Iwasaki's careful respect for the Long Beach program and its lawyers earned him the political capital he needed to complete his takeover in a matter of weeks. "The Long Beach program had strong support in the community so in a situation like that, one has to recognize that it's not like a takeover where I have all the answers and I know best," Iwasaki said. "The people in the community who are working there have the contacts and the knowledge that will allow service to continue." Things have gone less smoothly across town. There, Dudovitz, a longtime poverty lawyer and executive director of the San Fernando Valley's 36-year-old legal aid program, continues to struggle with his hostile takeover of the neighboring San Gabriel-Pomona Valleys service area one year after it was accomplished. On the bright side, Dudovitz has extended his respected program to clients in the San Gabriel-Pomona Valley, and he now operates on a much larger budget, $6.5 million last year. However, his clash with the old San Gabriel program resulted in litigation, bitter feelings and a mission that some say is not clearly focused on serving poor people. "It was a difficult situation that was probably mishandled by everyone," a longtime observer of the public interest community said of the San Fernando Valley-San Gabriel-Pomona Valley merger. "There are very few people who come out as the heroes. Personalities got involved when they shouldn't have. Things were said that caused bad feelings and couldn't be unsaid." Iwasaki's merger with the smaller, 48-year-old Long Beach program was friendly and fast, and no one - not even Long Beach board members - lost a job. When it was over, Iwasaki had $1 million more in federal dollars and two new offices. Long Beach clients regained services they had lost years ago when federal budget cuts and dwindling grants reduced the staff of 15 lawyers to five and cut immigration and consumer law programs. Iwasaki said, "[I judged the transition] better than I could have hoped for."

Question: "In the eyes of the public interest community, was Dudovitz's hostile takeover well-handled?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Not handled well"

Response: yes

As food is pushed along, it undergoes digestion. Digestion is the process of breaking down food into nutrients. There are two types of digestion: mechanical digestion and chemical digestion. Mechanical digestion occurs when large chunks are turned into smaller chucks. Perhaps not surprisingly, this happens when you chew your food. Once you swallow the food, your stomach also does some of this work. Chemical digestion occurs when food is broken down into useful nutrients. This is a chemical process that begins as you start to chew your food. The saliva in your mouth starts this process. Once you swallow, the acid in your stomach further breaks down food. From the stomach, the foods moves into the small intestine. In the small intestines, another set of chemicals goes to work. Are you surprised? Your small intestine, and not your stomach, does most of the work!

Question: "What is digestion?"

Response: "Food disappears"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: no

Problem: Sometimes a full Moon moves through Earths shadow. This is a lunar eclipse . During a total lunar eclipse, the Moon travels completely in Earths umbra. During a partial lunar eclipse, only a portion of the Moon enters Earths umbra. When the Moon passes through Earths penumbra, it is a penumbral eclipse. Since Earths shadow is large, a lunar eclipse lasts for hours. Anyone with a view of the Moon can see a lunar eclipse. So unlike a solar eclipse, it doesnt get dark on Earth. Instead it gets dark on the Moon. Partial lunar eclipses occur at least twice a year, but total lunar eclipses are less common. The Moon glows with a dull red coloring during a total lunar eclipse.

Question: "What are the types of lunar eclipses?"

Answer: "Solar eclipse"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer: no

Low-income domestic violence victims may find long-term legal help -- representation in divorces or child-custody disputes -- hard to come by, if two organizations now providing such help can't replace their lost funding. The Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake and Utah Legal Services are already facing cutbacks after they were refused a federal grant of more than $450,000 in September. The board overseeing the state Office of Crime Victim Reparations [CVR] has voted to deny a stopgap funding request from the two organizations. While describing the request as a worthy cause, board members agreed Tuesday that funding divorces or custody disputes was outside their focus -- providing direct services for crime victims. The $175,000 requested would have allowed the legal aid groups to maintain a skeleton staff to continue providing help beyond emergency protective orders for victims, completing existing cases and offering services in limited cases. The groups also plan to enlist more pro bono attorneys through coordination with the Utah State Bar. "We don't have a lot more options," said Anne Milne, executive director of Utah Legal Services, after learning of the CVR refusal Wednesday. The organization has already lost some staff through attrition and has turned away some cases, she said. Milne said she may ask the board overseeing her organization to give her until November to seek funding from additional sources. Without additional funding, the outlook for longer-term legal help is unclear. For two years, the groups had received 18-month civil legal assistance grants from the U.S. Department of Justice and had used them to provide such assistance. But last month, a third request was denied. Funding used to help victims obtain emergency protective orders remains in place, said Milne and Stewart Ralphs, executive director of the Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake. Although an order's requirements that an abuser stay away from a victim may remain in effect for years, protective orders only settle issues such as child custody, child support, custody and property arrangements for 150 days. Many judges are reluctant to address those issues in emergency protective orders, since the decrees stay in effect for such a short time, Milne and Ralphs said. "The likelihood a victim will return to her abuser increases if she cannot permanently sever the relationship and establish workable support, custody and property arrangements," the funding request to CVR said. The Department of Justice said it denied the grant application, in part, because evaluators did not see enough collaboration between the organizations and victims' advocates, Ralphs and Milne told CVR board members. While the two said they believe their organizations coordinate well, the organizations cannot appeal the grant denial. Although CVR board members considered giving the money as a loan, not a grant, their vote on the funding request -- taken after Milne and Ralphs left the meeting -- was unanimous.

Question: "Board members overseeing the state Office of Crime Victim Reparations described what request as a worthy cause?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "The service that the two organizations provided"

Response:
no