Skip to main content
Category

Legislation

May 21

Children’s Commission gains a foothold

By Legislation

By Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors

Indiana, like most states in the country, has no shortage of vulnerable, at-risk children. Indiana’s kids, however, may be more fortunate than others in that they have friends in high places.

The state’s Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush and state Sen. Travis Holdman (R-Markle) have been strong advocates for Indiana’s children for a large portion of their time in public service. Both have spent significant time at the grassroots level learning about issues affecting this population.

For Rush, it included volunteering in the 1980s as a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA), making recommendations to a judge on behalf of neglected or abused children, and as a judge, visiting the institutions where she would sentence young people. Holdman has been associated with Child Protection Services in Indiana for over 40 years.

Five years ago, they worked in concert to affect state-level change. They advocated and tenaciously supported the creation of the Commission on Improving the Status of Children in Indiana. Holdman saw a need and sponsored the legislation and said Rush and others worked doggedly to support the effort. Both believed there needed to be regular attention paid to improving the status of children.

 

[content_box box_type=”normal”]

Information sharing guide

This mobile-friendly guide summarizes how specific types of information about children and families can be shared between professionals, which parties can share this information, and who can receive the information. Visit the mobile app

href="#" data-color-override="false" data-hover-color-override="false" data-hover-text-color-override="#fff">Button Text

[/content_box]

 

“There were so many different entities that touch children, but there was no coordination between the entities. When we did research for the children’s commission, we found 31 committees or commissions on the record books dealing with children and child-related issues,” said Rush who has served as chief justice since 2014. Over a year, they did a global overview and determined that a children’s commission could pull all these entities together.

Although Holdman said there was no one incident that led to the commission’s creation, the overarching reason was that with the many parts and pieces and different agencies, it often resulted in duplication of services and payment.

Established by Senate Bill 125 in 2013, the 18-member commission includes leaders from the executive, legislative and judicial branches of state government, but more importantly, its positions are specifically named in the statute. Five members form the executive committee and the commission chairmanship rotates among the three branches of government.

Holdman said from the start they were adamant that the leader of a division be the representative.

“Bill drafters wanted to add ‘designee.’ We said, ‘No, we’re not going to put that language in because they will never come to a meeting, if we do that.’ The commissioner of health, the superintendent of public instruction, and the attorney general, all of those leaders need to be personally involved so that we get their attention, and they help determine how to resolve issues for children.

“I think having all three branches is what makes it unique from other states,” said Holdman who rotated off the commission and was replaced by Sen. Erin Houchin (R-Salem). Not all states have commissions, and Indiana’s was scheduled to sunset in 2019. That, however, was changed to 2029 in the most recent legislative session.

Last September, Julie Whitman became the commission’s first full-time executive director. Previously she was Indiana Youth Institute’s (IYI) vice president of Statewide Engagement and Advocacy, and also served as a co-chairperson for the commission’s data sharing and mapping committee.

At the commission’s inception, Rush said that data-gathering was among the most important things it would do. And Whitman is well poised to help make that happen. For the past 24 years, one of IYI’s annual publications has been the KIDS COUNT data book, which provides easily accessible, reliable data regarding childhood well-being in five categories: families and communities, economy, education, health and safety. Whitman believes the commission takes it one step further.

“I think that the commission picks up where KIDS COUNT leaves off, in the sense that the data book gives a general picture of the state. Then these guys are tasked with researching, ‘OK, now what do we do about it? What are other states doing about it?’ So they’re doing a different type of research. Really looking at interventions and best practices and policies,” she said.

One of the first important tasks that the commission did, Holdman said, was to build an inventory of all the services around the state. It helped the commission learn where the gaps and holes in services were geographically.

The commission has also been able to raise the visibility of issues, like infant mortality.

“We brought that to light, got Governor Pence’s attention and the state held the first infant mortality symposium. So as much as anything, it’s not doing the work itself, but bringing the issues to light for the public to be aware of it. Folks in a lot of different communities have stepped up to the plate to address the issue locally,” said the senator who has represented his district since 2008.

Rush said a tangential effect is collaboration.

“You have people who have never sat around the table who are dealing with state-wide policies who have never communicated with each other. When you get different people who care, it’s really interesting to see how these partners help,” she said.

At the start, the commission met quarterly for four hours. When Whitman came on board, she did a listening tour. The majority mentioned the length of meetings. Now the group meets more frequently — six times a year for two hours. Meetings are held from 10 a.m. to noon on the third Wednesday of each month.

And they have made progress.

The commission is not doing this work in isolation. Four task forces provide insight and expertise, each representing one priority of the strategic plan — Child Safety and Services, Educational Outcomes, Mental Health and Substance Abuse and Juvenile Justice and Cross-system Youth.

“None of the commission members sit on the task forces. Altogether under the Children’s Commission umbrella, we have about 150 people working on issues, and that includes the commission members themselves,” said Whitman. The committees include individuals from both government agencies and nonprofit leaders. About 30 to 40 percent are non-governmental employees.

“The commission has really said to these task forces, ‘You are the subject matter experts, bring us your recommendations, we want to take action and create policies that really are driven by what works in the field,’” said Whitman.

“Even though they’re volunteers, they’ve agreed to do this work and hold each other accountable. We’ve started a process where every task force reports out at every commission meeting, so I think this helps them just stay invested in the work and really make sure these objectives are moving forward,” she said.

When the task force is ready to bring a recommendation to the commission, it asks to be placed on the commission’s agenda. At the commission meeting, there is a hearing that includes discussion and questions.

Whitman provided two concrete accomplishments since the fall.

One identified need was additional mental health therapists and counselors. The Mental Health and Substance Abuse Task Force was charged with researching what could be done at the state level to increase the available number. A subcommittee discovered a specific barrier to state licensing: Indiana law has an internship requirement of 1,000 hours, whereas most nationally accredited programs require only 700.

So the committee offered a recommendation to change that requirement, which was approved unanimously, and according to Whitman, also came up with an innovation.

“Once an individual has an initial clinical license, he or she has to have hours of supervision from a person with the same type of licensing. In rural areas, especially, it can be a challenge to find a supervisor who has a specialization to get the required hours of face-to-face supervision,” she said.

So the task force recommended that 50 percent of those hours be virtual to ease the burden.

Both recommendations were approved unanimously. That particular task force is chaired by Sen. Randall Head (R-Logansport), and he filed that bill with the Indiana General Assembly that made it all the way through.

“I thought that was a pretty exciting win for this past year,” said Whitman.

Another example was from the Child Safety and Services Task Force. One of its objectives is addressing teen suicide in Indiana. That task force researched Zero Suicide Academy, which is a policy approach and designed specifically for hospital emergency departments and community mental health centers to make sure that the safety net has no holes and that those contemplating suicide don’t fall through the cracks.

“After completing the research, the task force recommended that the commission endorse the academy. WFYI was at the commission meeting and broadcast a segment. There was greater public awareness. I was able to reach out to the head of the hospital association and say, ‘Hey, the Children’s Commission has just approved this, can you get this information out to your hospital members?” And he was very happy to do so. And that kind of power of collaboration and just raising awareness sometimes, can get an initiative a little further than maybe it would have gotten otherwise,” said Whitman.

Diverse perspectives can help clarification language. Recently at a meeting, there was a discussion about the words “wrap-around services.”

“Some folks who are steeped in the mental health field said ‘wrap-around’ has a very particular meaning within the mental health world, which we think actually is not what was meant here. We think it’s actually school-based services. So they re-worded that objective, and the commission said fine,” said Whitman.

“I think there’s a kind of deference and respect in both directions between the commission and the task forces, so when those subject matter experts come and say, ‘We just wanted to clarify and make sure this was your intent,’ the commission has a great respect for the expertise in those groups.”

So what’s next? Whitman said that the commission is waiting for the Department of Child Services assessment report in June and assumes it will affect what the commission is doing.

“I’m not sure we’re where we need to be, but at least we have a framework in place that we can use to monitor what’s going on to get a better handle on it,” said Holdman.

Whitman said she would love the state to get to a point where we have an overall vulnerable youth dashboard, children’s budget or fiscal map and match them up.
“Ultimately we need to say, ‘What’s the return on investment? What are we doing as a state for kids? Is it as effective as it can be? Is it as efficient as it can be?”

Dec 18

Tax bill could impact Indiana’s charitable giving

By Feature, Legislation

By Charitable Advisors staff

At this time of year, we are reminded that Americans are generous people. Last month, for example, an estimated $274 million was raised online during the sixth annual Giving Tuesday event. And much of that total will be written off on people’s taxes.

By the end of this week, Congress is expected to approve changes to the U.S. tax code, and it’s important for nonprofits to understand their potential effects. Dissecting what we know about the pending bill can help put it in perspective.

The details of the fast-moving tax code rewrite released on Friday indicate that the standard deduction will temporarily be increased from $6,350 to $12,000 for single taxpayers and from $12,700 to $24,000 for married couples filing jointly. In 2025, those deductions will revert to the current law.

One consequence of roughly doubling the standard deduction would be to significantly lower the number of filers who itemize. Currently, only taxpayers who itemize can deduct charitable contributions.

This change has the potential to affect middle-income families, according to Una Osili, professor of economics and associate dean for research and international programs at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. She estimates roughly 30 million households making between $50,000 and $100,000 will be less likely to itemize their deductions on their taxes.

According to IRS data, over 500,000 donors in Indiana claimed the charitable deduction, accounting for $3.2 billion in donations. But without seeing a direct link between their contributions and their bottom-line tax obligations, fewer potential donors are expected to open their wallets.

Research by the Lilly School shows that itemizers are much more likely to donate to charitable causes. A recent report showed that 83 percent of itemizers reported donating any amount of charitable giving at all, compared to 44 percent of non-itemizers. And non- itemizers contribute less than 20 percent of total giving. Lilly’s Osili predicts at least a $13 billion annual drop in charitable giving if the new standard deduction becomes law.

One remedy this fall was a universal charitable deduction introduced by U.S. Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.) that would have incentivized charitable giving for low and middle income earning individuals and families. The Universal Charitable Giving Act (H.R.3988) would have established a universal charitable deduction for individuals and married couples who did not itemize, and be in addition to the standard deduction.

According to Marissa Manlove, president and CEO of the Indiana Philanthropy Alliance, it is disappointing that it was not considered.

“This solution would have allowed taxpayers at all income levels to take advantage of the 100-year-old charitable deduction. Without such an incentive, I fear charitable giving could decrease dramatically, placing underserved Hoosiers at greater risk. I encourage our nonprofit sector to monitor the effect tax reform has on their organization and to share stories of people affected with their policymakers,” she said.

 

Feb 29

Nonprofits and lobbying: Yes, they can!

By Feature, Legislation

By Nayantara Mehta, counsel, Alliance for Justice |

When many people think about nonprofits and lobbying, they might think of a relationship like oil and water: they don’t mix. There is a widespread perception that nonprofits cannot lobby, or if they do lobby, they are exploiting some kind of legal loophole. The fact is that nonprofits, even 501(c)(3) organizations, which are the most restricted type of nonprofits, may legally lobby. Getting involved in the legislative process and having a say in policy discussions is not just an appropriate role for nonprofits; it is vital. If nonprofits are not speaking on behalf of their often-vulnerable communities, chances are nobody else is either.

Organizations with a focus on the environment may be the most visible nonprofits engaging in the policy process, but lobbying is no less important for nonprofits working on every issue area, from the arts to wildlife preservation.

Button Text
Feb 29

Two nonprofits face more than $47,000 in fines over L.A. lobbying forms

By Feature, Legislation

By Emily Alpert Reyes, reporter, Los Angeles Times |

Two nonprofits could face fines totaling more than $47,000 from the city Ethics Commission for failing to accurately report how much they had spent on lobbying at City Hall.

Ethics Commission staffers have proposed a fine of $30,000 for the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, an influential organization that has successfully pushed to raise wages for hotel and airport workers, and $17,500 for the Hospital Assn. of Southern California, a regional trade group for hospitals.

Button Text
Feb 29

Nonprofits can lobby

By Feature, Legislation

By Center for Nonprofits |

Given the many crucial issues facing nonprofit organizations and the people they serve, it is more important than ever that charities become involved in the public policy debate. Yet too many people mistakenly assume that it is illegal for nonprofits to lobby.

To the contrary, federal laws actually exist to encourage charities to lobby within certain specified limits. Knowing what constitutes lobbying under the law, and what the limits are, is the key to being able to lobby legally and safely. This article represents a vastly simplified summary of some of the laws and regulations governing charitable lobbying. The complete laws are much more complex, so consult your attorney or accountant for professional advice.

Button Text
Feb 08

Framing: the art and science

By Feature, Legislation, Programming

By Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors |

In 2012, a staggering 46.5 million people were living in poverty in the United States — the largest number in the 54 years the U.S. Census has measured poverty. This figure has increased or held steady for 11 of the past 12 years.

The reasons are varied, but one contributing factor resonates: Over the same period of time, incomes have stagnated or declined. And with more people earning less, the need for human services has increased, while funding for these services has not.

So what’s a hard-working social service agency or nonprofit to do?

