ILNews

IBA: Indianapolis Bar Foundation Creates Impact Fund

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Foundation has reorganized its grant making activity with the intent to provide greater impact with its dollars. The Indianapolis Bar Foundation Impact Fund is now organized to provide a single high dollar grant to an Indianapolis area project meeting the purpose of the IBF. For 2011 the grant amount has been determined to be $35,000.

To be considered a project must advance the administration of justice and an understanding of the law through philanthropy, education and service. Through its grant award, the IBF wishes to support a project presented by an organization or collaborating organizations that seek to effect a substantial positive impact in central Indiana.

The criteria which must apply to qualify for funding include the following:

Project funding from IBF 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 IBF.

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 June 15, 2011. Funds will be awarded by August.

In the past, the IBF distributed a variety of grants ranging in amounts of $500-$10,000. Due to the small impact these dollars were having upon the viability or longevity of a given program the IBF sought a new approach with the desire to develop a greater relationship with the organization gaining support and higher awareness for the impact of the donated dollars.

In addition to the Impact Fund, the IBF has 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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT