by the comptroller general report to the congressarchive.gao.gov/f0902d/107900.pdf$2,200 per indian...

BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL

Report To The CongressOF THE UNITED STATES

Federal Management WeaknessesCry Out For Alternatives To DeliverPrograms And Services To IndiansTo Improve Their Quality Of LifeA Bureau of Indian Affairs ReorganizationTask Force concluded in March 1978 thata general management crisis pervades theBureau. The Assistant Secretary for IndianAffairs called attention to the numerousreports, studies, and investigations byGAO, the American Indian Policy ReviewCommission, congressional committees, andothers that have pointed out symptoms ofnear collapse of management throughoutthe Bureau.

Because this situation and similar manage-ment weaknesses in other Federal agenciesproviding assistance to Indians (Depart-ments of Commerce; Health, Education,and Welfare; and Housing and Urban De-,velopment) have persisted for years, theCongress should take action to improvedelivery of programs and services to Indi-ans. Unless alternatives are tried, misman-agement of programs and services willcontinue and improvements in the qualityof life of Indians will still be impeded.

Four alternatives the Congress should con-sider to make delivery of Federal pro-grams and services to Indians more effec-tive are offered in this report.

O st CED-78-166"CCOUv%~ tc92 '9OCTOBER 31, 1978

~~' s' '

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES

o a/~~ .~~~~WASHINGTON, D.C. 20548

B-114868

To the President of the Senate and theSpeaker of the House of Representatives

This report points out that Federal agencies have nottaken actions necessary to correct weaknesses in the man-agement of Federal Indian programs. The report also pointsout that because management weaknesses persist, the Congressshould consider alternatives to deliver programs and servicesto Indians to insure improvements in their quality of life.

We made our review pursuant to the Budget and Account-ing Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 53), and the Accounting and Audit-ing Act of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 67).

We are sending copies of this report to the Director,Office of Management and Budget; and to the Secretaries ofCommerce; the Interior; Health, Education, and Welfare;Housing and Urban Development; and Labor

Comptroller Generalof the United States

COMPTROLLER GENERAL'S FEDERAL MANAGEMENT WEAKNESSESREPORT TO THE CONGRESS CRY OUT FOR ALTERNATIVES TO

DELIVER PROGRAMS AND SERVICESTO INDIANS TO IMPROVE THEIRQUALITY OF LIFE

D I G E S T

In spite of recommendations by GAO,congressional committees, the AmericanIndian Policy Review Commission, and otherresponsible groups over the past severalyears, Federal agencies have failed tocorrect weaknesses in their management ofprograms and services to Indians. GAOhas concluded that management alternativesmust be legislated by the Congress ifFederal activities on behalf of Indiansare to be effective.

As a result of the management weaknesses,many Indians may have suffered needlessly,while costs of administering the programsand services have increased drastically.For example, the Bureau of Indian Affairs'appropriations alone have risen fromabout $500 million in fiscal year 1975to about $1.4 billion (including trustfunds) for fiscal year 1979. The fiscalyear 1979 budget estimates amount to about$2,200 per Indian living on or near areservation. If data were available onfunds expended on Indian programs admini-stered by all Federal agencies, the costper Indian living on a reservation wouldbe even higher.

Prevalent weaknesses, which are listed below,were in such areas as education and health,school construction, business development,housing, training, natural resources, andself-determination activities. Althoughthese weaknesses generally were noted inBureau of Indian Affairs programs andactivities, GAO found similar weaknessesin other Federal agencies that provideassistance to Indians.

ITear Sh. Upon removal, the reportcover date should be noted hereon. i CED-78-166

--Planning and policy guidance has beenlacking or outdated. This situationcontributed greatly to the poor successof Federal programs and services. (Seepp. 8 to 10.)

-- Lack of reliable information has preventedeffective needs assessment and made itvirtually impossible to measure progressin areas such as educational achievementand to determine whether funds appropri-ated for Federal programs and services arebeing used properly. (See pp. 10 and 11.)

-- Federal agencies must effectively super-vise, monitor, and evaluate Federal andtribal performance to make sure that thefunds for various Indian programs arebeing used effectively. Adequateinformation must be reported and aconcerted management effort must bemade, as previously defined, if theservices intended to improve thequality of life of Indians are to besuccessful. (See p. 11 and 12.)

-- Some Federal agencies have not definedwhat role they should fill in this eraof Indian self-determination and, as aresult, did not take initiative to pro-vide assistance unless requested by atribe. (See p. 12.)

-- Tribal governments need more trainingand technical assistance to help themdevelop the capability to negotiate andadminister self-determination contractsand grants and improve the managerialand governmental capabilities required tofully exercise their self-determinationoptions. (See pp. 12 and 13.)

-- The Indian people often suffer needlesslybecause Federal agencies have not coordi-nated their activities adequately toprevent fragmentation or duplication ofprograms and services. The need forcoordination between Federal agencies isdramatized by a chart that shows the

ii

maze of Federal programs involved inbusiness development activities for In-dian reservations. (See pp. 13 to 15.)

-- Many programs have been plagued byshortages of funds and adequate orknowledgeable staff to operate allaspects of the programs. As a result,some Federal agencies have been unableto provide adequate technical assist-ance and advice to Indian tribes.(See p. 14.)

ALTERNATIVES TO IMPROVEDELIVERY OF PROGRAMS ANDSERVICES TO INDIANS

The Congress should consider the followingfour alternatives for delivering programsand services to Indians:

-- Consolidate all federally administeredIndian programs and services into asingle agency such as the Bureau or anindependent agency. (See pp. 18 to 20.)

-- Consolidate Indian programs and services*into the Federal agency having primaryresponsibility for overall Federal pro-gram areas, such as education, health,housing, economic development, etc.(See pp. 20 to 22.)

--Have all Federal agencies funnel theirIndian program funds through one agencysuch as the Bureau, rather than directlyto Indian tribes. (See pp. 22 to 24.)

-- Assist tribes in developing the capabilityto manage all Federal programs and servicesand provide direct funding through blockgrants. (See pp. 24 to 26.)

Agency comments were not obtained on thisreport because GAO had previously reportedits findings and recommendations concerningthe management weaknesses to the individualFederal agencies involved. Agency commentswere considered in developing final recom-mendation which were incorporated in otherGAO reports.

Tear Shet i ii

Contents

Page

DIGEST

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION 1The quality of life of Indians is

a major concern 1The Congress has taken action to

help improve the quality of lifeof Indians 1

Agency comments not obtained 3

2 FEDERAL MANAGEMENT WEAKNESSES WHICHIMPEDE PROGRESS IN IMPROVING THEQUALITY OF LIFE OF INDIANS REMAINUNRESOLVED 4

GAO reports point out managementimprovements needed to helpimprove quality of life of Indians 6

Better planning and policy guidanceare needed 8

Better records and managementinformation systems are needed 10

Program monitoring and evaluatingmust be strengthened to insurethat required services are pro-vided to Indians 11

Training and technical assistanceactivities need to be strengthened 12

Federal agencies need to coordinatetheir activities to preventfragmentation and duplicationof Indian programs 13

Staffing and funding of programsfor Indians need to be improved 14

3 ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO DELIVER PROGRAMSAND SERVICES THAT WILL IMPROVE THEQUALITY OF LIFE OF INDIANS 17Consolidate all federally administered

Indian programs into a singleindependent agency 18

Consolidate program areas into theFederal department or agencyhaving primary responsibilityfor that area 20

Page

Have all Federal agencies funnel

their Indian program funds through

one agency 22

Develop tribes' capabilities to

manage their own affairs and provide

direct funding through block grants 24

APPENDIX

I GAO reports on Federal management of

Indian programs 27

II American Indian Policy Review

Commission's management study of the

Bureau of Indian Affairs--digest of

recommendations 51

ABBREVIATIONS

ACE Active Corps of Executives

ANA Administration for Native Americans

BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs

CSA Community Services Administration

EDA Economic Development Administration

FmHA Farmers Home Administration

GAO General Accounting Office

HEW Health, Education, and Welfare

HUD Housing and Urban Development

OMBE Office of Minority Business Enterprise

RDS Rural Development Service

SBA Small Business Administration

SBI Small Business Institute

SCORE Service Corps of Retired Executives

YPO Young Presidents Organization

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF INDIANSIS A MAJOR CONCERN

A major concern of the Federal Government and Indians 1/today is how to improve the quality of life of Indians andthat of their descendants. Generally, the American Indian'squality of life--as contrasted to other Americans--is char-acterized by low income, high unemployment, high incidenceof health problems, inadequate housing, low educationallevel, and high rates of major crime. The Federal Govern-ment, through treaties, legislation, executive orders, andexecutive agreements, has established a unigue relationshipwith Indians and a special responsibility for assisting themin improving their quality of life. Although initially theFederal role was primarily that of serving as a trustee forIndian lands, it has expanded considerably through directaid, grant, loan, subsidy, and other assistance programsin areas such as economic development, health care, housing,education, income assistance, and resource management.

Yet, although the Indian's quality of life has improved,it continues to fall short of that enjoyed by other Americans.

THE CONGRESS HAS TAKEN ACTIONTO HELP IMPROVE THE QUALITYOF LIFE OF INDIANS

Within the last decade significant events have occurredthat demonstrate increasing congressional concern andinterest in federally sponsored programs and services forIndians and in relations between Indian tribes and theFederal Government.

On December 18, 1971, for example, the Alaska NativeClaims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et. seq. (Supp. V1975)) was approved for the purpose of settling land claimsof Alaska Natives. Public Law 93-580, dated January 2, 1975,created the American Indian Policy Review Commission to (1)conduct a comprehensive review of the historical and legaldevelopments underlying the Indians' unique relationship withthe Federal Government and (2) determine the nature and

l/For purposes of this report the term "Indian" will applyto all native Americans.

scope of necessary revisions in the formulation of policyand programs to benefit Indians.

