Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
content center
The Comprehensive Centers and unseen (and unelected) bureaucrats providing ‘guidance’ to your state agencies and schools. Accessed here.



The recent Brexit vote was a referendum on citizens voting on self-determination.  Regardless of what the progressive media and its spokespersons are spinning, the vote had less to do with fear of others and more to do with the UK being able to regain its sovereignty.  When a country cannot set its own policies and Belgium is the controlling entity, the centralization of European government was not appealing to the majority of UK voters.  Maybe the tipping point for Brits and its independence from Brexit tyranny disguised as a collaborative union revolved around…..TEA.  Oh, the irony is rich, isn’t it?  Go back a few hundred years and an American revolution’s concern was….TEA.  Taxing tea or directing how one makes one’s tea should be studied and how it impacted civil disobedience and a vote against the ruling class.  Was Brexit ultimately decided by the EU’s the centralized  policy of banning certain appliances?  From EU to launch kettle and toaster crackdown after Brexit vote:


The EU is poised to ban high-powered appliances such as kettles, toasters, hair-dryers within months of Britain’s referendum vote, despite senior officials admitting the plan has brought them “ridicule”.

The European Commission plans to unveil long-delayed ‘ecodesign’ restrictions on small household appliances in the autumn. They are expected to ban the most energy-inefficient devices from sale in order to cut carbon emissions.

The plans have been ready for many months, but were shelved for fear of undermining the referendum campaign if they were perceived as an assault on the British staples of tea and toast.

A sales ban on high-powered vacuum cleaners and inefficient electric ovens in 2014 sparked a public outcry in Britain.

EU officials have been instructed to immediately warn their senior managers of any issues in their portfolios that relate to the UK and could boost the Leave campaign were they to become public.

The decision to push ahead with the plans soon after the British vote was revealed by Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission president, at the weekly College of Commissioners meeting on April 20.

Internet routers, hand-dryers, mobile phones and patio jet-washers are also being examined by commission experts as candidates for new ecodesign rules.

However, several products may be granted a stay of execution, as officials admitted the plans are a lightning rod for public anger at perceived meddling by Brussels.

At the meeting, Jyrki Katainen, the Commission’s vice president for growth, said they should push ahead with the plans for standardised energy usage limits as they could contribute significantly to emissions targets.

But he “admitted that ecodesign standards were sometimes ridiculed in the media in terms of the political and geostrategic issues the union was faced with”, according to official minutes of the meeting.

David Coburn, a Ukip MEP, earlier this year blamed the EU after finding it took his toaster four attempts to brown the bread sufficiently to spread marmalade, and the minutes show how politically fraught the issue has become.


As an example, the heavy hand of centralization is well known to Americans in the mandates of light bulb usage.  Light bulb manufacturers now must manufacture their product which must meet governmental specifications.  Even if you don’t like the new design and having to dispose of it in a different manner because of its radioactive component, that’s too bad for you.  The government has decreed it, so that’s your new reality.  Could the EU have crossed the line when it was set to decree what type of electric appliances Brits must use?

What does self-determination in educational services and policy mean?   Should local school districts should make decisions for their own schools?  Many Americans think that’s how schools still operate.  They have the antiquated (but constitutional) belief that taxpayers, through their school board representatives, have a voice in educational directives and policies in the public schools.  Many taxpayers and even school board members are unaware of the federal and state bureaucrats in control of school district policies and directives.   Here is one list of the Federal ‘guidance’ to your state and local districts from The Wisconsin Center for Education Research:





Comprehensive Centers Network

The Comprehensive Regional Assistance Centers program is a network of 15 regional centers funded by the U.S. Department of Education under the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994 and  the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (NCLB). The purpose of the centers is to help implement NCLB in ways that support Federal, State, and local efforts to improve teaching and learning and to increase the academic achievement of all children. Activities include professional development/capacity building at the State, district, and school levels; customized consultation;  and other technical assistance services to improve the quality of instruction, curricula, assessments, policymaking, and other aspects of school reform supported with funds under NCLB. In particular, high poverty, low-performing schools, BIA schools, and districts with high-risk populations are targeted for Comprehensive Center services.



U.S. Department of Education

The U.S. Department of Education was established by Congress on May 4, 1980, under the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88 of October 1979). The Department of Education  seeks to supplement and complement the efforts of states, local school systems, the private sector, public and private nonprofit educational research institutions, community-based organizations, parents, and students to improve the quality of education. The Department promotes federally supported research, evaluation, and dissemination of information to improve the coordination of Federal education programs and activities.



Secretary’s Regional Representatives and Regional Offices

The U.S. Department of Education maintains 10 regional offices throughout the country. These offices represent the Department’s programs and interests on a regional basis, and each is staffed by program representatives. The Secretary’s Regional Representative (SRR) and staff conduct Departmental business on many issues. The Office of Student Financial Assistance Programs (OSFAP) handles questions related to student financial assistance programs. The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) assists constituents with rehabilitative services. The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) responds to questions about and reviews complaints related to civil rights issues. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) investigates potential violations of law and conducts audits on Department-funded programs. The Office of Management (OM) also maintains personnel offices or representatives in each of the regional offices.



Center on Education and Work

The Center on Education and Work – through collaborative, interdisciplinary research and development programs – seeks to provide leadership in identifying and responding to issues affecting  the connections among education, work, community, and the family . The Center is committed to translating research and development findings into practical solutions and effective policies through focused dissemination, professional development, and technical assistance.

Dr. L. Allen Phelps, Director
Center on Education and Work
964 Educational Sciences Building
1025 W. Johnson Street
Madison, WI 53706-1796
Tel: 800.446.0399
Fax: 608.262.3050


Equity Assistance Centers

The Equity Assistance Centers (formerly Desegregation Assistance Centers) 
were first established in 1978. The 10 centers, funded by the U.S. Department 
of Education under Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, provide assistance to 
public schools in the areas of race, gender, and national origin to promote equal 
educational opportunities. The following regional Equity Assistance Centers serve 
those states in the CC-VI region (Iowa, Michigan,Minnesota, North Dakota, South 
Dakota, and Wisconsin).
(Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin)
Percy Bates, Director
Programs for Educational Opportunity (PEO)
University of Michigan
1005 School of Education
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1259
Tel: 734.763.9910
Fax: 734.763.2137
(Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska) 
Dr. Charles I. Rankin, Director
Midwest Equity Assistance Center
Kansas State University
401 Bluemont Hall
1100 Mid-Campus Drive
Manhattan, KS 66506-5327
Tel: 785.532.6408
Fax: 785.532.5548

(Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming) 
Ramon Villarreal, Project Director
Interwest Equity Assistance Center
Colorado State University
410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1690
Denver, CO 80202
Tel: 303.623.9384; 970.497.3660
Fax: 303.623.9023; 970.497.3665


Educational Resource Information Center (ERIC)

The Education Resource Information Center (ERIC) is a digital library of education-related resources, sponsored by the Insitute of Education Sciences of theU.S. Department of Education. ERIC will eventually provide a comprehensive, easy-to-use, searchable, Internet-based bibliographic and full-text database of education research and information that also meets the requirements of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002. The 2005 collection consists primarily of electronic bibliographic records describing journal and non-journal literature selected by ERIC from 1966-2003. In the months and years ahead, the collection will expand to include the full-text of articles along with other electronic resources such as audio and video materials.


Eisenhower National Clearinghouse for Mathematics and Science Education (ENC)

The Eisenhower National Clearinghouse for Mathematics and Science Education (ENC) is a searchable repository of K-12 mathematics and science instructional materials, vwith hotlinks to virtual resources for math and science teaching and to Federal programs supporting math and science education improvement.

Len Simutis, Director
Eisenhower National Clearinghouse
Ohio State University
1929 Kenny Road
Columbus, OH 43210-1079
Tel: 800.621.5785


National Network of Eisenhower Regional Consortia

The National Network of Eisenhower Regional Consortia and Clearinghouse (the Eisenhower 
Network) works collaboratively to improve and strengthen K-12 mathematics and science 
education for all. This unique regional and national system provides professional development, 
fosters collaboration, and disseminates exemplary products and resources.  
Originally authorized by Congress in 1990, the Eisenhower Network is funded by the U.S. Department 
of Education and is sponsored by the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.  
The following Consortia serve those states in the CC-VI region (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota,
and Wisconsin). 
(Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming) 

Ceri Dean, Director
McREL Mid-continent Eisenhower Regional Consortium for Mathematics and Science
2550 S. Parker Road, Suite 500
Aurora, CO 80014
Tel: 800.949.6387
Fax: 303.337.3005
(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin)

Gil Valdez, Director
North Central Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Consortium
1120 E. Diehl Road, Suite 200
Naperville, IL 60563
Tel: 800.356.2735
Fax: 630.649.6700


National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (NCADI)

The National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (NCADI), one of the largest Federal clearinghouses, distributes the latest studies and surveys, guides, videocassettes, and other types of information and materials on substance abuse and addiction treatment.  NCADI offers a wide variety of services, many free of charge, to the public. English- and Spanish-speaking information specialists staff are skilled at recommending appropriate publications, posters, and videocassettes; conducting customized searches; providing grant and funding information; and referring people to appropriate organizations. NCADI is co-sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

11420 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD. 20852

Tel: 800.729.6686 (


National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA)

The National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (formerly the National Clearinghosuse for Bilingual Education) is funded by the U.S. Office of English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students (OELA) Department of Education under Title III of the No Child LEft Behind Act of 2001. NCELA collects, analyzes, synthesizes, and disseminates  information about language instruction educational programs for  English-language learners and related programs.  students. NCELA compiles information on materials, programs, research, and other resources that can help educators meet the challenge posed by the complex and changing educational needs of language minority students in U.S. schools.

Nancy Zelasco, Director
George Washington University
2121 K Street, NW, Suite 260
Washington, DC 20037
Fax: 800.467-4283
URL: []


Regional Laboratory Network (REL Network)

The Regional Laboratory Network (REL Network) links 10 educational research and development organizations supported by contracts with the U.S. Education Department, Institute of Education Sciences.The Regional Educational Laboratories work as vital partners with state and local educators, community members, and policymakers in using research to tackle the difficult issues of education reform and improvement. The laboratories listed below serve those states in the CC-VI region (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin).

(Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming) 

J. Timothy Waters, Director
Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL)
2550 S. Parker Road, Suite 500
Aurora, CO 80014-1678
Tel: 303.337.0990
Fax: 303.337.3005

(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin) 

Cathy Gunn, Director
North Central Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Consortium

North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL)
1120 E. Diehl Road, Suite 200
Naperville, IL 60563
Tel: 800.356.2735
Fax: 630.649.6700


Regional Technology in Education Consortia (RTECs)

Funded by the Technology for Education Act of 1994, the Regional Technology in Education Consortia (RTECs) help states, local educational agencies, teachers, school library and media personnel, administrators, and other education entities integrate technologies into K-12 classrooms, and library media centers, adult literacy centers, and other educational settings.

The following RTECs serve states within the CC-VI region (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin).

(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin) 

Gil Valdez, Director
North Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium (NCRTEC)
1120East Diehl Road, Suite 200
Naperville, IL 60563-1486
Tel: 630.649.6500
Fax: 630. 649.6700

(Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Souht Dakota, Wyoming)
High Plains Regional Technology in Education Consortium (HPR*TEC) 

Jayne James, Director
University of Kansas
1122 West Campus Road, Suite 239
Lawrence, KS 66045
Tel: 888.TEC.2001
Fax: 785.864.0704


Federal Resource Center for Special Education (FRC)

The Federal Resource Center for Special Education (FRC) supports a nationwide technical assistance network to respond to the needs of students with disabilities, especially students from underrepresented populations. Through its work with the Regional Resource Centers for Special Education (RRCs) and the technical assistance networks, the FRC provides a national perspective for establishing technical assistance activities within and across regions by identifying and synthesizing emerging issues and trends.In addition, the FRC works with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) to plan national conferences of education professionals, with the object of communicating OSEP priorities and promoting positive systemic change in special education programs across the nation.

URL: following Federal Resource Centers for Special Education serve states within the CC-VI region (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin).

(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin) 

Michael N. Sharpe, Director
North Central Regional Resource Center (NCRRC)
University of Minnesota
12 Pattee HAll
150 Pillsbury Drive SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455-2070
Tel: 612.626.8155
Fax: 612.624.9344

(Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming, Bureau of Indian Affairs) 

John Copenhaver, Director
Mountain Plains Regional Resource Center (MPRRC)
Utah State University
1780 North Research Parkway, Suite 112
Logan, UT 84341
Tel: 435.752.0238
Fax or TTD: 435.753.9750


Regional Resource Centers for Special Education (RRCs)

The Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (OSDFS) administers, coordinates, and recommends policy for improving quality and excellence of programs and activities that are designed toprovide financial assistance for drug and violence prevention activities a carried out by state and local educational agencies and by other public and private nonprofit organizations.



The Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools

The Iowa Department of Education 

The Michigan Department of Education 

The Minnesota Department of Children, Families, & Learning 

The North Dakota Department of Public Instruction 

The South Dakota Department of Education 

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction 


State Education Agencies (SEAs)

The Technical Assistance Alliance for Parent Centers is an innovative
project that supports a unified technical assistance system for the
purpose of developing, assisting and coordinating Parent Training and
Information Projects and Community Parent Resource Centers under the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This project is
funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education
URL: []

Paula Goldberg, Executive Director
National Technical Assistance Office
PACER Center
8161 Normandale Boulevard
Minneapolis, MN  55437-1044
Tel: 888.248.0822 
TTY: 952.838.0190
Fax: 952.838.0199

(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
 Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin)

Lee Ann Derugen and Margaret Burley, Regional Co-Directors
Ohio Coalition for the Education of Children with Disabilities (OCECD)
Bank One Building
165 West Center Street, Suite 302
Marion, OH 43302-3741
Tel: 800.374.2806
Fax: 740.383.6421

(Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, 
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming)

Barbara Buswell, Executive Director
PEAK Parent Center, Inc.

611 North Weber, Suite 200
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
Tel: 719.531.9400
Hotline: 800-284-0251
Fax: 719.531.9452
E-mail: href=””>


Technical Assistance Alliance For Parent Centers

The mission of the Wisconsin Clearinghouse for Prevention Resources is to help schools, families and communities to lead healthy, productive lives. The Clearinghouse, a division of University Health Services, University of Wisconsin-Madison, is the state information center on alcohol, tobacco and other drug abuse. It also provides health promotion, education and early intervention materials on child abuse and neglect, community empowerment, resiliency, violence, teen pregnancy, juvenile delinquency, suicide, community service and civic involvement.

Kathryn Wolf, Director
Wisconsin Clearinghouse for Prevention Resources 
University Health Services
University of Wisconsin-Madison
1552 University Avenue
Madison, WI 53726-4085
Tel: 800.248.9244
Fax: 608.262.6346


Wisconsin Clearinghouse for Prevention Resources

File col23.html not found


Comprehensive Center Region VIUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonWisconsin Center for Education Research 1025 West Johnson St.Madison, WI 53706Tel: 888-862-7763Fax: 608-263-3733


When will the TEA or light bulb moment occur that derails the educational reforms foisted on Americans by NGOs and unseen bureaucrats?  Think you still have local control in your state and school district?  Do you know where your taxes are going and for what purpose?  It’s evident from the layer upon layer of federal and regional agencies that local control is a joke.  If this is not knocked down like the House of Cards that it is, then the highly paid superintendents and administrators should suffer severe pay decreases.  When ‘guidance’ is offered to schools and bureaucrats on the state level, they are only taking orders.  How much does a cashier in a fast food restaurant make today?   Many superintendents and administrators are just taking orders.  Why should they be heavily compensated to do whatever they are told?  Do they really need a PhD for this skill?

More reading on Comprehensive Centers and the unseen bureaucrats:


C3 works with the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to improve educational outcomes for the over 918,000 K-12 students in nearly 560 districts and 2300 schools in the state. C3 works with DESE on projects and services defined in cooperation with the C3 Missouri State Coordinating Council (SCC). The SCC includes members from DESE leadership working with the C3 to identify state priorities and tailor work to meet specific and changing needs. To maintain the flow of communication and plan technical assistance services, each state’s SCC meets regularly with C3 staff members, partners, and collaborators.

Missouri Highlighted Projects:



Washington Paying Attention to the People?:

SETRA was first enacted in 2002. The goal was to look at the effectiveness of the various education programs that were federally funded. Not a bad idea. However, that purpose is changing with certain provisions in S227. Look what else was in that Act.

SEC. 203. COMPREHENSIVE CENTERS   Section 203 (20 U.S.C. 9602)

This is a new section which redefines the role of these Comprehensive Centers which have been in existence since 2002.

(2) MISSION.—The mission of the comprehensive centers is to provide State educational agencies 
and local educational agencies technical assistance, 
 analysis, and training to build their capacity in implementing the requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) and other Federal education laws, and research-based practices.

So now we have federally funded and managed centers whose mission is to help states implement federal programs. In other words, you WILL comply with federal intrusion into education!

‘‘(3) REGIONS.—In awarding grants, contracts,  or cooperative agreements under paragraph (1), the Secretary—

‘‘(A) shall establish at least one comprehensive center for each of the 10 geographic regions served by the regional educational laboratories established under section 941(h) of the Educational Research, Development, Dissemination, and Improvement Act of 1994 (as such provision existed on the day before the date of enactment of this Act); and

‘‘(B) may establish additional comprehensive centers—

‘‘(i) for one or more of the regions described in subparagraph (A); or

‘‘(ii) to serve the Nation as a whole by providing technical assistance on a particular content area of importance to the Nation, as determined by the Secretary with the advice of the regional advisory committees established under section  206(a).

See, the Secretary of Education, and some federally defined regional board which may cross state boundaries, now determines which content areas are important locally. And you thought Congress was trying to return local control.

Now check out the definition of “the Nation.

‘‘(4) NATION.—In the case of a comprehensive center established to serve the Nation as described  in paragraph (3)(B)(ii), the Nation shall be considered to be a region served by such Center.

Are we officially breaking apart the country now into 10 regions, where your state sovereignty is surrendered to the will of a regional directorship? Remember the progressive plan is to make changes slowly, little by little, until one day  you wake up and realize  you have lost all control.

Then the bill gets into these public private partnerships, or at least drawing private money into this system.  This first section is a description of who can receive federal monies for research conducted by these comprehensive centers.

(6)(A) (ii) by striking ‘‘research organizations, institutions, agencies, institutions of higher education,’’ and inserting ‘‘public or private, nonprofit or for-profit research organizations, other organizations, or institutions of higher education,’’;

Then we see who will get priority in the awarding of federal research dollars.

‘(3) NON-FEDERAL SUPPORT.—In conducting a competition for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give priority to eligible applicants that will provide a portion of non-Federal funds to maximize support for activities of the comprehensive centers to be established under this section.’’;

Government doesn’t have to foot the whole bill because private industry will help them out. Private industry doesn’t have to pay for all their own market research. They can get a federal grant, that comes with free data, to help them out.  Note that these regional centers will get our assessment data. So the federal government in the form of the USDoED is not getting the data, but this center, also not controlled by your state, is.

p. 82  (2) PLAN ‘(ii) the needs of State educational agencies and local educational agencies, on an ongoing basis, using available State and local data, including the relevant results of the regional assessments under section 206(e);

Regional centers being partially funded by private organizations, who may be for profit entities, will get your child’s assessment data on regional assessments. What happened to our state determined assessments in HR5?  Is this a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, or an attempt at misdirection. Notice that they were trying to quietly pass S227 without any public hearings while everyone was supposedly watching the debate on HR5.

This means that publishers can get this data and use it for product development. In fact the bill talks about product development as one of the reportable outcomes from these evaluations. It’s not a happy side effect, it is the intent in this legislation.

Do the people in DC need a little refresher course on Fascism 101?

Gretchen Logue