The Office of Education's response was that again we were too late for these changes to be considered. Although Title IV gave legislative authority to the Council to perform several functions independent of the Office of Education, the current control of the Council's budget by this Office severely hobbles the Council's efforts to fulfill its statutory responsibilities to (1) "evaluate programs and projects carried out under any program of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare in which Indian children and adults can participate or from which they can benefit, and disseminate the results of such evaluations". (2) "provide technical assistance to local educational agencies and to Indian educational agencies, institutions and organizations to assist them in improving the education of Indian children", (3) and the right to "contract with any public or private non-profit agency, institution or organization for assistance in carrying out such functions". The Council's obvious message to the Congress in all this is that as long as the bureaucracy is not held rigidly accountable for their continued blatant distortion of Congressional legislative intent, little will change in their habits or attitude toward this Council. And as importantly, it is all well and good for the Congress and the Executive Office to be outspoken proponents of Indian SelfDetermination, but the bureaucracy's actions belie these words and the unofficial policy of "paternalism" continues to be perpetuated. We ask, When will it stop! Hopefully, the Congress will examine this policy and restore our autonomy or we will not be able to perform our responsibilities. This clearly again seems to be in contradiction to the intent of the Congress who wanted Indians to have some control over programs and resources and decision affecting the educational lives of their children. Since the initial funding of the Indian Education Act, an evolving practice has arisen within the Office of Education which dilutes the appropriated budget sums of Title IV. It is an internal cabal whereby Indian related programs are being shifted to Title IV which in turn become a form of supplemental funding to these other programs to the detriment of the intended beneficiaries of Title IV. This, of course, violates the very heart of the reason Congress goes to such pains to carefully identify line items in agency budgets; to restrict the latitude and practices of the bureaucracy's unauthorized manipulation of their budgets. In the case of Title IV funds, various programs for vocational, adult and other forms of training that would ordinarily qualify for other Office of Education program funds are being shunted over into Title IV programs. The Council is drawing special attention to this practice not so much in that the Council in any way begrudges the funding of other than Title IV programs, but for the reason that has been made so emphatically in other parts of this report: There is already a critical shortage of Indian Education funds available and this practice further compounds the problem. In addition to the above, most of the existing programs within the Office of Education are not serving Indian institutions or Indian communities. Most Indian communities and Indian institutions are not even aware that such programs exist. Others who attempt to seek such funds, find that they are usually turned down for any number of reasons. The main reasons are generally connected with rules, regulations and criteria used for selection which are all oriented toward the non-Indian programs. Since Indians canot get much funds under this system, Congress should insist that Indian people be employed in every program within the USOE and that a part of every program have a special set aside for Indian people. A case in point, is the vocational education programs within USOE, which does little or nothing to train Indian people in vocations that would allow them to be employed in the community in which they reside. The regulations on the act must be changed to allow Indian people to plan and decide for themselves the kind of programs needed for their people. It may also require that special kinds of vocational programs be set up on or near Indian communities. The Council is especially concerned about bilingual/bicultural education. Indian languages are an extension of Indian culture. Denial of Indian languages thus is a denial of Indian culture. Bilingual/bicultural programs need to be redesigned to allow for Indian language development by Indians not by nonIndians linguists. Because only a small percentage of Indian people have graduated from college, emphasis should be placed upon programs which are designed to encourage Indians to seek higher education. Indian colleges, located on or near Indian committees, should be given a preference in funding or special funds set aside for this purpose. Any number of studies on Indian education have been authorized by Congress, the most recent by PL 93-380. The Council has gone on record requesting that primary contracts go to Indian organizations, that the instrument used be drawn up by Indians, and that Indians be involved in drawing conclusions and making recommendations. Therefore, we make an earnest appeal to the Congress to (1) Restore the Council's originally intended and independent status which has been usurped by the bureaucracy. (2) authorize its separate and direct funding. (3) understand, protect, and improve the uniqueness and quality of the Indian Education Act, (4) hold the Office of Education stringently accountable for the proper implementation of the Congress' Indian Education policies, (5) insist that Indian people be employed in every program within the USOE and that a part of every program have a special set aside for Indian programs, (6) insist that USOE changes the regulations for disbursing vocational programs on or near Indian communities can be specially designed to meet the needs of Indian people, (7) insist that USOE bilingual/bicultural programs be redesigned to allow for Indian language development by Indians not by non-Indian linguists, (8) insist that USOE give preference in funding to Indian controlled higher education institutions or provide special set aside funds for this purpose, and (9) insist that studies or surveys made, concerning Indian programs, be contracted to Indian firms, organizations, or institutions to insure that the design, evaluation, conclusion and recommendations are by Indian people who are intimately aware of the problems of Indian people. Mr. Chairman, these are only a few examples of the difficulties our Council has encountered with the Office of Education. The Council believes the legislation passed in 1972 and amended in 1974 will have greater impact on Indian Education than any other law passed by the Congress. The potential is definitely there and it remains to be seen if the U.S. Office of Education under new leadership can fulfill its role by properly utilizing this Council's advisory capacity. Mr. Chairman, this concludes our statement; on behalf of the National Advisory Council on Indian Education, sincere and special thanks for this opportunity to present these vital concerns. NATIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, RESOLUTION ON THE INDIAN EDUCATION ACT OF 1972 (PUBLIC LAW 92-318 TITLE IV) Whereas the Indian Education Act of 1972 (PL 92-318 Title IV) authorized the necessary funds to bring the level of education of Indian children up to the level of the general population (over $300,000,000) and, Whereas the forty million dollars that had been appropriated for the past two years proved to be inadequate; and, Whereas the Indian communities throughout the United States are being frustrated with Title IV of the Act, which in effect promises to fund projects for the improvement of Indian Education, yet turns down all but a small percentage of the applicants and, Whereas the Indian communities feel that the Office of Education has been negligent in its duty by not including in its annual budgets adequate funds to meet their needs; therefore, be it Resolved, That the National Indian Education Association Board of Directors meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on February 14, 1975 urgently request that at least fifty percent of the funds authorized under the Indian Education Act of 1972 be included in the Office of Education budget for the fiscal year 1976–77. AD HOC COMMITTEE OF NATIVE AMERICANS CONCERNED WITH INDIAN EDUCATION The Ad Hoc Committee of Native Americans Concerned with Indian Education is a National committee made up of fifteen Indian people elected at a National meeting on Indian Education held in Denver, Colorado on January 17 and 18, 1975. Five members of the committee represent (1) five National organizations (National Indian Education Association, Coalition of Indian Controlled School Boards, National Congress of American Indians, National Tribal Chairmans Association, and American Indian Higher Education Consortium), (2) five represent the reservation community and (3) five represent the Indians-at-large. Mem bers of the committee and their addresses are attached. The purpose of this committee is to work with "grass root" Indians from throughout the country for the purpose of improving Indian education. The committee has held four meetings to date: two in Denver, Colorado, one in Washington, D.C. and one in San Diego, California, to discuss Education, development of a master plan for the future of Indian Education, recommendations on Indian Education and strategy for carrying out these recommendations. Two recommendations of immediate concern regarding the Indian Education Act of 1972, P.L. 92-318, are resolutions No. 4-75 and No. 5–75, which are attached. RESOLUTION NO. 4-75 Whereas the Indian Education Act of 1972, P.L. 92-318, has not provided sufficient funding to meet the expressed educational needs of Indian people, and Whereas past and current funding has not exceeded 10% of the total funding need as expressed in the report entitled "The Need for Full Funding of Federal Indian Education Programs", and Whereas it has been erroneously stated that Title IV funding is a duplication of JOM, Title I, etc. : Now, therefore be it Resolved, That the United States Office of Education through the appropriate Congressional Committees request that all parts of Title IV, P.L. 92-318, The Indian Education Act, as amended in P.L. 93-380, Title VI, Part C, be funded at not less than 50% of the total authorized appropriation for Fiscal Year 1976, and not less than 100% beginning Fiscal Year 1977. Date: April 5, 1975. Certification; This Resolution was adopted by the Ad Hoc Committee of Native Americans Concerned With Indian Education at a duly called meeting at the Rodeway Inn, San Diego, California, April 5, 1975. Attested to by : GWEN COOPER, Secretary. LLOYD ELM, Chairman. DAVID M. GIPP, Whereas the original legislation authorizing funds for teacher training under the Education Professions Development Act of 1972 has expired and has not been renewed, and Whereas a network of nationwide programs has been initiated during the past two fiscal years which addresses programs to the needs of professional development for Indian teachers of Indian children, and Whereas this program now supports the professional training of a significant number of Indian people who have now entered teacher preparation with the assistance of these federal projects, and Whereas legislation authorizing professional developments exists under Title IV (Indian Education Act) Part E to establish and maintain these programs, and Whereas prudent use of federal funds mandates a moral decision to continue programs that specifically address teacher training with an Indian preference, and Whereas there is a continuing need for more professionally prepared Indian teachers and educational specialists to work within the growing number of Indian community programs, to fill vacancies as they occur within BIA school systems and in many rural public school systems that are charged with educating a significant number of Indian children: Now therefore be it Resolved, That Congress immediately appropriate add on funds necessary to sustain at an efficient level eligible programs now evaluated as effectively training professional educators for Indian children under the existing legislation; and be it further Resolved, That NACIE sustain the need for trained Indian teachers as a high priority in the overall needs of Indian education. Date: April 5, 1975. Certification: This Resolution was adopted by the Ad Hoc Committee on Native Americans Concerned With Indian Education at a duly called meeting at the Rodeway Inn, San Diego, California, April 5, 1975. GWEN COOPER, Secretary. Attested to by: LLOYD ELM, Chairman. DAVID M. GIPP, AD HOC COMMITTEE FUTURE OF INDIAN EDUCATION Chairman.-Lloyd Elm Sr., Onondaga Indian School, Nedrow, New York 13120, 315/469-6991. Vice Chairman.-American Indian Higher Education Consortium, 1626 High Street, Denver, Colorado 80203, 303/321–5909. Secretary. Dr. Gwen Cooper, Calif. Indian Educ. Assoc. Inc., 7447 Orien Avenue, La Mesa, Calif. 92041. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Walter Abrams, Chief's Council of Tonawanda Indian Reservation, Basom, New York 14013, 716/542-4360. Lannie Deserly, National Indian Education Association, 4241 70th Street, La Mesa, Calif. 92041. Ms. Joy Hanley, 406 So. Priest Road #164, Tempe, Arizona 85282, 602/838-5582. Steve P. Johnson, Alaska Native Assoc. of Oregon, United Indian Council of Oregon, Urban Indian Council, 5306 SW Hewett Blvd., Portland, Oregon 97221, 503/288-5361 (0), 503/292-4783 (H). Birgil Kills Straight, Box 28, Kyle, South Dakota 57752, 605/867-5815 (College Center), 605-455-2450 (O). Jana McKeag, National Congress of American Indians, 1430 K Street, NW, #700, Washington, D.C. 20005, 202/347-9520. Warren Means, United Tribes of North Dakota, Box 139, Bismarck, North Dakota 59501, 701/255-3285. Abe Plummer, Coalition of Indian Controlled School Boards, Suite 4, 811 Lincoln, Denver, Colorado 80203, 303/573-9016. Benny Star, Five Pueblo Indian Education Inc., Santo Domingo Pueblo, New Mexico 87052, 505/465-2948. Ted Rising Sun, Busby, Montana 59016, 406/477-6240. Lawrence Snake, National Tribal Chairmans Assoc., 401 E. Steed Street, Midwest City, Oklahoma 73110, 405/732-1997. Jake Whitecrow, Program Director, Inter-Tribal Council, P.O. Box 762, Miami, Oklahoma 74354, 918/542-4486. STATEMENT TO NATIONAL INDIAN ADVISORY COUNCIL ON INDIAN EDUCATION MARCH 1975 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this paper is to update a document presented to the Office of Management and Budget in October of 1973 by a number of Indian Educational Organizations and interest groups. The presentation was made on October 4, 1973 for the purpose of outlining a rationale for full funding not only of Title IV, P. L. 92-318, "The Indian Education Act", but also a rationale showing the need for continued funding of the Johnson O'Malley Act, and P. L. 874, "Impact Aid". Since that time we have witnessed a major upheaval in National Politics. Gerald Ford is now President of the United States. Congressional seats have been won and lost, as have powerful positions on Congressional Committees. While the audience to whom this presentation is directed has changed, the need for full funding of Federal Indian Education programs has not changed. Moreover, we find ourselves in the grip of a national economic crisis, a crisis which is being felt at every level of the economy and which makes our funding needs more acute. It is our hope that this presentation by the "Ad Hoc Committee” on Indian Education will be the starting point of a joint effort by Indian communities, their leaders and the Federal Government to bring about the goal of full funding of Federal Education Programs for Indian children. In addition to the economic and political changes there has been a significant legislative development in the enactment of S. 1017 into Public Law 93-638. Presi dent Ford, on January 4, 1975, stated: "I have signed into law S. 1017, the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. My Administration is commited to furthering the self-determination of Indian communities without terminating the special relationships between the Federal Government and the Indian people." President Ford goes on to say: "It will be through the initiatives of Indian communities that the authorities provided in this act will be implemented. I urge these communities to make the fullest possible use of them and pledge the support of this Administration." We believe that only through "initiatives of Indian communities" and persistence in making our views known that the Federal Government will appropriate the funds that are necessary to implement the present laws that authorize funds for Indian Education. As an "Ad Hoc Committee" we formed at a meeting in Denver, Colorado on January 17 & 18, 1975, which was called by the "Legislative Committee" of the National Advisory Council on Indian Education. Yet, our committee, is truly representative of the broad Indian Educational Community, and as such we intend to speak out for our constituencies. We hope that our views are received and furthered through the efforts of the National Advisory Council on Indian Education. Today's issues The presentation mentioned above was developed specifically for O.M.B. It was the Indian communities' feeling that O.M.B. understanding of the status of Indian educational needs was vital to the approval of budget amounts necessary to provide for such needs. This presentation is directed to the National Indian Advisory Board and indirectly to the respective government policy and decisionmaking bodies. We believe therefore that it is necessary to list issues which we feel are vital to the further development of Indian Education. These issues include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Title IV funding level; (2) Appropriations for and implementation of P.L. 93–638 (S. 1017) ; (a) Appropriations for Title I, P.L. 93-638, contracting with Tribes and Tribal organizations, and (b) Appropriations for and distribution formula for Title II, P.L. 93-638 (S. 1017) which amends the Johnson-O'Malley Law. (3) The adequacy of Impact Aid, P.L. 874 for Indian school districts to provide basic support monies for Indians in such schools; (4) The lack of adequate state "basic support" funds in Indian school districts; and (5) The development and articulation of an adequate statement and policy for Tribal educational jurisdiction. While these issues encompass problems that by no means lend themselves to an easy solution, they are issues that this body, the National Indian Advisory Board must be cognizant of and we hope take positive steps along with other Indian educational interest groups to resolve. Indian youth profile 326,354 total-Of these: 48,000 on reservations attend BIA schools; 9,000 attend private or mission schools; 225,000 (or more) attend public schools; 29,138 attend public schools with 10 or less Indian pupils; and 12,000 not in school. The above figures are USOE's projection of Indian enrollment found in their publication "Indian Education Act of 1972, Report of Progress for the First Year of the Program", dated March 31, 1974, page v. While we would tend to feel that there are more Indian children out of school than the 12,000 listed in the USOE publication, the figures do show that the greater number of Indian children are in public schools. Thus we must continue to be concerned with sources of finance for such schools for basic support, compensatory programs, and for cultural programs. Of equal importance is control and monitoring of expenditure of such funds. This is an area in which NACIE has specific responsibilities. The question of duplication of services One of the recurring questions by budget policy makers is that which asks if in fact there is a duplication of services by the various authorities. We understand that this question is dealt with in the recently completed "USOE/BIA Study of the Impact of Federal Funds on Local Educational Agencies Enrolling Indian |