On January 4, 1975, the Indian Self-Determinationand Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450) was approved.In enacting this legislation, the Congress declared itscommitment to maintain the Federal Government's continuingrelationship with and responsibility to the Indian peoplethrough establishment of a meaningful Indian self-determination policy. This was to permit an orderlytransition from Federal domination of programs for Indiansto more effective and meaningful participation by Indiansin planning and administering programs and services.

On May 17, 1977, the American Indian Policy ReviewCommission, chaired by Senator James Abourezk, submittedits final report to the Congress which called for action"to right the wrongs done to Indian tribes since the earlydays of this country." (The Commission included threeSenators and three Congressmen.) The report urged crea-tion of a Department of Indian Affairs or an independentagency to take over functions now handled by the Bureauof Indian Affairs, Indian Health Service, and other agen-cies. In addition, as shown in appendix II, the reportincluded 23 recommendations for improving the Bureau'smanagement of programs and services for Indians.

On August 9, 1977, the Chairman, Subcommittee on theDepartment of the Interior and Related Agencies, SenateCommittee on Appropriations, requested that we make a com-prehensive audit of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).The request was prompted by several existing reports onthe poor administrative operations of BIA and the everincreasing costs of its activities. The Subcommittee onInterior, House Committee on Appropriations, has also ex-pressed its concerns. As a result of this request, weissued ten reports.

These recent events which demonstrate increasing con-gressional concern and interest in federally sponsored pro-grams and services for Indians and in the relations betweenIndian tribes and the Federal Government have given us anopportunity to work with congressional committees to iden-tify alternative ways to deliver programs and services.In this respect, our recent reports point to the need forgreater Federal efforts if the concepts espoused by theAlaska Native Claims Settlement Act, the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, and the IndianPolicy Review Commission Report to the Congress are to beachieved. (See app. I.) Specifically, any alternativesmust enhance settlement of Indian and native land claims,

2

turn over federally run programs to Indian tribes, andimprove BIA management activities presently under attackby the Congress and the Indian community.

AGENCY COMMENTS NOT OBTAINED

Agency comments were not obtained on this reportbecause we had previously reported its findings andrecommendations concerning the management weaknesses tothe individual Federal agencies involved. Agency commentswere considered in developing final recommendations whichwere incorporated in other reports. (See app. I.)

3

CHAPTER 2

FEDERAL MANAGEMENT WEAKNESSES WHICH IMPEDE

PROGRESS IN IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE

OF INDIANS REMAIN UNRESOLVED

In recent years numerous GAO reports, the review

conducted by the American Indian Policy Review Com-mission, and reviews by several congressional committeeshave all identified similar weaknesses in Federal manage-ment of programs and services for Indians. In this respect

a Bureau of Indian Affairs Reorganization Task Force con-cluded in its March 1978 report to the Secretary of the

Interior that a "general management crisis pervades theBureau of Indian Affairs." Concerning this managementcrisis, the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, in aFebruary 15, 1978, statement to the Task Force statedthe following:

"During the past few years numerous reports,studies, and investigations have pointed outthe symptoms prevalent throughout the Bureauof near-collapse of the organization's manage-ment systems. These include the AmericanIndian Policy Review Commission's report, manyGAO and congressional committee reports andinvestigations, the Reassessment Report on theBureau's Management Action Plan, Civil ServiceCommission evaluation reports--and, mostpoignantly and significantly, the chorus ofcriticisms and complaints from the Indian com-munity itself, as well as the general publicand the media.

"From my own experiences and observations, .

"These reports and statements are not purelycritical in a destructive manner. In fact,with few exceptions, over and over again theycontain constructive recommendations andsuggested action steps to be taken, and haveattempted to point to specific and urgentlyneeded reforms and improvements in the generalmanagement of the Bureau.

"The staff paper which has been preparedrecently * * * contains a Management Systemssection which outlines and encapsulates all

4

of those comprehensive management improvementactions required--in the areas of missionstatement clarification, policymaking, programplanning and evaluation, budgetary processes,manpower allocation, organization analysis,personnel management, decisionmaking, manage-ment information, communications, and contract/property/supply management.

"I urge you to consider carefully these manage-ment system improvements, which I stronglyendorse as long needed and required to overcomethe fundamental malaise of the Bureau, ratherthan continuing to treat only the symptomswith band aids. These improvements are foundedon the proven management principles of account-ability, responsibility, and discipline--whichare the principles on which the Bureau's man-agement must be based if the Indian peopleare to be served effectively and efficiently."

Because significant management weaknesses have con-tinued to remain unresolved over the past several years, amore concerted effort is needed by the Congress, Federalagencies, and Indian organizations to develop alternativeways to deliver programs and services for meeting the needsof Indian people and to insure that they are properly coor-dinated and managed and to make them more effective.These weaknesses, which are described throughout all ourreports as well as the reviews of the Commission and con-gressional committees, are the failure of Federal agenciesto:

-- Develop adequate plans, policies, and proceduresfor carrying out programs and services for Indians.

-- Develop management information systems for con-trolling and measuring effectiveness of Indianprograms.

-- Supervise, monitor, and evaluate Federal andtribal performance effectively to insureservices are provided to the Indian people.

--Provide adequate training and technical assist-ance to tribal governments.

-- Coordinate their activities to prevent frag-mentation and duplication of Indian programs.

-- Provide adequate staffing and funding.

5

This chapter summarizes the management weaknessesidentified in 19 of our reports on Indian programsand services issued between June 1975 and March 1978.Five of these reports were addressed to the Congress;three to the Senate Committee on Interior and InsularAffairs; nine to the Subcommittee on the Department ofInterior and Related Agencies, Senate Committee on Appro-priations; one to an individual Congressman; and one tothe Secretary of the Interior.

The management weaknesses identified in each of thereports, regardless of the area of concern, were oftensimilar, and criticisms of deficient Federal managementof Indian programs were generally directed at BIA. How-ever, in some cases--such as in Indian housing, education,and business development--criticisms were directed atother cognizant Federal departments and agencies as well.

GAO REPORTS POINT OUT MANAGEMENTIMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO HELPIMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE OF INDIANS

In response to the August 9, 1977, request of theChairman, Subcommittee on the Department of the Interior andRelated Agencies, Senate Committee on Appropriations, weissued 10 reports criticizing Federal agencies' administra-tion of program and services for Indian people. The reportspresented a comprehensive review of federally administeredIndian programs and were used by both the Senate Subcom-mittee on Interior and the Subcommittee on Interior, HouseCommittee on Appropriations, during the fiscal year 1979appropriations hearings on the BIA budget. The reportswere also used by the Senate Select Committee on IndianAffairs during its hearings on several Indian matters heldduring March and April 1978.

Our reports cited major shortcomings as follows:

-- BIA did not have adequate controls over self-determination contracts and grants awarded toIndian tribes under the Indian Self-DeterminationAct, or over related training and technicalassistance activities. Thus, BIA did not knowwhether the tribes were providing requiredservices to Indian or if training and techni-cal assistance funds were being used properly.About $157 million were spent on these activi-ties in fiscal year 1977.

-- BIA lacked criteria to evaluate the performanceof its Indian training program (Indian Action

6

Team). As a result BIA did not know which ofits Indian contracts were successful, whichones needed technical assistance, and whichones should not have been renegotiated. Totalcost of the training program from inception in1972 through fiscal year 1977 was $66.2 million.

--Federal agencies have been unable to assure thedevelopment of profitable businesses on Indianreservations, although 25 grant, loan, andtechnical assistance programs were beingfederally funded and administered. The twomajor agencies involved, BIA and the Eco-nomic Development Administration, provided$294 million to help establish businessesduring fiscal years 1975-77. Deficiencies inBIA's administration of its business loan andgrant programs under the Indian Financing Actof 1974 had caused the programs to suffer fromdelinquencies, inadequate accounting sytems,poor analysis of loan and grant applications,missing documents in loan and grant files,inadequate loan servicing by lenders, shortrepayment terms, and limited provision oftechnical assistance to businesses.

-- BIA based its priorities for constructing schoolfacilities on invalid information, thereby mak-ing its 1979 school construction priority listunreliable. Furthermore, BIA had not developedcomprehensive planning information on schoolneeds of Indian children and could not readilydetermine when or where school facilities wereneeded. BIA estimated that as of January 1978that about $300 million would be needed torenovate or construct Indian school facilities.BIA could save millions of dollars by havingIndian children attend nearby public or BIAschools and by constructing larger, consoli-dated schools in lieu of smaller, scatteredones.

--BIA had not provided needed educational servicessuch as monitoring and evaluating school activ-ities, because of staffing problems and/ortravel fund limitations at its Indian EducationResources Center.

-- BIA had inconsistently used its budget pro-cess (called band analysis) which is intendedto reflect tribal needs and priorities.

7

Therefore, tribal input in the BIA's fiscal

year 1979 funding decisions varied from totalinvolvement to no involvement at all.

-- BIA reduced funds for Indian programs by about

$7.6 million in fiscal years 1977 and 1978rather than reduce its administration costsas directed by congressional committees.

-- BIA knew little about Indian students'preparation for and performance in college

or about the colleges they attended, yet con-tinued to spend millions of dollars each yearon the higher education grant program forIndians. In fiscal year 1976 grants totaledabout $33 million.

-- BIA and Indian Health Service dominance overIndian programs and services had changed littlesince enactment of the Indian Self-Determination

and Education Assistance Act, although the actestablished a Federal policy permitting tribesto assume control over their own programs.

In addition to these reports, we issued otherreports citing similar problems in Federal management ofIndian programs and services. All of our reports containnumerous recommendations to the Congress, BIA, and other

cognizant Federal agencies which, if implemented,should greatly improve the Federal administration ofIndian programs and services. (See app. I.)

In response to our reports, Federal agencies generallyagreed with our findings and recommendations and stated thatcorrective actions had been taken or planned. In some casesthey said implementing our recommendations would requireincreased funding and staffing. One agency said that imple-menting some of our recommendations would not be effectiveunless all Indian economic development programs were placedin a single agency as we had recommended. As pointed outin several of our reports (see app. I), Federal agenciesdid not always take action previously promised, the actionswere inadequate, or they were not implemented on a continu-ing basis.

BETTER PLANNING AND POLICYGUIDANCE ARE NEEDED

Most of the reports pointed out that planning andpolicy guidance was lacking or was outdated. Thissituation coupled with the lack of needs assessment has

8

contributed greatly to the poor success of Federal programsand services. For example, in January 1977 we reported tothe Congress that the kinds of deficiencies BIA educationalprograms had in 1972 still existed. Our 1977 report pointedout that, as a result, there was little evidence that BIAhad made progress since 1972 toward improving educationalachievement of Indian children.

BIA had not communicated 'educational goals to itsarea offices and schools nor designed and implemented aspecific plan for raising Indian students' academicachievement levels. In this respect BIA had not updatedthe goals and objectives published in its manual in 1953and had failed to define what constituted adequate Indianeducation for the 1970s. We recommended that an educa-tional needs assessment be made and that plans, goals,policies, and procedures be established for meeting theseneeds.

In a February 1978 report, we pointed out that BIAdeveloped its 1979 school construction priority list with-out adequate comprehensive planning data and that, as aresult, many schools ranked high on the priority listshould not be built.

In 1975 and 1976 we issued reports pointing out thatthere was a serious need to improve the management ofIndian natural resources. Management of forest land,rangeland, and cropland had been hindered by limited BIAand tribe planning on how resources would be developed ona long-term basis. Planning for irrigation management oncroplands had been limited or nonexistent, and BIA had notprovided guidance to the tribes for implementing irriga-tion systems. Also, BIA had placed only minor emphasison planning for mineral resource development; formalmineral management plans had not been developed, causingdelays in leasing of Indian lands.

In March 1978 we reported that the underlying objec-tive of the Indian Self-Determination and EducationAssistance Act was the possibility that most or all of theservices provided by BIA and the Indian Health Service wouldeventually be provided by tribes under self-determinationcontracts. However, officials of both BIA and the IndianHealth Service stated that they had not developed plansto define their roles or to identify the organizationalchanges needed if the tribes were to some day controlIndian programs.

9

In other reports we have pointed out that better plans,policies, and procedures should be developed to improveIndians' standard of living through business developmentand housing construction. Numerous planning and policyproblems exist in these areas and will continue to existwithout a concerted Federal effort to coordinate develop-ment of plans, policies, and procedures which insure thatrequired services are provided to Indians.

BETTER RECORDS AND MANAGEMENTINFORMATION SYSTEMS ARE NEEDED

The lack of reliable or, in many cases, any statisticsand data concerning the conditions of Indians, the mannerin which Federal program dollars are expended, the current

status of Indian lands, and the lack of any realisticassessment of Indian needs and reservation potential havebeen discussed and documented by the American Indian PolicyReview Commission, the Congressional Research Service, and

various committees and subcommittees of the Congress in addi-tion to most of our reports. For example, during April 1978hearings on S. 2712, 95th Congress, cited as the Indian

Program Evaluation and Needs Assessment Act, the Chairman,Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs stated that:

"The lack of information has in the pastseverely hampered the Congress in evaluatingthe effectiveness of Federal Indian programs,and the effectiveness and performance of theFederal agencies administering them."

Our review of various Federal programs and services forIndians showed that the problems of inadequate records and/

or lack of a reliable management information system formeasuring overall effectiveness of the Indian programs existin most areas discussed in our reports. These areas includedbusiness development, higher education loans and grants,education, and Indian self-determination activities (tworeports on each area); and natural resources, employmenttraining, boarding schools, the budget system, administra-tive costs, and housing (one report on each). We haveconcluded repeatedly that better management informationsystems should be developed by Federal agencies that wouldprovide meaningful and comprehensive data on various Indianactivities, yet there is no evidence that improvements havebeen made in this area.

The lack of reliable information prevents effectiveneeds assessment and makes it virtually impossible tomeasure progress in such areas as educational achievement

10

of Indian students. Also, because Federal agencies do nothave reliable information, they cannot determine effectivelywhether funds appropriated for Federal programs and servicesfor Indians are being used properly.

PROGRAM MONITORING AND EVALUATINGMUST BE STRENGTHENED TO INSURETHAT REQUIRED SERVICES AREPROVIDED TO INDIANS

Federal agencies have not established adequatecriteria and measurable goals for use in monitoring andevaluating programs and services for Indians. Consequently,monitoring and evaluating of programs and services has notbeen done or has been grossly inadequate. This problemexisted in many of the program areas discussed in ourreports. For example, in one report we pointed out thateven though BIA had been contracting with tribal groupsfor 5 years to train Indian people on reservations foremployment, BIA still lacked written criteria to determinethe results of its training program (Indian Action TeamProgram). Until such criteria are established, no over-all evaluation of the program's effectiveness can be made.

In another report we pointed out that BIA did nothave adequate controls over self-determination contractsand grants awarded to Indian tribes or the related train-ing and technical assistance activities. Thus, BIA did notknow whether the tribes were providing required servicesto Indians. The Indian Self-Determination Act clearlymandates that tribal performance under contracts and grantsmust be supervised; however, BIA had not met this mandateeven though self-determination contracts and grants in fis-cal year 1977 accounted for about 25 percent of its budgetfor operation of Indian programs. We cited severalexamples why supervision and monitoring of contracts andgrants was not effective in identifying and helping improvetribal performance.

In March 1977 we reported that the Department ofHealth, Education, and Welfare (HEW) had not adequatelymonitored special education projects for Indian studentsduring the early stages of its special education program.Few onsite project reviews were made, and contact withgrantees was primarily through letters and telephone calls.

It is not enough to just provide funds to Indians forvarious programs. Federal agencies must insure that thesefunds are being used effectively and that required servicesare being provided to Indians. To accomplish theseobjectives, adequate information must be reported and a

11

concerted effort must be made to monitor and evaluate all

Federal program activities designed to help improve the

quality of life of Indians.

TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCEACTIVITIES NEED TO BE STRENGTHENED

Tribal governments need more training and technical

assistance to help them (1) develop the capability to

negotiate and administer self-determination contracts

and grants and (2) improve the managerial and govern-mental capabilities required to fully exercise their self-

determination options. In spite of this need, Federalagencies, as discussed in many of our reports, have not

provided the assistance needed by tribes. In fact, some

Federal agencies such as the Department of the Interior

and HEW had not defined what role they should play in the

era of Indian self-determination and, as a result, did not

take any initiative to provide assistance unless requestedby a tribe.

For example, in response to our January 1977 report

"Concerted Effort Needed to Improve Indian Education," theDepartment of the Interior stated that the role of BIA

"in the future, as determined by the Congress and Indian

communities of the country, is to support and strengthen

Indian self-determination." Interior stated that "self-determination in education means that tribes should

decide education issues and programs." Interior stated

that BIA's role would be that of providing technical

services but that the full meaning of such services,at this point, is not clearly known.

In June 1975 and February 1978 reports on businessdevelopment, we pointed out the the Departments of the

Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce and the Small BusinessAdministration (SBA) needed to provide better and more

timely technical assistance to tribes. The 1978 report

noted that when technical and managerial assistance was

provided, it was provided after the businesses had lost

considerable amounts of funds. We pointed out that by

the very nature of business development programs, theseFederal agencies financed businesses which could not

qualify for financing from commercial lenders. Thusthere was a strong need for the agencies to monitor

businesses to help them succeed. Neither of the agencies

felt, however, that it was their responsibility to assist

an Indian business unless the business asked for help.

In addition to not providing adequate training and

technical assistance, we found instances where training

12

and technical assistance funds were used improperly. BIAused training and technical assistance funds appropriatedby the Congress for self-determination services for purposesother than those necessary to implement the Indian Self-Determination Act. The act intended that training andtechnical assistance to tribes should be directly relatedto increasing the tribes' capability to contract for pro-grams now provided by BIA and to helping tribes overcomeproblems that could cause BIA to decline requests forcontracts. However, BIA provided technical assistancethat had no bearing on the tribes' capability to contractunder the provisions of the act. Further, some tribalprograms were funded with training and technical assistancefunds where regular program funds should have been used.Also, BIA did not have a management reporting system tohelp monitor and control area office use of these funds.

FEDERAL AGENCIES NEED TOCOORDINATE THEIR ACTIVITIESTO PREVENT FRAGMENTATION ANDDUPLICATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS

Our reports point out that at the present time thereis very little if any coordination of Federal Indian pro-grams between the various Federal agencies. Consequently,the effectiveness of the programs and the well-being of theIndian people often suffer needlessly. The need for coor-dination between Federal agencies is dramatized by the charton page 15, which shows the maze of Federal programs involv-ed in the delivery of business development activities toIndian reservations.

Several Federal agencies administer programs underwhich Indians can obtain assistance in areas such as educa-tion, housing, economic development, transporation, andwater and sewerage facilities. Within this proliferationof programs, each agency acts independently according todiffering mission responsibilities, program goals, andadministrative procedures.

Responsibility for coordinating the various FederalIndian programs is fragmented. It is especially unclearwhat roles each agency should have in dealing with Indianneeds in the context of their overall mission and programresponsibilities. Further, it is impossible to determinefor any one Indian tribe how much Federal money goes tothe tribe or whether the tribe receives duplicate fundingfrom several Federal agencies.

In addition to our reports which repeatedly point outthe lack of coordination of Federal programs for Indians,

13

the American Indian Policy Review Commission stated in its

May 1977 report to the Congress that:

"* * * there is a serious lack of coordination

both within and between Federal agencies. As a

result, Indian people often fail to realizemany of the benefits intended for them."

STAFFING AND FUNDING OF PROGRAMSFOR INDIANS NEED TO BE IMPROVED

Although we have addressed the problem of inadequate

staffing and funding last in this series of major problems

identified in the Federal management of Indian programs,

it is by no means the least important. In fact, the prob-

lem of inadequate staffing and funding has been the one most

frequently mentioned in our reports. All but a few of the

Indian programs we reviewed appear to be plagued with a

shortage of funds and adequate or knowledgeable staff to

properly operate all aspects of the programs.

For instance, in our reports on business development,

we found that several Federal agencies did not monitor or

promote business on Indian reservations because of a lack

of manpower. In our reports on Indian natural resources,

we found that lack of personnel had hindered BIA from giv-

ing tribes necessary technical assistance and advice, and

had also hindered the U.S. Geological Survey from adequately

inspecting lease sites or monitoring and enforcing lease

provisions. In one report on Indian education, we found

that the lack of program direction within BIA was attributed

to constant turnover of high level positions. In two other

reports on Indian education, agency officials said that

either they were having difficulty recruiting experienced

staff, and were therefore operating below their position

ceiling, or they did not have enough personnel to

effectively monitor agency performance and tribal contract

compliance.

14

FEDERAL PROGRAMS FOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS

DEPARTMENT INTERIOR COMMERCE AGRICULTURE TASK W INDIAN

FORCE R ' ~ USINESS

.......... I I . .DEVELOPMENTCOMMITTEE

AGENCY IA EDA OME RS FM SXA CS ANA

FEDERAL

PROGRAMS D P | P C P C

\ |, I!::/,2 - 0F / / _ ZECH~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ OINES OSMO-NCE ISE 0I

8 RANS-~IIRCNNINO. 1 ON/rREVTION 10L

TRIBAL ORGANIZATIONSINDIAN-O NED

BUSINESSINDIAN INDUSTRIAL TRIBALRESERVATIONS PARKS BUSINESSE

ENTERPRISES

RESERVATIONS

- /5+/-#9

CHAPTER 3

ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO DELIVER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

THAT WILL IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF INDIANS

Although Federal agencies have repeatedly advised usand the Congress that actions had been taken or planned to'correct the management weaknesses discussed in our reports,such actions were not always taken, were inadequate, or werenot implemented on a continuing basis. The weaknesses,which are discussed in chapter 2, have persisted through theyears with little or no progress in improving the deliveryof Federal programs and services 'to Indians. As a result,many Indians may have suffered needlessly, while costs ofadministering the programs and services have increaseddrastically. For example, BIA's appropriations alone haverisen from about $500 million in fiscal year 1975 to about$1.4 billion (including trust funds) for fiscal year 1979.The fiscal year 1979 budget estimates amount to about $2,200per Indian living on or near a reservation. If data wereavailable on funds expended on Indian programs administeredby all Federal agencies, the cost per Indian living on areservation would be even higher.

We believe that implementation of the numerousrecommendations in our reports would have vastly improveddelivery of programs and services to Indians. However,the continued failure of Federal agencies, over the pastseveral years, to implement our recommendations or other-wise correct those management weaknesses discussed inchapter 2 lead us to the conclusion that the Congress needsto consider alternatives to insure more effective deliveryof programs and services to Indians. Unless new alterna-tives, such as those discussed in this chapter, areadopted, mismanagement of programs and services may con-tinue and improvement of the quality of life of Indianswill be impeded.

The alternatives we identified are:

-- Consolidate all federally administered Indianprograms and services into a single agency,such as BIA or a separate independent agency.

-- Consolidate program areas, such as Indianeducation, housing, and business development,into the Federal department or agency having

17

primary responsibility for that area. For

example, all Indian education could be under

HEW, all Indian housing could be under the

Department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD), and all Indian business development

programs could be under the Department of

Commerce.

-- Have all Federal agencies funnel their Indian

program funds through one agency, such as BIA,

rather than directly to Indian tribes.

-- Assist tribes in developing the capability to

manage Federal programs and services and pro-

vide direct funding through block grants.

Each of the alternatives has advantages and disadvan-

tages. In the discussions which follow, we have identified

some of those we believe could affect Indians and the Fed-

eral Government.

CONSOLIDATE ALL FEDERALLYADMINISTERED INDIAN PROGRAMS

INTO A SINGLE INDEPENDENT

AGENCY

On May 17, 1977, as a result of a congressionally man-

dated review of Federal programs for Indians, the American

Indian Policy Review Commission submitted its final report

recommendations to the Congress. Regarding Federal admini-

stration of Indian programs, the report stated:

"One of the most serious impediments to the

development of Indian self-sufficiency today lies

in Federal administration. Indian tribes, like

non-Indian communities, are plagued by an exces-

sive number of Federal agencies offering different

programs all of which must be inter-related in

order to achieve full community development.

"It is the conclusion of this Commission that:

1. The executive branch should propose a plan

for a consolidated Indian Department or

independent agency. Indian programs should

be transferred to this new consolidated

agency where appropriate."

18

This proposal or alternative has certain advantagesthat make it attractive to Indians as well as to the Fed-eral Government; however, some disadvantages would haveto be overcome.

Advantages to Indians Disadvantages to Indians

1. Indians would have to deal None.with only one agency toobtain needed assistance.

2. Fewer forms and reportswould be required.

3. Fewer policies, regula-tions, rules, procedures,etc. would have to beadhered to.

4. Federal response toIndian needs shouldbe faster and therebyreduce hardships onmany Indians.

5. Communications betweenIndians and the FederalGovernment should begreatly enhanced, lead-ing to a better under-standing of Indian needsand solutions to theirproblems.

Advantages to Government Disadvantages to Government

1. Coordination problems 1. Relocation of Federalwhich now exist between employees would possiblyFederal agencies would lead to morale problemsbe eliminated. in the short run.

2. Overall costs of providingprograms and services toIndians should be reducedbecause of economies inadministration.

3. The possibility of dupli-cate funding being pro-vided to Indians would beeliminated.

19

4. Control over Federal fundsfor Indian programs could

be greatly improved.

5. The Congress would have

easier access to informa-

tion on Indian needs and

Federal efforts to meet

those needs.

6. Communications betweenthe Federal Governmentand Indians should be

greatly enhanced, lead-

ing to a better under-

standing of Indian needs

and solutions to their

problems.

CONSOLIDATE PROGRAM AREAS INTO THE

FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY HAVING

PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT AREA

In our reviews of Indian programs, we have found that

often there are similar programs being administered by

several Federal agencies, yet there is little or no coordi-

nation among these agencies to avoid confusion and duplica-

tion. Our reports on Indian business development, for

example, pointed out that several Federal agencies within

the Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce

and the Small Business Administration administer proqrams

under which Indians can obtain economic development assist-

ance. Within this proliferation of programs, however, each

agency acts independently according to differing mission

responsibilities, program goals, and administrative proce-

ures, and no formal mechanism has been formulated to

coordinate Federal projects.

In a June 27, 1975, report on this subject, we

concluded that action was needed to decide how Federal

agencies would respond collectively to Indian economic

development needs and to assign to one agency the role of

directing and coordinating Federal programs affecting

economic development efforts. We recommended at that time

that a proposal by the Director, Office of Management and

Budget (OMB), to establish a domestic council committee on

Indian affairs, specify that the Committee handle these

Indian economic development efforts.

When we again reviewed this area for our February 15,

1978, report, we found that (1) OMB had taken no action

20

to establish such a committee and (2) other Federalefforts to coordinate economic development programs werenot effective. We, therefore, recommended that the Congressconsolidate Federal programs on Indian economic developmentand place them in a single agency. Such consolidation wasalso recommended by the American Indian Policy ReviewCommission.

In our March 31, 1978, report on Indian housing, weagain concluded that existing uncoordinated Federalprograms had not been successful. We recommended, amongother things, that the Congress redefine the nationalpolicy for Indian housing, and consolidate Indian housingprograms and the responsibility for Indian housing intoa single agency.

One way of reducing fragmentation is by consolidatingIndian programs into the department or agency which hasprimary responsibility for the subject area. This wouldmean that:

--HEW would have total responsibility for allIndian health, education, and welfare programs.

--HUD would have total responsibility for allIndian housing programs.

-- Commerce would have total responsibility forIndian business and economic development programs.

BIA would retain only its role of meeting the Federaltrust responsibilities and providing technical assistanceto help tribes improve their governments. BIA staffinglevels would be substantially reduced under this alterna-tive. Other advantages and disadvantages of thisalternative are:


1. Indians would have to 1. Indians would stilldeal with only one agency have to deal withto obtain single services more than one agencysuch as housing and edu- to meet all theircation. As a result needs. For example,Federal response to education needs wouldthese single services be met by HEW andmay be quicker. housing needs by HUD.

2. Because programs suchas housing depend oncoordination of water,sewerage, roads,

21

etc., Indians wouldstill have to dealwith more than oneagency to obtainsuch assistance.

3. Because Federal agen-cies operate underdifferent criteria,have differentpriorities, and do notalways coordinatetheir activities,completion of projectsand other assistancesuch as housing, mightstill be delayed underthis alternative.


1. The Government should have 1. Federal efforts to

better control over Federal meet total Indian needs

funds spent on single pro- would still be frag-

grams such as housing and mented among several

education. agencies, and as a re-result, coordinationof all Indian pro-grams would still bea problem.

2. Costs of such programs 2. Some reorganization of

should decrease because Federal agencies and

certain administrative shifting of employees

costs would be reduced would be required.

by the consolidation. This would cause somepersonal hardshipsand morale problems.

HAVE ALL FEDERAL AGENCIESFUNNEL THEIR INDIAN PROGRAMFUNDS THROUGH ONE AGENCY

This alternative may be the least drastic to implement,

as it would not require any major reorganization within the

present Government structure. It would, however, require

considerable communication, coordination, and cooperation

among the Federal agencies administering Indian programs,

which at present is severely lacking.

22

Because of the trust responsibilities alreadydesignated to BIA, it may be logical for BIA to handlecoordination of Federal funding for Indian programs. AllFederal agencies involved in funneling funds through BIAshould be required to provide accurate and timely informa-tion on their Indian programs, which in turn would have tobe carefully analyzed by the Congress and BIA. Due to thelack of accurate information now available, improved manage-ment information systems would be required, and otherproblem areas discussed in chapter 2 of this report wouldhave to be resolved. Otherwise, although this alternativeshould provide information on where Federal funds are beingused, it may not improve Federal management of Indianprograms.

Some specific advantages and disadvantages of thisalternative are discussed below.


None 1. This alternative wouldadd another layer forIndians to deal within obtaining assist-ance. Further delaysmight be experienced.

2. More forms and reportswould be required.Additional rules, regu-lations, and procedureswould also be required.


1. Under this alternative 1. Coordination ofthe Federal Government reporting would be verywould be able to iden- difficult.tify the total Federalfunds provided to eachIndian tribe. Presentlythis cannot be done, andas a result some dupli-cate funding may occur.

2. Coordination of Federalprograms for Indianscould be improved pro-vided the agencythrough which funds

23

are funneled isauthorized to do morethan compile statistics.

3. Improved coordinationand control over fundsshould improve thedelivery of programsand services to Indians.

DEVELOP TRIBES' CAPABILITIES TOMANAGE THEIR OWN AFFAIRS ANDPROVIDE DIRECT FUNDINGTHROUGH BLOCK GRANTS

In the past several years, following the President'sJuly 1970 message to the Congress on American Indians, BIAhas attempted to develop tribes' capabilities to managetheir own affairs by encouraging them to contract forthe authority and responsibility to plan, conduct, andadminister programs and services now provided by BIA.

The importance of developing tribal management capa-bilities was further emphasized on January 4, 1975, byenactment of the Indian Self-Determination and EducationAssistance Act, which authorizes contracts and grants tohelp tribes develop the capability to operate programsfor which they might eventually contract. The Senate Com-mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs stated in Senatereport 93-762 that the grants would be used:

"* * * (1) to undertake orderly planning for thetakeover of the more complex federally operatedprograms; (2) to train Indians to assume managerialand technical positions once the tribe has assumedcontrol and management of Federal programs; and(3) to finance a thorough evaluation of performancefollowing a reasonable period of time in which aformer federally controlled program has been admini-stered by a tribe under contract."

This action may be the first step toward providingdirect funds through block grants to tribes to allow themto manage their own affairs. However, BIA's actionsso far have not been without problems. As stated inour report on Indian self-determination contracts, grants,and training and technical assistance activities, BIA isnot monitoring the use of these contracts and grants, andtraining and tedhnical assistance grants are being usedfor purposes other than those contemplated in the act.For example, one grant was used to establish and operate

24

a drought impact area office and another was used to con-duct a fisheries management program. In neither case weretraining and technical assistance provided to enable thetribe to take over any program segment previously admini-stered by BIA.

Before this alternative can be considered viable,Federal agencies must help tribes acquire the skills neededto effectively manage their own programs. This will in-clude training that will provide management, budgeting,financial accounting, personnel, and auditing skills. Itwill also include assistance in development of adequateaccounting and reporting systems. Without such skillsthere would be no control over grant funds and no assurancethat the required services were provided to Indians.

Under this alternative, BIA's role would consist ofmeeting the Federal trust responsibility. As a result,BIA staffing would be substantially reduced.

Other advantages and disadvantages for this alterna-tive are discussed below.


1. Under this alternative 1. Tribal governments wouldtribes would be able function as do otherto take full advantage local governments andof the principles of would be limited toself-determination. funds obtained throughTribes would manage block grants. Unliketheir own affairs. the past, when BIA would

always come to theirrescue, tribes wouldhave to compete withlocal governments forincreased funding forprogram overruns andunexpected emergencies.

2. Tribes would set theirown priorities andbudget requests.

3. Tribal governments wouldbe strengthened and as aresult the Indian peoplewould have control overtheir own destiny.

25


1. Substantial economies 1. No control over programsshould occur because and as a result no assur-

Federal agencies would ance that needed servicesnot be responsible for would be provided toplanning and implement- Indians.ing Indian programs.

2. Under this alternative 2. The Federal Government'sthe Federal Government trust responsibility mightwould be able to identify be affected and would have

total Federal funds pro- to be carefully consideredvided to each Indian before initiating thistribe. alternative.

26

APPENDIX I APPENDIX I

GAO REPORTS ON FEDERAL MANAGEMENTOF INDIAN PROGRAMS

IMPROVING FEDERALLY ASSISTED BUSINESSDEVELOPMENT ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS(RED-75-371, JUNE 27, 1975)

The report discussed effectiveness of Federal effortsto improve economic conditions on Indian reservations,problems encountered, and opportunities to improve thoseefforts.

We reviewed 28 economic development projects on 7Indian reservations that accounted for more than $27 mil-lion of Federal agency expenditures for developing theeconomies of reservations. The study including a surveyof businesses showed that the agencies have had limitedsuccess.

Recommendations

To increase effectiveness of the Indian reservationpromotion program, the Director, Office of Management andBudget, should work with the Secretaries of the Interior,Commerce, and Agriculture; the Administrator, Small BusinessAdministration; and other agency heads he deems appropriate,to establish an interagency committee which would

-- identify industries which are most likely toconsider locating on a reservation,

-- aggressively encourage and assist those firmsidentified as having an interest in locatingon a reservation, and

-- insure the availability of current promotionalliterature and materials.

To provide greater assurance of successful operationof new federally financed business ventures on Indian re-servations, the Director, Office of Management and Budget,should work with the Secretaries of the Interior, Commerce,and Agriculture; the Administrator, Small Business Admini-stration; and other agency heads he deems appropriate, toestablish an interagency committee which would developprocedures for each agency's use in making systematicevaluations of proposed business and commercial develop-ment projects and in providing timely monitoring of, andcompetent technical assistance for, businesses receivingFederal financing assistance.

27


The Secretary of the Interior should have theCommissioner of Indian Affairs 1/ identify solutions to

the problems of excessive turnover of Indian labor and

consider the establishment of a postemployment counselingprogram as one possible solution to helping the Indianworker adjust to a structured work environment.

The Director, Office of Management and Budget, should

require that a proposal by his Office to establish a

domestic council committee on Indian affairs specify thatthe committee's responsibility would include efforts to

(1) clarify Federal policy concerning Indian economic de-velopment assistance responsibilities of Federal agencies,

(2) assign responsibility to a single agency for directing

and coordinating program efforts, and (3) work with the

Secretaries of the Interior, Commerce, and Agriculture;the Administrator, Small Business Administration; and other

agency heads he deems appropriate, pending establishmentand operation of the committee, to develop proposals forthe committee's consideration.

BETTER OVERALL PLANNING NEEDEDTO IMPROVE THE STANDARD OFLIVING OF WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHESOF ARIZONA (FGMSD-75-47,AUG. 12, 1975)

This report shows that the standard of living forApache Indians on the Fort Apache Reservation in Arizona

was considerably lower than that for the general public.The problems preventing White Mountain Apaches from achiev-ing a standard of living comparable to the national averagewere multiple and interrelated. The report discussed theneed for the Department of the Interior to assist the FortApache tribal council in planning and implementing an over-

all program for improving the standard of living of the

White Mountain Apaches.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Bureauof Indian Affairs to accentuate its cooperative efforts withother Federal agencies and the tribal council in formulatingand implementing an overall plan which recognizes theinterrelationships among the various programs and factors

l/The Commissioner of Indian Affairs position was elimi-nated in Sept. 1977 at the same time the new positionof Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs was established.

28


involved. The plan should take into account the naturalassets of the reservation and its people and should estab-lish goals and priorities in accordance with Apache valuesand aspirations. Under the Indian Self-Determination andEducation Assistance Act of 1975, the Bureau's Planninqefforts should be offered as technical assistance to thetribal council on an interim basis until tribal capacityto perform this planning and coordination is fullydeveloped.

The Secretary of the Interior should also direct theBureau to work with other Federal agencies and with thetribal council to improve the economic self-sufficiency ofthe reservation so that increase in Apache income is lessdependent upon increased Federal expenditures for thereservation.

Even recognizing the Self-Determination Act and theemphasis it places on giving Indians more responsibilityfor managing their own affairs, the executive branch stillhas a large responsibility for seeing that Federal fundsare used effectively and efficiently to improve thestandard of living of Indians on reservations.

Coordination of Federal efforts at the reservationlevel is needed for all Indian tribes and evaluations ofthe type covered in this report should be made for alltribes.

Therefore, the Office of Management and Budget shouldtake the necessary action to insure that

--an approach is developed which will coordinateFederal efforts at the reservation level; 1/

--continuous evaluations are conducted of the effectthat Federal programs have on the standard ofliving at Indian reservations, including develop-ing information systems to support such evalua-tions; and

l/Our report "Improving Federally Assisted BusinessDevelopment on Indian Reservations" (RED-75-371,June 27, 1975) made a similar recommendation withrespect to business development programs on Indianreservations. The above recommendations expand theearlier one to apply to all Federal programs.

29


-- annual reports are submitted to the Congress on

progress made in improving the standard of living

of reservation Indians and on any needed changes

in legislation to improve the effectiveness of

Federal programs.

If early action is not taken, we recommend that the

Congress enact appropriate legislation.

INDIAN NATURAL RESOURCES--OPPORTUNITIESFOR IMPROVED MANAGEMENT AND INCREASED

PRODUCTIVITY, PART 1: FOREST LAND,

RANGELAND, AND CROPLAND (RED-76-8,AUG. 18, 1975)

The management of Indian natural resources had been

hindered by

-- limited long-term planning for resource development,

-- lack of personnel for technical assistance and

advice, and

--conflict of tribal or individual Indian desires

with accepted resource management practices.

This report made numerous recommendations to help over-

come these problems and improve the management of natural

resources to increase the benefits to Indian people and to

assist in meeting the Nation's long-term needs for food and

fiber.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Bureau

of Indian Affairs to work with the tribes to:

-- Assess the viability of such forest management

opportunities as precommercial thinning, commer-

cial thinning, and reforestation to identify the

best opportunities.

--Develop long-range work plans for eliminating the

backlog of needed forest management work over a

reasonable time, with emphasis on the best oppor-

tunities first.

-- Develop guidelines that limit the use of 10-percent

funds to specific forest management activities and

establish review procedures to insure the funds

are used in accordance with the guidelines.

30


-- Develop salvage plans and use simplified timbersale preparation and administration procedurestailored especially for harvesting dead and dyingtimber.

-- Determine the additional staff needed to harvestthe allowable volume of timber and to performneeded forest management work and inform the appro-priate committees of the Congress of these needs.

-- Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of itsefforts in increasing timber production and reportthe results to the Congress.

The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Bureauto work with the tribes to develop long-term range manage-ment plans. These plans should provide for agreement be-tween the Bureau and the tribes on:

--Range and soil inventories to determine currentrange capacity.

-- Timetables for adjusting herd size to capacity.

-- Grazing permit systems.

-- Development and prudent use of improvements toincrease range capacity.

-- The amount of Federal and tribal funding neededto develop the improvements.

-- Education programs to promote good range manage-ment practices.

To encourage the appropriate implementation of theseplans, the Secretary of the Interior should request fund-ing for only those range improvements that are in agreementwith the long-term management plans and submit the plans tothe Congress when requesting funds for range improvements.

The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Bureauto develop lease procedures and terms to insure that Indians(1) have full and complete knowledge of Federal grantsinvolving their leased lands and (2) do not unknowinglyforego rental income for improvements made by renters andfinanced by Federal grants.

31


COORDINATION NEEDED IN THE AWARD OFFINANCIAL AID TO INDIAN STUDENTS

(MWD-76-14, SEPT. 8, 1975)

The report pointed out that problems had arisen in

developing financial aid packages for Indians because of

the lack of Office of Education and Bureau of Indian

Affairs guidance.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should require that:

--The Bureau of Indian Affairs inform all those

responsible for providing Bureau grants to Indian

students that Bureau policy is that such grants

are to be supplementary to all other sources of

financial aid.

-- Bureau educational specialists take actions to

see that Indian students apply on time for Office

of Education aid. These actions could include a

renewed effort to make high school counseling

more effective and contacts with Indian students

on campus to help them apply for Office of Educa-

tion aid.

INDIAN NATURAL RESOURCES--PART II:

COAL, OIL, AND GAS BETTER MANAGEMENTCAN IMPROVE DEVELOPMENT AND INCREASE

INDIAN INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT(RED-76-84, MAR. 31, 1976)

The development of Indian mineral resources for the

benefit of American Indians had been hindered by

-- lack of resource inventories, mineral management

plans, and mineral expertise within the Bureau

of Indian Affairs;

-- no means to determine if Indian preference in

hiring lease provisions were effective;

-- failure to establish a coal lease royalty rate

based on the selling price of coal; and

-- inadequate monitoring of lease terms afterissuance of a lease.

This report made numerous recommendations to help

overcome these problems and improve the management of

32


mineral resources to increase the economic benefits ofthe Indian people and help the Nation meet its energyneeds.

Recommendations

To help improve development of Indian mineral resources,the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Bureau ofIndian Affairs to:

-- Develop complete minerals inventories for allreservations having such resources.

-- Develop, through the use of available resourceinformation, mineral management plans, taking intoconsideration the wishes of the Indian people,and update these plans as additional informationbecomes available.

--Determine the mineral expertise staffing BIAneeds to adequately fulfill its trust responsi-bilities at its headquarters and field locationsand take the steps necessary to meet these needs.If it is not feasible to have mineral experts atall mineral developing reservations, alternativesshould be considered such as using a mineralstask force or consultants.

-- Establish procedures to exchange and distributebetween area and agency offices informationrelating to experience gained by the tribes indeveloping mineral resources.

-- Update and maintain its operations manual andexpedite revisions to the Code of Federal Regu-lations when changes are necessary.

To increase Indian employment in the mineralsindustry, the Secretary of the Interior should direct theBureau of Indian Affairs to

-- establish specific requirements in all Indianmineral leases for Indian preference in hiringand procedures for leasees to report regularlyto the Bureau and the tribes on the status ofIndian employment, and

-- establish procedures for each reservation withminerals development for either the Bureau or thetribe to insure that Indian-preference-in-hiringprovisions and requirements are being followed.

33


To help insure that Indians benefit from the

increasing value of the coal resources and to improve coal-

lease management, the Secretary of the Interior should

direct the Bureau of Indian Affairs to:

-- Establish a coal-lease royalty rate policy

based on a percentage of the selling price

of coal, with a fixed amount (floor) below

which the price cannot fall.

-- Determine whether the 2,560-acre limitation

and the criteria for exceeding the limitation

are valid, and, if it is found they are no

longer valid, take action to revise the Code

of Federal Regulations accordingly. In making

this determination, factors to be considered

in determining the number of acres to be

leased should be identified.

-- Insure that the Bureau lease files are ade-

quately documented to support all actions

taken.

To improve the Geological Survey's management of

leases of Indian mineral lands, the Secretary of the

Interior should require the Director of the Geological

Survey to

-- establish a penalty fee for late payment of

royalties and enforce such requirements as

necessary;

-- instruct leasees to submit reports required by

Federal regulations and lease terms when they

are due and require purchasers of Indian min-

eral resources to submit reports on products

purchased;

--establish procedures to coordinate reservation

reclamation activities among the various agen-

cies involved with this activity on each

reservation;

-- determine the level of staffing necessary to

satisfactorily perform its oil and gas respon-

sibilities on Indian lands and take the steps

necessary to obtain such staffing;

-- require its field offices to verify on a random

basis that oil and gas wells reported to be shut

down are no longer producing;

34


-- perform all required oil and gas site inspections;and

-- postaudit all Indian oil and gas lease accounts.

CONCERTED EFFORT NEEDED TO IMPROVE INDIANEDUCATION (CED-77-24, JAN. 17, 1977)

This report pointed out that in April 1972 we report-ed that the Bureau of Indian Affairs needed to improve thequality of education provided by Bureau schools. It alsopointed out that since April 1972 the Bureau had donelittle to meet the educational needs of its students.

-- Indian education for the 1970s had not beendefined.

--A comprehensive educational program had notbeen established.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Commis-sioner of Indian Affairs 1/ to:

--Determine the educational needs of Indian stu-dents, so appropriate programs can be designedto meet the needs.

-- Establish realistic goals and objectives formeeting such needs and communicate the goalsand objectives to all operating levels inthe Bureau.

-- Develop a comprehensive educational programwhich includes specific policies and proce-dures for dealing with problems which impedeprogress in meeting established goals andobjectives.

-- Monitor and evaluate implementation of estab-lished educational goals and programs at alloperating levels of the agency.

-- Develop a management information system thatwill provide:

1/The Commissioner of Indian Affairs position was eliminatedin Sept. 1977 at the same time th'e new position ofAssistant Secretary for Indian Affairs was established.

35

APENDIX I APPENDIX I

1. Meaningful and comprehensive information

on the academic aptitude and achievement

levels of students in the Bureau's school

system.

2. Program-oriented financial management

reports to meet the management needs of

Bureau education program officials.

Matters for attention by the Congress

Since the Bureau had made no major progress over

several years in implementing policies, procedures, and

programs to insure that the educational needs of Indian

students were met, the congressional committees should

more intensively monitor the Bureau and, if adequate

progress is not made, explore other alternatives, such

as transferring responsibilities for administering Indian

education programs to another Government agency.

INDIAN EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL

SYSTEM NEEDS MORE DIRECTION FROM THE

CONGRESS (HRD-76-172, MAR. 14, 1977)

The Indian Education Act of 1972 is primarily designed

to support special educational needs of Indian children in

elementary and secondary schools. This report discussed

problems in identifying and selecting Indian children and

assessing their special educational needs. It also dis-

cussed problems in program operation and administration.

Recommendations

The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare should

direct the Commissioner of Education to establish adequate

guidelines for local education agencies to use in deter-

mining and documenting the number of Indian children

eligible for the part A program.

For better distribution of part A funds and to serve

only Indian children with special needs, the Congress

should--after consulting with the Office of Indian Educa-

tion, the National Advisory Council on Indian Education,

and Indian organizations and tribes--provide a clearer

definition of Indian children who should be considered

eligible for the program and require that part A funds be

awarded to local education agencies based on the number of

Indian children with special educational needs.

The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare

should direct the Commissioner of Education to:

36


--Provide local education agencies more specific.guidance on conducting needs assessment.

--Require local education agencies to adequatelymake and document such assessments.

-- Prohibit local education agencies from usingIndian Education Act funds to purchase pre-fabricated buildings, unless specific statutoryauthority is obtained for such uses.

The Congress, after consulting with the Office ofIndian Education, the National Advisory Council on IndianEducation, and Indian tribes and organizations, shoulddefine what constitutes the special educational needs ofIndian children.

The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare shoulddirect the Commissioner of Education to:

-- Establish clear, measurable goals for thetitle IV Indian education program and setperiodic milestones for measuring programeffectiveness. Within these goals, granteesshould continue to have flexibility to designtheir projects according to their particularneeds. Approaches used in the Department ofHealth, Education, and Welfare's OperationalPlanning System and data obtained from thenational needs assessment may be useful inestablishing these goals and milestones.

-- Require grantees to make adequate annualproject evaluations.

-- Use project evaluations to determine if granteeimprovements are needed in future projects.

-- Improve technical assistance to parts A and Bgrantees to help them develop clear, measur-able project objectives and evaluate andreport project results.

--Solicit grantee comments on the usefulness ofthe Office of Education's evaluation handbook.

The Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare shoulddirect the Commissioner of Education to clarify parent com-mittee responsibility and authority in program regulations.The Office of Indian Education should also encourage theLocal Education Agencies to provide parent committees the

37


necessary guidance and assistance and the necessary dataon their children's needs and accomplishments. The Officeof Indian Education should also encourage the Local Educa-tion Agencies to increase the number of Indian parentsparticipating consistently in committee functions and getparent committees involved in title IV project operations.

