IPS and Its Relationship to BIA Budgeting for IPS Funding and budget and all tribe/agency budgets within the area to the BIA Central Office. Subsequently, about 4 to 6 months after the process begins, BIA area and agency offices and tribes are provided "target" budget figures from the Central Office. These target amounts are the anticipated IPS program funding levels prior to the Office of Management and Budget's review of BIA's budget request. Following congressional appropriations, area and agency offices receive actual funding allocations. The portion of BIA's budget subject to IPS has varied since the late 1970s. The largest amount of funds subject to IPS, $495 million, occurred in fiscal year 1979. Programs removed from IPS, particularly BIA's Indian schools program, account for the sharp decline in IPS funds between fiscal years 1979 and 1980. Since that time, although there have been changes regarding which programs are subject to the IPS process, the level of funding subject to IPS has been more stable, ranging between about $227 million and $333 million and averaging about $275 million annually, or about 30 percent of OIP funds. As stated in chapter 1, the portion of BIA's budget subject to the IPS process is contained in BIA'S OIP budget component. Table 2.1 shows the amounts of congressional funding provided to BIA, the portion of those funds devoted to the OIP, and that portion of the OIP subject to the IPS process. aAmounts shown for fiscal years 1978-80 and 1987-90 include BIA area office direct operations IPS funds. Amounts shown for fiscal years 1981-86 include only funds categorized by BIA as tribe/agency funding and do not include area office direct operations funds. In addition, IPS funding data for fiscal years 1978-80 were derived from appropriations hearings documents; data for fiscal years 1981-90 were provided by BIA. "The data for fiscal year 1990 represent initial BIA appropriations. As indicated earlier, BIA administers IPS funds at both its area and agency offices and uses those funds to carry out a number of BIA programs. In addition to direct program services to tribes, IPS funds also are used for a portion of BIA area and agency office operations expenses. These expenses include salary costs for BIA area office directors, agency superintendents, and administrative staff, as well as costs for general administrative functions, such as property management and accounting. The expenses are collectively referred to as executive direction and administrative services (ED&A). According to BIA Central Office officials, the BIA Central Office uses no IPS funds. Table 2.2 shows the distribution of IPS funds between BIA area and agency offices for fiscal years 1987-90. The table also shows the amount of IPS funds devoted to ED&A at these respective offices. aIPS funding for the BIA Navajo area office and the five tribe/agency locations within the Navajo area "This column represents the funds distributed to BIA agency offices, or the total tribe/agency funds for As reflected in table 2.2, BIA area offices (excluding the Navajo area office) have administered an average of about $36 million annually in IPS funds, or about 14 percent of the total. Of the area office IPS funds, about 39 percent, on average, has been used to fund ED&A. In addition, an average of about 8 percent of IPS funds allocated to the BIA tribe/ agency level (excluding Navajo) was devoted to agency office ED&A activities. With respect to the types of programs associated with IPS funding, table 2.3 shows that portion of IPS funds associated with major BIA programs for fiscal years 1987-90. IPS and Its Relationship to BIA Budgeting for Programs Subject to IPS As shown in table 2.3, the largest portion of IPS funds has been devoted to tribal services. Major program activities under the tribal services area include law enforcement, social services, adult vocational training, and aid to tribal governments. The major decrease in funding under the economic development area from fiscal year 1988 to fiscal year 1989 primarily resulted from BIA's decision to exclude road maintenance from the activities subject to the IPS process. Since the fiscal year 1978 budget formulation, the combination of programs subject to IPS has varied. The identification of programs subject to the IPS process primarily results from BIA decisions although, in some instances, programs have been removed from the IPS process pursuant to legislative guidance. Between 1977 and early 1980, BIA removed two programs, Indian Schools and Facilities, from IPS. BIA's rationale for removing Indian Schools was to comply with formula requirements of the Education Amendments of 1978 (P.L. 95-561); Facilities was removed to ensure adequate maintenance of federal facilities. Schools took about $200 million out of the IPS process; Facilities about $60 million. During this same period, other programs, such as Law Enforcement, Scholarships, and Tribal Courts, were included in the IPS process. Since early 1980, six programs have been removed from the IPS process. Two programs, Indian Action Teams and the Housing Improvement Program, were removed pursuant to legislative guidance contained in congressional reports accompanying BIA appropriations bills. A third program, Roads Maintenance, was removed by BIA on the basis of the findings of a Department of the Interior Inspector General report.1 BIA removed a fourth program, its Financial Trust Services program, in fiscal year 1988 because of uncertainties surrounding the implementation of a new contract with a private sector financial institution to provide trust fund accounting services. BIA noted in its fiscal year 1988 budget submission to the Office of Management and Budget that a portion of these funds may be returned to the Indian Priority System for 1Road Maintenance Program, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Inspector General (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 8, 1987). On the basis of the finding that roads on Indian reservations were not effectively and economically maintained, which resulted in the potential waste of government funds, the report recommended, among other things, that BIA remove its road maintenance program from IPS. BIA agreed with the recommendation. IPS and Its Relationship to BIA Budgeting for tribal decisions on funding/staffing levels once the contract for trust fund accounting services is "firmly in place." BIA provided us no specific explanations for having removed its General Community Development and Business Enterprise Development programs from the IPS process in fiscal year 1982. A BIA official informed us, however, that a former BIA official, in fiscal year 1982 budget hearings, commented that BIA had exhausted its opportunities in the business enterprise program area. In addition to the inclusion or exclusion of programs over the years, some programs have been represented differently in different years. For example, in fiscal year 1978 BIA listed forestry as one IPS program; in fiscal year 1990 forestry was five discrete IPS programs. Similarly, wildlife and parks was listed as one program in fiscal year 1978 and as seven discrete programs in fiscal year 1990. Changes to the programs subject to the IPS process have been made by the BIA Central Office on the basis of administrative decisions or legislative directives, as noted above. Such decisions are not subject to appeal by the BIA area or agency offices or the tribes. BIA area and agency office officials indicated that the Central Office had often provided no advance notification to the area and agency offices or to tribes regarding changes to the IPS listing. However, we were told by a Central Office official that notification of an IPS program change for the fiscal year 1991 budget was provided to tribes in January 1989. |