ILNews

IBA: Foundation Accepting Impact Grant Applications

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis service agencies are eligible for a $35,000 grant through the Indianapolis Bar Foundation’s Impact Fund. Projects seeking to advance how justice is administered and promote or enhance an understanding of the law will be considered. Historically, the Foundation has chosen to support a project designed to effect substantial impact in central Indiana.

The criteria that applicants must meet to qualify for funding include the following:

Project funding from Indianapolis Bar Foundation may be awarded only to non-profit organizations.

Project benefits the central Indiana community, as a whole, including its impact on the image of the legal profession.

Project presents opportunities for members of the central Indiana legal community to participate on a pro bono or modest means basis.

Project articulates a plan to be sustained by other funding beyond the potential financial award from the Indianapolis Bar Foundation.

Project represents either a new venture for the applicant organization(s) or a plan for significant supplementation to an existing service.

Grant applications are now available online at www.indybar.org and are due by March 1. The chosen project will be unveiled at a special breakfast for Indianapolis Bar Foundation donors on May 30.

In 2011, Indiana University’s Health & Human Rights Clinic located in Haughville was chosen to receive the Impact Grant.

In addition to the Impact Fund, the IBF granted $105,000 earlier this year to a variety of community service programs co-sponsored with the Indianapolis Bar Association. Some of the programs funded include Ask a Lawyer, Legal Line, the publishing of Commonly Asked Questions about Indiana Law, and educational programming at Bench Bar Conference.•

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. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT