Talk:Annie E. Casey Foundation

Proposed merge with Casey Family Programs
Paid editor has tried to expand this article but has found few independent sources. The only way for a separate Casey Family Programs article to exist is to rely mostly on press releases and the website of the article subject, so this is likely to fail WP:ORG and be a permastub, not counting the self-published info. Better to have one well-sourced paragraph in the parent article than a whole article made up mostly of self-sourced material about the subject. Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:46, 16 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I support the proposed merger. Safehaven86 (talk) 00:46, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I oppose the proposed merger. Casey Family Programs is not affiliated with the Annie E. Casey Foundation, so merging with this article would not make any sense whatsoever. Annie E. Casey Foundation and Casey Family Programs are parallel, separate peer organizations. A $2B foundation working in 50 states and regularly called upon as experts in the field merits a separate entry. I have provided a wealth of recent independent sources on the Casey Family Programs talk page.


 * I also dispute the categorization that I'm a "paid editor," as I have made clear from the outset. I do not edit Wikipedia listings for a living. I have been very transparent about the fact that I am a short-term contract employee for Casey Family Programs (contract ending next week), and one (very small) part of my duties has been to attempt to address previously stated concerns and improve the accuracy of the listing. The foundation neither solicits nor grants funding, they are not a self-trumpeting organization, they simply want to improve the accuracy of the listing. In no way does my compensation depend on the outcome of this dispute. From the get-go the assigned editor has not afforded us the standard Wikipedia courtesies of assuming good faith, being civil, or being open to compromise. I've had to endure ad hominem personal attacks and the editor has never, not once, offered a substantive editorial suggestion. I've offered multiple revisions and compromises in attempts to respond to blanket criticism, but to no avail.Worldraveler (talk) 19:31, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I removed this from the third opinion noticeboard because it is a dispute between more than two editors. Consider other methods of dispute resolution (btw, no one is going to read all that).  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 03:52, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I dispute the merger proposal. According to GuideStar, an independent database of info on nonprofit foundations, Casey Family Programs' EIN is 91-0793881, and Annie E. Casey Foundation is 52-1951681. Legally and funcationally, these are distinct entities founded at different times by the Casey family. Jlawshe (talk) 17:32, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

This is an absurd proposal. The Annie E. Casey Foundation and Casey Family Programs are two entirely different foundations. They were founded by two different branches of the Casey family and are completely separate and distinct entities. I'm closing this discussion per Emily Litella. 32.218.152.31 (talk) 01:57, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with your conclusion, but I'm not sure I fully understand your methods. Can an anonymous editor close a discussion? There are many sources we can cite to reach consensus in good faith regarding the separation of Seattle-based Casey Family Programs, and Baltimore-based Annie E. Casey Foundation, so let's focus on those. For instance, the 2013 article |The Many Faces of Federal Child Welfare Reform by the Chronicle of Social Change mentions three different Casey family organizations. The article's author, John Kelly (editor in chief of the Chronicle), clearly draws a distinction between the approach of Casey Family Programs (which the article classifies as a "Family Preservation/Flexible Funding" organization), and Annie E. Casey Foundation (which it classifies as "Restricting and Improving Foster Care"). Jlawshe (talk) 18:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Also please note that any merger discussion should be looking at the actual parent page for both the Annie E. Casey Foundation page and the Casey Family Programs page, namely the James E. Casey page, which mentions both of these organizations separately. Dennis Bratland, I sympathize with your concern that keeping CFP and AECF separate will mean that CFP becomes a stub, but I think that's more of an indication of a WP:Stub that we need to improve than of an organization that will fail the WP:ORG test. Based on the TLDR list Worldraveler provided, I think we can safely say there is broad independent coverage of CFP: the challenge (once this dispute is resolved) is making sure it's used properly here. I'd like to take on the task of making the CFP page less of a stub once we reach consensus on this merger discussion, with the caveat that I'm operating under a conflict of interest I've disclosed in my profile. Jlawshe (talk) 18:56, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

other issues
I see two issue with this article and first is that RUDE disclaimer that the entry has "issues". What Wikipedia entry DOESN'T have "issues"? Get rid of that -- it's annoying, distracting and un-necessary. I think the only reason why its there is because someone has a different opinion rather than there being real issues. Second the article does not say what this outfit's politics are. Are they left or far left? What kind of legislation do they want etc..--Mccommas (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I disagree with your former issue, that warning is informative and led me to this page, where I am no engaging in fruitful discussion on the future of this page.
 * Your second point I believe actually raises an interesting point, the page identifies that the organization attempts to "improv[e] the well-being of American children according to their ideals." However, what those ideals aren't necessarily laid out explicitly. The way, I believe, to resolve this issue, would be to actually address the cause of your first concern (which, for the record, is the recommended policy when one encounters these maintenance template messages, according to Help:Maintenance template removal). If this community could obtain and publish accurate information regarding the founding and the ideals of this organization based off information other than from press releases or paid editors, they would be able to 1.) remove the 'RUDE disclaimer' because the cause of the concern would be addressed and 2.) would identify more clearly the goals and aims of this organization.
 * I hope this has addressed your concerns, thank you for your time.  Iamyoursheppard (talk) 19:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

President & CEO
On January 1, 2019, Lisa Hamilton became the president and chief executive officer of the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Prior to assuming this role, Hamilton served as the Foundation's executive vice president and chief program officer, as well as initially serving as its vice president of external affairs.

--Ventiicecoffee (talk) 20:54, 18 September 2021 (UTC)