Sunday, November 22, 2009

Education Department to Demand School Pay Data

By Stephen Sawchuk

U.S. Department of Education officials plan to require districts receiving economic-stimulus aid to report school-level salaries—a sign, observers say, that the Obama administration might seek key changes to district accounting procedures for federal Title I funds.

The reporting—the first collection of its type undertaken by the federal government—could give a clearer picture about the extent to which district spending on salaries differs between schools that receive Title I dollars for disadvantaged students and those that do not.

The results of the data collection, which is to take place this winter, are likely to give more ammunition to school finance experts and lawmakers who maintain that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act should be changed to require districts to address such disparities before receiving the federal aid.

Because a majority of districts’ costs are tied up in salaries, the data have implications for the way teachers of different levels of pay and experience are distributed across districts.

“We’ve never had a moment before when public officials have asked questions about these inequities,” said Marguerite J. Roza, a research associate professor at the University of Washington, in Seattle, who has studied the issue extensively. “Many districts swear that they don’t have them. But they haven’t looked.”
Teacher Distribution

A little-noticed provision in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act requires each district receiving Title I funds under the stimulus law to file with its state a school-by-school listing of per-pupil expenditures by December 2009.

Aside from a brief notice in the Federal Register, the Education Department has been silent about what information it would seek from districts to fulfill the requirement. But according to forms filed by the department with the White House Office of Management and Budget over the past two months, the Education Department indicated that it plans to require districts to report information on wages, including:
Total salaries in each school;

• Salaries of instructional staff (such as paraprofessionals) only;

• Salaries of teachers only; and

• Nonpersonnel expenditures, if available.

The department would also request more detailed information from five states yet to be chosen. Those states would be asked to break down the expenditure information by state, local, and federal funding sources, including Title I, the documents indicate.

The heavy emphasis on teachers’ salaries stands in direct contrast to the way that districts currently account for them under the Title I program, which provides additional money to districts with high concentrations of poor students.

To receive the federal funding, districts must meet three financial requirements meant to prevent them from using the extra federal dollars to fill in gaps in state and local funding. Under the “comparability” provisions, districts must show that they provide equitable state and local resources to low- and high-poverty schools before receiving their Title I allocations.

But the current version of the ESEA allows districts to exclude salary differentials from the calculation. Instead, they can allocate money to schools based on the district’s average teacher pay as set out in the districtwide salary schedule.

Researchers such as Ms. Roza have found significant funding disparities between low- and high-poverty schools in the same district, largely as a result of differences in teacher salaries. She contends that the omission of salaries from the comparability language papers over factors, such as transfer rules in contracts and high turnover in low-income schools, that tend to lead to a concentration of lower-paid novice teachers in those schools.

In their documentation to the OMB, department officials wrote that the findings from the data collection could be used to help policymakers craft changes to the comparability provisions in the ESEA.

“This is the only way to truly measure whether resources around teacher salaries, curriculum, and technology are being equitably distributed to schools and classrooms,” said Charles Barone, the director of federal policy for Democrats for Education Reform, a New York City-based political action committee. “Districtwide figures obscure resource differences, which is the key reason why most districts refuse to publish school-by-school dollar figures.”

Raegen Miller, a senior policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank headed by a former Clinton White House official, praised the department’s efforts in the five states that would be chosen for the more detailed reporting, saying such scrutiny could intensify the focus on putting performance at the center of school policy.

“A lot of people think that some amount of budgetary discretion should reside in the hands of principals, that there should be some more flexibility about how teachers are compensated,” he said. “That depends on knowing how much money is flowing to the schools and whether outcomes are measured.”

But the documents show that state officials approached about the collection have expressed concerns about the burden and cost, as well as its feasibility.

“We also understand that districts may not have comprehensive data on school-level expenditures that they can report for a previous school year, but we believe that, at a minimum, they should be able to identify which staff were assigned to each school and to determine the salary expenditures for each school staff member,” Sandra Abrevaya, a spokeswoman for the Education Department, said in an e-mail.
Closing ‘Loopholes’

Although the Obama administration has not made any public statements about the comparability language, several experts on the issue now work in the administration.

A former Center for American Progress analyst, Robert Gordon, and Russlynn Ali, a former vice president of the Education Trust West, an advocacy group, work, respectively, at the OMB and in the Education Department’s office for civil rights. Both pressed for changes to the Title I comparability provisions in their prior roles.

Such changes could, for instance, require districts to account for actual, rather than average, teacher salaries in determining whether state and local funds are distributed comparably to Title I schools.

Any such alterations would require congressional approval, and that could well be difficult.

When the House Education and Labor Committee, in 2007, issued a discussion draft of a bill to reauthorize the ESEA—currently the No Child Left Behind Act—that proposed accounting for actual teacher salaries, comparability became a surprise hot-button issue. ("Draft Proposal Seeks to Equalize School Resources," Sept. 19, 2007.)

Teachers’ unions opposed the proposal, fearing it would cause districts to try to override contracts and transfer teachers forcibly to equalize salaries.

The National Conference of State Legislatures and the American Association of School Administrators argued that the change would interfere with state funding formulas and district budget flexibility.

But Ms. Roza contends that closing the comparability “loophole” would not necessarily require transferring teachers. Districts couldmake up for lower teacher salaries in high-poverty schools, she says, by spending more to hire instructional coaches for those schools, creating incentives for teachers to move to them, or reducing class sizes.

Neither the American Federation of Teachers nor the National Education Association returned requests seeking comment on the new data collection.

For their part, lawmakers are not likely to take up comparability before turning their attention again to the ESEA, which is overdue for reauthorization. But they still have their sights set on the provision.

“I think you have to [make changes],” said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, when asked about comparability following a recent hearing on ensuring equitable access to teachers.

“We assume that there is equal funding across the district so that these [Title I] dollars go to schools impacted by heavy concentrations of poor and minority students,” he continued. “But if those resources are siphoned off, that purpose of federal law is not being met.”

Education Week
Vol. 29, Issue 12, Pages 15,17

Wednesday, October 21, 2009



What a difference a year makes! Heading into October 2008 we were watching in horror as the banking system teetered on the abyss. Portfolios withered in ways no Monte Carlo projection could depict. Panic was gripping the markets, and our leaders allowed politics to drive them to devastating lows.

Fast forward to October 2009, and while there are the usual remarks about this being a bad month for the markets, the recovery to date has been stellar. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 15% to close the quarter at 9,712.28 and posted its best quarter since 1998, as well as its best third quarter since 1939. While the actual lows for this cycle in the Dow were attained on March 9, 2009, it has roared back since then, sensing economic rebound, and recovered 48%. Although the Dow is still 31% lower than the all time high it reached in October 2007, it has posted an 11% gain year to date.

The overall market turned in strong gains, as evidenced by the 15% jump in the Standard and Poor’s 500 index for the third quarter. The S&P 500 is up 17% year to date and has recovered 56% from the March lows. It still remains 32% lower than its October 2007 high.

Interestingly and not unexpectedly, the markets have retrenched a bit early in October, and will probably provide some unpleasant experiences going forward. Markets never provide straight line growth, especially after such a tumultuous period. Look for volatility to increase as the forces of recovery battle the forces of an economic backslide. Eventually the inevitable recovery will manifest itself, and the indices will be within striking distance of their all time highs once again. In order to take advantage of this fact, investors should be committing assets to their portfolios now.

There are many factors to be considered as we head into the final quarter of this year. Interest rates, taxes, health care, foreclosures, inflation, deflation, regulation, Social Security and energy are all issues commanding our attention. How they are handled in the next few years is paramount to our well being. The markets will react accordingly.


On September 30, the Bureau of Economic Analysis released its third revision of the estimate of Gross Domestic Product for the second quarter. The estimate of - 0.7% indicates the economy remained in recession at least through June 30, 2009. As I noted in previous newsletters, the two longest recessions, since the Great Depression, were the recessions of 1973-75 & 1981-82. Each of those recessions lasted 16 months. The current recession is officially 19 months and the longest since the depression. The third quarter has shown signs of economic recovery, and it is possible we may see a return to growth when the BEA releases statistics on the current period.

Many economists and Fed Chairman Bernanke echo the belief that the economy has turned positive in the third quarter, and the stock markets certainly have ratified it. There are arguments supporting this belief, as well as one’s dismissing the projections of the beginning of a new economic cycle. As I have mentioned before, the introduction of a trillion dollars of stimulus into the economy will definitely return us to growth, and will more than likely have some very positive consequences, as well as some unintended negative consequences. Our economy is changing and when this happens old industries falter as new ones develop. Creative destruction can’t be stopped.


Saving money for college expenses is a goal I hear many young parents express, and one of the best ways to build tax-advantaged savings for college is the 529 plan. A 529 plan is a tax advantaged savings plan designed to encourage saving for future college costs. 529 plans, legally known as “qualified tuition plans,” are sponsored by states, state agencies, or educational institutions and are authorized by Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Changes in the tax code were made in 2006 making permanent the provision that earnings in a 529 plan are tax free upon withdrawal when used for education expenses. This has resulted in eliminating any change in status for earnings for the 529 plan and made it the premier savings vehicle for college savers.

There are two types of 529 plans: pre-paid tuition plans and college savings plans. All fifty states and the District of Columbia sponsor at least one type of 529 plan. In addition, a group of private colleges and universities sponsor a pre-paid tuition plan. There are differences between pre-paid tuition plans and college savings plans, and each individual family needs to determine which plan may be right for their needs.

Pre-paid tuition plans generally allow college savers to purchase units or credits at participating colleges and universities for future tuition and, in some cases, room and board. Most prepaid tuition plans are sponsored by state governments and have residency requirements. Many state governments guarantee investments in pre-paid tuition plans that they sponsor.

College savings plans generally permit a college saver (also called the “account holder”) to establish an account for a student (the “beneficiary”) for the purpose of paying the beneficiary’s eligible college expenses. An account holder may typically choose among several investment options for his or her contributions, which the college savings plan invests on behalf of the account holder. Investment options often include stock mutual funds, bond mutual funds, and money market funds, as well as, age-based portfolios that automatically shift toward more conservative investments as the beneficiary gets closer to college age. Withdrawals from college savings plans can generally be used at any college or university. Investments in college savings plans that invest in mutual funds are not guaranteed by state governments and are not federally insured.

If you are a parent or grand parent and wish to learn more about this option as a means to save for college, please don’t hesitate to contact me for more information. As with any type of investment, the longer time frame you have to invest, the better chance you have to achieve your goals. There is no time like the present to get started!


The successful merger of Transamerica Financial Advisors and Intersecurities resulted in only a few technical difficulties for me. Some clients received confirmations with Intersecurities as the B/D, and some accounts were charged a fee for systematic investments, which will be reimbursed. Overall, I have to offer kudos to our back office for the meticulous completion of the merger. I look forward to providing enhanced services to you and your family through our state of the art broker/dealer. If the advisor of any of your friends or relatives has left the business, or if any of your other investment representatives have been absent during the recent market turmoil, please feel free to make a referral. Your confidence in me is greatly appreciated, as I monitor and protect your assets.


Investment Advisory Services offered through:
Jersey Benefits Advisors
P.O. Box 1406
Ocean City, N.J. 08226
Phone: 609 827 0194
Fax: 609 861 9257

Securities offered through:
Transamerica Financial Advisors, Inc.
A registered Broker/Dealer
570 Carillon Parkway
St. Petersburg, FL 33758-9053

Third Party Administration and Insurance Services offered through:
Jersey Benefits Group, Inc
P.O. Box 1406
Ocean City, N.J. 08226
Phone: 609 827 0194
Fax: 609 861 9257

All opinions expressed in this newsletter are solely those of John Kaighn & Jersey Benefits Advisors, formerly known as Kaighn Financial Services.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Education Department Unveils Investing In Innovation Fund Criteria.

Here is a reprint from the Associated Press giving some information on how stimulus dollars are being spent. Although most of the $5 billion of stimulus money is targeted for the states, at least $650 million will be going directly to schools to try to improve the quality of education in this country.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- School districts and nonprofit partners can benefit from a $650 million competitive grant fund for school reforms pushed by President Barack Obama.

The money is part of the economic stimulus law, which gave Obama $5 billion to help overhaul schools. Most of the money is for states, but $650 million will go directly to school districts or schools in partnership with colleges, philanthropies, nonprofit companies that turn around failing schools or other nonprofit groups.

The idea is to provide seed money for fresh ideas and for smaller programs that need help to expand.

''This is an unprecedented investment in cutting-edge ideas,'' Education Secretary Arne Duncan said.

Duncan issued rules for the competition Tuesday. The Education Department plans to publish a final application early next year, accept proposals in the spring and award the money by Sept. 30, 2010.

In August, Duncan said Teach for America and programs like it could benefit from the competition. Begun in 1990, the nonprofit recruits recent college graduates to teach in schools in poor communities for at least two years. The group sent an unprecedented 4,100 recruits into the classroom this fall.

Duncan also talked about charter schools, which are taxpayer-funded schools that operate independently of local school boards. Obama wants to expand the number of charter schools, which are an estimated 4,100 of the country's nearly 100,000 public schools.

Duncan said the biggest grants from the $650 million ''Investing in Innovation'' fund will go to programs that have been proven to work. Grants for those programs could reach $50 million.

Programs that need money to expand or build a research base could get grants of up to $30 million, and promising ideas worth trying could get grants of up to $5 million, he said.

Obama announced the rules for the $5 billion state grant competition in July, and that money should be awarded early next year.

John Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Advisors

The Kaighn Report

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Nation's Teachers Unions Feel Squeezed by Some Former Allies

Unions continue to be battered by the Democrats, and still they stand 100% in lock step behind their candidates... go figure!! Read on.

By Rob Hotakainen
Published: Monday, Sep. 21, 2009 - 7:05 am | Page 16A
Last Modified: Monday, Sep. 21, 2009 - 7:53 am

WASHINGTON – When Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed merit pay for teachers and lifting the cap on charter schools, the head of the California NAACP stood by his side.

And when the Los Angeles school board voted to approve a plan that could turn over a third of its schools to private operators, Latino members and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa led the charge.

The nation's public school teachers are feeling the squeeze from all sides these days, and some of the heat is coming from unlikely sources: minorities and longtime Democratic allies.

One of them is President Barack Obama, who is irking teachers by suggesting that student test scores be used to judge the success of educators.

The pressure is particularly intense in California, where U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan says the state has "lost its way" with public schools.

In an attempt to improve them, the Obama administration is threatening to withhold federal stimulus money if the Golden State does not rescind a state law that prevents the state from tying test scores to teacher performance.

None of this is exactly what teachers had in mind when they knocked on doors to help elect Obama.

"It takes more than the ability to fill in bubbles to be considered an educated person," Marty Hittelman, president of the California Federation of Teachers, said in a letter to Duncan. "We thought President Obama understood that."

As the battles intensify, longtime political alliances are shifting, said Jaime Regalado, executive director of the Edmund G. "Pat" Brown Institute, a nonprofit public policy center at California State University, Los Angeles.

"They're in flux. There's no question about that," he said, adding that "teacher unions feel somewhat chagrined" with what they're hearing from Washington.

David Sanchez, president of the 340,000-member California Teachers Association, said teachers had high hopes for Obama but that so far there has been little change.

Indeed, when it comes to education policies, he said it's hard to distinguish Obama from his predecessor, President George W. Bush, who placed a premium on high-stakes student testing.

"To be perfectly honest, it's disappointing again," Sanchez said. "Our perception is it's more of the same, and that's not good, because we thought we were going to be able to change something, make some true reform in public education."

Ironically, the teacher unions find themselves opposing some of their former members.

Alice Huffman, the NAACP's president since 1999, helped lead fights against school vouchers and merit pay when she worked as an organizer for the CTA for 13 years. Her thinking has definitely changed, which is why she was standing next to a Republican governor last month.

"The only place the NAACP can be is with this governor," Huffman said. "If the teacher unions put a better proposal on the table, we would stand with them."

For Huffman, the battle is personal. She said too many inner-city minority children are stuck in failing schools and that immediate and revolutionary changes are needed.

"I have watched this for 20 years," Huffman said. "And I have nieces and nephews that have come out of the public schools that can't read, can't write, will never be employable. This is happening right here. … Something profound has to happen. We can't wait another decade and another decade while people tweak with it."

In Los Angeles, Villaraigosa turned against the local teachers union to help push a school-choice plan that was approved last month. It will allow private operators to submit plans on how they'd run 250 schools, including many that failed to meet federal benchmarks on state tests. United Teachers Los Angeles, Villaraigosa's former employer, is opposed to the plan, saying it's the first step toward privatizing the school district.

In Sacramento, state legislators will soon meet in a special session to consider Schwarzenegger's "Race to the Top" plan. Among other things, it would allow merit pay and more charter schools while permitting the state to use test scores to evaluate teacher performance.

John Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Advisors

The Kaighn Report

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Obama Speech To Students Revisited

The controversy eminating from various corners of the country in regard to Obama's speech to schoolchildren abated dramatically when the text of the speech was released and former First Lady, Laura Bush, gave her support to the initiative. Of course the fear was that the speech would be some sort of indoctrination into left wing politics, when in fact it was just a use of the presidential bully pulpit to encourage students to do their best in school. Freedom of speech allows everyone in this country, including the extremists on the left and the right to speak their minds and be heard. Below are some quotes from various news agencies regarding the speech.

A plethora of news outlets covered President Obama's speech to schoolchildren, which took place at "Wakefield High School just outside Washington" on Tuesday. Most coverage was positive in nature, with some sources emphasizing students' reactions to the speech. The New York Times (9/9, Dillon) reports, "Millions of American schoolchildren, oblivious to the uproar that preceded a back-to-school speech by President Obama, heard him exhort them to greatness on Tuesday, watching, applauding and in some classrooms cheering a nationally broadcast address that urged them to set high goals, knuckle down in their studies and persevere through failure."

Education Week (9/9, Klein) reports, "In a speech that triggered advance controversy -- and logistical headaches for school officials -- President Barack Obama...urged America's K-12 students to study hard and stay in school, saying, 'What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country.'" The President's remarks "capped days of criticism, primarily from" his "conservative opponents...who asserted that Mr. Obama might use the address" and corresponding lesson plans from the U.S. Department of Education "to persuade children to support his political agenda."

The AP (9/9, Matheson, Rohr) reports that "for all the hubbub among adults over the back-to-school speech, many youngsters" nationwide "took the president's message to heart." After listening "closely to Obama's story of studying with his mother at 4:30 a.m.," William Geist, "a San Francisco fifth-grader who likes to sleep late," said, "Now since I heard this speech, I'm like, 'Man, I've got to get up early in the morning. I've got to get ready for school. I've got to do this.'"

The Miami Herald (9/9, Sampson, McGrory) reports that "kids interviewed by The Miami Herald called the speech inspiring and seemed incredulous that the 15-minute talk had sparked such outrage nationally." Pines Middle School seventh-grader Chanelle Missick, for instance, said, "I don't see what's wrong with him coming and talking to the kids, trying to give them responsibility and direct them in the right way." Meanwhile, 12-year-old Pines student Carlton Campbell "said he was encouraged when Obama talked about his own struggles. 'He really inspires me," said Carlton, 12. 'Because I was failing last year.'"

The Salt Lake Tribune (9/9, Stewart, Tribune) reports that "Utah students who watched the televised speech in class called it 'inspiring' and 'real.' Still, "some admitted to zoning out and others dismissed it as 'a political stunt.'" Nevertheless, the Salt Lake Tribune adds, after the speech was aired, "all the uproar over Obama using classrooms to push socialism or a hidden policy agenda seemed overblown." The Washington Post (9/9, 2:29 PM, Chandler, et al.) reports that in his speech, Obama "described his own upbringing, noting that he 'got in more trouble than I should have' as a youth. He told the students, 'There is no excuse for not trying. No one has written your destiny for you, because here in America you write your own destiny.'" Jack D. Dale, superintendent of Fairfax County Public Schools, called the speech "phenomenally good," noting that it focused on "the positive aspects of kids taking ownership of their education."

Tonight we get to hear all about the health care initiative. While it is true most Americans don't want the government involved too much in the free enterprise system, it is also unfair to characterize every undertaking of the government as folly. Perhaps some cooler heads will prevail and we will see some health insurance reform, no public option and mandatory health insurance for everyone, much as we have with auto insurance. Then the government could possibly look at some public/private initiatives which would revive the pure research models, such as Bell Labs and the Xerox program at Palo Alto, which we had when we first attempted to land on the moon. Of course, that would mean that the CEO's and other top management types would have to plow some of the cash from our leading corporations into research and development, instead of their pockets. I guess one could dream a little, huh?

John Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Advisors

The Kaighn Report

Friday, July 17, 2009



As we close the books on the first half of 2009, there appears to be a cup half empty, cup half full scenario going on, depending on your point of view. The markets closed mixed with the S&P 500 winding up at 919.32, a 1.8% gain for the year and up 35.9% from the low of 676.53 in March. The DJIA finished at 8,447.00, which is still -3.8% below the beginning of the year, but still 29% above the low of 6,547.05 set in March. The Nasdaq posted the best year to date gain of the major indices when it closed at 1,835.04, which is a 16.4% increase for the first half of 2009.

While these gains from the lows in March indicate a fantastic recovery for the markets, they represent only a portion of the returns necessary to restore the indices to their former highs. For example, the DJIA would have to gain 67.7% to get to it’s former all time high of 14,164.53 and the S&P 500 would have to add 70.3% to reach it’s former high of 1,565.15. Of course the NASDAQ, which went to the moon in 2000, would have to increase a whopping 175.1% in order to reach the heights it attained before the dotcom bubble burst. While these numbers are troubling, they speak volumes about percentages and compounding. The sad fact is that it takes a 100% gain to recover a 50% loss, or put another way: if you start with 100 dollars, and lose 50%, you have 50 dollars. It will take a 100% gain to return the 50 dollars to the original 100 dollars. Isn’t math just so unfair!

The point here is not to make you feel despondent, but rather to help keep things in perspective. Yes, this was a great quarter and perhaps this recession could be over or at least in its final stages, but there are a great deal of challenges ahead of us. After having witnessed the near implosion of the world’s financial system, the creative destruction of the auto industry in the US, and a tanking of the stock market to levels not seen since the mid 1990’s, looking for positive signs makes sense. If you’ve been investing through all of this turmoil, it is like you had the opportunity to go back to 1997 and put in new money. These gains are real and will continue to positively impact your portfolio going forward.


Has the advisor of any of your friends or relatives left the business, or have any of your other investment representatives been absent during the recent market turmoil?

Do you feel as if your representative only wants to talk to you when all is well with the world? I am here to talk to you about the state of the market, the performance of your investment portfolio, and your retirement plans, regardless of what the market is doing.

With the merger of Transamerica and Intersecurities, I look forward to continuing to provide you with quality investment products and individualized service.

Please feel free to refer any of your friends or relatives who may looking for a new advisor to me. Thank you!


As I mentioned on the preceding page, there is some evidence, as well as historical precedent to indicate the recession may be over or in the fourth quarter, to use a sports analogy. As I noted in previous newsletters, the two longest recessions, since the Great Depression, were the recessions of 1973-75 & 1981-82. Each of those recessions lasted 16 months. March of 2009 was the 16th month of the current recession. As I’ve mentioned before, there are always numerous opinions on these matters, but it is more than likely no coincidence the markets, which are leading indicators, began recovering in March.

While I’d like to believe this is not a head fake, but rather a real recovery, I’ve read enough opinions by numerous bears to remain reticent. This doesn’t mean not being invested, but rather it means cautious, disciplined investing. With the government running GM, TARP funds in the financial sector, Korea and Iran defiantly rebuking Obama’s olive branch, Congress salivating over health care and over a trillion dollars of stimulus in the system, a lot could go wrong. Inflation is one evil that comes to mind.

Obama says he doesn’t want to run GM or the health care system. The specter of public housing conjures up horrendous images of what public health care would look like.



At Jersey Benefits Advisors and Jersey Benefits Group, Inc. protecting your privacy is very important to us. We want you to understand what information we collect and how we use it. We collect and use information from you on applications and other forms as well as information about financial transactions with us and from non-affiliated third parties. This “nonpublic personal information” is obtained in connection with providing a financial product or service to you.

We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about you without your express consent, except as permitted by law. We may disclose the nonpublic personal information we collect to persons or companies that perform services on our behalf.
We restrict access to your nonpublic personal information and only allow disclosures to persons and companies as permitted by law to assist in providing products or services to you.

We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your nonpublic personal information at all times.


Transamerica Financial Advisors, Inc. is excited to share some important news with you. Pending final regulatory approval, Transamerica Financial Advisors will merge its operations with St. Petersburg, Florida based InterSecurities, Inc., an affiliated firm that has been offering financial services for almost 25 years. We anticipate the merger will take effect in September 2009. As part of the merger, the resulting entity will retain the Transamerica Financial Advisors, Inc name and continue to be a full service, independent broker-dealer and registered investment advisor. Most importantly, the relationship you have with your registered representative or investment advisory representative WILL NOT change.


Have you reviewed your insurance policies lately. Whether it comes to insurance on your life, health or investments, the need for insurance is something that should not be overlooked. Changes in status, such as a marriage or the birth of a child are times when insurance levels may need to be adjusted. Also, during times of peak earnings and peak responsibilities, a look at the protection you are providing to your family, in the event of an untimely death, is an unpleasant, but necessary task. Just as the insurance on retirement income, provided by annuities as part of an investment strategy paid off during this downturn, planning with life insurance helps your family when an unanticipated death occurs.

John H. Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Group, Inc.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Coverdell Education Savings Accounts

For parents who are interested in saving money for their children's education, the Coverdell Education Savings Account (ESA) is an account which was created as an incentive for that purpose. The total contributions for each beneficiary of this account can't exceed $2,000 in any year, no matter how many accounts have been established. A beneficiary is someone who is under age 18 or is a special needs beneficiary and will receive the funds for educational purposes.

Any funds which are contributed to a Coverdell ESA are not tax deductible, however, money invested in the account will grow tax free until a distribution is taken. The beneficiary on the account will not owe any taxes on those distributions if they are less than a beneficiary’s qualified education expenses at an eligible institution. This benefit applies to post secondary, higher education expenses as well as to elementary and secondary education expenses.

Here are some things to remember about distributions from Coverdell Accounts:

Distributions are tax-free as long as they are used for qualified education expenses, such as tuition, books and fees

There is no tax on distributions if they are for an eligible educational institution. This includes any public, private or religious school that provides elementary or secondary education as determined under state law, and any college, university, vocational school, or other postsecondary educational institution eligible to participate in a student aid program administered by the Department of Education. It includes virtually all accredited public, nonprofit, and proprietary (privately owned profit-making) post secondary institutions.

The Hope and lifetime learning credits can be claimed in the same year the beneficiary takes a tax-free distribution from a Coverdell ESA, as long as the same expenses are not used for both benefits

If the distribution exceeds education expenses, a portion will be taxable to the beneficiary and will be subject to an additional 10% tax. Exceptions to the additional 10% tax include the death or disability of the beneficiary or if the beneficiary receives a qualified scholarship

There are contribution limits for taxpayers based on the taxpayer’s Modified Adjusted Gross Income. Contributions to a Coverdell ESA may be made until the due date of the contributor’s return, without extensions.

If there is a balance in the Coverdell ESA at the time the beneficiary reaches age 30, it must be distributed within 30 days. A portion representing earnings on the account will be taxable and subject to the additional 10% tax. The beneficiary may avoid these taxes by rolling over the full balance to another Coverdell ESA for another family member.

For more information, see IRS Publication 970, Tax Benefits for Higher Education, available at or by calling 800-TAX-FORM (800-829-3676)

John Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Advisors

The Kaighn Report

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Taxing Health Care as Income

So you thought the new administration was really for middle-class tax cuts? There is no way a government can run the financial services industry, the automobile industry and the health care industry, without raising taxes on EVERYONE. Here is an example of what's in the works:

Unions target Wyden in anti-tax push
By Reid Wilson
Posted: 05/19/09 07:01 AM [ET]

Union groups are targeting one of their close allies in Congress over a controversial proposal to tax employee healthcare benefits.

In a coordinated campaign using radio advertising, mail and other pressure mechanisms, three top unions are urging Oregonians to voice their displeasure to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), whose proposal may be stalled in the Senate.
The radio ads, purchased by the National Education Association, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the United Food and Commercial Workers, take Wyden to task for his Healthy Americans Act, a bill that would provide universal coverage while removing the tax exemption employers get when they provide health benefits to their employees.

"Taxing health benefits? That doesn’t make sense," the ad's narrator says. "Tell Sen. Wyden that Oregon families want quality, affordable healthcare — not taxes on their healthcare benefits."

The three major unions are running the radio ad in Wyden's backyard in the Portland and Eugene markets, to the tune of $60,000, according to those familiar with the expenditure. AFSCME is undertaking a larger pressure campaign utilizing phones, mail, canvassers and a website.

Top Oregon labor leaders took to a prominent liberal website last week to question Wyden's plan, which they compared to proposals by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) during the 2008 presidential election.

Wyden's bill is far different from the proposal McCain offered last year. Wyden would add a standard deduction estimated at $17,000 for a family of four, according to estimates by the Oregon Democrat's office. More expensive plans would be subject to taxes.

The proposal would make employers' share of health premiums taxable. Unions largely stand to gain from maintaining the status quo.
Last week, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said he would not consider Wyden's proposal. But Baucus did release a list of priorities that unions are unlikely to be pleased by. A broadside aimed at Wyden could serve as a warning to Baucus.

Wyden "has been a champion of healthcare reform, and his work to reform the system and to encourage public options for health care coverage could change the face of our health care system, expand coverage, and make health more affordable for all Americans. But only if our Senior Senator stops lobbying for a health care benefits tax," wrote Oregon AFSCME executive director Ken Allen and Oregon AFL-CIO president Tom Chamberlain on the BlueOregon blog.

President Obama opposed the proposal during the campaign, but in March Obama's budget director, Peter Orszag, said the idea should not be taken off the table.

Finding himself on the opposite side of labor is not a normal position for Wyden. Ordinarily a strong backer of labor, Wyden voted labor's way on 94 percent of the scored votes in 2007, the last year for which the AFL-CIO has scored members of Congress. In his career in Congress, Wyden has voted with labor 88 percent of the time.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009



The recession unleashed its fury on us during the first quarter of 2009 and drove the markets down to levels not seen since 1997. It does get tough to stay the course with your investments during trying times like we are experiencing. Yet it is exactly the determined and disciplined investor who will fare the best, when the markets begin their recovery.

I feel it is my responsibility at this juncture to attempt to assuage client concerns, while at the same time acknowledging the very real challenges we all face in the midst of declining real estate values and investment wealth. The reason why every asset class and almost every hedge seems to have failed is because we had a systemic failure in the financial system. To keep things in perspective, it is important to note that these types of systemic failures have happened before and will happen again, despite the government’s best efforts to curb them.

As I have said all along, the current recession is not and will not become a calamity of the proportion which was experienced during the 1930’s, even though the media and a rookie President intimated catastrophic consequences if the stimulus bill was not enacted with all its pork barrel legislation. Notice how the rhetoric has abated substantially since President Obama has gotten his way.

However, this is a very deep and substantial recession, and at the end of the first quarter its duration has been 16 months, which is as long as the downturns of 1973-74 and 1981-82. While every recession is different, its conclusion won’t be known until after the fact. When job losses begin to ebb, there is a good possibility the recession will already be over, because job losses usually continue for several months after the economy begins to recover.

So how long can we expect this misery to continue? Economists in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey expect the recession to end in September, though most say it won't be until the second half of 2010 that the economy recovers enough to bring down unemployment. While this is only a prediction, it indicates this is a very deep recession, as if you didn’t already know it.

With that in mind, it would make sense there is a rather large window for investors to take advantage of this downturn. The market should continue to be volatile and could still revisit the lows set in March of 2009. An investor who has been dollar cost averaging all through this recession has seen the overall value of his assets drop considerably, but each new purchase is being made at a 30% to 40% discount. If the recession lasts until September of this year, that is almost two years of discount shares being purchased. When things finally pick up, the increased number of shares which have been purchased will help account values increase more rapidly than if no shares had been purchased during the recession.

I caution everyone not to make large timing purchases, because in times like these, it is very difficult to determine the best time to add a large sum of money to your account. This is why I stated earlier the disciplined, dollar cost averaging investor will reap the highest rewards when the markets turn upward.

The DJIA ended the first quarter down 13.3%, the NASDAQ was down 3.1% and the S&P 500 closed down 11.7%. When the market closed for Easter, the DJIA increased 6.3% since 3/31.


Now that it is generally accepted that we are not reliving the Great Depression, but are experiencing a difficult recession, the search for someone to blame has intensified. While Bernie Madoff is the poster boy for bad behavior, there is plenty of blame to go around from Wall Street to Main Street. I don’t see assigning blame as my role, since my main impetus is to understand what is actually happening and how to profit from it going forward.

Prior to the Great Depression, any time there was a financial calamity that caused the economy to contract, it was referred to as a depression. After the Great Depression, because the term depression conjured up such dire circumstances, the term recession was coined to refer to a contraction in the economy of less than 10%. The term depression is still used to define a drop in GDP of more than 10%.

According to the most recent Wall Street Journal forecasting survey, gross domestic product (GDP) was predicted to contract in the first and second quarters of this year by 5.0% and 1.8%, respectively, on a seasonally adjusted annualized rate. A return to growth, a modest 0.4%, isn't expected until the third quarter. In the fourth quarter of 2008, the most recent period for which data is available, the economy contracted 6.3%. Also, with all of the social safety net programs in place, such as unemployment insurance, FDIC insurance, food stamps and the huge government stimulus program, conditions for those who are unemployed are much less dire than during the Great Depression.

So we have talked about dollar cost averaging into your investments as a way to profit during this downturn, but it does take a certain amount of intestinal fortitude to continue to invest, when so many people are worried about the sky falling. This contrarian view is very important, because as Warren Buffett stated several months ago, the time for fear is when everyone is being greedy and the time to be greedy is when everyone else is fearful. I think you could say fear has permeated the investment landscape at this point!

Finally, you have to take into account the experience level of the journalists who are reporting 24/7 about this recession. Most of them were not even working during the 1973-74 recession, so their frame of reference is very limited. Even the 1981-82 recession is like a history lesson to many of them. Many people thought America’s best days were behind us back then. That opinion certainly turned out to be false. The point is that after recessions come recoveries. Government spending, whether for social programs such as the New Deal or military programs, like under Reagan, ignited growth. The two best five year runs for the market began in 1938 and 1982. Time to be greedy?


Some of you who have invested in the Transamerica and MetLife Annuities have expressed some difficulty finding the Guaranteed Minimum Income Benefit information on your statement. Depending when your purchase was made, the rider may have different names. On the Transamerica product, the value appears on the second or third page and is called the Family Income Protector, Minimum Income Base, or Managed Annuity Program. On the MetLife product, it is called the GMIB or GMIB Plus and is on the first page. Since the market has been so volatile, and account values are already higher than they were at the end of the quarter, I am not sending consolidated statements. Anyone who would like to receive a consolidated statement should give me a call and I’ll send it to you.


Investment Advisory Services offered through:
Jersey Benefits Advisors
P.O. Box 1406
Ocean City, N.J. 08226
Phone: 609 827 0194
Fax: 609 861 9257

Securities offered through:
Transamerica Financial Advisors, Inc.
A registered Broker/Dealer
1150 S. Olive St. Suite T-25
Los Angeles, CA 90015

Third Party Administration and Insurance Services offered through:
Jersey Benefits Group, Inc
P.O. Box 1406
Ocean City, N.J. 08226
Phone: 609 827 0194
Fax: 609 861 9257

All opinions expressed in this newsletter are solely those of John Kaighn & Jersey Benefits Advisors, formerly known as Kaighn Financial Services.

Thursday, April 9, 2009

Chase and Other Big Banks Fraudulently Devalue Homes

While the banks are reaping billions of dollars in taxpayer funded relief, not only do they continue to make credit tight and foreclose on mortgage holders, but they have now begun to unilaterally adjust home values on mortgage holders who didn't over extend themselves during the housing boom. The audacity of banks, with Chase Bank being one of the largest banks perpetrating this fraud, is just unforgivable. In essence, they are marking to market the property values of homeowners who are not delinquent, not in danger of foreclosure and good paying customers. Furthermore, the values they are assigning to properties are no more based on reality than the values of the toxic assets they hold on their books.

I happen to be one of the people who didn't overreach during the housing boom, didn't use all of the credit line Chase Bank provided and paid my bills every month on time. Still, Chase decided to arbitrarily lower the value of my home on their website to $200,000, a value 40% lower than its assessed value and thereby wiping out, on paper only, most of the equity in my home. They did this even though I have no intention of selling my home and never asked for an increase in my home equity line of credit. I am sure they did this because the line has an adjustable rate of interest which currently is 2.49%. Obviously, they don't like the fact that I am getting a bit of a break on my interest payments at this time. The kicker is that their website specifically states that the values listed for homes are NOT APPRAISALS and "The tool on this page is provided by a third-party site. Please note that the third party's privacy policy and security practices may differ from Chase's standards. Chase assumes no responsibility for nor does it control, endorse or guarantee any aspect of your use of this tool." Yet, they have used this very tool to value my home.

I checked other sites, including Zillow and found the value of my property to range from a low of $279,000 to a high of 375,000. Even on the Chase site, my neighbors property was listed $61,000 higher than my property. While my neighbor has a very nice property and he was very recently approved for a refinancing which exceeds the value Chase assigned to his home, my house is bigger, has more bedrooms, more bathrooms and other features my neighbor doesn't have. My property was also freshly painted this spring and is in excellent condition. The whole point is that Chase arbitrarily deflated the value of MY PROPERTY to force me to beg them for a fixed rate loan.

When I called their customer service line, they were rude and disrespectful. After my third call, I was given the phone number of the corporate office where supposedly I would be able to talk to someone who actually was involved in the decision making process. As you can imagine, I got to talk to a very nice secretary who told me everyone was busy, but someone would return my call. Of course, nobody returned my call.

So now I have a question for you, Jamie Dimon. Is this the way you build customer loyalty? Is this how you envision using taxpayer dollars, MY DOLLARS, to help homeowners. You can rest assured I have already contacted my lawyer and have begun the appraisal process on my property, because you have hurt me financially, degraded the value of other properties in my neighborhood and fraudulently blocked my line of credit, which is the least of my concerns and the only thing you have the legal authority to do.

So fellow taxpayers, is there anyone else who has had a similar experience. Anyone else who thought they were doing the right thing by paying your bills on time, only to get SCREWED by your multinational, too big to fail bank? Please feel free to comment on this rant and perhaps we can join together to sue this and other culprits who have destroyed the value of our investment portfolios, while paying fat bonuses to the very fools who caused this credit crisis.

John H. Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Advisors

The Kaighn Report

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Brokerage Account Features

Many people have accounts with different mutual fund companies, and receive numerous statements, which can be a burden. One way to lessen paperwork is to consolidate assets into a brokerage account. Most major brokerage firms offer a brokerage account, which they may also call an Asset Management Account. Below are some of the features and benefits provided by a Pershing Brokerage Account, offered by Jersey Benefits Advisors, which include:

· Consolidated statement which shows all investments including money market funds, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, unit investment trusts, partnerships, brokered CD’s and annuities

· Daily sweep of idle cash into a money market account

· Available borrowing power for Margin approved accounts

· Procash checking services

· Free ACH transactions from checking to brokerage and from brokerage to checking

· Electronic funds transfer services

· Free dividend reinvestment

· Direct deposit of payroll, social security, pension checks, etc.

· Online access to account information

· Access to numerous mutual funds from different investment companies as well as variable annuities* from many insurance companies

· Systematic investment into mutual funds in order to purchase shares on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis utilizing dollar cost averaging

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me through my websites listed below.

John Kaighn is a Registered Investment Advisor with Jersey Benefits Advisors and writes articles on various business and investment information, ideas and opportunities. For more information about this and other topics you can visit Jersey Benefits Advisors and The Kaighn Report

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Of Bad Banks & Retribution

Now that the Obama Administration is considering the idea of a "bad bank" to clean up the toxic assets on bank balance sheets, the concern turns to how the assets should be valued. As I discussed in my blog post called Resolution Trust Corporation Redux there is precedence for this type of action, which goes back to our Savings & Loan crisis during the 1980's. While the RTC seized the assets from failed Savings & Loan institutions and allowed the insolvent ones to go out of business, depositors assets were merged into solvent banks and individual depositors didn't lose their money.

Recently, I read an editorial by Robert C. Posen of MFS Investment Management. The valuation method he suggests for the toxic assets on bank balance sheets has merit and should be explored. While it is less sanguine than the RTC process of seizing assets and allowing the company to go out of business, Posen's idea attempts to deal with the fact that the toxic assets of today may still have a great deal of intrinsic value, but marking them to market, a market which has been frozen for six months may not be the best way to deal with this situation.

Posen suggests that "after the Treasury has determined a best estimate of the assets current value, they should offer the bank a cash payment equal to 80% of that value. For the remaining 20% Treasury should provide the bank with a capital certificate, which would count as common stock in determining whether the bank meets its capital requirements". This would help to insure that the Treasury doesn't overpay for the assets, which would help protect taxpayers, and should entice the banks to participate in the program, because the prices won't be too low.

Furthermore, this plan would give taxpayers and the banks an opportunity to benefit from a sale of the assets in the future. The certificate given to the bank would entitle it to 80% of any profit that might be made on the asset when it is sold by the government. If the government sells the asset at a break even price or for a loss, the bank would be entitled to nothing.

Click here to read the entire editorial How to Value Toxic Bank Assets

I've also copied a blog entry by Edmundo Braverman of which discusses the quest to find a scapegoat for this most recent financial debacle.

A Pound of Flesh

© 2009 Edmundo Braverman,

Now that the media and Congress have succeeded in deflecting all blame for the current crisis to Wall Street, they've begun their frantic search for the fall guy. You know the guy I'm talking about. The one guy who personifies all that is wrong with the world and is deserving of limitless scorn and a hefty prison sentence. Think Ken Lay of Enron, Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom, and Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco.

In the Roman circus that is the 24/7 news cycle, the crowd is getting restless and they want blood. It's not their fault they were thrown out on their asses after defaulting on an adjustable rate mortgage that represented 65% of their take-home pay. That house was supposed to go up in value, damn it! Now their blood lust must be sated. Always a willing accomplice to government skulduggery, the media is deciding whom to throw to the mob, even as we speak.

We all know Barney Frank, arguably the chief architect of the housing demise, will never see the inside of a jail cell..... To read more click here
John H. Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Advisors

The Kaighn Report

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Jersey Benefits Advisors Winter 2009 Newsletter


Trying to ascertain a realistic assessment of the current economic situation is tenuous, at best, as we begin 2009. Finding a balance between the people who believe we are actually experiencing financial Armageddon, and those who perpetuate that fear for political advantage, is where I find myself at this point in time. History is always a good place to look to determine if a financial panic has some precedent we can use to guide our decisions.

The US economy has been in recession since December of 2007, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, and unemployment will continue to increase well into 2009. This recession could be the worst since the 1973-75 and 1981-82 recessions, and possibly the worst since the Great Depression. If you look in the right column , there is a historical list of various recessions and their duration. While not attempting to downplay the severity of the current economic slump, it is quite evident we have not reached the depths of the Great Depres-sion, despite sensational media reporting.

Below is a list of recessions, since 1926 and their duration.

1929-1933, 43 months in duration (Great Depression).

1981-1982, 16 months in duration.

1973-1975, 16 months in duration.

1937-1938, 13 months in duration.

1926-1927, 13 months in duration.

2007-2008, 13 months in duration.*

1970, 11 months in duration.

1948-1949, 11 months in duration.

1960-1961, 10 months in duration.

1953-1954, 10 months in duration.

Government response has been intense. Whether the stimulus planned can jumpstart the economy remains to be seen. There are many who believe government stimulus is a waste of taxpayer money, that it will go to family members, and friends of the politicians who sponsor legislation, and our children will be left with European style taxes for generations. It seems that the taxpayers in this country are psychologically wrestling with the choice between free market capitalism and the safety net of increased socialism.

As I mentioned earlier, I tend to look for balance between the multitude of opinions, so I think we will avert disaster, but the price will be more government and a period of slower growth. It is not possible for us to have low taxes and deficits of a trillion dollars for very long. For now, however, even people who believe in free markets realize the government does have a role to play when panic grips our financial system. This is especially true when government policies, such as "affordable housing initiatives" and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards have exacerbated problems for certain industries. The cost down the road will be high, especially as taxpayers weigh the option of further nationalizing the health care system.

The markets have been humbling to many money managers this year, and as you know from the end of the year statistics, quite dismal. The Dow Jones Industrial Average ended 2008 at 8,776.39, which is a decline of 33.84% from the 2007 close of 13,264.82. The S&P 500, which reflects the broader market, was down 38.49% from its 2007 level of 1,468.36 and closed at 903.25. The NASDAQ index dropped from 2,652.28 to 1,577.03 to end 2008 with a 40.54% loss.

In the next article, I discuss ways to survive and thrive in this market. The next year or so is a buying opportunity!


I stated in Market Watch that the markets humbled many money managers in 2008, and with this downturn comes the chorus of concerns about not being able to make money in the stock market, because it is too volatile. At first glance, the argument seems plausible, because if you look at the indices, and their returns to date, they are abysmal. In fact, on November 20, 2008, the S&P 500 fell to a low of 752.44 not seen since the 754.72 close on April 15, 1997. At that point the S&P 500 was 51.92% lower than the high set in October 2007. From November 20 through the end of 2008, the S&P 500 gained back 20%.

There is no doubt the stock market has been a real roller coaster ride, and the 2008 lows will probably be tested in 2009. When you analyze the numbers, and understand how rapidly the market can recover, you begin to understand knee jerk reactions are not the best responses to this volatility. In fact, I am of the opinion the only way those of us who work for a living have a chance to build wealth is to continue to save and stay invested during this roller coaster ride.

Furthermore, while it is true there was a market low of 51.92% in the S&P 500 in November, those of us who kept their investments didn’t realize that loss, except psychologically. These gains and losses are temporary paper fluctuations that are only realized when you sell. Variable annuities can protect future income, if you are concerned and close to retirement.

With the markets off more than 30%, every share you buy in your 401k, 403b, ROTH IRA, IRA, 529 plan, brokerage account or mutual fund is being purchased at a discount. I feel this buying opportunity will continue for at least 6 months and possibly longer. When the markets recover, as they always do, all of your old shares, plus the new ones you purchase will bring your account to a higher level than it was before the recession.

Click on the graphic to make it larger if you have difficulty viewing it!

It is true nobody has a crystal ball to tell us exactly when the markets will recover, but once again history is where I usually go to help me understand what we are experiencing and how best to survive and thrive. The graphic above helps put some of the current conditions into perspective. The first graph depicts the recent job losses. While the 2,589,000 jobs lost in 2008 were the most since 1945, the percentage of jobs lost was only 1.88%. This compares favorably with the 2.34% of jobs lost in the 81-82 recession.

The second graph shows that unemployment peaks some months after a recession has ended. The recessions are noted by the shaded areas and the line depicts the unemployment rate. Since trying to time these trends is an inexact science, it is my opinion patience, discipline and calm are the keys to building wealth.


Many of you have invested in the Transamerica and MetLife Annuities, so I want to remind you, once again, about the Guaranteed Minimum Income Benefit. This rider protects the assets so your account will continue to grow in a down market. Look for the line item GMIB, Income for Life or Managed Annuity Program to ascertain this value.

While the market value reflects the turmoil in the stock market, the beauty of these products is their insured value during times of market upheaval. These products help to protect your assets and are an especially good investment for retirement assets. They are great for anyone who wants some insurance on their investments, especially if you are going to be drawing income in the near future. Contact me for an appointment or more information.

John Kaighn

Jersey Benefits Group, Inc.

Investment Advisory Services offered through:
Jersey Benefits Advisors
P.O. Box 1406
Ocean City, N.J. 08226
Phone: 609 827 0194
Fax: 609 861 9257

Securities offered through:
Transamerica Financial Advisors, Inc.
A registered Broker/Dealer
1150 S. Olive St. Suite T-25
Los Angeles, CA 90015

Third Party Administration and Insurance Services offered through:
Jersey Benefits Group, Inc
P.O. Box 1406
Ocean City, N.J. 08226
Phone: 609 827 0194
Fax: 609 861 9257

All opinions expressed in this newsletter are solely those of John Kaighn & Jersey Benefits Advisors, formerly known as Kaighn Financial Services.