Irv Katz, the former president of United Way of Central Indiana, has spent his career in the human service field. He is now interim president of the National Human Service Assembly (NHSA), a Washington, D.C.-based association of more than 80 of the largest national nonprofit human service organizations.

Katz believes nonprofits have to somehow change the narrative, and change the mindset of funders — both government and private — that social services are a “need” instead of simply a “want.”

In recent years, Katz has witnessed the increase in need, but he also realized that the arguments for services were ineffective and falling on deaf ears. As Congress moved to support one program, nonprofits were asked to recommend another to be cut.

“It started happening about five years ago, where the public policy council of the National Assembly recognized that nobody had any positive legislation going forward. We were just fighting to keep funding levels at best, but it was really being cut, time and time again,” said Katz.

“We’re dying a death by a thousand cuts, and we need to do something different. We need to get people’s attention in a way that citizens can go, ‘Wait a second, I believe in this,’” he said.

Katz believes current communication practices were achieving diminishing returns. So the choice was either to change course or become irrelevant. His group chose the former and is now dipping its toes into the waters of science and psychology with a concept called framing.

Katz’s group became aware of framing and the work of neuroscientists’ work to understand the brain’s architecture. What neuroscientists had learned was that new concepts as initially understood are fixed in an individual’s brain and information pertaining to the concept is viewed through that frame. Scientists also have learned that changing that initial frame is difficult.

For example, a widely held view is that funding for human services is charity. Namely, if there is enough money to go around, that’s fine. But if not, such programs are expendable. Katz is working to change that perception.

“We quite frankly thought that reframing might be a pathway out of the issues that human services were facing — the lack of recognition, the lack of attention, the lack of understanding,” said Katz. “We’re not building a frame by consensus, we’re building it based on research. So we actually went out looking for framing experts.”

Enter the Kresge Foundation and a planning grant. The idea resonated with the foundation because it had actually started a similar dialogue with grantees. In 2013, the National Human Services Assembly contracted with The FrameWorks Institute and began by researching the public’s perception.

“The research that the FrameWorks Institute really identified is that there is a huge gap between public perception and the understanding of people in the human services field. The public tended to think the individual was the cause of the problem, and the individual is responsible for addressing the problem. The experts tended to see that there was more of a societal context. These also included the very significant structural aspect, that it was literally not the individual in terms of causes and solutions and responsibility. And that’s just huge,” said Katz.

The Annie E. Casey Foundation joined in supporting this effort and together the foundations have not only supported the NHSA’s work, but helped fund a re-framing tool kit. In November, Building a New Narrative on Human Services was released. It includes a collection of framing research, recommendations, and sample communications designed to help explain the importance of human services.

While the tool kit is new, Katz is hopeful it will change the conversation.

“Hopefully people will realize this is a new and better way to talk about this whole enterprise of humans helping one another thrive,” said Katz. “I’ve been really pleased and amazed that the wonderful and positive reception that we’ve gotten almost everywhere we’ve gone,” said Katz.

NHSA is beginning to share the narrative and tool kit in workshops with state and local human services coalitions and national entities. Marketing and public policy leaders Assembly members will be introduced to the tool kit at scheduled workshops at sessions with their peers.

May 19

Legislative session: few changes for nonprofits

By Feature, Legislation

Compiled by Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors |

This year’s Indiana legislative session was not without controversy. Of the over 1200 bills that were originally filed for the session, several hundred made it through the entire process and were eligible for action by the governor. In addition, lawmakers approved a two-year $31 billion budget, which includes a $464 million increase in K-12 education spending.

While there were no surprises for nonprofits, here are bills that may have an effect on the way nonprofits do business.

If you want to learn more about any bill, click here.


HB 1009: Innovation Network Schools. (Behning)

Provides for innovation network school programs in school corporations. Establishes the career pathways pilot program. Establishes the innovation network school pilot grant. Repeals the article relating to the establishment of innovation network schools by the Indianapolis Public Schools.

Status: SIGNED BY GOVERNOR 5/7/2015

HB 1015: Benefit corporations (Cox)

Allows a business entity to incorporate as a benefit corporation under Indiana law.

Status: SIGNED BY GOVERNOR   4/30/2015

HB 1042: Education loan information. (Cox)

Requires a postsecondary educational institution that enrolls students who receive state financial aid to annually provide each student with certain information concerning the student’s education loans. Provides that an eligible institution does not incur liability for any information provided to students.

Status: SIGNED BY GOVERNOR 4/15/2015

HB 1435: Beer, wine, liquor prizes/charity auction sales (Olthoff)

Allows a nonprofit corporation that is a qualified organization under the charity gaming law (qualified organization) to give sealed bottles or cases of alcoholic beverages as prizes in a charity gaming event without obtaining an alcoholic beverage permit. Allows a qualified organization to auction purchased or donated alcoholic beverages in sealed bottles or cases, without obtaining an alcoholic beverage permit. Prohibits alcoholic beverages that are auctioned or given as prizes from being consumed on the premises. Repeals and replaces the current statute regarding payments to the commission. Requires the commission to accept payments by certain financial instruments. Allows the commission to charge certain fees.

Status: SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR 5/4/2015

HB: 1635: Various education matters. (Behning)

Allows grants from the safe schools fund to provide school wide programs to improve school climate and professional development and training in alternatives to suspension and expulsion and evidence based practices thatcontribute to a positive school environment. Provides that a consolidated school corporation shall offer to transfer property to the township from which the consolidated school corporation received the property for any purpose if the property is no longer needed by the school corporation. (Current law requires the transferred property to be used for park and recreation purposes.) Allows the township to sell or lease the property to an Indiana nonprofit corporation that is exempt from federal taxation.

Status: SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR 5/7/2015

HB 1636: Charter schools. (Behning)

Provides that a governing body of a school corporation, a state educational institution, and a nonprofit college or university must register with the state board of education (state board) if it has not previously issued a charter for any charter school prior to July 1, 2015. Makes changes to the definition of an “organizer.” Requires the state board to provide a formal evaluation of the overall state of charter school outcomes in Indiana every five years. Provides that a charter school may give enrollment preference to children of the charter school’s founders, governing body members, and charter school employees, as long as preference is not given to more that 10% of the charter school’s total population. Provides that if a proposal to establish a charter school concerns an existing charter school overseen by a different authorizer than the authorizer to which the organizer is submitting the proposal, the proposal must include written acknowledgement of the proposal from the current authorizer. Provides that a charter school may limit admissions to allow preschool students who attend a Level 3 or Level 4 Paths to QUALITY program preschool to attend kindergarten at a charter school if the charter school and the preschool provider have entered into an agreement to share services or facilities. Provides that a governing body is not bound by a collective bargaining agreement for employees of a conversion charter school. Provides that employees of a conversion charter school may collectively bargain.

Status: SIGNED BY GOVERNOR 5/7/2015

SB 267: Dual language immersion; biliteracy. (Kruse, Lanane)

Establishes the dual language immersion pilot program to provide grants to school corporations and charter schools that establish dual language immersion programs in certain foreign languages. Creates the state certificate of biliteracy. Requires that the appropriate designation appear on the student’s transcript. Requires the state board of education to adopt rules and to direct the department of education to administer the state biliteracy program. Provides that a school corporation, a charter school, or a nonpublic high school is not required to participate in the biliteracy program.

Status: SIGNED BY GOVERNOR 5/7/2015

SB 317: Community foundations. (Head)

Defines an “eligible community foundation” for state income tax purposes as an organization that: (1) is a tax exempt charitable organization; (2) satisfies the public support test for public charities; (3) is an autonomous, nonsectarian philanthropic institution with component funds established by many separate donors; (4) is accredited under national standards for United States Community Foundations; and (5) supports a broad range of charitable activities in a specific area of the state.

Status:  SIGNED BY GOVERNOR 4/23/2015

SB 327: Charity gaming. (Leising)

Provides that the prize for a progressive bingo game may not exceed $2,000. Provides that the total prizes for one pull tab, punchboard, or tip board game may not exceed $10,000. (Current law provides that the total prizes may not exceed $5,000.) Provides that the prize limit for a game using a seal card is $1,000 and a progressive or carryover pull tab game is $5,000. Requires that a qualified organization may pay for licensed supplies only with a check drawn on or by an electronic funds transfer from the qualified organization’s gaming account. Provides that a licensed distributor may obtain licensed supplies to be used in charity gaming only from an entity licensed by the gaming commission as a manufacturer or distributor or from certain qualified organizations. Reduces from three years to one year the amount of time that an Indiana affiliate of a qualified

organization holding an annual comprehensive charity gaming license must be in existence in Indiana before it may conduct a raffle or door prize event. Adds “bona fide state foundations” and “bona fide state organizations” to the list of qualified organizations that may receive an annual comprehensive charity gaming license. Requires a licensed distributor to notify the gaming commission of the sale of any licensed supply that has a certain prize level.

Status:   SIGNED BY GOVERNOR 5/8/2015