To strengthen the administration and monitoring of

title IV projects, the Secretary of Health, Education, andWelfare should direct the Commission of Education to

-- require that title IV applications containsufficient information supporting full granteecompliance with specific provisions of the actand the Office of Indian Education regulationsand

-- develop a better management information andreporting system to allow the Office of IndianEducation to determine and resolve granteeproblems.

THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS SHOULD DOMORE TO HELP EDUCATE INDIAN STUDENTS(HRD-77-155, NOV. 3, 1977)

The Bureau of Indian Affairs knew little about Indian

students' preparation for and performance in college orabout the colleges they attend, yet it continued to spend

millions of dollars each year on the higher educationgrant program for Indians. In fiscal year 1976 grantstotaled about $33 million.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct theAssistant Secretary for Indian Affairs to:

-- Develop and implement a system for gatheringinformation on Indian students and the collegesthey attend to help these students plan theireducation. Student information should includehigh school courses taken, achievement testscores, career goals, college grade pointaverages, the number of students not continuingtheir education, and the number of graduates.Information should be obtained on support ser-vices--such as counseling, tutoring, andremedial programs--at postsecondary educationalinstitutions.

38


-- Encourage Indian counselors to perform dutiesthat enhance the Indians' opportunities tofurther their education.

-- Encourage colleges and universities withoutIndian counselors to see that Indian studentsare receiving adequate supportive services.

-- Develop regulations based on the higher educa-tion program manual and require Bureau per-sonnel to follow them.

-- Sufficiently staff the higher education programso that needed services can be provided toIndian students.

LETTER REPORT ON BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRSCOORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES(CED-78-47, FEB. 8, 1978)

The letter referred to and transmitted copies of fourpreviously issued reports dealing with the need for improv-ed coordination among Federal agencies operating Indianprograms.

THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS NEEDS TODETERMINE HOW WELL ITS INDIAN TRAININGPROGRAM IS WORKING AND ASSIST TRIBESIN THEIR TRAINING EFFORTS (CED-78-46,FEB. 13, 1978)

After 5 years of contracting with tribal groups totrain Indian people on reservations for employment, theBureau of Indian Affairs still lacked written criteria toevaluate the performance of its Indian training program(Indian Action Team). As a result, the Bureau did notknow which of its Indian contracts were successful, whichones needed technical assistance, and which ones shouldnot have been renegotiated. Total cost of the trainingprogram from inception in 1972 through fiscal year 1977was $66.2 million.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct theAssistant Secretary for Indian Affairs to carry out therecommendations of the Bureau's management review teamand to make every effort to reorganize the Indian Tech-nical Assistant Center in the manner outlined in theBureau's draft operating manual. The Assistant Secretaryshould then instruct the Chief of the Center to:

39


-- Establish, with the Indian contractors,

measurements to evaluate the effective-

ness of the Indian Action Team program.

-- Modify the Indian contracts to reflect the

measurement criteria established and thereporting requirements.

-- Require that Indian contractors submit

necessary reports to the Center for evalua-tion purposes.

-- Evaluate the Indian contractors' perform-ance as soon as possible to identify thoseprograms for which further contracts should

not be negotiated.

-- Evaluate proposd Indian Action Team pro-grams and fund the most promising ones if,

as a result of the contractor evaluations,funds become available.

--Review all Indian Action Team program con-

flicts with the Indian contractors todetermine if technical assistance may beneeded and to provide such assistance.

CONTROLS ARE NEEDED OVER INDIANSELF-DETERMINATION CONTRACTS, GRANTS,AND TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCEACTIVITIES TO INSURE REQUIRED SERVICESARE PROVIDED TO INDIANS(CED-78-44 FEB. 15, 1978)

The Bureau of Indian Affairs did not have adequate

controls over self-determination contracts and grantsawarded to Indian tribes under the Indian Self-Determination

and Education Assistance Act, or over related training and

technical assistance activities. Thus, the Bureau did notknow whether the tribes were providing required services to

Indians or if training and technical assistance funds were

being properly used. About $157 million were spent on these

activities in fiscal year 1977.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct theAssistant Secretary for Indian Affairs to develop a manage-

ment reporting system to help monitor and control self-determination contracts, grants, and training and technical

assistance activities. The Assistant Secretary should also

40


be directed to revise the Bureau's policies, regulations,procedures, and practices as appropriate to:

-- Prohibit award of contracts in which thestarting date preceeds the date of award.

-- Require that all contracts and grants includespecific criteria against which to measureperformance.

-- Require that contracts and grants are effectivelysupervised and monitored by contract and grantofficers. This should include (1) designationof full-time contract and grant officer repre-sentatives at the area level rather than agencylevel in order to remove conflict of interest,(2) clear description of contract and grantofficer representative responsibilities, and(3) adequate training of contract and grantofficer representatives.

-- Prevent training and technical assistancefunds appropriated for self-determinationpurposes from being used for assistance thatdoes not help tribes (1) develop the capa-bility to negotiate and administer self-determination contracts and grants or(2) improve their managerial and govern-mental capabilities required to fullyexercise their self-determination options.

MORE FEDERAL EFFORTS NEEDED TO IMPROVEINDIANS' STANDARD OF LIVING THROUGHBUSINESS DEVELOPMENT (CED-78-50,FEB. 15, 1978)

Federal agencies had been unable to assure the devel-opment of profitable businesses on Indian reservations,although 25 grant, loan, and technical assistance programswere being federally funded and administered. The twomajor agencies involved, the Bureau of Indian Affairsand the Economic Development Administration, provided $294million to help establish businesses during fiscal years1975-77. Deficiencies in the Bureau's administration ofits business loan and grant programs under the IndianFinancing Act of 1974 had caused the programs to sufferfrom delinquencies, inadequate accounting sytems, pooranalysis of loan and grant applications, missing documentsin loan and grant files, inadequate loan servicing bylenders, short repayment terms, and limited provision oftechnical assistance to businesses.

41


Recommendations

The Secretaries of Commerce and the Interior shoulddirect the Administrator, Economic Development Administra-tion, and the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs tocooperatively:

-- Conduct an economic feasibility study thatidentifies reservations most likely to supportself-sustaining economic development and carryout a comprehensive business development pro-gram including (1) pursuing businesses tolocate on reservations, (2) providing theminitial financial assistance and (3) assistingthem in becoming self-sustaining, profitableenterprises.

--Decide whether long-term Federal support shouldbe provided to economically develop other reser-vations or whether alternative strategies areneeded to improve the living standard of Indiansliving on reservations that lack potential forsuccessful business development. If so, newstrategies should be developed and proposed tothe Congress for implementing authority andfunding.


-- Establish specific procedures and guidelines topreclude making revolving fund loans to tribalrelending organizations that have experiencedcontinuous problems.

-- Take the necessary action to correct deficien-cies in the revolving loan fund's automatedaccounting system.

-- Make sure that the required documentation isobtained, accurate, and evaluated by theBureau before making or guaranteeing loansand grants.

-- Establish a policy restricting participationin the guaranteed loan program to only privatelenders that demonstrate adequate loan-servicing capability.

-- Make sure that necessary technical and managementassistance is promptly identified and provided.

42


-- Concentrate on identifying and correctingdeficiencies in the grant computer system,including requiring that each agency obtainthe necessary information reports from itsgrantees.

The Congress should consolidate Federal Indian eco-nomic development programs and place them in a singleagency. This agency would be in a much better position toimplement the above recommendations.

QUESTIONABLE NEED FOR ALL SCHOOLS PLANNEDBY THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS(CED-78-55, FEB. 15, 1978)

The Bureau of Indian Affairs based its priorities forconstructing school facilities on invalid information,thereby making its 1979 school construction priority listunreliable. Furthermore, the Bureau had not developed com-prehensive planning information on school needs of Indianchildren and could not readily determine when or whereschool facilities were needed. The Bureau estimated thatas of January 1978 about $300 million would be needed torenovate or construct Indian school facilities. The Bureaucould save millions of dollars by having Indian childrenattend nearby public or Bureau schools and by constructinglarger, consolidated schools in lieu of smaller, scatteredones.

Recommendations

The Secretary of the Interior should direct theAssistant Secretary for Indian Affairs to

-- compare the costs and cultural and academicbenefits of constructing small, scatteredschools as opposed to larger, centralizedschools before schools are scheduled forconstruction;

-- enforce the Bureau's policy of having Indianchildren attend nearby public schools whereadequate facilities are available;

-- establish a policy which would require use ofavailable space in nearby Bureau schools beforenew schools are built;

-- require comprehensive planning data to justifyschool construction priorities;

43


-- require verification of data on all constructionrequest applications before including them onschool construction priority lists; and

-- clarify and enforce the Bureau's policies onschool attendance boundaries.

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS NOT OPERATINGBOARDING SCHOOLS EFFICIENTLY(CED-78-56, FEB. 15, 1978)

The Bureau of Indian Affairs had failed to consoli-date its boarding schools to make greater use of space andequipment, to establish policies to control boarding schoolexpenditures, and to provide for adequate staff and fundsto properly maintain boarding schools. As a result, mil-lions of dollars were being lost.

Recommendations


-- Instruct area offices, agency offices, andboarding schools to follow established eligi-bility criteria and admission procedures.

--Develop space utilization, staffing and fundingcriteria for boarding schools that will insureefficent operation and that the educationalneeds of Indian children are met.

--Consolidate boarding schools into the minimumnumber of facilities needed to meet the abovecriteria.

--Dispose of unneeded facilities, buildings, andequipment in accordance with establishedprocedures.

-- Include provisions for linking procurements tospecific educational needs in developing com-prehensive education programs.

-- Develop a system that will provide informationwith which to monitor program expendituresand/or determine need for detailed evaluations.

-- Monitor and evaluate expenditures of funds atthe school level periodically.

44


-- Reevaluate staffing and funding of maintenanceat Navajo area boarding schools and make ad-justments necessary to insure that thesefacilities are maintained adequately.

