings possible. We would also like to thank the many individuals who contributed their time and expertise to the meetings and whose on-going work to fight poverty and racism in the U.S. inspires. Thank you Abdillahi Alawy (Public Welfare Foundation), David Arizmendi (Iniciativa Frontera), Adeyemi Bandele (Men on the Move), …

“Sentence” highlit in yellow above is an incomplete sentence, missing a final word (probably direct object) after the word “inspires”. My posts also have long but grammatically incomplete sentences — on the other hand, I don’t do this with help from major tax-exempt foundations and a significant staff including at least two people with advanced degrees (I see (Jacquelyn Boggess — J.D. and David Pate, a Ph.D.) or even a budget for the writing.

Because now I know how to show the images, I’m going to add two pages here — the CFFPP people (first image) and the EXTENSIVE “Acknowledgements” page — both the organizations that funded the meetings, and lots of other people…//LGH:

CFFPP (%22Fathers%22 name, co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 2 CFFPP personnel ONLY viewed Jul2016

click image to enlarge as needed

CFFPP ('Fathers' in org. name|co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 3|Acknowledgmts| ONLY viewed Jul2016

click image to enlarge as needed

page 2, left, has figures in background, page 3, right is the plain text one.
CFFPP (“Fathers” in its name, co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 2 CFFPP personnel ONLY viewed Jul2016

CFFPP (‘Fathers’ in org. name|co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 3|Acknowledgmts| ONLY viewed Jul2016

[the pdf links above produce same result as clicking on the image. Technological tweak (setting adjustment) on the image upload menu I hadn’t noticed yet, but now use regularly, making the extra “pdfs” unnecessary except where they are for files more than a page (i.e., one image) long].

Next quote (inside this 2016 update) shows Resources and References from this CFFPP “Fatherhood and DV” Document make NO reference to the multi-million-dollar HHS-backed “responsible fatherhood/ healthymarriage” grants stream which — trust me — plenty of the participating groups knew about (see http://TAGGS.hhs.gov to compare which of them may have been recipients).

I notice heavy references to “Oliver Williams” including the “IDAAV” under “resources” which (in this part) doesn’t specifically mention his name, but which he’s basically (with steering committee) been leading — for years… and probably back then, too. NOTE: the “IDVAAC” does NOT appear to be an independent 501©3 or registered business entity– at least not in Minnesota, where it’s been operating from:

References

Carrillo, Ricardo and Jerry Tello, eds. 1998. Family Violence and Men of Color: Healing the Wounded Male Spirit. New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc.

Raphael, Jody. 2000. Saving Bernice: Battered Women, Welfare, and Poverty. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Williams, Oliver, Jacquelyn Boggess, and Janet Carter. 2001. “Fatherhood and Domestic Violence: Exploring the Role of Men Who Batter in the Lives of Their Children” in Sandra A. Graham-Bermann and Jeffrey L. Edleson, eds. Domestic Violence in the Lives of Children: The Future of Research, Intervention, and Social Policy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 157—187.

Williams, Oliver. 1999. “Working in Groups with African American Men Who Batter” in Larry E. Davis, ed. Working With African American Males: A Guide to Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 229-242.

Williams, Oliver. 1999. “African American Men Who Batter: Treatment Considerations and Community Response” in Robert Staples, ed. The Black Family: Essays and Studies, 6th edi- tion. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 265-279.

Resources

• Building Comprehensive Solutions to Domestic Violence: a Collaborative Project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, University of Iowa School of Social Work, and Greater Hartford {{CT}} Legal Assistance—a series of policy and practice papers

• Connecticut’s Evolve Program: a 26 and 52 week culturally competent, broad based, skill building, psycho-educational curriculum for male domestic violence offenders with female victims, by Denise Donnelly, Fernando Mederos, David Nyquist, Oliver Williams, and Sarah Wilson. State of Connecticut Judicial Branch, June 2000

• Men of Color Fatherhood Education and Violence Prevention Project, a joint project of the Domestic Violence Program and the Father-Friendly Initiative of the Boston Public Health Commission

• National Institute on Domestic Violence in the African American Community ((Not mentioned — Oliver Williams’ involvement in this..I don’t know also whether the word “National” was ever in its name. See idvaac.org website))
• National Latino Family and Fatherhood Institute (not mentioned — See Jerry Tello)

Basically, they (participants/conference leadership) are referring to themselves and their own work. Re: references to states of Connecticut and Massachusetts: AFCC has had a strong presence in both states for years (see my Jun/July 2016 posts for more; not necessarily legally incorporated the whole time) and Connecticut also had — starting about this time — a significant “Fatherhood Initiative of Connecticut” (i.e., statewide)

Shortly after this (and after having corporate status suspended in Illinois) CFFPP underwent a corporate name change — and address change. This was, however, recorded on an improper EIN#, using “39” where the correct number was “36.”

p17 ONLY, IL (Form NFP112.45:113.60) Appl for Reinstatemt (not stamped “Rec’d”) @CFFPP’s Amended FY2003 Return as EIN#394038873 (2nd digit should be “6”) showing Req for Namchange Signed 2-24-2005 in WI (Certific of Diss: Revoc Dec1, 20014 (19pp)

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

(End of 2016 Update Section);

March 3, 2010, post (vs. its update, above) Begins Here.

In the last post, a FVPF (Family Violence Prevention Fund) Program targeting fathers was supported by several groups, one of them “CFFP,” a name I recognized (along with most of the others). Which prompts me to finish this draft, a few days old, which began…

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

There’s an established group (since 1995) called “CFFP.” For what that acronym stood for (originally) and stands for (now), read on. It doesn’t take much scrutiny to figure out that what originally said “fathers” now says “family.” On their home page, currently, is a 40 page pdf summarizing the marriage/fatherhood movement in lay terms.

Those at sea in terminology might wish to read this:
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

March 3, 2010 at 12:35 PM

Yes, we SHOULD call them “restraining order suggestions” (Certifiably Insane Protection Orders in MN; meanwhile, more “Fatherhood” in KS) [[Orig. Aug. 7, 2009]].

with 25 comments

[[Title & Shortlink added Dec. 1, 2023 to refer to this post]]

[Feb. 17, 2016 UPDATE NOTES:

This post originally published over five years ago — on August 7, 2009. For more recent focus of this blog, see more recent posts (2016, 2014) which focus on systems operations, and consolidation of economic power from outside state lines (divorce and custody remaining under state jurisdiction, as well as domestic violence prevention orders).

I am currently working on posts regarding the Greenbook Initiative (2000-2008) and involved parties, on the NCJFCJ, on IDVAAC, and the “DV cartel” as identified by its participants (centralized, coordinated, and stuck in a policy rut) on the HHS and USDOJ grants stream.

I look up nonprofit organizations functioning as social policy conduits for a small group of inter-related professionals who cut deals with each other on what to minimize, what to focus on. These represent a much larger pattern throughout government, not just relating to domestic violence itself.

Many times by the time individuals find out about the policy deals that were cut, their lives, or kids are “gone.” If not physically, often in all the other critical aspects of life which people NOT entrenched in some of these systems may still take for granted. For example, the ability to get to and from, and hold a job once one has been hired, or completing projects for clients inbetween police events, court hearings, and ongoing threats to one’s personal safety and particularly, financial survival (i.e., ability to sustain food, housing, transportation, etc.). This comment added 2/17/2016 //LGH]

THIS POST IS: Yes, we SHOULD call them “restraining order suggestions” (Certifiably Insane Protection Orders in MN; meanwhile, more “Fatherhood” in KS) [[Orig. Aug. 7, 2009]].

(Short-link ends “-ez” and post is about 10,600 words. Including many quotes…and the text of a Kansas Senate Bill starting a “Fatherhood Initiative” — and the entire text of the U.S. Declaration of Independence (trying to see if there’s a disconnect somewhere between those two?)

I also respond to some news articles at length on the timeline in the first article shown below.) (Parts of this post also refer to the Inter-American Council on Human Rights (IACHR) for a domestic violence (“DV”) case from Kansas (Claudine Dombrowski) which appealed that high up for justice…) //LGH 12/1/23.

Today’s [Aug. 2009] headlines are right on topic with yesterday’s post. . . and the one referenced above….

Mr & Mrs. OUELETTEs, MINNESOTA, 2 accounts of 2,100 on the web, from Kare11News.

(1) Wife had order of protection against husband prior to murder-suicide

(2) Harris man gave up guns before strangling wife, hanging himself

Well, I swore I was NOT going to blog on this today, but I fear that these are indeed possibly copy-cat murder/suicides. It is now “out there” in the news as a possible way out of an emotionally embarrassing and humiliating situation.

Read THIS one, and then see if you can tell which parts were certifiably insane public policy, and how many warning signs people ignored.

And I’ll tell you why this one chills me, and makes me glad to be alive today.

(TOP of post — Minnesota. BOTTOM — Kansas.

They relate.)

Blogger’s Preface

At this point, it seems to be “certifiably insane public policy” to expect women to trust, or men to respect, such restraining orders, when clearly they don’t — I already blogged on this re: the woman in Pennsylvania who fought back.

Recently, I wrote about a father accused of molesting his (teenaged) daughter who, seeing as she was only moved 2 doors down, and into the home of a man that used to be the same father’s employee (say, what???!?). Within one week, Dad had killed: daughter, foster father and himself, and almost killed foster mother, too. So THAT helpful ruling got 3 people dead and one injury.

Great going, child protective services in that region of Tennessee.

Here’s another one that slipped through the cracks somehow, and at several different points. What “gets” me about this one is realizing several domestic violence prevention groups, nonprofits, that have been getting millions upon millions of federal dollars, over at least a decade in grants to provent violence locally, rurally, and in Indian tribes, as well as technical assistance grants to, I guess, “get the word out.”

So far, I can see they are doing a great job with putting together literature that’s already on the web somewhere, positioning themselves as the experts, consulting in private with other professionals about what to do, and keeping a body count. Which hasn’t substantially changed (per these counts) statewide in Minnesota within a decade.

So either the state is raising more suicidal or unable-to-handle-stress people, or immature young adults who then continue the immaturity into adulthood and parenthood (referring to the fathers in this case), or something. . . . . . Or so many people are being born each day that they STILL don’t know the warning signs of danger, and are talked into minimizing them.

Let’s maybe add ONE more “lethality risk” — trusting in protection orders to start with.

That’s for the courts and for the women alike. And encouraging a woman to do so (or continuing to present them as viable alternatives — when in fact they are panaceas too often) also places her in risk, given the facts. Ignorance of them is NOT bliss. . . .

When police DO respond in time, they run the risk of death themselves. When they do NOT respond in time, typically Mom, and sometimes Dad, are killed, and sometimes more. Or otherwise traumatized. SO . . . . . what else is available?

CONSIDER THIS ONE:

State: Minnesota
Body Count: 2, no responding officers or bystanders killed this time.
Orphans: 3, ages 10 (boy), 8 & 8 (twin girls)
Who are they now living with? Relatives.
Did they witness the murder – – of their mother by their father, YES, the girls
Did they try to intervene and fail? – — YES, an 8 year old girl tried to save her mother.
Was 911 called? – — YES, by an 8 year old daughter?

Was the call heeded (it seems No), or interfered with (yes, by the father)? – – – read below.
Was that restraining order as written certifiably insane? – — ABSOLUTELY. (And it seems identical to the one I got many years ago.)
Does making a restrained person turn in his or her guns always save a life? – — NO. Other weapons also can kill (apparently here, hands).
Or, a person not allowed to get a gun could get a friend’s (or in a recent case girlfriend’s gun).

Are risk assessments going to redeem lives from living in fear (or being lost)? – – – I’m not sure. I’m of the current opinion, NO, unless the woman herself takes them seriously and takes serious actions not reliant on 911 to ensure safety.

So, let’s talk about the body counts vis-a-vis the legal terminology:

When you think about it, and read the results, even calling these things “protection orders” makes zero sense. They are restraint requests. A man without restraint is ordered in public by a judge to show restraint.

WHO is to protect, in “protection order”? The power of the state? Does the state, like God, declare “protection” exists because it ordered this? And is the state, in so doing, lying to the protected parties?

I think so, basically.

Here’s a perhaps (I ALWAYS say “perhaps,” or try to) more viable protection order:

A trained, armed mother with an attitude to match, telling the man who just received the judicial order, that she is going to take the boundaries of the property seriously, and understands all laws regarding the 2nd amendment, and any contingencies. IN other words, she needs to be more determined and more aggressive than the person who formerly attacked or threatened her.

So do the people surrounding or dealing with her on this issue.

Alternately, a “not in the same state” “county” “500 mile radius” mother, and kids. And the kids could be told the truth about why this is happening, in age-appropriate terms but without name-calling or derogatory treatment of their father.

But of course that would screw up “access visitation” and “National Fathers Return Days” somewhat….

NOW, this mindset is not typically the state of a woman who has gotten to the point of requesting such an order from her husband, right? The request for an order represents to an abuser an ESCALATION in OPPOSITION to SUBMISSION. How’s he likely to respond?

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

August 7, 2009 at 12:38 PM

	Let's Get Honest\|She… on Gulag Archipelago, Bahrain Arc…
	sandwich near Detroi… on Gulag Archipelago, Bahrain Arc…
	Let's Get Honest\|She… on Historic Day Today, and Week,…
	Let's Get Honest\|She… on ‘Table Talk’ Helps…
	Let's Get Honest\|She… on So, You Want Us To Speak Out A…

Increasing Women’s Numbers and Influence in Policing
	Breaking and Entering the Thick Blue Line ~ Where is the Women’s Movement?
	Law Enforcement Opportunities NOW!
	More Sexism than Ever at Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department

Record Date	Document Number	GrantoR GranteE	Name	Cross Reference Name	Document Type
	14-DEC-2010	J09891700	R	KIDS TURN	SFTC	NTC LIEN
	14-DEC-2010	J09960500	R	KIDS TURN	SFTC	NTC LIEN
	11-DEC-2009	I88704700	R	KIDS TURN	SFTC	NTC LIEN
	27-JAN-2004	H64725800	R	KIDS TURN	SFTC	NTC LIEN

Posts Tagged ‘U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.’

SHARE THIS POST on...

Concentric Circles of Investigation, Common Themes – To Review

SHARE THIS POST on...

…

SHARE THIS POST on...

Re-education Camps Levels

Camp Conditions and Deaths

The End of “Re-education” Period

SHARE THIS POST on...

A Family Justice Center (like a Family Physician?) — what a warm and fuzzy concept!

How warm and fuzzy is it? Was the public asked whether it’s a good idea, before, during, or after its conception, the labor ($3 million grants, etc.) to bring it forth, and the subsequent cloning actions?

Let’s consider (and then, I’ll get to the colors and graphics part, don’t worry….)

[Below]. Does its pretty purple-bordered website with vivid graphics look nice? Sure.

See? http://www.familyjusticeinitiative.com/

Do (and should?) public stamps of approval from:

a former San Diego City Attorney, a current Alameda County District Attorney, Verizon, Blue Shield of California Foundation, at least one prominent Domestic Violence Professional** — and in 2003, even former U.S. President George Bush

earn OUR stamps of approval? Because we will be helping to pay for it….

(And, should we encourage our local CA legislator to vote “YES” on SB 557, which seeks to legitimize and expand these, naming specific cities)

Well, now, let me think a moment on that last one…. in fact, let me ask Josie Clark:

?? What Lawsuit?

This Family Justice Center isn’t even that old….

Sunny San Diego Finds Itself Being Viewed as a Kind of Enron-by-the-Sea

“I had completely lost confidence in the city’s financial decision making,” she said in an interview on Wednesday. “I just couldn’t let this go forward.”

CA SB 557 INTRODUCED BY Senator Kehoe (Coauthors: Assembly Members Atkins and Fletcher)

will certainly help this personal retirement plan of some key public figures. No wonder it’s catching on..

[Back to the FJC site….]

The CFJI consists of two 2-year phases. Phase I operated from March 2009-March 2011 and Phase II will operate from March 2011-March 2013.

Not if I have anything to do with this!

I suggest that they be forced — with supervised visitation monitors paid for from their last set of royalties or anywhere but a federal or foundation grants stream — to sit through classes from the “California Healthy Marriages Coalition” whether or not they have faith

(This $2.4 million/year grant from HHS was to establish a coalition of coalitions on the other side of the issue of DV _- i.e., it’s just a “family” matter, you guys should work it out…. stay (or get) married, marriage is good!).

Make everyone wanting to expand these centers take time (Get off a plane! Skip a conference!) and sit through a session of KIDS’ TURN SAN DIEGO at their own expense, and then publish narratives of it.

SHARE THIS POST on...

BELOW THIS LINE: AS WRITTEN May 2011 (except as I may later return here to clean up formatting, which is seriously in trouble at this point, but for a snapshot in time, you can see the basic content is still here and was then/still is now, solid on the business model in play…//LGH 9/29/2019):

FEE TABLE

WHO & WHAT IS KIDS’ TURN?

(well, see my recent post on this)…(or figure it out yourself):

Kids’ Turn

Specialties

So what IS it, anyhow?

Such a great organization obviously deserves some extra, extra legislative help…

http://www.metnews.com/endmomay02.html (This is 2002)

Case Against Judge Should Remain in San Diego, Court Rules

Honors, Memberships, and Professional Activities

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, MUCH?

SHARE THIS POST on...

Not just for US. Nope, the UK is going to help out this “charity” (started by family law judge…)

UNbelievable… Some families stuck in the courts (beCAUSE they are stuck in the courts) can’t afford internet, and “Kids’ Turn” has its facebook page…

International Conference Presentations (cached article…)

SHARE THIS POST on...

This background-color and box (text inside borders) is a 7/27/2016 Update

March 3, 2010, post (vs. its update, above) Begins Here.

SHARE THIS POST on...

(1) Wife had order of protection against husband prior to murder-suicide

(2) Harris man gave up guns before strangling wife, hanging himself

(TOP of post — Minnesota. BOTTOM — Kansas.

They relate.)

So, let’s talk about the body counts vis-a-vis the legal terminology:

SHARE THIS POST on...

Short Unique Words (Acronyms, or even EIN#s) Work Better than Phrases. I don’t always tag & quit using “categories.”

ARCHIVES | Posts only (March 2009ff, pick a month). For Pages, see my Tables of Contents, & (as of its date published) Sticky Post ’58 Essays.’

Visitor Count (added 1/29/2018, Blog started 3/2009). Only Counts Home Page.

Follow Blog via Email

Twitter It (mention)

Blog Navigation: Current Posts occur BELOW Sticky Posts. Tables Of Contents by Year and Others are Sticky). (One Widget, Many Boxes with Links). Rev. Dec. 2019; Split Apr. 2022

[April, 2022] DONATE! To show appreciation and help me Justify Continuing this INVESTIGATIVE BLOGGING Begun March, 2009,** (Not Tax-Exempt: Yet). WHY ELSE? See Apr. 2022 Narrative in 5 text boxes.

DONATE to Show Appreciation & Help Me Keep Writing (NB: Not an IRS 501©3)

More Blog Navigation: Doorways to Key Posts & Pages (Apr. 2022, formerly with Dec. 2019 Widget). These Contents May Change.

Meta

DONATE to Show Appreciation & Help Me Keep Writing (NB: Not an IRS 501©3)

Google Translate (added March 2017)

More Resources (a.k.a. Former Sidebar Widgets (FULL of Show & Tell Texts, Links, Key Points and a few ‘DONATE’ Buttons too)

Top Clicks (testing Widget @ March 2017, 2-3 days to display)

Top Posts & Pages (24-48hr Delays apply)

Recent Comments

This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn’t be! **

Cold,Hard.Fact$ (Links similar but not identical to one off-ramped to Widgets post. I may off-ramp this one soon too..//LGH mid-Aug. 2019

Ltrs to/from US Presidents ~ Federal Agencies

(Note: I don't use consistently)

Copyright “fair use” doctrine cited USC Title 17 Ch 1 SEC. 107

CA SB 557 INTRODUCED BY Senator Kehoe
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Atkins and Fletcher)