ILNews

IBA: Impact Fund Making Impact

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In 2011, the Indianapolis Bar Foundation awarded its first Impact Fund grant, in the amount of $35,000, to the Health and Human Rights Clinic (HHRC) at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. The HHRC utilizes a medical-legal partnership to identify legal issues facing low-income clients who present seeking medical care. 26 attorneys attended the first full-day CLE and training hosted by the HHRC in February — an impressive turn­out for the initial training. Several volun­teers are already planning to participate in the next training later this year.

Dea Lott, the Clinical Adjunct Professor of Law & Director of Outreach for the HHRC, has been busy conducting ini­tial evaluations with prospective clients, performing conflict checks and assigning cases to volunteer attorneys. Several cases have already been assigned and many more assignments will be made.

“We are encouraged by this progress, and we are excited that your donations, through the Impact Fund, have made possible this training of volunteers who are now pro­viding pro bono legal services to clients in dire need of assistance, “ said Kelly Scanlan, Indianapolis Bar Foundation President and an attorney with Wilson Kehoe & Winingham. She added, “Later this year, we hope to share some specific examples of clients who were helped through your generosity.”

The Foundation is now in the process of reviewing applications for the 2012 Impact Fund Grant. 16 applica­tions were received. The Impact Fund Committee carefully reviewed and considered those applications, and has invited 5 of those applicants to present their grant proposals in person to the Committee and answer questions re­garding the proposals, which will take place on April 19, 2012.

A breakfast will be held on May 30, 2012, at which the 2012 Impact Fund grant recipient will be announced. A representative from the HHRC will also be invited to provide an update regarding use of the 2011 grant. Also at the May breakfast, those who ac­cept their nomination to become a mem­ber of the 2012 class of Distinguished Fellows will be honored.•

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT