IndyBar: IBF awards $35,000 Impact Fund Grant to the Joseph Maley Foundation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Foundation announced May 28 that the Joseph Maley Foundation has been named the recipient of the 2014 Impact Fund Grant of $35,000. Specifically, the grant will fund the foundation’s new Parent Education and Pro Bono Legal Assistance Program for central Indiana students with individualized education plans.

“On behalf of the Indianapolis Bar Foundation and its donors, we are delighted to award our Impact Fund Grant to a project that will raise awareness and provide legal assistance to those in our community facing legal issues associated with caring for a loved one with a disability,” says David J. Duncan of Bose McKinney & Evans LLP and 2014 president of the Indianapolis Bar Foundation. “We look forward to partnering with the Joseph Maley Foundation to provide pro bono legal assistance addressing the challenges and opportunities in crafting individualized education plans. We are confident that together with the Joseph Maley Foundation, Indianapolis Bar Association members will affect positive and meaningful impact in these individuals’ daily lives.”

JMFfin-1col.jpg Indianapolis Bar Foundation Impact Grant Fund Committee Chair Melanie Reichert of Broyles Kight & Ricafort PC (pictured at far right) presents the 2014 Impact Fund Grant to the Joseph Maley Foundation at a celebration breakfast held Wednesday, May 28. Representing the Joseph Maley Foundation were (from left) John Maley of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Allison Boyll, Maggie Mestrich and Vivian Maley.

The Joseph Maley Foundation was founded in 2008 with the mission to serve children of all abilities. The organization works to build acceptance of individuals through programs that engender compassion and respect for the diversity of life, with its efforts focusing primarily on disability awareness, adaptive athletics, opportunities for youth leadership, and service learning.

The Parent Education and Pro Bono Legal Assistance Program is specifically designed to address the unmet legal needs of central Indiana’s special education students, providing education, counseling and advocacy for parents and guardians and their students with disabilities. In addition to the grant funding, program support from the Indianapolis Bar Association will continue as members will be recruited as volunteer speakers, as volunteer writers for educational materials, and as pro bono advocates for students. The program is slated to begin in August 2014.

The Impact Fund began in 2011 as a vehicle to maximize the financial generosity of Indianapolis Bar Foundation donors and to provide members of the Indianapolis Bar Association with compelling opportunities to donate their time through pro bono service. This single, substantial grant to a non-profit organization is meant to provide a significant positive impact in central Indiana through the promotion of access to justice for indigent persons. Previous recipients of the IBF Impact Fund Grant include the Military Assistance Project of Indiana Legal Services Inc., Reach for Youth, and the Health and Human Rights Clinic at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. The application process for the 2015 grant will begin in early spring 2015.

The Impact Fund is an important tool in the foundation’s efforts to fulfill its mission: to advance justice and lead positive change in Indianapolis through philanthropy, education and service. In addition to the Impact Fund, the Indianapolis Bar Foundation grants $105,000 each 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, and educational programming at the Bench Bar Conference.•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  2. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  3. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  4. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?

  5. Research by William J Federer Chief Justice John Marshall commented May 9, 1833, on the pamphlet The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States written by Rev. Jasper Adams, President of the College of Charleston, South Carolina (The Papers of John Marshall, ed. Charles Hobson, Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 2006, p, 278): "Reverend Sir, I am much indebted to you for the copy of your valuable sermon on the relation of Christianity to civil government preached before the convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Charleston, on the 13th of February last. I have read it with great attention and advantage. The documents annexed to the sermon certainly go far in sustaining the proposition which it is your purpose to establish. One great object of the colonial charters was avowedly the propagation of the Christian faith. Means have been employed to accomplish this object, and those means have been used by government..." John Marshall continued: "No person, I believe, questions the importance of religion to the happiness of man even during his existence in this world. It has at all times employed his most serious meditation, and had a decided influence on his conduct. The American population is entirely Christian, and with us, Christianity and Religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not often refer to it, and exhibit relations with it. Legislation on the subject is admitted to require great delicacy, because freedom of conscience and respect for our religion both claim our most serious regard. You have allowed their full influence to both. With very great respect, I am Sir, your Obedt., J. Marshall."