59–010 

Calendar No. 110 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 110–45 

AMENDING THE INDIAN CHILD PROTECTION AND FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION ACT TO IDENTIFY AND REMOVE BARRIERS TO REDUCING 

CHILD ABUSE, TO PROVIDE FOR EXAMINATIONS OF CERTAIN CHILDREN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

APRIL 10, 2007.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DORGAN, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 398] 

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the bill, 

S. 398, to amend the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence 

Prevention Act to identify and remove barriers to reducing child 

abuse, to provide for examinations of certain children, and for other 

purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE

The bill to amend the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act of 2007 (S. 398) provides for a five-year reauthorization of child abuse prevention and treatment programs and 

conforms the Act to other federal child abuse reporting and confidentiality laws. It enhances the ability of the Congress to identify 

the scope of child abuse and family violence in Indian Country; recognizes the role of the Attorney General in documenting and addressing incidents of felony child abuse in Indian Country; encourages coordination between the Indian Health Service (IHS) and 

public and private medical or treatment organizations in the treatment and examination of children through the use of telemedicine; 

and reauthorizes the Indian child abuse treatment grant program. 

BACKGROUND

Public Law 101–630, the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act, was enacted in 1990. The Act addressed the 

findings of the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs and the 

Special Committee on Investigations that reports of child abuse in 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

2 

1S. Rpt. 101–203 on S. 1783, November 13, 1989. 

Indian Country were not properly investigated; that incidents of 

child abuse in Indian Country had been perpetrated by federal employees with a known history of suspected child abuse; and that Indian tribes and the federal government lacked sufficient resources 

to treat children who had been abused.1

In 1989, the Special Committee on Investigations convened hearings after several federal employees were indicted for abusing multiple Indian children over the course of several years. The hearings 

focused on three Indian reservations where large numbers of children had been abused by federal government employees. The Special Committee found that, often, the perpetrator had been earlier 

removed or terminated from federal employment for suspected acts 

of child abuse and, in several instances, reports of the abuse were 

disclosed to administrators and local law enforcement who failed to 

respond appropriately. In some cases, the failure to act on these reports resulted in the employee being hired to work with children 

in other Indian communities, which resulted in the continued 

abuse of Indian children. 

Further, the Special Committee and the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs found that Indian tribes lacked the mental 

health resources to appropriately treat victims of sexual abuse or 

to provide services to Indian communities affected by the abuse. 

The Act resulted in the first federal mandatory Indian child 

abuse reporting law with criminal penalties for the failure to report 

suspected abuse. It required the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), 

the IHS, and Indian tribes receiving Indian Self-Determination and 

Education Assistance Act funds to conduct employee background 

checks on individuals who come into contact with children. The Act 

proposed to identify the scope of child abuse and family violence in 

Indian Country and to provide funds to Indian tribes for the mental health treatment of child sexual abuse and family violence victims. In addition, it encouraged cooperative investigation and prosecution activity to ensure that no further trauma was inflicted on 

children during the investigation and adjudication of child abuse 

crimes. 

A. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE ACT

In 1995, the Committee convened a hearing on the Act’s reauthorization. The Committee learned that neither the BIA nor the 

IHS had requested funding to implement child abuse prevention 

and treatment programs that were authorized by the Act. In addition, the BIA had not promulgated regulations for the administration of such programs or developed the Central Registry for reports 

or information on the abuse of children in Indian Country called 

for in the Act. The reauthorization legislation, S. 441, became Public Law 104–16. 

During the 108th Congress, S. 1601 was introduced to reauthorize the Act. A hearing was held on that bill and information was 

provided by the Administration and Indian tribes and organizations. The testimony largely revealed that child abuse treatment 

grants and programs continue to be administered in piecemeal 

fashion and with little consistency. In addition, a concern was 

raised that information about the rates of child abuse in Indian 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

3 

Country remains elusive due to the multiple jurisdictions with responsibility for responding to reports of abuse. Consequently, Indian tribes and the federal government remained unable to adequately measure the resources necessary to address the impact of 

child abuse in Indian Country. S. 1601 passed the Senate, but was 

not acted on by the House of Representatives. 

During the 109th Congress, S. 1899 was introduced to reauthorize the Act. On March 15, 2006, the Committee held a legislative 

hearing on S. 1899. The hearing addressed several key matters, including annual reports to the Congress, background character investigations, an amendment to the Major Crimes Act, and the use 

of telemedicine in the treatment and diagnosis of child abuse. S. 

1899 passed the Senate, but was not acted on by the House of Representatives. 

B. SENATE BILL 398

S. 398 is intended to strengthen the Act and provide the means 

to address the current lack of comprehensive data available on the 

extent of child abuse in Indian Country. The Committee believes 

that this data, including numeric reporting data, is critical to the 

Congress’ understanding of the scope of the problem and the extent 

of resources needed to address it. S. 398 encourages a collaborative 

effort between the responsible agencies and governments in collecting data on an annual basis. Finally, it requires annual reports 

to those Committees of the Congress that have oversight responsibility for agencies that respond to the effects of child abuse in Indian Country. 

1. Annual reports to the Congress 

The Act currently requires local law enforcement immediately to 

submit reports of child abuse to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This process was intended to ensure that reports of 

child abuse did not go unaddressed. Shortly after the law was enacted, the FBI began collecting this data on an annual basis. The 

Committee believes that the Congress would benefit from receiving 

an annual report of the numeric data currently collected by the 

FBI. See the attached November 18, 2005, letter from the FBI. 

Therefore, S. 398 amends the Act to require the FBI, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Interior to 

submit this numeric data annually to the Congress. In addition, S. 

398 amends the Act to provide that the FBI shall maintain this information in a manner accessible to agencies that require such information to carry out an official duty or to comply with the background check for employees pursuant to the Act. 

The bill also provides an amendment for the collection of other 

types of child abuse information beyond that currently collected by 

the FBI. The Committee believes that federal, tribal and local judicial, behavioral health and medical agencies that respond to incidents of child abuse in Indian Country have important data. The 

amendment requires a collaborative effort between the Indian 

tribes, the Secretary, the Secretary of the Department of Health 

and Human Services, the Attorney General and the Director of the 

FBI to coordinate the collection of comprehensive data, including 

criminal and civil child abuse allegations, federal and tribal prosecutions, sentencing patterns and recidivism rates, and to provide 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

4 

this information annually to the Congress. This information will 

enhance the Congress’ understanding of the overall extent to which 

such child abuse impacts federal, state and tribal investigation, 

prosecution and treatment resources in Indian Country. 

The Committee believes these two reports are not duplicative. 

Each report calls for a different type of data. The first contains 

only local law enforcement reports of alleged child abuse and is immediately accessible. The latter report is more comprehensive and 

inclusive of non-law enforcement agency information, including information only known by tribal governments. Consequently, this 

second study will take considerably longer to develop and, thus, to 

submit to Congress. The Committee believes that the Congress 

should have access to information that is readily available in order 

to expedite an appropriate response to this problem. To the extent 

that these reports can be combined at a later date, the Committee 

will consider a recommendation in the future that this provision be 

amended. 

2. Background character investigations 

The Committee received comments that some Indian tribes that 

were engaged in the foster care placement of children were duplicating investigation efforts pursuant to the Act and other federal 

laws governing foster care and adoption placement. To avoid duplication of this effort, S. 398 would amend the Act to provide that 

an Indian tribe that conducts background checks on employees or 

potential employees (including volunteers) under this Act is 

deemed to have met the background investigation requirements of 

any other federal law requiring such investigation for placement 

purposes. 

3. Use of telemedicine in the treatment and diagnosis of child abuse 

The Committee is aware that there is a lack of available professionals trained to diagnose and treat the sexual and physical abuse 

of children in Indian Country. There is a level of training needed 

to appropriately diagnose and treat forms of child abuse, and not 

all physicians employed by the IHS are experienced in performing 

sexual assault examinations, particularly on children. However, 

physicians working in IHS and tribal facilities in Indian Country 

are routinely asked to perform such examinations and to render diagnosis and treatment, and there is a potential for a missed diagnosis or inappropriate referral for investigation and services. 

Therefore, S. 398 would amend the Act to authorize the use of telemedicine by experienced professionals at public and private medical and behavioral health facilities who specialize in the area of 

child abuse diagnosis and treatment to assist the IHS with diagnosis, treatment and training. 

This specialized care (including the proper manner of examination and interview) is critical to minimize trauma to children who 

have been victimized. Ideally, such examinations should take place 

immediately after disclosure of abuse. The Committee is aware, 

however, that due to the current lack of resources, some children 

must wait to receive these services. They may be transported hours 

away from their homes to reach the nearest physician for an examination. The bill provides that isolated Indian communities shall 

receive priority in receiving such telemedicine services. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

5 

4. Major Crimes Act Amendment 

Currently, the federal government has jurisdiction to investigate 

and prosecute specific acts of child sexual abuse in Indian Country 

pursuant to the Major Crimes Act. However, the federal government does not have jurisdiction to investigate or prosecute acts of 

child physical abuse or neglect unless they rise to the level of serious bodily injury or death. Given that child abuse or neglect is not 

a crime listed in the Major Crimes Act, these acts cannot be prosecuted using comparable state offenses. While Indian tribes have 

jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute acts of child abuse and neglect, tribal criminal prosecutions are limited to acts committed by 

Indians and to criminal sanctions of no more than one-year in custody and a $5,000 fine. The Committee is concerned that a whole 

category of crimes against children may be going unaddressed. 

Therefore, S. 398 contains an amendment to the Major Crimes Act 

to criminalize acts of child abuse and child neglect in Indian Country. This amendment is intended to close the gap that may exist 

in addressing the full range of crimes that may be inflicted on Indian children. The Committee encourages the federal government 

and the tribes to use multidisciplinary teams to determine how to 

proceed in adjudicating such crimes to avoid duplication of effort 

and to minimize the trauma to the child often associated with prolonged exposure to the judicial systems. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 398 was introduced on January 25, 2007, by Senators Dorgan, 

McCain, Inouye, Thomas and Domenici, and was referred to the 

Committee on Indian Affairs. On February 8, 2007, S. 398 was 

unanimously passed out of the Committee and ordered reported 

without amendment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND TABULATION OF VOTE

On February 8, 2007, the Committee, in an open business session, considered S. 398. By a voice vote, the Committee ordered the 

bill reported favorably to the full Senate with the recommendation 

that the bill do pass. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 

Short title. Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act Amendments of 2007. 

Section 2 

Sec. 402. Findings and purpose. 

A new finding is added which recognizes the responsibility of the 

federal and state governments in investigating and prosecuting felony acts of child abuse in Indian Country. A new purpose has been 

added to identify and remove impediments to the investigation and 

prosecution of acts of child abuse. 

Section 3 

Sec. 403. Definitions. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

6 

The definition of ‘‘local law enforcement agency’’ is modified to include a tribal law enforcement agency operating pursuant to a 

grant, contract or compact under the Indian Self-Determination 

and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.). Two new 

definitions are added. The term ‘‘final conviction’’ is defined with 

respect to an offense, as a formal judgment of guilty through a verdict by a judge or jury or a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, but 

does not include any formal judgment that has been expunged by 

pardon, reversed, set aside, or otherwise voided. The term ‘‘telemedicine’’ means a telecommunications link to an end user through 

the use of eligible equipment that electronically links health professionals or patients and health professionals at separate sites in 

order to exchange health care information in audio, video, graphic, 

or other format for the purpose of providing improved health care 

diagnosis and treatment. 

Section 4 

Sec. 404. Reporting procedures. 

An amendment to section 404 brings the Act into conformity with 

other federal child abuse reporting statutes to provide confidentiality protections for the child and to permit disclosure of information about the child only to those who need to know such information in investigating, treating or adjudicating child abuse. See Title 

18 United States Code Section 3509. 

The amendment to section 404 also requires the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation, in coordination with the Attorney General and the 

Secretary of Interior, to annually report to appropriate Committees 

of Congress the number of child abuse incidents that have been reported to it by virtue of the original law. This amendment is intended to enhance the Congress’ understanding of the extent of 

child abuse in Indian Country. 

This section also requires the Secretary, in consultation with the 

Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and 

the Attorney General and Indian tribes, to gather other data relating to child abuse from the Indian tribes, federal and local law enforcement, criminal justice, behavioral health and medical agencies. 

This information has not previously been gathered or provided to 

the Congress and will assist the Congress in determining the type 

of resources necessary to address child abuse and where to direct 

such resources. 

Section 5 

Repeals Sec. 405. Central registry. 

Removal of Barriers to Reducing Child Abuse. 

The existing Section 405, the central registry provision, is repealed, based on recommendations from the Bureau of Indian Affairs that due process concerns and developing a mechanism that 

requires tribal implementation created substantial obstacles. The 

new section that replaces this provision requires a federal study 

and report to Congress to identify factors that are impeding the reduction of child abuse in Indian Country. 

Section 6 

Sec. 406. Confidentiality. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

7 

Section 406 is amended to broaden the waiver of laws requiring 

confidentiality of records to permit agencies that investigate and 

treat child abuse to receive the otherwise confidential information 

in the performance of their duties. 

Section 7 

Sec. 407. Waiver of parental consent. 

Section 407 specifies that no parental consent for forensic examinations is necessary if the reporting agency suspects a child has 

been abused. A new provision is added which is intended to minimize additional trauma to the child who may have been subject to 

abuse by requiring, to the greatest degree possible, avoidance of 

multiple interviewers in the examination and interview processes. 

Section 8 

Sec. 408. Character investigations. 

This section requires Department of the Interior and Department 

of Health and Human Services to conduct character investigations 

of individuals who work in positions, including voluntary positions, 

where they have regular contact with children. A new provision is 

added which is intended to remove redundancy in conducting background character investigations. This new provision deems that a 

character investigation under this subsection shall satisfy any requirement under any other federal law requiring background 

checks in connection with the placement of an Indian child in a 

tribally-licensed or approved foster or adoptive home, or other outof-home placement. 

Section 9 

Sec. 409. Indian child sexual abuse treatment grant program. 

This section reauthorizes appropriations for each FY 2008 

through 2012 at such sums as necessary. 

Section 10 

Sec. 410. Indian child resource and family services centers. 

Section 410 is amended to establish Indian Child Resource and 

Family Services Centers within each BIA Regional Office, rather 

than Area Offices, and includes the Attorney General in the agencies permitted to participate in the service centers. The service centers are to provide services to victims and families who have suffered abuse or violence, and provide training for tribal staff in child 

sexual abuse investigation and treatment or post-traumatic stress 

disorder treatment. The provision expands the lists of personnel 

appropriate for a multi-disciplinary team and reauthorizes appropriations for each FY 2008 through 2012 at such sums as necessary. 

Section 11 

Sec. 412. Use of telemedicine. 

A new Section 412 is added to authorize the Indian Health Service to enter into contracts or agreements with experienced private 

or public medical and treatment practitioners for the use of telemedicine in the treatment and diagnosis of Indian children. The 

Service is authorized to enter into contracts or agreements for the 

use of telemedicine with a public or private university or facility, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

8 

including a medical university or facility, or any private medical or 

behavioral health professional, with experience relating to pediatrics to assist the Service in the diagnosis and treatment of child 

abuse, or training of IHS personnel in diagnosing and treating 

child abuse. IHS would use existing telemedicine infrastructure 

and give priority to rural and isolated Service Units or medical facilities for these services. Access to any information or consultation 

on the treatment of Indian children who have, or may have, been 

subject to abuse or neglect, is limited to purposes of telemedicine 

services addressed in this section. An authorization of appropriations is provided for FY 2008 through 2012 at such sums as necessary. 

Section 12 

Conforming Amendments. 

Section 413 amends Title 18 U.S.C. § 1169 to broaden the class 

of people required to report child abuse to include foster parents 

and volunteers, thus bringing the Act into conformity with other 

federal child abuse reporting statutes. See Title 42 United States 

Code Section 13031. ‘‘Felony child neglect, felony child abuse’’ are 

added to the list of offenses in the Major Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. 

1153(a)). Other technical corrections are made to this section. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The Congressional Budget Office has calculated the cost estimate 

for S. 398 as follows: 

S. 398—Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention 

Act Amendments of 2007 

Summary: S. 398 would authorize appropriations to operate Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Indian Health Service (IHS) programs aimed at preventing abuse of Indian children. CBO estimates that implementing S. 398 would cost about $140 million over 

the 2008–2012 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary 

amounts. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

S. 398 would limit the authority of states to release names or 

other information about abused children under certain circumstances, and it would preempt state laws governing background check as conducted by tribes. Those provisions would be 

intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (UMRA), but they would impose no costs on state, local, 

or tribal governments. Thus, the threshold established in UMRA 

($66 million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation) would not be 

exceeded. 

The bill would impose two private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. S. 398 would allow local law enforcement and local child 

protective services to perform forensic examinations of children 

without parental consent and thus deny parents that right. Additionally, the bill would require certain individuals to report abuse 

or suspected abuse to local authorities. CBO estimates that any direct cost of these mandates would be minimal. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 398 is shown in the following table. The cost of 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

9 

this legislation falls within budget functions 450 (community and 

regional development) and 550 (health). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Indian Child Abuse Treatment Grants: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 12 12 13 13 14 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 6 9 13 13 14 

Indian Child Resource and Family Service Centers: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 6 6 6 6 7 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 5 6 6 6 7 

Use of Telemedicine: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 23 7 7 7 8 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 9 14 8 7 7 

Other Provisions: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 2 2 2 2 2 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 2 2 2 2 2 

Total Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................................. 43 27 28 28 31 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................ 22 31 29 28 30 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 398 

will be enacted in 2007, that the necessary amounts will be provided for each year, and that spending will follow historical patterns for similar programs. Based on information from BIA and 

IHS, CBO estimates that implementing S. 398 would cost about 

$140 million over the 2008–2012 period to operate programs that 

would be authorized under the bill. 

Indian child abuse treatment grants 

Section 9 would authorize the appropriation of such sums as necessary for fiscal years 2008 through 2012 to provide grants to Indian tribes to treat child abuse. The grants would be administered 

by the IHS. Based on the level of spending previously authorized 

for this activity (but which has not been previously funded), CBO 

estimates that implementing the grant program would cost $6 million in 2008 and $55 million over the 2008–2012 period, assuming 

appropriation of the necessary funds. 

Indian child resource and family services centers 

Section 10 would authorize the appropriation or such sums as 

are necessary for fiscal years 2008 through 2012 for Indian Child 

Resource and Family Services Centers. One center would be established in each of the 12 BIA regions and would provide services to 

victims and families who have suffered abuse or violence and provide training to tribal staff regarding family violence, child abuse, 

and child neglect. CBO estimates that implementing this section 

would cost about $6 million a year to fund the professional staff 

recommended in the bill, assuming appropriation of the necessary 

amounts. 

Use of telemedicine 

Section 11 would authorize the appropriation of such sums as are 

necessary for fiscal years 2008 through 2012 for IHS to use telemedicine (the transfer of medical information via electronic communication) to better diagnose and treat child abuse. Based on information from IHS, CBO estimates that implementing this section 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

10 

would cost about $9 million in 2008 and $45 million over the 2008–

2012 period for new equipment, staff, and training. 

Other provisions 

The legislation includes provisions that would add new information collecting and reporting requirements to federal agencies that 

would oversee Indian child abuse under the bill. Based on information from the agencies about the costs of similar services, CBO estimates that implementing those provisions would cost $2 million annually. 

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: S. 398 

would prohibit local law enforcement or child protection agencies 

from disclosing names or other information about abused children 

to entities that are not involved in preventing or treating child 

abuse. The bill also would deem background checks certified and 

conducted by tribes as having met state requirements. Because 

these provisions place limitations on state authority or laws, they 

would be intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA. However, CBO estimates that the mandates would impose no costs on 

state, local, or tribal governments. Therefore, the threshold established in UMRA ($66 million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation) would not be exceeded. 

Estimated impact on the private sector: The bill would impose 

two private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA. S. 398 would 

allow local law enforcement and local child protective services to 

perform forensic examinations of children without parental consent 

and thus deny parents that right. Additionally the bill would require certain individuals to report abuse or suspected abuse to local 

authorities CBO estimates that any direct cost of these mandates 

would be minimal. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Daniel Hoople and Eric 

Rollins. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Leo Lex. 

Impact on the Private Sector: Peter Richmond. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT

Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires that each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the 

regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in carrying out the bill. The Committee has concluded that the regulatory and paperwork impacts of S. 398 should be de minimis. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

In the 109th Congress, Chairman McCain and Vice Chairman 

Dorgan of the Committee sent letters to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, requesting information on each agency’s implementation of 

the law. A copy of each letter and the respective agency response 

is attached. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

11 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC, September 21, 2005. 

Re Reauthorization of The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Protection Act, Public Law 101–630 

Director ROBERT S. MUELLER III, 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. 

DEAR DIRECTOR MUELLER: The Federal Bureau of Investigation 

is authorized by statute to investigate Major Crimes that occur in 

Indian Country, including crimes against children. In 1993, The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act (‘‘the 

Act’’) was enacted after the disclosure of multiple instances of Indian child sexual abuse that were perpetrated by Indian school employees in Indian Country over a number of years. Among other requirements, the Act mandated reports of child abuse in Indian 

Country, sought to track the extent of child abuse, and reduce incidents of child abuse there. 

The Act is now due to be reauthorized. To determine whether the 

existing law is meeting its intended purpose, the Committee requests information from your agency: 

Section 404 of the Act requires all local law enforcement agencies 

in Indian Country to report allegations of child abuse, involving an 

Indian child and an Indian perpetrator, to the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation: 

1. Does the FBI routinely receive reports of Indian child abuse 

in Indian Country by local law enforcement agencies? If not, please 

identify the obstacles affecting their ability to do so or the ability 

of the FBI to gather that information; 

2. Upon receiving reports of Indian child abuse, how are these reports documented within the FBI; 

3. How many reports of Indian child abuse has the FBI received 

in the last 3 years; 

4. What does the FBI do with these reports, and 

5. What, if any, new trends or obstacles has the FBI encountered 

in investigating crimes against children in Indian Country. 

Finally, please share with the Committee any recommendations 

that you have for improving the Act and for addressing crimes 

against children in Indian Country. 

Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, 

JOHN MCCAIN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs. 

BYRON L. DORGAN, 

Committee on Indian Affairs. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

12 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Washington, DC, November 18, 2005. 

Hon. JOHN MCCAIN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your September 21, 2005, 

letter. I appreciate the opportunity to provide you the following information in response to your request regarding the reauthorization of The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Protection 

Act. 

1. Does the FBI routinely receive reports of Indian child abuse 

in Indian Country by local law enforcement agencies? If not, please 

identify the obstacles affecting their ability to do so or the ability 

of the FBI to gather that information. 

The FBI routinely receives reports of Indian child abuse from 

various local law enforcement agencies in Indian Country, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Law Enforcement Services (BIA–OLES). Additionally, the FBI receives referrals of allegations of Indian child abuse from other public service entities such 

as schools, medical professionals and child protective service organizations. Some of these referrals are the direct result of FBI participation on Multi-Disciplinary Teams (MDT) or Child Protection 

Teams (CPT) in Indian communities. 

There may be instances where child abuse complaints are received and investigated by other law enforcement agencies in Indian Country and the FBI is not made immediately aware of those 

allegations. 

2. Upon receiving reports of Indian child abuse, how are these reports documented within the FBI? 

Allegations of child abuse are documented in FBI investigative 

files if an investigation is initiated. In cases where the FBI refers 

the allegations to either tribal law enforcement or BIA–OLES, the 

allegation may be documented in a complaint form or other communication. 

3. How many reports of Indian child abuse has the FBI received 

in the last 3 years? 

The number of Indian child abuse allegations received by the FBI 

in the last 3 years can be determined by the number of investigations conducted by the FBI in the Sexual Abuse of Child or Physical Abuse of a Child investigative classifications and by the number of allegations documented in a format other than an investigative file. During the period covering fiscal years 2003 through 2005, 

the FBI initiated 1,596 investigations in matters involving Indian 

child abuse. This represents 30% of all FBI investigations in Indian 

Country during that period. 

Child abuse allegations received by the FBI and documented in 

a format other than an investigative file represent child abuse reports with various dispositions, including unsubstantiated reports, 

referral to other investigative agencies, or immediate declinations 

of prosecution. During the period covering fiscal years 2003 

through 2005, the FBI documented 1,451 reports of matters involving Indian child abuse. Two FBI field divisions in South Dakota 

and Arizona participate on extensive MDT projects that essentially 

result in the FBI field divisions documenting nearly all reports of 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

13 

child abuse that are collectively received by all participating agencies on the MDT. Accordingly, 1,005 of those reports were documented by the Minneapolis and Phoenix FBI field divisions. 

4. What does the FBI do with these reports? 

In nearly all cases of Indian child abuse reports received by FBI 

field divisions, investigations are conducted either by FBI Indian 

Country agents or task force members working with the FBI on Indian Country Safe Trails Task Forces (STTF). In circumstances, 

where the severity of the abuse is determined to be less serious, 

the allegations may be referred to tribal or BIA–OLES personnel 

for investigation and presentation to tribal courts as deemed necessary. 

5. What, if any, new trends or obstacles has the FBI encountered 

in investigating crimes against children in Indian Country? 

The FBI faces many unique, challenging obstacles in investigating crimes against children in Indian Country. These investigations often require significant commitments of investigative 

manpower in remote areas. This frequently means investigators 

must travel substantial distances and are without ready access to 

the technical expertise which is essential to their investigations. 

These investigations usually require substantial, specialized and 

expensive techniques, such as forensic interviewing of victims, serology/DNA and autopsy examinations, and polygraph examinations. Indian Country investigations are also hampered by the reluctance of witnesses to cooperate, due to close family structures in 

most tribal communities and cultural sensitivities in tribal relations. 

6. Finally, please share with the Committee any recommendations that you have for improving the Act and for addressing 

crimes against children in Indian Country. 

Indian Country law enforcement is hampered by a lack of standardized crime reporting for crimes in Indian Country. The standardization of crime reporting would be of invaluable assistance to 

the FBI and the BIA–OLES in identifying, tracking and analyzing 

crimes and crime trends. 

If I can be of further assistance to you regarding this matter, 

please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Sincerely yours, 

CHRIS SWECKER, Assistant Director, 

Criminal Investigative Division. 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC, September 21, 2005. 

Re Reauthorization of The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Protection Act, Public Law 101–630 

Secretary MICHAEL O. LEAVITT, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SECRETARY LEAVITT: In 1993, The Indian Child Protection 

and Family Violence Prevention Act (‘‘the Act’’) was enacted after 

it was disclosed that multiple instances of Indian child sexual 

abuse were perpetrated by Indian school employees (including fedmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

14 

eral employees) in Indian Country over a number of years. The primary goals of the Act are to reduce the incidents of child abuse, 

mandate reports of child abuse in Indian Country, and to track the 

extent of child abuse there. The Act is due to be reauthorized. To 

determine whether the law is meeting its intended purpose, we request the following information. 

Section 405 required the Department, in consultation with the 

Department of the Interior, to conduct a study on the feasibility of 

establishing a Central Registry to document reports of Indian child 

abuse in Indian Country. Please provide the Committee with any 

updated information regarding the study or the implementation of 

the Central Registry. 

Section 408 of the Act requires the Department to conduct background character investigations on individuals who seek employment in positions where they would have access to children. It further mandates that Indian tribes that receive Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act or Tribally Controlled 

School Act funding do the same. 

1. How has the Department complied with Section 408; 

2. How does the Department determine whether the required Indian tribes that contract services from the Department comply with 

Section 408, and 

3. Does the Department believe that Section 408 has met its intended purpose in keeping children safe? 

Section 409 provides that the Department, acting through the 

Department of the Interior, shall establish an Indian Child Abuse 

Treatment Grant program to establish child abuse treatment programs. Please provide the Committee with a status report on this 

grant program. In addition, please provide the Committee with a 

list of additional resources that are available through the Department to Indian tribes to treat victims of child abuse. 

In addition, please provide the Committee with the Department’s 

policies or protocols, specifically relating to the Indian Health Service, for sharing health related information with tribal, state, and 

federal law enforcement agencies who need to know such information in the course of investigating instances of child abuse. 

Finally, please share with the Committee any recommendations 

that you have for improving the Act and for addressing crimes 

against children in Indian Country. 

Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, 

JOHN MCCAIN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs. 

BYRON L. DORGAN, 

Vice Chairman, Committee 

on Indian Affairs. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

15 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, Rockville, MD, February 1, 2006. 

Hon. JOHN MCCAIN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN MCCAIN: Secretary Michael Leavitt asked me to 

thank you for your September 21, 2005, letter and to respond to 

you directly regarding your request for information on the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) role in implementing 

the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act 

(the Act). 

Section 405 of the Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 

(DOI), in consultation with the Secretary of HHS and the Attorney 

General, to prepare a study on the feasibility of establishing a Central Registry. The DOI consulted with the HHS and the Attorney 

General in 1990 and determined that the establishment of a Central Registry was not feasible due to privacy and legal concerns. 

In regard to your question about Section 408, on September 23, 

2002, the HHS published an Interim Final Rule implementing Section 408 of the Act, as amended by section 814 of the Native American Laws Technical Corrections Act of 2000. The regulations establish minimum standards of character for all positions in the Indian Health Service (IHS) where duties and responsibilities involve 

regular contact with children. All Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations receiving funds under the authority of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, as amended, must employ 

only individuals who meet standards of character no less stringent 

than those established by these regulations. These standards are 

met only after individuals in these positions (including volunteers 

and contractors), or individuals who are applying for these positions, have been the subject of a satisfactory background check. I 

believe the regulations implementing Section 408 ensure the safety 

of children. Audits conducted in November 2004 and June 2005 indicated there sometimes were lapses between the time an individual was identified as an employee and the completion of the 

background check. This has been addressed by requiring new employees to perform their duties ‘‘in the line of sight’’ of an experienced staff member until the clearance process has been completed. 

With the establishment of Section 409, the Indian Child Abuse 

Treatment Grant Program, the IHS is working independently as 

well as collaboratively with other Federal agencies to provide training materials and to ensure the quality and character of the IHS 

staff providing services to our American Indian and Alaska Native 

(AI/AN) children and families. Some of the resources available 

through the Department to Tribes to treat victims of child abuse 

include programs such as the Indian Child Protection and Child 

Abuse Prevention Demonstration Projects for Mental Health/Social 

Services for AI/ANs. The following demonstration programs provide 

additional resources: ‘‘Pueblo of Isleta,’’ ‘‘Little Traverse Bay Band 

of Odawa Grandmother’s Wisdom Program,’’ ‘‘Southern California 

Indian Center, Inc.,’’ ‘‘Indian Health Care Resource Center of 

Tulsa, Inc.,’’ ‘‘Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians,’’ and ‘‘The University of Oklahoma’s Project Making Medicine.’’

Attached please find information on the policies and protocols 

that have been shared with Tribal, State, and Federal law enforcemstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

16 

ment agencies for the purpose of investigating instances of abuse. 

We continue to explore new collaborations with other Federal agencies that will translate into action with Indian Country. 

I trust this information is helpful. Thank you for your continued 

interest in and concern for the health and well-being of the AI/AN 

people. A similar letter is being sent to Senator Byron Dorgan. 

Sincerely yours, 

CHARLES W. GRIM, 

Assistant Surgeon General, Director. 

Attachment. 

POLICIES AND PROTOCOLS SHARED BY THE INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE

WITH TRIBAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

The following policies and protocols have been shared with Tribal, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies for the purposes 

of investigating instances of abuse: • The IHS has funded the development of a child protection 

manual through the University of Oklahoma’s Health Sciences 

Center. • The IHS has entered into an inter-agency agreement with the 

Department of Justice’s Office of Victims of Crime to train IHS direct care staff in the application of forensic and telemedicine equipment in child sexual abuse cases. • The IHS has developed the ‘‘Mental Health and Community 

Safety Initiative (MH&CSI) for AI/AN Children, Youth and Families’’ to develop innovative strategies that focus on community safety needs. ‘‘Project Making Medicine,’’ a ‘‘train-to-trainer’’ model, 

provides awareness and intervention training for Tribal communities as well as a child abuse and neglect resource manual. • Finally, an interagency agreement with the Substance Abuse 

and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) provides 16 

Tribal cooperation demonstration projects from the MH&CSI. 

These projects deliver mental health services to Indian children 

who are at risk of becoming involved with the local justice system 

due to mental and behavioral health problems. 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC, September 21, 2005. 

Secretary GALE A. NORTON, 

Re Reauthorization of The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Protection Act, Public Law 101–630 

U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SECRETARY NORTON: In 1993, The Indian Child Protection 

and Family Violence Prevention Act (‘‘the Act’’) was enacted after 

it was disclosed that multiple instances of Indian child sexual 

abuse were perpetrated by Indian school employees (including federal employees) in Indian Country over a number of years. The primary goals of the Act are to reduce the incidents of child abuse, 

mandate reports of child abuse in Indian Country, and to track the 

extent of child abuse there. The Act is due to be reauthorized. To 

determine whether the law is meeting its intended purpose, we request the following information: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

17 

Section 404 of the Act requires all local law enforcement agencies 

in Indian Country to report allegations of child abuse, involving an 

Indian child and an Indian perpetrator, to the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation: 

1. Does the Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Law Enforcement 

Services routinely receive reports of Indian child abuse in Indian 

Country by local law enforcement agencies, including those agencies operating under Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act contracts? If not, please identify the obstacles impeding their ability to do so; 

2. Upon receiving reports of Indian child abuse, are these reports 

provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation? If not, please explain why; 

3. How many reports of Indian child abuse has the BIA Office 

of Law Enforcement Services responded to in the last 3 years; 

4. What, if any, new trends or obstacles has the BIA encountered 

in investigating crimes against children in Indian Country. 

Section 408 of the Act requires the Department of the Interior to 

conduct background character investigations on individuals who 

seek employment in positions where they would have access to children. It further mandates that Indian tribes that receive Indian 

Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act or Tribally Controlled School Act funding do the same. 

1. How has the Department complied with Section 408; 

2. How does the Department determine whether the required Indian tribes comply with Section 408, and 

3. Does the Department believe that Section 408 has met its intended purpose in keeping children safe? 

Section 405 required the Department, in consultation with the 

Department of Health and Human Services, to conduct a study on 

the feasibility of establishing a Central Registry to document reports of Indian child abuse in Indian Country. Please provide the 

Committee with any updated information regarding the study or 

implementation of the Central Registry. 

Section 409 provides that the Department of Health and Human 

Services, acting through the Department of the Interior, shall establish an Indian Child Abuse Treatment Grant program to establish child abuse treatment programs. Please provide the Committee 

with a status report on this grant program. 

Finally, please share with the Committee any recommendations 

that you have for improving the Act and for addressing crimes 

against children in Indian Country. 

Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, 

JOHN MCCAIN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs. 

BYRON L. DORGAN, 

Vice Chairman, Committee 

on Indian Affairs. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

18 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC, October 27, 2005. 

Hon. JOHN MCCAIN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your September 21, 2005, 

letter to Secretary of the Interior Gale A. Norton regarding the reauthorization of the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence 

Protection Act, Public Law 101–630 (the Act). The Secretary has 

asked me to respond to your inquiry. 

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Act, all law enforcement agencies 

in Indian country report allegations of child abuse involving an Indian child and an Indian perpetrator to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Office of Law 

Enforcement Services (OLES) routinely receives reports of Indian 

child abuse from local law enforcement agencies within Indian 

country, including tribally contracted and compacted programs. 

These reports are provided to the local FBI field office and the 

United States Attorney’s Office. The BIA OLES has responded to 

2,593 Indian child abuse calls in the last three years. This figure 

is limited to BIA managed programs. The BIA OLES, tribal police, 

and the FBI are committed to working together to coordinate their 

responsibilities in reporting child abuse cases. 

Pursuant to Section 408 of the Act, the Office of Indian Education Programs (OIEP) within the BIA requires that screening be 

conducted for each individual who is employed in or being considered for employment within its jurisdiction for a position having 

contact with or control over Indian children. It is the policy of 

OIEP that the initiation of a background investigation include an 

Advanced FBI Fingerprint check. The BIA further requires that all 

Indian tribal governments or their entities operating Bureau-funded schools sign within their grant or contract award documents 

Statements of Assurance to comply with Section 408 requirements. 

These contracts and compacts are monitored by the BIA OLES and 

compliance with local law enforcement reporting requirements is 

ensured. 

The BIA OLES believes that Section 408 has only partially met 

is intended purpose. Record checks have been limited to submissions of fingerprints to the FBI. The FBI only maintains records 

that are forwarded to them by local agencies or cases they investigate. Tribal convictions are not included in a basic criminal 

records check. There are also instances where crimes that result in 

a plea bargain may result in contact with children when the actual 

conviction of the crime would present such interaction. 

In a more positive light, each school sends its reports directly to 

local law enforcement. The OIEP Security Office keeps track of the 

number of Suspected Child Abuse/Neglect (SCAN) reports. Once an 

incident is reported at the local school level, an investigative team 

designated by a OIEP line officer conducts the investigation of the 

incident. The OIEP Security Office conducts annual training for 

these teams and partners with OLES and also provides information 

on what to look for when investigating an incident. 

Contrary to the provisions of Section 405 of the Act, a Central 

Registry has not been established. A feasibility study for this regmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

19 

istry was completed in 1994. The study concluded that the main 

obstacles to implementing the Central Registry were overcoming 

due process concerns and developing a mechanism that would require tribal implementation. To date, these obstacles remain a 

challenge. A federal study to identify factors that are impeding the 

reduction of child abuse in Indian country would fulfill the intent 

of Section 405, as the legal and other obstacles to implementation 

of the Central Registry may never be overcome. 

The Department of Health and Human Services has not established an Indian Child Abuse Treatment Grant Program. For more 

information on the implementation of this grant program, you may 

contact Michael Mahsetky, Director of Congressional and Legislative Affairs, Indian Health Service, at 301–443–7261. 

Thank you for bringing this important matter to our attention. 

We appreciate your continued interest in Indian country law enforcement. We have sent an identical letter to Senator Byron L. 

Dorgan, Vice Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs. 

Sincerely, 

W.P. RAGSDALE, 

Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

398, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new language to 

be added in italic, existing law to which no change is proposed is 

shown in roman): 

Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act 

Public Law 101–630 

25 U.S.C. § 3201 

25 U.S.C. § 3201. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. 

(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress, after careful review of the problem 

of child abuse on Indian reservations and the historical and special 

relationship of the Federal Government with Indian people, 

(1) finds that—

* * * * * * * 

(E) the Federal Government and certain State governments are responsible for investigating and prosecuting certain felony crimes, including child abuse, in Indian Country, pursuant to chapter 53 of title 18, United States Code; 

ø(E)¿ (F) funds spent by the United States on Indian 

reservations or otherwise spent for the benefit of Indians 

who are victims of child abuse or family violence are inadequate to meet the growing needs for mental health treatment and counseling for victims of child abuse or family 

violence and their families; and 

ø(F)¿ (G) there is no resource that is more vital to the 

continued existence and integrity of Indian tribes than 

their children and the United States has a direct interest, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

20 

as trustee, in protecting Indian children who are members 

of, or are eligible for membership in, an Indian tribe; and 

(2) declares that øtwo¿ the major goals of the United States 

are to—

(A) identify the scope of incidents of abuse of children 

and family violence in Indian Country and to reduce such 

incidents øand¿; 

(B) provide funds for mental health treatment for Indian 

victims of child abuse and family violence on Indian 

reservationsø,¿; and 

(C) identify and remove any impediment to the immediate investigation of incidents of child abuse in Indian 

Country. 

(b) PURPOSE.—The purposes of this title are to—

(1) * * * 

ø(3) authorize such other actions as are necessary to ensure 

effective child protection in Indian Country¿ 

(3) provide for a background investigation for any employee 

or volunteer who has access to children; 

(6) establish Indian Child Resource and Family Services 

Centers in each Bureau of Indian Affairs øArea Office¿ Regional Office which will consist of multi-disciplinary teams of 

personnel with experience and training in the prevention, identification, investigation, and treatment of child abuse and neglect; 

* * * * * * * 

25 U.S.C. § 3202 

25 U.S.C. § 3202. DEFINITIONS. 

For the purposes of this title, the term—

* * * * * * * 

(6) ‘final conviction’ means the final judgment on a verdict or 

finding of guilty, a plea of guilty, or a plea of nolo contendere, 

but does not include a final judgment that has been expunged 

by pardon, reversed, set aside, or otherwise rendered valid; 

ø(6)¿ (7) ‘‘Indian’’ means any individual who is a member of 

an Indian tribe; 

ø(7)¿ (8) ‘‘Indian child’’ has the meaning given to such term 

by section 4(4) of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (25 

U.S.C. 1903(4)); 

ø(8)¿ (9) ‘‘Indian Country’’ has the meaning given to such 

term by section 1151 of title 18, United States Code; 

ø(9)¿ (10) ‘‘Indian reservation’’ means any Indian reservation, public domain Indian allotment, former Indian reservation in Oklahoma, or lands held by incorporated Native groups, 

regional corporations, or village corporations under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 

1601 et seq.); 

ø(10)¿ (11) ‘‘Indian tribe’’ and ‘‘tribal organization’’ have the 

respective meanings given to each of such terms under section 

4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance 

Act (25 U.S.C. 450b); 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

21 

ø(11)¿ (12) ‘‘inter-tribal consortium’’ means a partnership between—

(A) an Indian tribe or tribal organization of an Indian 

tribe, and 

(B) one or more Indian tribes or tribal organizations of 

one or more other Indian tribes; 

ø(12)¿ (13) ‘‘local child protective services agency’’ means 

øthat agency of the Federal Government, of a State, or of an 

Indian tribe¿ the Federal, State or tribal agency that has the 

primary responsibility for child protection on any Indian reservation or within any community in Indian Country; 

ø(13)¿ (14) ‘‘local law enforcement agency’’ means that Federal, tribal, or State law enforcement agency (including a tribal 

law enforcement agency operating pursuant to a grant, contract 

or compact under the Indian Self-Determination and Education 

Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.)) that has the primary responsibility for the investigation of an instance of alleged child 

abuse within the portion of Indian Country involved; 

ø(14)¿ (15) ‘‘persons responsible for a child’s welfare’’ means 

any person who has legal or other recognized duty for the care 

and safety of a child, including— (A) any employee or volunteer of a children’s residential 

facility, and 

(B) any person providing out-of-home care, education, or 

services to children; 

ø(15)¿ (16) ‘‘related assistance’’—

(A) includes counseling and self-help services to abusers, 

victims, and dependents in family violence situations 

(which shall include counseling of all family members to 

the extent feasible) and referrals for appropriate healthcare services (including alcohol and drug abuse treatment), 

and 

(B) may include food, clothing, child care, transportation, 

and emergency services for victims of family violence and 

their dependents; 

ø(16)¿ (17) ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Interior; 

ø(17)¿ (18) ‘‘shelter’’ means the provision of temporary refuge 

and related assistance in compliance with applicable Federal 

and tribal laws and regulations governing the provision, on a 

regular basis, of shelter, safe homes, meals, and related assistance to victims of family violence or their dependents; øand¿ 

ø(18)¿ (19) ‘‘Service’’ means the Indian Health Service of the 

Department of Health and Human Servicesø.¿; and 

(20) ‘‘telemedicine’’ means a telecommunications link to an 

end user through the use of eligible equipment that electronically links health professionals or patients and health professionals at separate sites in order to exchange health care information in audio, video, graphic, or other format for the purpose 

of providing improved health care diagnosis and treatment. 

25 U.S.C. § 3203 

25 U.S.C. § 3203. REPORTING PROCEDURES. 

* * * * * * * 

(c) WRITTEN REPORT OF CHILD ABUSE.—

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

22 

ø(1) Within¿ (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 36 hours after 

receiving an initial report described in subsection (b), the receiving agency shall prepare a written report which shall include, if available—

* * * * * * * 

ø(2)(A) Any¿ (2) INVESTIGATION OF REPORTS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Any local law enforcement agency or 

local child protective services agency that receives a report 

alleging abuse described in section 403(3) shall immediately initiate an investigation of such allegation and 

shall take immediate, appropriate steps to secure the safety and well-being of the child or children involved. 

ø(B) Upon¿ (B) FINAL WRITTEN REPORT.—On completion 

of the investigation of any report of alleged abuse that is 

made to a local law enforcement agency or local child protective services agency, such agency shall prepare a final 

written report on such allegation including any Federal, 

State, or tribal final conviction, and provide to the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation a copy of the report. (C) MAINTENANCE OF FINAL REPORTS.—The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall maintain a record of each written report submitted under this subsection or subsection (b) 

in a manner in which the report is accessible to— (i) a local law enforcement agency that requires the 

information to carry out an official duty; and 

(ii) any agency requesting the information under section 408. 

(D) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 year after 

the date of enactment of this subsection, and annually 

thereafter, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in coordination with the Secretary and the Attorney 

General, shall submit to the Committees on Indian Affairs 

and the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committees on 

Natural Resources and the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on child abuse in Indian Country during the preceding year. 

(E) COLLECTION OF DATA.—Not less frequently than once 

each year, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services, the Attorney General, the 

Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations, and any 

Indian tribe, shall— (i) collect any information concerning child abuse in 

Indian Country (including reports under subsection 

(b)), including information relating to, during the preceding calendar year— (I) the number criminal and civil abuse allegations and investigations in Indian Country; 

(II) the number of child abuse prosecutions referred, declined or deferred in Indian Country; 

(III) the number of child victims who are the 

subject of reports of child abuse in Indian Country; 

(IV) sentencing patterns of individuals convicted 

of child abuse in Indian Country; and 

(V) rates of recidivism with respect to child 

abuse in Indian Country; and 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

23 

(ii) to the maximum extent practicable, reduce the 

duplication of information collection under clause (i). 

* * * * * * * 

(e) CONFIDENTIALITY OF CHILDREN.—No local law enforcement 

agency or local child protective services agency shall disclose the 

name of, or information concerning, the child to anyone other 

than—

(1) a person who, by reason of the participation of the person 

in the treatment of the child or the investigation or adjudication 

of the allegation, needs to know the information in the performance of the duties of the individual; or 

(2) an officer of any other Federal, State, or tribal agency that 

requires the information to carry out the duties of the officer 

under section 406. 

(f) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of 

this subsection, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit 

to the Committees on Indian Affairs and the Judiciary of the Senate 

and the Committees on Natural Resources and the Judiciary of the 

House of Representatives a report on child abuse in Indian Country 

during the preceding year. 

(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section 

for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. 

25 U.S.C. § 3204 

25 U.S.C. § 3204. øCENTRAL REGISTRY.¿ 

ø(a) PREPARATION OF STUDY.—The Secretary, in consultation 

with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney 

General of the United States, is hereby authorized and directed to 

prepare a written study on the feasibility of, and need for, the establishment of a Central Register for reports or information on the 

abuse of children in Indian Country. 

ø(b) CONTENT OF STUDY.—The study conducted pursuant to subsection (a) shall include, but shall not be limited toø(1) the need for, and purpose of, a Central Register; 

ø(2) the examination of due process implication of the maintenance of such a register; 

ø(3) the extension of access to information contained in the 

register; 

ø(4) the need and process for expunging information from the 

register; 

ø(5) the types, and duration of maintenance, of information 

in the register; and 

ø(6) the classes of persons who should be covered by such 

register. 

ø(c) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary shall complete 

the study conducted pursuant to this section and shall submit such 

study, together with recommendations and draft legislation to implement such recommendations, to the Congress within 180 days 

after the date of enactment of this title.¿ 

REMOVAL OF IMPEDIMENTS TO REDUCING CHILD ABUSE. 

(a) STUDY.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Service, shall conduct a study under which the Secmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

24 

retary shall identify any impediment to the reduction of child abuse 

in Indian Country and on Indian reservations. 

(b) INCLUSIONS.—The study under subsection (a) shall include a 

description of—

(1) any impediment, or recent progress made with respect to 

removing impediments, to reporting child abuse in Indian 

Country; 

(2) any impediment, or recent progress made with respect to 

removing impediments, to Federal, State, and tribal investigations and prosecutions of allegations of child abuse in Indian 

Country; and 

(3) any impediment, or recent progress made with respect to 

removing impediments, to the treatment of child abuse in Indian Country. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention 

Act Amendments of 2007, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Indian Affairs and the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committees on Natural Resources and the Judiciary of the House of 

Representatives, a report describing—

(1) the findings of the study under this section; and 

(2) recommendations for legislative actions, if any, to reduce 

instances of child abuse in Indian country. 

25 U.S.C. § 3205 

25 U.S.C. § 3205. CONFIDENTIALITY. 

øPursuant to section 552a of title 5, United States Code, the 

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (20 U.S.C. 

1232g) or Section 264 of title 42, the Health Insurance Portability 

and Accountability Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d), or provision of law, agencies of any Indian tribe, of any State, or of the Federal Government 

that investigate and treat incidents of abuse of children may provide information and records to those agencies of any Indian tribe, 

any State, or the Federal Government that need to know the information in performance of their duties. For purposes of this section, 

Indian tribal governments shall be treated the same as other Federal Government entities.¿ 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not withstanding any other provision of law, 

any Federal, State, or tribal government agency that treats or investigates incidents of child abuse may provide information and 

records to an officer of any other Federal, State, or tribal government agency that requires the information to carry out the duties of 

the officer, in accordance with section 552a of title 5, United States 

Code, section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264), 

the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (20 U.S.C. 

1232g), part C of title XI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d 

et seq.), and other applicable Federal law. 

(b) TREATMENT OF INDIAN TRIBES.—For purposes of this section, 

an Indian tribal government shall be considered to be an entity of 

the Federal Government. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

25 

25 U.S.C. § 3206 

25 U.S.C. § 3206. WAIVER OF PARENTAL CONSENT. 

(a) EXAMINATIONS AND INTERVIEWS.—Photographs, x-rays, medical examinations, psychological and forensic examinations, and 

interviews of an Indian child alleged to have been subject to abuse 

in Indian Country shall be allowed without parental consent if local 

child protective services or local law enforcement officials have reason to believe the child has been subject to abuse. 

* * * * * * * 

ø(c) PROTECTION OF CHILD.—Examinations and interviews of a 

child who may have been the subject of abuse shall be conducted 

under such circumstances and with such safeguards as are designed to minimize additional trauma to the child and, where time 

permits, shall be conducted with the advise, or under the guidance, 

of a local multidisciplinary team established pursuant to section 

411 or, in the absence of a local team, a multidisciplinary team established pursuant to section 410.¿ 

(c) PROTECTION OF CHILD.—Any examination or interview of a 

child who may have been the subject of child abuse shall— (1) be conducted under such circumstances and using such 

safeguards as are necessary to minimize additional trauma to 

the child; 

(2) avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, subjecting the 

child to multiple interviewers during the examination and 

interview processes; and 

(3) as time permits, be conducted using advice from, or under 

the guidance of— (A) a local multidisciplinary team established under section 411; or 

(B) if a local multidisciplinary team is not established 

under section 411, a multidisciplinary team established 

under section 410. 

25 U.S.C. § 3207 

25 U.S.C. § 3207. CHARACTER INVESTIGATIONS. 

(a) THE SECRETARY AND THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES SHALL—

(1) compile a list of all authorized positions, including any 

voluntary positions, within their respective departments the 

duties and responsibilities of which involve regular contact 

with, or control over, Indian childrenø,¿; 

(2) conduct an investigation of the character of each individual who is employed, or is being considered for employment 

(including in a volunteer capacity) by the respective Secretary 

in a position listed pursuant to paragraph (1)ø, and¿; and 

* * * * * * * 

(b) CRIMINAL RECORDS.—The minimum standards of character 

that are to be prescribed under this section shall ensure that none 

of the individuals appointed to positions described in subsection (a) 

of this section have been found guilty of, or entered a plea on nolo 

contendere or øguilty to, any felonious offense, or any of two or 

more misdemeanor offenses, under Federal, State, or tribal law involving crimes of violence; sexual assault, molestation, exploitation, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

26 

contact or prostitution; crimes against persons; or offenses committed against children.¿ guilty to, any felony offense under Federal, State, or tribal law, or 2 or more misdemeanor offenses under 

Federal, State, or tribal law, involving— (1) a crime of violence; 

(2) sexual assault; 

(3) child abuse; 

(4) molestation; 

(5) child sexual exploitation; 

(6) sexual contact; 

(7) child neglect; 

(8) prostitution, or 

(9) another offense against a child. 

* * * * * * * 

(d) EFFECT ON CHILD PLACEMENT.—An Indian tribe that submits 

a written statement to the applicable State official documenting that 

the Indian tribe has conducted a background investigation under 

this section for the placement of an Indian child in a tribally-licensed or tribally-approved foster care or adoptive home, or for another out-of-home placement, shall be considered to have satisfied 

the background investigation requirements of any Federal or State 

law requiring such an investigation. 

25 U.S.C. § 3208 

25 U.S.C. § 3208. INDIAN CHILD ABUSE TREATMENT GRANT PROGRAM. 

* * * * * * * 

ø(e) there is hereby authorized to be appropriated to carry out 

the provisions of this section $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal 

years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997.¿ 

(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section 

for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. 

25 U.S.C. § 3209 

25 U.S.C. § 3209. INDIAN CHILD RESOURCE AND FAMILY SERVICES CENTERS. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish within each 

øarea office¿ Regional Office of the Bureau an Indian Child Resource and Family Services Center. 

(b) MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT.—øThe Secretary and the Secretary of Health and Human Services¿ The Secretary, the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services, and the Attorney General shall 

enter into a Memorandum of Agreement which provides for the 

staffing of the Centers established under this section. 

* * * * * * * 

(d) CENTER RESPONSIBILITY AND FUNCTIONS.—

* * * * * * * 

(4) develop recommendations to assist Federal, State, and 

tribal personnel to respond to cases of family violence, child 

abuse, and child neglect; and 

(5) develop policies and procedures for each øagency office¿ 

Regional Office of the Bureau and service unit of the Service 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

27 

within the area which, to the extent feasible, comply with tribal laws pertaining to cases of family violence, child abuse, and 

child neglect, including any criminal laws, and which provide 

for maximum cooperation with the enforcement of such laws. 

(e) MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM PERSONNEL.—Each multidisciplinary team established under this section shall include, but is not 

limited to, personnel with a background in—

(1) law enforcementø,¿; 

(2) child protective servicesø,¿; 

ø(3) juvenile counseling and adolescent mental health, and¿ 

(3) adolescent mental and behavioral health (including suicide 

prevention and treatment); 

(4) domestic violence and sexual assaultø.¿; 

(5) criminal prosecution; and 

(6) medicine. 

(f) CENTER ADVISORY BOARD.—øThe Secretary in consultation 

with the Secretary of Health and Human Services¿ (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Service and the Attorney General, shall establish, for each Indian Child Resource and 

Family Services Center, an advisory board to advise and assist 

such Center in carrying out its activities under this Chapter. 

øEach¿ 

(2) MEMBERSHIP.—Each advisory board øshall consist of 7 

members¿ shall be appointed by the Secretary from Indian 

tribes and human service providers served by an area office of 

the Bureau. øMembers¿ 

(3) COMPENSATION.—Members shall serve without compensation, but may be reimbursed for travel and other expenses 

while carrying out the duties of the board. øThe advisory¿ 

(4) DUTIES.—Each advisory board shall assist the Center in 

coordinating programs, identifying training materials, and developing policies and procedures relating to family violence, 

child abuse, and child neglect. 

(g) APPLICATION OF THE INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION ACT TO

CENTERS.—øIndian Child¿ 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Indian Child Resource and Family Services 

Centers established under subsection (a) shall be subject to the 

provisions of the Indian Self-Determination øAct¿ and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq). øIf a Center is located in an area office of the Bureau which serves more than 

one Indian tribe, any application to enter into a contract to operate the Center pursuant to such Act must have the consent 

of each of the other tribes to be served under the contract, except that, in the Juneau Area Alaska Region, only the consent 

of such tribes or tribal consortia that are engaged in contracting of Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention programs pursuant to such Act shall be required.¿ 

(2) CERTAIN REGIONAL OFFICES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph 

(B), if a Center is located in a Regional Office of the Bureau that serves more than 1 Indian tribe, an application 

to enter into a grant, contract or compact under the Indian 

Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 

U.S.C. 450 et seq.) to operate the Center shall contain a 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

28 

consent form signed by an official of each Indian tribe to 

be served under the grant, contract or compact. 

(B) ALASKA REGION.—Notwithstanding subparagraph 

(A), for Centers located in the Alaska Region, an application to enter into a grant, contract, or compact described in 

that subparagraph shall contain a consent form signed by 

an official of each Indian tribe or tribal consortium that is 

a member of a grant, contract, or compact relating to an 

Indian child protection and family violence prevention program under the Indian Self-Determination and Education 

Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.).øThis section¿ 

(3) Effect of section.—This section shall not preclude the designation of an existing child resource and family services center operated by a tribe or tribal organization as a Center if all 

of the tribes to be served by the Center agree to such designation. 

ø(h) APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the provisions of this section $3,000,000 for each of the 

fiscal years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997.¿ 

(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section 

for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. 

25 U.S.C. § 3201 

25 U.S.C. § 3201. USE OF TELEMEDICINE 

(a) DEFINITION OF MEDICAL OR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROFES- SIONAL.—In this section, the term ‘medical or behavioral health professional’ means an employee or volunteer of an organization that 

provides a service as part of a comprehensive service program that 

combines— (1) substance abuse (including abuse of alcohol, drugs, 

inhalants, and tobacco) prevention and treatment; and 

(2) mental health treatment. 

(b) CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS.—The Service is authorized to 

enter into any contract or agreement for the use of telemedicine with 

a public or private university or facility, including a medical university or facility, or any private medical or behavioral health professional, with experience relating to pediatrics, including the diagnosis and treatment of child abuse, to assist the Service with respect 

to— (1) the diagnosis and treatment of child abuse; or 

(2) methods of training Service personnel in diagnosing and 

treating child abuse. 

(c) ADMINISTRATION.—In carrying out subsection (b), the Service 

shall, to the maximum extent practicable— (1) use existing telemedicine infrastructure; and 

(2) give priority to Service units and medical facilities operated pursuant to grants, contracts, or compacts under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 

U.S.C. 450 et seq.) that are located in, or providing service to, 

remote areas of Indian country. 

(d) INFORMATION AND CONSULTATION.—On receipt of a request, 

for purposes of this section, the Service may provide to public and 

private universities and facilities, including medical universities 

and facilities, and medical or behavioral health professionals demstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

29 

scribed in subsection (b) any information or consultation on the 

treatment of Indian children who have, or may have, been subject 

to abuse or neglect. 

(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section 

for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. 

18 U.S.C. § 1153 

(a) 18 U.S.C. § 1153(a). Offenses Committed Within Indian Country, in amended—

(1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘‘felony child abuse, felony 

child neglect’’ after ‘‘robbery,’’. 

18 U.S.C. § 1169 

(b) 18 U.S.C. § 1169. Reporting of child abuse, in amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(1)—

(A) * * * 

(B) teacher, school counselor, instructional aide, teacher’s aide, teacher’s assistant, or bus driver employed by or 

volunteering for any tribal, Federal, public or private 

school, 

(C) * * * 

(D) child day care worker or volunteer, headstart teacher, public assistance worker, øworker in a group home¿ 

worker or volunteer in a group home or residential or day 

care facility, or social worker, 

(E) psychiatrist, psychologist, øor psychological assistant¿ psychological or psychiatric assistant, or person employed in the mental or behavioral health profession; 

(F) licensed or unlicensed marriage, family, or øchild¿ 

individual counselor, 

ø(G) person employed in the mental health profession 

or¿ 

(G) foster parent; or 

(H) ølaw enforcement officer, probation officer¿ law enforcement personnel, probation officer, criminal prosecutor, 

worker in a juvenile rehabilitation or detention facility, or 

person employed in a public agency who is responsible for 

enforcing statutes and judicial orders; 

(2) in subsection (c)—

ø(3) ‘‘local child protective services agency’’ means that 

agency of the Federal Government, of a State, or of an Indian tribe that has the primary responsibility for child protection on any Indian reservation or within any community 

in Indian Country; and¿ 

(3) ‘local child protective services agency’ has the meaning given the term in section 403 of the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 

3202); and 

ø(4) ‘‘local law enforcement agency’’ means that Federal, 

tribal, or State law enforcement agency that has the primary responsibility for the investigation of an instance of 

alleged child abuse within the portion of Indian Country 

involved.¿ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

30 

(4) ‘local law enforcement agency’ has the meaning given 

the term in section 403 of that Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING