ILNews

Indiana Legal Services’ case load likely to increase with additional federal dollars

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

After watching its federal appropriation sink to $4.7 million during the economic downturn, Indiana Legal Services is set to receive a boost in funding for the 2014 calendar year.

The extra money is part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2014 which was approved by Congress in mid-January. ILS’s parent organization, Legal Services Corp., is receiving an appropriation of $365 million, up from the $340.88 million it received in 2013.

Indiana Legal Services’ total funding – calculated based on the percentage of residents in each state living in poverty – will be $6.53 million, a 6.18 percent increase from 2013.

“That’s good news,” said Norman Metzger, executive director of ILS. “Now we have to decide how to spend it.”

The ILS board of directors is scheduled to discuss ways to use the new money during its March meeting. Possibilities include giving pay raises to the employees and increasing the funds for contracts with private attorneys to provide legal services to ILS clients, especially in rural areas. Also, the board could decided to use the appropriation to move forward with some items on the nonprofit’s strategic plan.

“I think the board will end up doing two or three things,” Metzger said, noting boosting all three areas will potentially result in a 10 to 15 percent increase in the number of cases handled by ILS. In 2013, the agency closed 7,300 cases while about 3,000 remained open.

In late 2013, ILS gave all staff attorneys a $3,000 pay raise which increased the starting attorney annual salary from $42,000 to $45,000.

The $25 million increase in federal funding is the first increase Legal Services Corp. has recorded since 2010. However, adjusting for inflation, the latest appropriation is millions of dollars less than the $611.44 million granted in 1995 or the $413.13 million received in 2004.

Legal Services Corp. will use $2.5 million of the new money for the Pro Bono Innovation Fund. The fund will be used to establish a competitive grant program to develop and test new ways to provide pro bono services to indigent clients.

 

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