Evidence that the HHS-OIG Fails to Conduct Independent and Objective Audits and Investigations of Title IV-D Agencies

Doug Dante DougDante1@yahoo.com 29 October 2012 I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. As part of the recent discussions regarding evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activities at the Michigan Friend of the Court, and other federally contracted State Title IV-D agencies, some parents suggested that we contact the Federal Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. Please be aware that I have been in contact with the HHS-OIG for over one year, from August 2011, and they have steadfastly declined all requests for investigation. Sadly, the HHS-OIG, at least in their communications with me, repeatedly offered assurances The information you have provided will be thoroughly reviewed and OIG Hotline Operations will determine the most appropriate course of action (August 30, 2011), and We are reviewing it and will take appropriate action (January 22, 2012), and it took them 8 months to say We are declining to conduct such an investigation (April 12, 2012). It seems that a less persistent person might get the mistaken impression that the terms thorough review or appropriate action might mean the HHSOIG would independently and objectively conduct and supervise audits and investigations (Inspector General Act) in response to evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activities of HHS contractors. They instead rely, apparently exclusively, on Title IV-D agency self assessments which are not available to the public, and it is my opinion they likely contain merely whatever statements the F.O.C. or other Title IV-D agency wants the HHS-OIG to see. Based on the the observed inaction of the HHS-OIG, I think this "self assessment" is inadequate , and I feel that such actions may fail to meet the statutory duties of the duties of the HHS Inspector General as outlined in the Inspector General Act. (details below). Below are selected communications to and from the HHS-OIG and myself. Sincerely, a.k.a. Doug Dante http://www.scribd.com/DougDante ----- Forwarded Message ----From: Doug Dante <dougdante1@yahoo.com> To: "Kathleen.Sebelius@hhs.gov" <Kathleen.Sebelius@hhs.gov>

Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 Subject: Request HHS-OIG Conduct Independent and Objective Audits and Investigations of Title IV-D Agencies

Kathleen Sebelius Secretary of Health and Human Services,

Madam Secretary,

Thank you for your service to our country! I have sent the Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General a sequence of requests for investigation going back over one year to August 2011, and the HHS OIG has declined every request to investigate of fraud waste and abuse at the Michigan Friend of the Court, a Title IV-D HHS contracting agency under the jurisdiction of the HHS OIG, including those based on documents published by the FOC itself, news reports, and directly forwarded e-mails from parents pleading for help. I have been subscribed to the Inspector General's daily update since that time, and I have not observed any incidents where action was taken to prevent fraud waste and abuse victimizing children or parents at any HHS contracting Title IV-D agencies in the United States. Some of that evidence is summarized here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57079006/Some-Evidence-of-Illicit-and-Potentially-CriminalBehavior-at-the-Michigan-Friend-of-the-Court In one e-mail reply from Inspector in Charge Bartnick from 12 April 2012, he wrote: "Each State must submit a detailed annual self-assessment to this Departments Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), containing required program compliance criteria, including information about establishment and enforcement of orders. (45 CFR Pt. 308). "

As far as I know, these self assessments are not available to the public, and it is my opinion they likely contain merely whatever statements the F.O.C. wants the HHS-OIG to see. Based on the the observed inaction of the HHS-OIG, I think this "self assessment" is inadequately objective and less than independent. However, I'm unaware of any action taken by the HHS-OIG to ensure the integrity of Title IV-D programs beyond what appears to me to be a rubber stamp on these reports, and the occasional pro forma audit of undistributed child support.

I feel that this may be inconsistent with the duties of the HHS Inspector General as outlined in the Inspector General Act to independently and objectively conduct and supervise audits and investigations. Furthermore, statements from Inspector in Charge Bartnick cause me to be concerned that the HHS OIG is not effectively implementing their duties to report evidence of criminal activities of their contractors to the Attorney General. Please encourage the HHS-OIG to to investigate some of the issues reported by parents or in the media, and to conduct a more objective and independent assessment of the F.O.C.. Sincerely, a.k.a. Doug Dante PS: My most recent message appears below. http://www.scribd.com/DougDante ----- Forwarded Message ----From: Doug Dante <dougdante1@yahoo.com> To: "Daniel.Levinson@oig.hhs.gov" <Daniel.Levinson@oig.hhs.gov>; "Sheri.Denkensohn@oig.hhs.gov" <Sheri.Denkensohn@oig.hhs.gov>; "Erin.Lemire@oig.hhs.gov" <Erin.Lemire@oig.hhs.gov>; "HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov" <HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov>; hhstips X <hhstips@oig.hhs.gov>; "Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov" <Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 Subject: HHS Tip: Michigan FOC: "Oakland County Friend Of The Court ... are now stealing money from my kids" Inspector General, Daniel R. Levinson Daniel.Levinson@oig.hhs.gov Also Care of Special Assistant to the IG, Sheri Denkensoh Sheri.Denkensohn@oig.hhs.gov Director, External Affairs, Erin Lemire Erin.Lemire@oig.hhs.gov

US Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General Hotline HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov Bartnik, Darren P (OIG/OI) Assistant Special Agent in Charge

Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov Inspectors,

Here is yet another rip off report providing more evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activities at the Michigan Friend of the Court. In this one, a parent alleges an F.O.C. worker fraudulently and intentionally misapplied the Michigan Child Support Formula Manual. Now three more children appear to be suffering because they have allegedly had family resources stolen from them via this alleged fraud. This is hardly surprising given the F.O.C.s own 2008 Changes to Michigan's Child Support Formula Manual, which acknowledged the use of "Automatic Assumption" (a form of potential fraud) in the calculation of income for child support obligations, along with other evidence already provided (see some excerpts below): Possible crimes include wire fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud, conspiracy, and honest services fraud (18 U.S.C. Chapter 63 - all sections), Conspiracy Against Rights (18 USC 241), and Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18USC 242). Consistent with the duties of the HHS Inspector General as outlined in the Inspector General Act: "In order to create independent and objective units (1) to conduct and supervise audits and investigations relating to the programs and operations of the establishments listed in section 12 (2); (2) to provide leadership and coordination and recommend policies for activities designed (A) to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of, and (B) to prevent and detect fraud and abuse in, such programs and operations; and (3) to provide a means for keeping the head of the establishment and the Congress fully and currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to the administration of such programs and operations and the necessity for and progress of corrective action; " http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode05a/usc_sec_05a_0100 0002----000-.html

I respectfully invite you to conduct an independent and objective investigation to prevent fraud and abuse.

This includes, but is not limited to, the duty to conduct and supervise audits and investigations of fraud, waste, and abuse arising out of the failure of HHS contracting state agencies to effectively police the fraudulent misapplication of federally mandated "objective standards for the determination and enforcement of support obligations" "(1) has placed in effect and is implementing objective standards for the determination and enforcement of child support obligations," http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/654

Including such potential of fraud waste and abuse at HHS contracting agencies as would have lead to the totality of circumstances which would allow a F.O.C. worker to allegedly defraud three innocent children and their parent of family resources, as a parent alleges below, a part of a pattern of evidence of potentially fraudulent misapplication of federally mandated objective standards previously reported. http://www.scribd.com/doc/57079006/Some-Evidence-of-Illicit-and-Potentially-CriminalBehavior-at-the-Michigan-Friend-of-the-Court You will likely recognize this as yet another request in a sequence of requests for investigation going back over one year to August 2011, and the HHS OIG has declined every request to investigate of fraud waste and abuse at the Michigan FOC, including those based on documents published by the FOC itself, news reports, and directly forwarded e-mails from parents pleading for help. Also note that I have been subscribed to the Inspector General's daily update since that time, and I have not observed any incidents where action was taken to prevent fraud waste and abuse victimizing children or parents at any HHS contracting Title IV-D agencies in the United States. Inspector Bartnick wrote on 12 April 2012: "Each State must submit a detailed annual self-assessment to this Departments Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), containing required program compliance criteria, including information about establishment and enforcement of orders. (45 CFR Pt. 308). "

Reviewing 45 CFR Pt 308, it says in part that : 308.2 Required program compliance criteria. ... (b) Establishment of paternity and support order. ... (1) If an order for support is required and established during the review period ... location and support order establishment under

303.3(b)(3) and (5), and 303.4(d) of this chapter. http://law.justia.com/cfr/title45/45-2.1.2.1.9.html#45:2.1.2.1.9.0.1.3

Looking at 45 CFR Pt 303: 303.4 Establishment of support obligations. For all cases referred to the IV-D agency or applying under 302.33 of this chapter, the IV-D Agency must: ... (b) Utilize appropriate State statutes and legal processes in establishing the support obligation pursuant to 302.50 of this chapter. ... (d) Within 90 calendar days of locating the alleged father or noncustodial parent... to establish a support order ... in accordance with the State's guidelines ... http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/303.4

It is clear that no state can fulfill 303.4(d) without also fulfilling 303.4(b), and no state which does not fufill 303.4(d) can accurately claim to in its self assessment including CFR 308.2(b)(1). It is my belief that the Michigan FOCs annual self assessment does not examine evidence of potentially fraudulent manipulation of the Michigan Child Support Formula, or a variety of other issues presented here, in part because such matters appear to me to include evidence of plausible deniability and evidence of strategic diffusion of responsibility. Unfortunately, I can't find a copy of the report. Could you please send me a link if it's published online or an electronic copy if one is available? Various other issues presented can also be linked to sections of the CFR. I respectfully request that you independently and objectively conduct and supervise audits and examinations to uncover potential fraud waste and abuse at HHS contracting Title IV-D agencies, including the Michigan Friend of the Court, by independently comparing the evidence I've sent to you to the self assessment of the F.O.C. I'm sure you understand that accepting self assessments at face value, and not investigating any reports of fraud waste and abuse directly sent from real parents and children who claim to be suffering, could be considered insufficiently independent and objective to meet the requirements under the Inspector General Act. Unfortunately, the foreseeable consequences for children and parents can include the suffering of children whose familial resources may have been stolen from them, as outlined below. For other children and parents, the consequences of fraud waste and abuse may be more severe: After a quarter century Calhoun County Probate Court Judge Phillip

Harter said goodbye with punch and cake. .... "Lives depend on what goes in your court," said Erv Brinker, Summit Pointe chief executive officer. "There are people alive today because of the great job you have done over the years." Harter honored for work as Probate judge 'Social worker in a judge's robe' retiring after 26 years Battle Creek Enquirer December 18, 2010

Thank you for reading this e-mail message. I have been a part of several online communities of parents who have expressed concerns about Title IV-D agencies for over 7 years now, and have published documents read over a quarter of a million times. I have received effusive thank you message from parents, both men and women, and sincere compliments from doctors and lawyers. In my own way, I have helped to alter Michigan laws, Michigan Supreme Court decisions, and Michigan court rules. I am confident the HHS-OIG can take a more active role in protecting the rights and interests of children and parents, and respectfully request you consider taking the first steps towards more independent investigations of fraud waste and abuse at such agencies. Sincerely, aka Doug Dante PS: As a reminder, evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activities not from parents includes, but is not limited to: The "2008 Changes to the Michigan Child Support Formula" F.O.C. Training which they published on their web site: "Potential Income Criteria ensure that imputation is based on actual ability and likelihood of earning Any other rule based on pure speculation and violates requirement to base support on actual resources of the parent." 2008 Changes to Michigans Child Support Formula 16 Potential Income - cont'd Basing Income on a parents actual ability and likelihood of earning Shift in Thinking Automatic Assumption v Actual Ability Just the Factors please Just Factors, please Recording Info [MCL 552.517b(6)(a)] 2008 Changes to Michigans Child Support Formula

The new Genesee County F.O.C. whose statements before the FOCB one parent recently recounted on the FRC@yahoogroups.com e-mail list: "You only need to go as far as the Genessee County FOC (the officer, not the office). He openly tells of standing on line on his 1st day on the job as FOC, while an un-knowing clerk twice told him to "get behind the line" as she was taking a personal call on her cell, and told of another employee who came back from vacation, then proceeded to systematically dump over 90 voicemails from his phone while talking about the previous night ballgame with his cube-neighbor.

From "his report to the FOCB-AC earlier this month" And this youtube video from former FOC Child Support Enforcement Specialist Carol Rhodes, where she says in part: "I came to the 32nd circuit family court to make a difference, ... it was all about money ... My director would say regularly, 'We aren't the friend of the family, we're the Friend of the Court!' ... In the years I worked for the system I witnessed regular deception to clients that was mandated by office policy. I saw gender bias and discrimination. I saw records destroyed." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOC58c-Ibdk

She wrote a book on her experiences entitled: "Friend of the court enemy of the family: Surviving the child support system and divorce racket " http://www.amazon.com/Friend-court-enemy-family-Surviving/dp/0966816102 PPS: And the original report: http://www.ripoffreport.com/oakland-county-frien/family-services/pontiac-michigan3B0C9.htm Oakland County Friend Of The Court They went against state law. And are now stealing money from my kids whom live with me in Ohio Pontiac, Michigan

I have a daughter in Clarkston Michigan with my ex-wife. The women makes over 60,000 a yr, and I am a diabled veteran with another family who live with me. I only make 20,000 a yr. She has another child with her new marriage and is given her deduction on our child support case. I have 3 children that they are refusing to put on the deductions. MCSF 2.08 states that I should be given this deduction as well. My kids here in Ohio with me are suffering for the lack of money we could be getting if The Foc court system would follow the state law and calculate my support the legal way. They also have been assisting my ex wife in parental alienation of my daughter. They do everything in there power to limit my visitation for no reason what so ever but to gain more support money. Cause in Michigan if you have limited visit they calculate that for you to pay more support money. And all Friend Of The Court employees pay is base on the doller amount collected in Child support for each child. They care nothing about destroying these children and their relationship with their non- custodial parent. I am a 23yr disabled Iraq veteren. And I can go and get blown up protecting their children and they steal from mine.

==================================================================== FOC Issues - Request for Investigation Hide Details FROM: Bartnik, Darren P (OIG/OI) TO: Doug Dante Message flagged Thursday, April 12, 2012 Dear Mr. Dante: We have received your emails requesting that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General (OIG) investigate the Michigan Friend of the Court (FOC) program. We are declining to conduct such an investigation for the reasons detailed below. First, OIGs jurisdiction in the enforcement of child support orders is limited to investigation of noncustodial parents in interstate cases under 18 U.S.C. 228.* This provision makes it a Federal offense where: (1) the noncustodial parent willfully fails to pay child support for more than 1 year and the State where the child lives is different from the State where the noncustodial parent lives; (2) the

amount the noncustodial parent owes is more than $5,000 and the State where the child lives is different from the State where the noncustodial parent lives, or; (3) the noncustodial parent travels to another State or country to avoid paying child support. The information contained in your emails apparently postings from blogs generally involve disputes between non-custodial parents and FOC; they are not instances of alleged non-payment of past-due support for the HHS OIG to investigate and refer for Federal prosecution. The Department of Health and Human Services also provides grant funds to the State child support agency Michigan under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. The OIG does have authority to ensure that those HHS funds are expended in accordance with the terms of the grant. In this regard, the Federal law imposes important accountability measures on recipient states. Each State must submit a detailed annual self-assessment to this Departments Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), containing required program compliance criteria, including information about establishment and enforcement of orders. (45 CFR Pt. 308). In addition, on Federal level, OCSE, as part of its programmatic responsibilities in administering Section IV-D of the Social Security Act (42 USC 651ff.), conducts an audit of each State at least once every three years. The audit, among other things, assesses the adequacy of financial management of the State program operated under the State plan including assessments of whether Federal and other funds made available to carry out the State program are being appropriately expended, and are properly and fully accounted for; and whether collections and disbursements of support payments are carried out correctly and are fully accounted for. (42 USC 652(a)(4)(C)). As an additional layer of oversight, each State is subject an annual non-Federal audit, in accordance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 USC 75017507) and revised OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. (42 U.S.C. 92.26). The OIG does conduct additional audits relating to Title IV-D grants; some of those audits have involved the Michigan program (see e.g., Review of Undistributable Child Support Collections in Michigan from October 1, 1998, Through December 31, 2004," (A-05-05-00033, Aug. 4, 2006)). However, resource constraints render us unable to look into every complaint we receive. Where, as here, there is a comprehensive oversight and reporting mechanism in place at both the State and Federal levels, we often must rely primarily on those reviews and reports. Many of the incidents you reported involved disputes over custody determinations, visitation or the amount of court-ordered support. It is important to emphasize that the OIG has no authority to change the directives of state court orders addressing custody, visitation, and support arrangements. These authorities are a matter of state law and the OIG cannot intervene to change them. As stated earlier, our enforcement jurisdiction extends only to investigations and enforcement of interstate payment nonpayment of court-ordered support. In looking into your request, we also noted that there is a formal procedure for lodging a grievance against the FOC, as well as individual attorneys or judges. Model Friend of the Court Handbook, http://courts.michigan.gov/scao/resources/publications/manuals/focb/focb_hbk.pdf , at p. 22) The Court submits an annual report of these grievances to the Michigan State legislature.

Sincerely, Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI (XXX) XXX-XXXX _________ *This explicit jurisdiction is set out in the OIGs annual appropriation (most recently at P. L. 112-74, Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2012, Division F, which reads, in part, of such amount, necessary sums shall be available for . . . investigating non-payment of child support cases for which nonpayment is a Federal offense under 18 U.S.C. 228

==================================================================== Re: Lack of HHS-OIG response to evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activites in HHS administered Title IV-D programs Hide Details FROM: Doug Dante TO: Daniel.Levinson@oig.hhs.gov Sheri.Denkensohn@oig.hhs.gov CC: Bliss, Erin C (OIG/IO) Bartnik, Darren P (OIG/OI) hhstips Message flagged Monday, February 6, 2012

Inspector General, Daniel R. Levinson Daniel.Levinson@oig.hhs.gov Also Care of Special Assistant to the IG, Sheri Denkensoh Sheri.Denkensohn@oig.hhs.gov

cc: Director, External Affairs, Erin Lemire Erin.Lemire@oig.hhs.gov cc: OIG Hotline HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov cc: Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov Mr. Levinson, Thank you for your service to our country as our HHS OIG. (And to everyone else cc:ed, thank you also) As you may recall, I contacted you regarding evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activities (some I feel certain are crimes) regarding some of the programs you oversee in August of 2011, specifically evidence of crime at the Michigan Friend of the Court, Michigan's child support enforcement and parenting time enforcement pseudo-agency. I am concerned that the HHS-OIG has not yet lived up to its goal to "ensure healthy lives for the people we serve through efficient and effective government programs, more than 300 of them". One of these people was Robert Byrd, a 4 year old boy who was starved to death in the home of his relative foster care family, reported the Detroit News May 11, 2011 (copy on advocate's blog): http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2011/05/charges-expected-today-in-highlandpark.html#axzz1lcSfvOs2 Please note especially that his father was seeking custody of the child. During the months the boy slowly died in his aunt's and uncle's home, covered in the bruises from their abuse, it's a safe bet that his father was not able to get parenting time with him. This is likely due in part because the federal parenting time grants that the HHS-OIG is tasked with protecting have all been substantially stolen from innocent children like Robert, and what is left is a trap laden bureaucratic maze which enriches FOC appointed functionaries while endangering the lives of innocent children like Robert by preventing their parents from protecting them. Robert's death and the deaths of other children were some of the many reasons that I gathered and reported this information on illicit and potentially criminal activities at the FOC to your office in August, 2011, and why I was so excited when Inspector in Charge Bartnick finally requested additional information in November and December, 2011. And now it is almost 3 months later. Has your agency conducted even a de-minimis investigation of these crimes? Judging by the actions of the HHS-OIG I can view, no. If the HHS-OIG had, they probably would have read where I offered, on many occasions in these follow up e-mail messages, to give further evidence regarding these crimes if anyone at the HHS-OIG merely requests it. That no such request is forthcoming, signals that there is no investigation, or worse

that there is an investigation, but it is that it is incapable of performing the most simple tasks necessary to the mission of the agency and protecting children like Robert. Mr. Levinson, is the HHS-OIG going to investigate evidence of the crimes at Michigan Friend of the Court to which you now have evidence? Is the HHS-OIG going to ensure that children like Robert live healthy lives through efficient and effective government programs administered through the HHS? Sincerely, Doug Dante PS: Some previous messsages are below. http://oig.hhs.gov/about-oig/about-us/index.asp

==================================================================== RE: Lack of HHS-OIG response to evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activites in HHS administered Title IV-D programs Hide Details FROM: Bartnik, Darren P (OIG/OI) TO: Doug Dante CC: Bliss, Erin C (OIG/IO) Message flagged Friday, January 27, 2012 Mr. Dante: Thank you for providing information to HHS/OIG regarding alleged criminal conduct related to Title IV-D Programs. We are reviewing it and will take appropriate action. However, we do not comment on potential investigations, even with a referral source, and so I cannot provide you the status update that you are seeking. If HHS-OIG has questions for you, we will be in touch. Thank you again for your time and attention on this matter. Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI (XXX) XXX-XXXX

======================================================================= Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI (313) 218-8993 Mr. Bartnik, Do you have any questions regarding the information I've sent so far? Do you still wish to schedule a meeting? Sincerely, Doug Dante PS: Messages are: FYI: [FRC] Garbage In Garbage Out C$ Calculation Complaint Review: Wayne Co. Friend of the court 2008 Child Support: Pathetic offsets which appear to harm children and questionable and inaccurate figures 2008 Changes to Michigan's Child Support Formula: Information on automatic income imputation FYI: Possible Gender Bias in Michigan Child Custody Case: Stay-at-Home Dad Loses Custody, Part 1 Note: Complaint Review: WAYNE COUNTY FRIEND OF THE COURT AND WAYNE COUNTY CLERK OFFICE Featured Ripoff Reports Fw: Muskegon Chronicle: Lisa Hovis, ex-Muskegon County Friend of the Court worker, pleads no contest to embezzling child-support money FW: Oaklandcountypress.com: Conflict of interest concerns cloud court Re: Friend of Court Article Fw: WXYZ-TV: A new court policy leads to judicial oversight and better protection of parents' rights Fw: [FRC] Drunk driving with child case Fw: Illegal child support Fw: FYI: WXYZ-TV: Should the state be able to take your kids, or does it have too much power? Evidence of Parenting Time Problems: lack of enforcement, grant money wasted, excessive fees, etc Many HHS-OIG Related Issues from Documents Online

=====================================================================

Evidence of Parenting Time Problems: lack of enforcement, grant money wasted, excessive fees, etc Hide Details FROM: Doug Dante TO: Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov Message flagged Thursday, December 15, 2011

Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI Darren Bartnick, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. It seems that Wayne County FOC appears to deny its obligation to enforce parenting time, suggesting that federal HHS parenting time grants are not being used in a useful manner to assist the children and parents of Wayne County. AFAIK, this money appears to simply be handed to people running supervised visitation centers, who are often relatives or allies of the FOC or local courts. See previous messages regarding conflicts of interests in parenting time funds. As you can read from previous articles, these visitation centers do not use that grant money to provide free or discounted services to low income residents. I personally am concerned that this federal grant money may be ending up in the pockets of insiders via inflated salaries or other mechanisms rather than going to programs that actually help children. See also: Conflicts of Interest Concerns Cloud Court Oakland County Press http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2011/05/24/business/doc4ddc3a31aaa15781664917.txt? viewmode=4 Also, it has been reported in the past that FOC refused to enforce parenting time for parents who complained, and then demanded payment to investigate and modify parenting time, and then often reduced the time a parent had with his/her child in a manner which the parents often felt was retaliatory. (I can dig through the archives to find some examples. These things take a lot of time). More on this later.

From their web site: "WAYNE COUNTY FRIEND OF THE COURT SERVICES Mission: To encourage positive relationships and ensure financial security for Children and families in accordance with state and federal laws. Vision: The Friend of the Court through strong leadership and well trained managers, referees, attorneys, supervisors, and staff will provide the highest quality of service to the children and families on the domestic relations docket. After the Michigan Department of the Human Services forwards a case action referral, the Wayne County Friend of the Court provides the following services: Establishing Paternity Establishing court orders for support Establishing court orders for custody and parenting time Collecting and processing child support payments Modifying support court orders Enforcing court orders for support" From: WAYNE COUNTY FRIEND OF THE COURT SERVICES.pdf ( Link no longer active. Accessed on Thursday, April 21, 2011) They do not provide services to enforce parenting time or to provide makeup parenting time. Please note that this seems to be inconsistent with Michigan Law. From MCL 552.501 "(2) The purposes of this act are to enumerate and describe the powers and duties of the friend of the court and the office of the friend of the court; to ensure that procedures adopted by the friend of the court will protect the best interests of children in domestic relations matters; to encourage and assist parties voluntarily to resolve contested domestic relations matters by agreement; to compel the enforcement of parenting time and custody orders; and to compel the enforcement of support orders, ensuring that persons legally responsible for the care and support of children assume their legal obligations and reducing the financial cost to this state of providing public assistance funds for the care of children. This act shall be construed to promote the enumerated purposes and to facilitate the resolution of domestic relations matters." This is consistent with a long held apparent policy that was evident in the 2008 Friend of the Court Statistical Supplement, which showed that they ordered zero hours of makeup parenting time. Please also note MCL 552.642: "(1) Each circuit shall establish a makeup parenting time policy under which a parent who has been wrongfully denied parenting time is able to make up the parenting time at a later date. The policy does not apply until it is approved by the chief circuit judge. A makeup parenting time policy established under this section shall provide all of the following: (a) That makeup parenting time shall be at least the same type and duration of parenting time as

the parenting time that was denied, including, but not limited to, weekend parenting time for weekend parenting time, holiday parenting time for holiday parenting time, weekday parenting time for weekday parenting time, and summer parenting time for summer parenting time." The FOC in Michigan receives about $1 Million per year to enforce parenting time and similar services. Its difficult to determine exact numbers, but I believe that the money comes from: US CODE TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 7 > SUBCHAPTER IV > Part D > 669b.Grants to States for access and visitation programs

See also my document describing financial incentives and conflicts of interest:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/630611/A-Quick-Summary-of-Title-IVD-Funding-and-Incentives The law recently changed in Michigan (December 2009 IIRC) so that the FOC can charge fees to investigate parenting time complaints. The fees are supposed to be for the "expenses of the office for conducting an investigation" (This was called "actual costs" or similar terms in various legislative summaries) From MCL 552.505: "(3) Pursuant to standards prescribed by the state court administrative office under the supervision and direction of the supreme court, the office may charge the parties an amount that does not exceed the expenses of the office for conducting an investigation and making a report and recommendation under subsection (1)(g). If the court orders a whole or partial waiver or suspension of fees in the case because of indigency or inability to pay, the office shall not charge the amount or, if applicable, shall reduce the amount. An amount shall not be charged under this subsection if the investigation was not requested by either party. If the court determines that a request by a party that led to the investigation was frivolous, the court may order that the amount be charged only against the party, but the amount shall not be charged against the other party. Money collected under this subsection shall be deposited in the county friend of the court fund created under section 2530 of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.2530." http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-552-505 However, it appears to me that the pattern is that FOC offices *always* demand $300 as the "expenses of the office for conducting an investigation" of the investigation, and they simply refuse to do anything until they get the money. Firstly, it's a crying shame that the courts don't recognize their duties to provide subsidized services to disabled parents, including disabled veterans, who simply can't afford $300 every time that they can't see their kids, and therefore end up with zero effective parenting time enforcement. The law even reminds them of their ability to waive fees. They get about $1M in taxpayer dollars each year to provide this service, none of which appears to go towards it, and they get lots of other taxpayer money too.

Secondly, I simply have serious doubts that this $300 is not significantly inflated as the "expenses of the office for conducting an investigation". As far as I can see, most investigations of parenting time complaints consist of a worker receiving payment and complaint, someone handling paperwork, someone reading the report, and making a recommendation. Most FOC worker advertisements are at around $15 per hour for skilled workers and $9 per clerks. I can go through and get some records if you like. I simply don't understand how reading a form and processing the money takes more than 1.5 hours. This puts my total estimated "expenses of the office for conducting an investigation" at $22.50 of labor, and lets say $7.50 in overhead, or about $30, or about 10x less than the $300. This $300 does not even include a meeting with a single person! For that, it appears customary that even more fees are assessed!

"Before the investigative process can begin, $300 must be paid at the FOC Office ...Should the court refer you to a Troubleshooting meeting, payment can be made the day of the appointment. If payment is not made, no meeting will take place and a report to that effect will be sent to the court." INVESTIGATION FEES INFORMATION Kent County FOC Investigation_Fees_Information.pdf Search: "Investigation_Fees_Information.pdf site:accesskent.com" on www.google.com to get active link. To me, these "expenses of the office for conducting an investigation" are so far from what I suspect the real costs are that I feel the it is possible that people involved may be intentionally deceiving the parents involved (and by extension, the children). Given that this information is available electronically via the internet, telephone, as well as payments and processing done via check, credit card, and mail, it seems that these matters, if they involve intentional deception, appear to fall into federal jurisdiction, including potential criminal jurisdiction. Furthermore, I feel that, as I understand them, the facts suggest that the parenting time grants that Michigan receives all go directly to people who seem to often have a connection to the FOC, and go to subsidize the funding of supervised visitation shelters run by those people. These shelters appear to offer no free or low cost services to parents and children, and I'm concerned that their prices should also be investigated (note in the news article above, the center requested county money to cover their fees for providing those services for poor parents), and given that they appear to be essentially monopoly providers of the only service that allows some parents to see their children, it is possible that those prices charged to parents may similarly be much higher than one might normally think is reasonable. This means that it is possible that those federal grant dollars may be substantially misspent, wasted, or

otherwise diverted, and it is possible that parents may simply be "priced out" of the ability to see their children, both through high fees for parenting time enforcement, and through high fees for supervised parenting time. Please recall that two parent involvement is well known to reduce incidences child abuse, so these high fees may also be promoting the abuse of innocent children! Also, there is some other evidence that these supervised visitation centers may be overused, and may therefore be interfering with the natural and protective parent child relationship for some parents and their children. Note the conflicts of interests in the article above. (I can get more information if you request. Again, it requires digging) Can you please what investigate what, if anything, is necessary within your jurisdiction to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of Michigan's federally funded HHS programs, including investigating whether the statutory and constitutional rights of parents, children, and other family members, and the applications of various grants, and other various federal laws, may be being violated in these situations? Sincerely, Doug Dante

===================================================================== Fw: FYI: WXYZ-TV: Should the state be able to take your kids, or does it have too much power? Hide Details FROM: Doug Dante TO: Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov Message flagged Wednesday, December 14, 2011 Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI Darren Bartnick, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

Please see the article below from WXYZ-TV and follow the link below to watch the video. Please note concerns of Michigan ACLU director: Michigan ACLU Legal Director, Michael J. Steinberg says Michigan law is unconstitutional because it allows a child to be taken from his parents without having to prove the child is in immediate danger. Courts across the country have said, if youre going to take a kid without a hearing there has to be a finding or a showing that the child is in harm, said Steinberg. Also note University of Michigan Law Professor Vivek Sankran: Whats happening in Michigan is a pattern of kids being taken away from parents against whom no allegations are made, simply based on the other parents conduct, said University of Michigan Law Professor Vivek Sankran. Sankran challenges DHS decisions in the court daily and hes alarmed by what he calls the guilt by association problem. Sankran says both DHS and the courts are equally to blame for perfectly fit parents losing their children. To me, such actions may be violations of the statutory and constitutional protections of parents and children, including their due process rights to the care and custody of their children, as well as their various statutory rights. AFAIK, these activities are at least partly paid for by HHS funds. Investigating this situation seems to me to be reasonably within the duties of the HHS-OIG. Can you please what investigate what, if anything, is necessary within your jurisdiction to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of Michigan's federally funded HHS programs, including investigating whether the statutory and constitutional rights of parents, children, and other family members, and various federal laws, may be being violated in these situations? Sincerely, Doug Dante http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/1356/22 WXYZ-TV: Should the state be able to take your kids, or does it have too much power? http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/state-taking-your-kids

=====================================================================

2008 Child Support: Pathetic offets which appear to harm children and questionable and innacurate figures Hide Details FROM:

 Doug Dante TO: Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov Message flagged Thursday, December 1, 2011 Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI Mr. Bartnick, With regards to the 2008 Change document, and other publications from the FOC made at the time, I would like to draw your attention to a figure which I find troubling. Based on my previous calculations, the figure on slide 22 is incorrect, and that the new parenting time offsets are almost always smaller than the older ones. I am concerned that this figure, which shows a simple shift in some parenting time overnights, sometimes favoring the custodial parent, and at other times favoring the non-custodial parent, could have been intentionally misleading. Anyway, I don't see how to apply the formula to make it accurate. My own calculations show a shocking lack of family resource devoted to children in the home of the non-custodial parent, often much less than the actual cost of feeding them, and suggest that the new formula, if correctly understood, can substantially harm a child's relationship with his or her noncustodial parent. My calculations showed for a typical one child, two parent, situation, a child who stayed 95 overnights at the home of his/her noncustodial parent would only be provided a pathetic $29.35/month for his/her maintenance there, not even enough of the family's resources to cover his/her food costs. Please also see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/458394/Michigan-Friend-of-the-Court-Child-Support-ModificationRequest This issue of inadequate offsets is covered on pages 45-47. I am concerned that the people who approved of this formula as being in the best interests of children, or whatever approval process was used, were not adequately informed of the serious lack of family resources children would be given in the homes of their noncustodial parent, and may have been misinformed about its effects on children and parents. I urge you to determine whether it's within your jurisdiction to review the formula and correct it so that children are adequately provided for, and to do a review of the documentation presented in support of the formula to determine whether it is inadequate or incorrect, and to investigate whether it is possible that someone may have intentionally provided incorrect information which may have the effect of

harming innocent children and parents. Sincerely, Doug Dante http://www.scribd.com/DougDante ===================================================================== From: "Bartnik, Darren P (OIG/OI)" <Darren.Bartnik@oig.hhs.gov> To: DOUGDANTE1@YAHOO.COM Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 Subject: Concerns about Michigan's Friend of the Court Doug: I would like to schedule a time to speak to you about your concerns regarding Michigans Friend of the Court. Let me know what your availability is during the last week of November. Thanks. Darren Bartnik Assistant Special Agent in Charge DHHS/OIG/OI

===================================================================== RE: Fraud, waste, and abuse tip for an HHS program Hide Details FROM: Lemire, Erin B (OIG/IO) TO: Doug Dante Message flagged Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Dear Mr. Dante,

Thank you for bringing your concern to our attention. The information you have provided will be thoroughly reviewed and OIG Hotline Operations will determine the most appropriate course of action. Please be assured that your identity will be protected as permitted by Federal law. You will receive no further communication from our office unless you are contacted directly by one of our Investigators. OIG Hotline Operations does not provide status updates, nor can OIG disclose information from its systems of records to third parties, including individuals who make allegations. If you have more information concerning this or any other allegation involving HHS programs or operations, please contact OIG Hotline Operations as follows: Telephone: Fax: TDD: Email: Internet: Mailing Address: 1-800-HHS-TIPS (1-800-447-8477) 1-800-223-8164 1-800-377-4950 HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov www.oig.hhs.gov/fraud/hotline US Department of Health & Human Services Attn: OIG Hotline P.O. Box 23489 Washington, DC 20026 Thank you,

Office of Inspector General

Erin Bliss Lemire Director of External Affairs Office of Inspector General US Department of Health and Human Services

202-327-3115 mobile 202-205-9523 office

From: Doug Dante [mailto:dougdante1@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 To: Levinson, Dan R (OIG/IO); Denkensohn, Sheri N (OIG/IO); Lemire, Erin B (OIG/IO); Tips, HHS Subject: TIP: Fraud, waste, and abuse tip for an HHS program

Inspector General, Daniel R. Levinson Daniel.Levinson@oig.hhs.gov Also Care of Special Assistant to the IG, Sheri Denkensoh Sheri.Denkensohn@oig.hhs.gov Director, External Affairs, Erin Lemire Erin.Lemire@oig.hhs.gov OIG Hotline HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov Please be aware of evidence of illicit and potentially criminal activity at the Michigan Friend of the Court, Michigan's Title IV-D "agency" and an HHS contractor. This includes evidence of theft of child support, evidence of child custody fraud, evidence of tampering with witnesses, evidence of child support calculation fraud, evidence of obstructing a federal audit, evidence of conspiracy against rights, and evidence of federal felony gender discrimination. Please see the attached document, which is also posted online at http colon slash slash scri dot bi slash kQHvC9 or simply use Google and search for the phrase "Some evidence of illicit and potentially criminal behavior at the Michigan Friend of the Court" Former FOC enforcement specialist Carol Rhodes explained: "I came to the 32nd circuit family court to make a difference, ... but early on I realized ... it was all about money ... My director would say regularly, 'We aren't the friend of the family, we're the Friend of the Court!' ... In the years I worked for the system I witnessed regular deception to clients that was mandated by office policy. I saw gender bias and discrimination. I saw records destroyed. ... I saw hundreds of pleas for parenting time or enforcement get buried because there is no money in enforcing custody or visitation issues. ... We were rated according to how much money we would bring in" (there is a link to the youtube video at scr dot

bi slash kQHvC9 ). Please acknowledge that the HHS-OIG has received this material by replying to this e-mail or sending an e-mail to DougDante1@yahoo.com. Please keep me apprised of your investigation, and investigation identifiers used for tracking purposes, and the names of the investigators assigned. Please notify me if you feel any part of the information you have received is not subject to the jurisdiction of the HHS-OIG, and the agency whom you feel has jurisdiction. Sincerely, A.K.A. Doug Dante DougDante1@yahoo.com http://www.scribd.com/DougDante PS: This is contact numbers 5-8. On Monday August 8, 2011, I FAXed the HHS-OIG a document entitled "Some evidence of illicit and potentially criminal behavior at the Michigan Friend of the Court". No response. On Wednesday, August 17, I also sent a follow up FAX. No response. On Tuesday, August 23, I e-mailed Mark Wolfson, Office of External Affairs, Office of Inspector General, Health and Human Services, via public.affairs@oig.hhs.gov. No response. On Saturday, August 27, 2011, I sent an e-mail to HHStips@oig.hhs.gov. No response.