Holiday-assistance program scrambling to help families

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Enough with the white stuff. Organizers of United Way of Central Indiana’s holiday-assistance program are hoping for a green Christmas.

Less than a week before its final distribution of vouchers for needy families, United Christmas Service is $285,000 short of its seasonal fundraising goal—and about 3,100 families are still waiting for help. Another 250 have yet to be matched with donor groups who provide food, clothing and toys to brighten the holidays.

“We’re hopeful,” said program director Mary Jones, UWCI’s director of community projects. “Everyone’s still out there trying, and we’re moving closer.”

Caseworkers from more than 100 human-service organizations in United Way’s six-county region referred 8,180 families to United Christmas Service for help this year, she said.

As of Monday afternoon, 1,145 of the neediest families had been matched with donors (who tend to spend about $75 on each family member) and 3,678 had received vouchers worth $30 per person.

“It’s not a lot, but they wouldn’t have anything without it,” Jones said.

Wednesday is the deadline for donor groups to sign up; families that aren’t matched will move to the top of the voucher list. The vouchers, which can be redeemed at participating retailers, will be handed out until Dec. 23.

Most donations arrive after Thanksgiving, Jones said, a pattern that may be a factor in this year’s shortfall since the holiday was unusually late.

United Christmas Service has raised about $515,000 so far this year; the past few years it reached the $700,000 mark.

But even that fell short of the $800,000 goal. As a result, about 1,500 needy families did not receive assistance last year or the year before, Jones said.

The bigger the gap, the more families who won’t get help.  

“We’re sending emails to caseworkers, but there really isn’t much left out there right now,” she said.


Visit United Christmas Service's website for information on how to help.


  • Consider giving if you have the means
    This is a worthwhile charity to be involved in if you've never done it before. We adopted a family this year for the first time and our finding it very rewarding. The site linked at the bottom of the article has the signup info.

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 IBJ 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

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

  2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

  3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

  4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

  5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).