-- Implement plans to decentralize and simplifythe Navajo area maintenance system.

INFORMATION ON ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONSOF THE INDIAN EDUCATION RESOURCES CENTER(CED-78-57, FEB. 15, 1978)

This report points out that the assistance provided bythe Indian Education Resources Center was considered gen-erally satisfactory by its clientele--mostly Bureau ofIndian Affairs field offices and schools. However, Centerofficials and the Director of Indian Education said thatthe additional needed services, such as monitoring and eval-uating of school activities, had not been provided becauseof staffing problems and/or travel fund limitations.

TRIBAL PARTICIPATION IN THE BUREAU OF INDIANAFFAIRS BUDGET SYSTEM SHOULD BE INCREASED(CED-78-62, FEB. 15, 1978)

Tribal participation in the Bureau of Indian Affairsfiscal year 1979 budget system and program funding deci-sions varied. Therefore, the budget represented some, butnot all, tribal funding priorities. Major improvementswere needed in the Bureau's system to increase tribal par-ticipation so that the budget would reflect tribal needsand priorities.

The Bureau had proposed a new process for settingfunding priorities. It would build on and modify, ratherthan replace, the current budget process. However, condi-tions will again limit tribal participation in developingthe fiscal year 1980 budget.

Recommendations


-- Give the tribes complete funding data andinformation.

--Inform the tribes of the exact amount of fundsactually available to change the mix of programsand funding priorities.

45


-- Narrow the criteria for excluding a programfrom the funding priority-setting processand for not assigning program funds to thetribes for priority setting.

-- Give the tribes more time to develop program-funding priorities and an opportunity torevise their priorities due to changingconditions.

-- Revise the procedures and requirements forsetting program-funding priorities to makesure that tribal officials are given an oppor-tunity to identify their priorities.

-- Give the tribes an opportunity to participatein developing new programs and making majorrevisions to existing programs.

-- Determine how the Bureau's Planning, Programmingand Evaluation Data System can be improved tobetter evaluate program performance and mana-gerial effectiveness.

--Identify the number of Indian tribes andAlaskan Native groups requiring planningassistance, inform the tribes concerningthe benefits to be derived from comprehen-sive plans and needs analyses, and givefunding priority to tribal requests forcomprehensive planning assistance.

-- Reflect tribal funding priorities in theBureau's budget.

MORE EFFECTIVE CONTROLS OVER BUREAU OFINDIAN AFFAIRS ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARENEEDED (FGMSD-78-18, FEB. 15, 1978)

The Bureau of Indian Affairs reduced funds for Indianprograms by about $7.6 million in fiscal years 1977 and1978 rather than reduce its administration costs as direct-ed by congressional committees.

Recommendations


--Act immediately to reduce its administrativecost for fiscal year 1978 by most, if not all,

46


of the $4 million as requested by thecommittees.

-- Discontinue plans to show reimbursements forcomputer services as reductions in adminis-trative costs.

-- Identify and eliminate (1) positions thatoverlap or layer another position and(2) unqualified personnel.

-- Revise its accounting sytem operations to useits organizations' operating budgets as ap-proved by the Bureau's budget office to controlcosts and prevent unauthorized deviations fromoperating budgets.

-- Issue instructions to identify the specificsubaccounts to which each Bureau organizationcan charge its administrative costs, consistentwith any changes requested by congressional com-mittees to the appropriation structure, andemphasize the need to comply with the instruc-tions.

-- Eliminate the production of all financialreports not needed for effective and efficientprogram management and revise all retainedreports to include only essential data.

-- Develop edit routines in the automated systemto reject all invalid and improper transactionsand provide for prompt correction of rejectedtransactions.

-- Establish fund controls that will keep areaoffices within amounts budgeted and requirethem to obtain prior approval from theBureau's budget office for significantdeviations.

-- Resubmit the revised system to us for approval.

Along with the Subcommittee on the Interior, HouseCommittee on Appropriations, the Subcommittee on the Depart-ment of the Interior and Related Agencies, Senate Committeeon Appropriations, should:

-- Provide the Bureau of Indian Affairs with aseparate appropriation for administrativeexpenses or place a percentage or dollar

47


limitation on the amount of its totalappropriations that can be spent foradministrative costs.

-- Specify in future appropriations the amounts thatcan be used to pay personnel costs, especiallywhen desiring to reduce the number of administra-tive personnel.

Should either of these alternatives be adopted, theSecretary of the Interior should require the Bureau tochange its budgets and related justifications to showtotal administrative costs and personnel by specific Bureauoffices and by each program category. Also, the Secretary'should direct the Bureau to include statistics on theBureau's total work force and total personnel employed byeach Bureau office in its budgets and related justifications.

THE INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION ACT--MANYOBSTACLES REMAIN (HRD-78-59, MAR. 1, 1978)

Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service domi-nance over Indian programs and services had changed littlesince enactment of the Indian Self-Determination and Educa-tion Assistance Act, although the act established a Federalpolicy permitting tribes to assume control over their ownprograms.

Recommendations

The Secretaries of the Interior and Health, Education,and Welfare should direct the Bureau and the Indian HealthService to establish criteria for measuring progress inimplementing the Self-Determination Act and to implementprocedures for:

--Making sure that tribes have a full understand-ing of their options under title I.

-- Helping tribes obtain information needed forfully informed decisions on assuming programs orprogram segments. This may require helpingtribes assess their ability to operate and man-age the contractable programs.

-- Guiding the tribe in determining how to acquirethe skills or resources needed to contract fora particular program or program segment, includ-ing training and assistance available from theagencies.

48


SUBSTANDARD INDIAN HOUSING INCREASESDESPITE FEDERAL EFFORTS--A CHANGE ISNEEDED (CED-78-63, MAR. 31, 1978)

Although the Federal Government built nearly 27,000new homes on Indian reservations from 1970 to 1976, thenumber of Indian families living in substandard housingincreased from about 63,000 to about 86,000 during thatperiod. This was due to

--more Indian families living on reservations,

--a relatively low level of housing production, and

--inadequate management of new homes.

Recommendations

The Congress should redefine the national policy forIndian housing and establish a program with realistic goalsand objectives for implementing that policy. To be effec-tive, an Indian housing program must be centrally administ-ered and must be designed to recognize that Indian housingneeds and problems on isolated, rural reservations aredifferent than those encountered in urban non-Indian areas.Accordingly, in establishing a program for Indian housing,the Congress should

-- consolidate Indian housing programs and theresponsibility for Indian housing into asingle agency and

--recognize that a wide range of housing assistanceoptions such as loans, grants, and subsidies willbe needed to serve the various income levels andcope with the unique conditions and special needsof Indians living on reservations.

Major changes are necessary to solve the problemsexperienced in meeting Indian housing needs. Pending theestablishment of a new national policy on Indian housingand the implementation of any new or redirectrd programs,however, prompt action needs to be taken to improve theeffectiveness and efficiency of existing programs. Accord-ingly, the following actions should be taken.

The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should:

-- Assess goals for Indian housing in view of theincreasing need and provide the funds necessaryto meet these goals.

49


-- Insure that prototype costs be established foreach Indian area unless a special analysis ismade showing that such costs are not needed.

-- Develop procedures to insure that projects arecompleted as planned in terms of quality andcompleteness.

-- Revise procedures to permit the lesser of theappraised value or cost of leaseholds to befully considered as part of the total projectdevelopment costs.

-- Reassess the present structure by which housingon reservations is managed.

-- Insure that home buyer training required by theIndian housing regulations issued in March 1976is provided.

The Secretary of the Interior should:

-- Determine the number of Indian families whichcan only be served by the housing improvementprogram and identify the location and type ofassistance needed in terms of new constructionor rehabilitation.

-- Develop a formal plan for meeting that needand request from the Congress the necessaryfinancial and other resources required tocarry out the plan.

The Secretary of Agriculture should direct theFarmers Home Administration to place a greater emphasison Indian housing, develop a more effective outreachprogram, and provide staff necessary to implement sucha program.

50

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION'S

MANAGEMENT STUDY OF THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS--

DIGEST OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Budget process:

1. Establish a formal planning system within BIA andintegrate it into the present budget process.

2. Reorganize budgeting, planning, and intergovern-mental relations into one integrated organization.

3. Stimulate Indian participation in the budgetprocess.

4. Include all nonbanded area programs except trustfunds in the agency budget formation processby fiscal year 1979.

5. Make the budget function responsible for varianceanalyses and performance reviews.

6. Emphasize Indian participation and band analysis inthe BIA budget review to Interior, OMB, the Presi-dent, and the Congress.

7. Establish annual project planning at area andagency levels for all continuing programs andmonitor performance quarterly on a personal basis,altering the plan to reflect status changes.

Personnel management:

8. Strengthen Indian preference to improve BIA effec-tiveness while continuing to hire, train, andupgrade Indians for Bureau employment.

9. Develop a human resources planning system usingindustrial engineering techniques to establishappropriate staffing levels and positionrequirements.

10. Develop an aggressive recruiting program to securequalified or trainable Indians.

11. Reorganize the employment classification system toimprove credibility.

12. Improve BIA employee relations practices.

51

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

13. Develop training programs to meet specific BIArequirements.

14. Continue regular civil service evaluations andupgrade personnel management quality throughDepartment of the Interior project managerappointments.

Management information:

15. Establish and install performance measurementstandards.

16. Initiate a program to improve and facilitategeneral communications between central officeand field supervisors.

17. Develop a concise statement on critical issues.

18. Improve the management by objectives program.

19. Expedite the automatic data processing moderniza-tion study to insure completion by January 1,1977.

20. Complete application analysis section of themodernization study by October 1, 1976.

21. Add remote access and interactive capabilities toreduce precessing time and increase computer pro-gram development efficiency.

22. Develop an inventory system for a comprehensivemanagement system.

23. Develop standardized material and supply inventorysystems.

(14584)

52

by the comptroller general report to the congressarchive.gao.gov/f0902d/107900.pdf$2,200 per indian...

Documents