NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON INDIAN EDUCATION 330 C Street, S.W., Room 4072 Washington, D.C. 20202 (202) 732-1353 TESTIMONY OF THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON INDIAN EDUCATION On Office of Indian Education and Other Department of Education Programs Before the Select Committee on Indian Affairs United States Senate October 27, 1989 Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Select Committee on Indian Natives. The National Advisory Council on Indian Education has been in existence since 1973, having been established pursuant to the Indian Education Act passed as title IV of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-318). The Indian Education Act has undergone five reauthorizations with the last being Part C of title V of Public Law 100-297. The Council consists of 15 and Members who are Indians, as defined in the Indian Education Act (including Alaska Natives), and are appointed by the President from lists of nominees furnished, from time to time, by Indian tribes and organizations, representing diverse geographic areas of the country. The Council's charge has remained virtually unchanged in these reauthorizations and includes, among other things, the duty to advise the Secretary of Education with respect to administration of any program in which Indian children and adults participate or from which they can benefit, including the programs under the Indian Education Act, and the duty to submit to the Congress each year a report, including any recommendations necessary for the improvement of federal education programs in which Indian children and adults participate or from which they can benefit. the I cannot speak regarding the attitude of previous Members of the Council on the breadth of its mandate. However, the current Council unanimously passed a motion at its meeting in January 1989 that it recognizes that its mandate to advise and/or recommend on federal education programs in which Indians participate or from which they can benefit includes all federal education programs, regardless of the department in which the program is located. Consequently, the Council interprets its charge a8 including programs ranging from early childhood education to higher education to adult vocational/technical education in any department of the federal government, including programs in which Indian children and adults are currently participating or those from which they can benefit but have not yet and done so. - 3 Please let me begin by noting that I have been with the Council since December 1988. My comments will reflect interactions with and observations of the Office of Indian Education (OIE) and the Department of Education since that time. During this period of time, many events have occurred, including the appointment of an Acting Director of OIE, the posting and reposting of vacancy announcements for seven mid-management positions, the posting of a vacancy announcement for the Director of OIE with subsequent interviews and submission of a NACIE list of nominees for that position, the posting of other announcements for jobs within OIE, and the signing of Indian preference and non-Indian preference memoranda of understanding between the Department and the labor union. vacancy Programmatically, OIE has completed a cycle of formula grant, discretionary grant, and fellowship awards as well 88 publication for comment of proposed rulemaking and publication of final regulations for formula grants, discretionary grants, and fellowships. Consequently, this short period of time has encompassed most of the possible events that could happen to OIE with the exception of hiring of permanent staff under the Indian preference policy. Mr. Chairman, let me make it clear that the National Advisory Council on Indian Education began an effort in December 1988 to try to work with the Department of Education within the confines of our reading of the Council's enabling legislation. Section 5342(b)(1) of Public Law 100-297 provides that the Council shall "advise the Secretary with respect to the administration (including the development of regulations and of administrative practices and policies) of any program in which Indian children or adults participate or from which they can benefit," including the Indian Education Act programs. The Council felt that this provision covered administrative policies, including the development and implementation of an Indian preference policy in OIE. In addition, section 5342(b)(6) provides that the Council shall "submit to the Secretary a list of nominees for the position of Director of the Office of Indian Education whenever a vacancy in such position occurs." Based on these statutory mandates, we began in December in conversations with the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Beryl Dorsett regarding the implementation of Indian preference under section 5341(c) of Public Law 100-297 and regarding the placement of an Acting Director for the Office of Indian Education. However, we learned that the Assistant Secretary had simply been told by the Department who the Acting OIE Director would be, and we got negative responses to requests for a copy of the Department's Indian preference policy statement and advance copies of mid-management vacancy announcements prior to posting. Accordingly, a letter, dated January 4, 1989, was sent to Secretary Cavazos seeking his intervention to acquire these documents. Unfortunately, this request was denied and the announcements were posted showing the first evidence to the Council of the Department's Indian preference policy. The Council staff nevertheless mailed several hundred copies of these announcements out to Indian tribes and organizations and other entities to encourage Indian and Alaska Native people to apply for the jobs. Acting OIE Director Aaron Neal Shedd reported to the Council at its meeting on January 18, 1989, that there were neither sufficient funds nor full-time equivalents available in ΟΙΕ to fill all 7 mid-management positions. He stated that all of the positions could not be filled until October 1, when the new appropriation would become available. Based on this 5 information, the Council voted unanimously to recommend to the Secretary that the Department not fill these positions until after the permanent Director of OIE is selected. Mr. Shedd later reported in mid-February at a meeting of United South and Eastern Tribes that there would be sufficient funds to fill one branch chief job in mid-May and another in early summer with the remaining positions having to wait to be filled in October. On February 23, 1989, the Chairman of the Council sent a letter to the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education reflecting the Council's position on this matter. It should be noted that Secretary Cavazos responded on February 2 to the Council's January 4 letter by stating that Department Officials do not believe that the Council has any statutory role for advising on internal management or personnel issues related to OIE or any other office of the Department. He noted the one exception relating to "the Council's role in nominating a Director of OIE." In a follow-up letter on February 23, 1989, the Council requested a meeting and a desire to establish a cooperative and open relationship with the Secretary. The Secretary replied on April 26 but did There has been no response to the not respond to the request for a meeting. February 23 letter to the Assistant Secretary recommending that the 7 mid-management personnel be selected by the new OIE Director. In late April and early May, the Acting Director of OIE (who was also an applicant for the permanent OIE Director position) conducted very hastily scheduled interviews for the mid-management jobs with one applicant reportedly |