ILNews

Court to award $290,000 for abuse programs

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court Improvement Program has announced it will be giving away up to $290,000 in grants to programs that help families and children involved in cases of neglect or abuse. The grants are funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children & Families. Applications are due July 1.

“This is an excellent opportunity for Juvenile Courts and other child welfare stakeholders to apply for funding for innovative programs to help abused and neglected children in their counties,” Angela Reid-Brown, administrator of the Court Improvement Program, said in a statement.

Individual grant awards are usually no larger than $25,000 to $35,000 and are intended to support program needs from Oct. 1, 2010, to Sept. 30, 2011. All grant funds must be used by Nov. 15, 2011.

There is also a match requirement. These grants from the Court Improvement Program can constitute up to 75 percent of the total cost of the project. The additional 25 percent or more of program budgets – from in cash or in-kind sources – must be from non-federal resources.

The following types of programs are eligible to receive the recently announced grants:

- CHINS and TPR mediation and facilitation programs

- CHINS mental health programs

- CHINS drug court programs

- CHINS and TPR training programs

- CHINS and TPR-related educational brochures, guides, and pamphlets

- Videoconferencing equipment for CHINS and TPR cases

- Court recording technology for CHINS and TPR cases

- Adopting and implementing court performance measures for CHINS and TPR cases

- Other projects that will further the goals of the Court Improvement Program.

The Indiana Supreme Court and members of the Court Improvement Program’s executive committee oversee how grants are distributed. The Division of State Court Administration serves as the fiscal administrator of the federal grants and the Indiana Judicial Center administers the program.

For these grants, a team will review applications and make their recommendations to the Court Improvement Program’s executive committee, which makes the final decision.

The executive committee will be looking for how realistic and measurable the applicants’ goals are, whether there is overlap between proposed programs and existing programs funded by Court Improvement Program grants, and other qualifications outlined in the application.

Applications sent via e-mail are due to Reid-Brown, arbrown@courts.state.in.us, by 4 p.m. (EDT) July 1. An original signed application should also be mailed to the Indiana Judicial Center, Attention: Angela Reid-Brown, 30 S. Meridian St., Suite 900, Indianapolis, IN 46204.

For more information about the Court Improvement Program or for help in filling out the application, contact Reid-Brown at (317) 232-1313 or via e-mail.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. File under the Sociology of Hoosier Discipline ... “We will be answering the complaint in due course and defending against the commission’s allegations,” said Indianapolis attorney Don Lundberg, who’s representing Hudson in her disciplinary case. FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT KNOW ... Lundberg ran the statist attorney disciplinary machinery in Indy for decades, and is now the "go to guy" for those who can afford him .... the ultimate insider for the well-to-do and/or connected who find themselves in the crosshairs. It would appear that this former prosecutor knows how the game is played in Circle City ... and is sacrificing accordingly. See more on that here ... http://www.theindianalawyer.com/supreme-court-reprimands-attorney-for-falsifying-hours-worked/PARAMS/article/43757 Legal sociologists could have a field day here ... I wonder why such things are never studied? Is a sacrifice to the well connected former regulators a de facto bribe? Such questions, if probed, could bring about a more just world, a more equal playing field, less Stalinist governance. All of the things that our preambles tell us to value could be advanced if only sunshine reached into such dark worlds. As a great jurist once wrote: "Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman." Other People's Money—and How Bankers Use It (1914). Ah, but I am certifiable, according to the Indiana authorities, according to the ISC it can be read, for believing such trite things and for advancing such unwanted thoughts. As a great albeit fictional and broken resistance leaders once wrote: "I am the dead." Winston Smith Let us all be dead to the idea of maintaining a patently unjust legal order.

  2. The Department of Education still has over $100 million of ITT Education Services money in the form of $100+ million Letters of Credit. That money was supposed to be used by The DOE to help students. The DOE did nothing to help students. The DOE essentially stole the money from ITT Tech and still has the money. The trustee should be going after the DOE to get the money back for people who are owed that money, including shareholders.

  3. Do you know who the sponsor of the last-minute amendment was?

  4. Law firms of over 50 don't deliver good value, thats what this survey really tells you. Anybody that has seen what they bill for compared to what they deliver knows that already, however.

  5. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

ADVERTISEMENT