IBJNews

Vera Bradley gives another $10M to IU cancer center

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Vera Bradley Foundation for Breast Cancer has pledged $10 million to fund breast cancer research at the Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center.

The latest gift continues funding from the Fort Wayne based charity, which is an arm of the Vera Bradley handbag company. Three previous gifts from the foundation, dating back to 1998, also totaled $10 million.

“Generosity and commitment like that from the Vera Bradley Foundation are what will make the difference in this disease,” said Dr. Craig Brater, dean of the IU School of Medicine, in a prepared statement. “These gifts touch women every day, not just in Indiana, but all over the world.”

Money from Vera Bradley has helped IU's cancer center hire 10 researchers, increasing its total team to 34. Those 34 researchers have secured other grant funding that brings in more than $10 million every year.

To recognize of the foundation’s past gifts, IU recently named medical research laboratories in its new Walther Hall building after the Vera Bradley Foundation for Breast Cancer.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Tax write off
    I am truly disgusted with Vera Bradley. First they lay off all their employees so they can claim stimulus money on the pretense of hiring more employees, providing more jobs. Instead they hire contract workers so they donâ??t have to provide any benefits. NOW theyâ??re giving money in the name of charityâ?¦I donâ??t think so. There is nothing charitable about a ruthless company that lays off employees with no intention of rehiring just so they can get fat on stimulus money. This must be a tax shelter for them. I wouldn't own their bags if they gave them to me.

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 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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT