Tribal Leader/ Department of the Interior Task Force on Trust

Reform Report For the Secretary of The Interior

June 4, 2002
CONTENTS

I. Summary Page 3

II Background Page 4

III. Task Force Members Page 7

IV. Task Force Sub-Committees Page 10

V. Creating a Better Alternative Than BITAM Page 12

VI. Cross-Cutting Principles Page 15

VII. Options/Advantages/Disadvantages Page 16

VIII. Further Consideration of the Acceptable Options Page 21

IX. Line Management Page 21

X. Changes Needed at Successive Levels of Authority Page 22

XI. Key Program Staff Positions Page 26

XII. Evaluation Criteria Page 27

XIII. Conclusion Page 28
3

I. Summary 

The Tribal Leaders/ Department of the Interior Trust Reform Task Force (Task

Force), composed of Tribal Leaders and representatives of the Department of the

Interior (Department), has developed a number of proposed alternatives to the Bureau

of Indian Trust Asset Management (BITAM) proposed by the Department in November,

2001. The elements of the various proposals are not necessarily exclusive of each

other and are designed to be flexible concepts for discussion among Tribal Leadership.

The Task Force believes that, with sound implementation, the options the Task Force

recommends for further consultation could serve as the basis for determining the

appropriate organizational structure for the Department to make progress in fulfilling its

trust responsibilities toward American Indians and Alaska Natives. 

During the next two months, the Department will engage in a series of regional

and national consultation sessions with tribal leaders on these proposals. At the recent

Task Force meeting in Minneapolis, the Task Force agreed to initiate consultation in

early June, hold regional meetings throughout June and early July, and hold a national

consultation meeting in Bismark, North Dakota on June, 19. Tribal leaders will be

urged to provide their comments on the proposed alternatives. 

The Task Force believes that there is a need for reform, and that the status quo

is not acceptable. However, the Task Force notes that significant progress has been

made in the spirt and success of self-determination and self-governance policies. To
4

date, the Task Force has largely focused on consideration of high-level reorganization

options. The Task Force intends to address the regional and field level organizational

structure in full detail, in the future, after receiving input regarding the upper-level

structure. This Report contains some illustrations of regional and agency level

organizational structures, these are purely descriptive illustrations, they are not

proposed options.

II. Background

PursuantPursuant to treaties, statutes, executivePursuant to treaties, statutes, executive orders, j

ofof dealing with the Indian Nations, the United States government has acquired a broad

trusttrust relationship with Indian tribes. That trust relationship obligates the Fetrust relations

government to protect tribal self-government, to provide services togovernment to protect tribal self-go

and to exerciseand to exercise the highest degreeand to exercise the highest degree of fiduciary resp

and resources. 

TheThe Federal The Federal governmentThe Federal government has held funds in trust for 

1820.1820. In 1887, the enactment of the General Allotm1820. In 1887, the enactment of th

government's fiduciary duties to individualgovernment's fiduciary duties to individual Indians. The All

ofof rof reservationof reservation lands to Indian heads of households and opened "surplus" lands to 

IndianIndian settlement. The allotted lands werIndian settlement. The allotted lands were Indian s
5

designateddesignated period. Individual trust accounts weredesignated period. Individual trust accoun

in those lands. 

TheThe Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 ("IRA")The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 ("IRA"

providedprovided for the return of "surplus" Indiprovided for the return of "surplus" Indian land

indefinitelyindefinitely the period for holding allotted lands in trust. Trust findefinitely the period fo

consistconsist of money received through the sale oconsist of money received through the sa

transactionstransactions as timbertransactions as timber sales, agricultural fees, and oil and gas 

accounts may also include funds awarded from judgments against the United States. 

MoreMore recentMore recently,More recently, reports filed by the General Accounting Office a

committeescommittees andcommittees and lawsuits filed by Indian tribes have pointed outcommittees a

government'sgovernment's long-standing mismanagement of fundsgovernment's long-standing misman

Congress soughtCongress sought to correctCongress sought to correct some of these problem

TrustTrust Fund ManagemTrust Fund Management Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994

Interior'sInterior's resInterior's responsInterior's responsibilities for the accounting and management 

providedprovided the opportunity for Indian tribes toprovided the opportunity for Indian tribes to directly m

thethe Act established a Special Trustee for American Indian trust funds the Act established a 

comprehensive,comprehensive, strategic plancomprehensive, strategic plan for managementcomprehe

place throughout the Department of the Interior. 
6

TheThe purpose of the Trust Reform Task Force as defined in theThe purpose of the Trust Refo

is as follows:

devedevelopdevelop and evaluate organizational options to improve the integritydevelop 

efficiency,efficiency, and effectiveness of the Departmental &Indian Trust Operations

consistentconsistent with Indian treaty rights, Indian trust law,consistent with Indian treaty rights

government relationship.

AlthoughAlthough the Task Force mission is to develop optAlthough the Task Force mis

structure,structure, the Task Force has engaged in discussions addressingstructure, the Task Force has 

thatthat the reorganization must address. Thethat the reorganization must address. The purposetha

toto improve various aspects oto improve various aspects of truto improve various aspects of trust 

resources management, whileresources management, while complementing andresources manageme

trusttrust services. However, the Task Force only detrust services. However, the Task Force on

authorized by the tribal leadership which they represent from their respective regions.

TheThe Task Force has approached the development of its options in a mannerThe Task Forc

affirmsaffirms tribal authority over the management oaffirms tribal authority over the managem

StatutesStatutes such as the Indian Reorganization Act, the Indian SelStatutes such as the In

EducationEducation Assistance Act, and specific resource management statutes, such asEducation Ass

Forest Resources Management Act, confirm the tribes  rights to be primary managers of

theirtheir tribal lands andtheir tribal lands and natural resources.their tribal lands and natural resources. A

TitlesTitles I and IVTitles I and IV of the IndianTitles I and IV of the Indian Self-Determination and Educa
7

assumedassumed trust management responsibilities and have a proven record of effectiveness in

performing those functions.

TheThe TaskThe Task ForceThe Task Force has concluded that trust reform must be driven by th

andand must assure that the govand must assure that the governmand must assure that the govern

and the United States is improved and strengthened, not diminished or weakened.

TheThe Task Force wasThe Task Force was formed after Tribal Leaders throughout the countryT

serseriousserious concerns regarding Secretary Norton s November 2001 establishment of a nseriou

AssistantAssistant Secretary position and the creation ofAssistant Secretary position and the creation o

AssetAsset ManAsset ManagemAsset Management (BITAM). The Secretary s plan reorganized a

InIndiaIndianIndian trust asset management functions into a new and separate organizational unit

headedheaded by a new Assistant headed by a new Assistant Secretheaded by a new Assista

additionaladditional senior management attention to thisadditional senior management attention to this 

thethe Department.the Department. Thethe Department. The Secretary believed this newly established 

havehave the neededhave the needed authority and responsibility for improved trusthave the needed 

trusttrust asset management.trust asset management. However, through severaltrust asset manageme

the Tribal Leaders were opposed to BITAM.

AtAt the meeting held on December 16, At the meeting held on December 16, 2001, inAt the 

LeaderLeader Tex Hall proposed theLeader Tex Hall proposed the formationLeader Tex Hall proposed 

adviceadvice to the Department advice to the Department to guide its trust reform efforts. The purpose 

waswas to evaluate all available options and to subwas to evaluate all available options and t
1 Other Departmental representatives to the Task Force included: the Associate Deputy

Secretary, the Special Trustee, the Director the Office of Trust Transition, the Associate Solicitor for

Indian Affairs, the Director of Congressional and Legislative Affairs, the Director of Communications and

the Counselor to the Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs. 

8

alternativesalternatives to BITAM. Toalternatives to BITAM. To further develop an improved reorgani

broader consensus, Secretary Norton agreed to the creation of a Task Force.

III. Task Force Members

TheThe composition of the Tribal MembershipThe composition of the Tribal Membership ofThe co

tribes and represents a broad cross-section of tribaltribes and represents a broad cross-section of trib

ofof two elected tribal leaders from each region,of two elected tribal leaders from each region, with a th

actingacting as anacting as an alternate. Tex Hall, Chairman/President of theacting as an alternate. 

SusanSusan Masten, Chairwoman of the Yurok Susan Masten, Chairwoman of the Yurok Tribe s

DepartmentDepartment officials also serve on the Task Force, including Deputy SecretaryDepartment o

AssistantAssistant Secretary for Indian AffairsAssistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Neal McCaleb, wh

chairs.1 Tribal Representatives are the following:

AlaskaAlaska Region: Ed: Ed T: Ed Thomas, President, Central Council of Tlingit Haida In

TribesTribes of Alaska; Mike Williams, Aniak Village; Alternate Joe Williams, President,

Organized Village of Saxman.

EasternEastern Oklahoma Region: Bill: Bill Anoatubby, Governor, Chickasaw Nation;: Bill Anoa

O.O. O. TilO. Tillman, Jr., Principal Chief Osage Nation; Alternate Grace Bunner, Mekko,

Thlopthlocco Tribal Town.

EasternEastern Region:: Keller George, President, United: Keller George, President, United S
9

(USET);(USET); Tim Martin, Executiv(USET); Tim Martin, Executive Di(USET); Tim Martin, 

(USET); Alternate Peter Schultz, Vice-Chair, Mohegan Tribe.

GreatGreat Plains Region: Mike Jandreau, Chairman,: Mike Jandreau, Chairman, Lower Brule S

RichardRichard Monette,Richard Monette, Chairman, Turtle MountainRichard Monette, Chairma

Tex Hall, Chairman/President, Three Affiliated Tribes/NCAI.

MidwestMidwest Region:: Melanie Benjamin, Chief Executive, Mille Lacs Band: Melanie Benjam

BusinessBusiness Committee; Paul Ninham, Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin; Alternate

Troy Swallow, President, Ho-Chunk Nation.

NavajoNavajo Region: Er: Ervin Kee: Ervin Keeswood, Navajo Council Delegation; Georg

Navajo Council Delegation; Alternate Alfred Yazzie, Navajo Nation.

NorthwestNorthwest Region:: Ernie: Ernie Stensgar, Chairman, Coeur d Alene Tribe; W. Ron A

Chairman,Chairman, Jamestown S Klallam Tribe; Alternate Colleen Cawst Colleen Cawston, C

Colville Confederated Tribes.

PacificPacific Region: Susan Masten, Chairwoman, Yurok Tribe; Rache: Susan Maste

Chairperson,Chairperson, Lone Pine Reservation; Alternate Mary Belardo, Chairperson,

Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians.

Rocky MountainRocky Mountain Region:: Alvin Windy Boy, Chairman, Chippewa Cree Busin

Council;Council; Ivan PoCouncil; Ivan Posey,Council; Ivan Posey, Chairman, Shoshone Bus

Small, President, Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council.

SouthernSouthern Plains Region:: Gary McAdams, President, Wichita & Affiliated: Gary McA

JamesJames Potter, Treasurer, Prairie Band Potawatomi Tribe of Kansas; AlteAlternaAltern

AlonzoAlonzo Chalepah, Vice Chairman, ApacAlonzo Chalepah, Vice Chairman, Apache Tri
10

Treasurer, Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma.

SouthwestSouthwest Region: Joe A. Garcia, San Juan Pueblo; Harry E. Early, Governor,

PuebloPueblo of Laguna; Alternates Clement Frost, Vice Chairman, Southern Clement Frost, V

Tribe and Gregory Ortiz, Lt. Governor, Acoma Pueblo.

WesternWestern Region: Edwar: Edward Man: Edward Manuel, Chairman, Tohono O od

Moyle,Moyle, Chairman, Fallon Paiute ShoshMoyle, Chairman, Fallon Paiute Shoshone;Moyle, Cha

PaiutePaiute Tribes of Duck Valley, Rose Taveapont, Vice-Paiute Tribes of Duck Valley, Ro

Tribe.

ToTo date, theTo date, the Task Force has held several multi-day meetings. TheseTo date, the Ta

beenbeen held in Shepherdstown, Westbeen held in Shepherdstown, West Virginiabeen held in S

2002);2002); San2002); San 2002); San Diego, California (April 2002); and Minneapolis, Minnes

Additionally, monthly meetings have been scheduled for the nextAdditionally, monthly meetings have 

the activities and tasks identified by the Task Force. 

FromFrom the very first joint meeting, which wasFrom the very first joint meeting, which was held

andand the Department have earnestly attempted toand the Department have earnestly attempted to ac

FebruaryFebruary meetingFebruary meeting inFebruary meeting in Shepherdstown, presentations hig

trusttrust responsibility and the important differences from private or commercial fiduciary trust

management. Subcommittees were created with specific goals.

IV. Task Force Sub-Committees
11

The Task Force established several subcommittees as follows: 

1. Protocol Sub-Committee: This subcommittee was charged with the This subcommittee was ch

ofof protof protocoof protocols for the Task Force s activities. The Tribal Leaders serving o

ProtocolsProtocols Subcommittee wereProtocols Subcommittee were Tim Tim Martin-Chair, 

RonRon Allen, Joe Garcia, and Rachel Joseph. This subcommittee developeRon Allen, Joe 

groundground rules for theground rules for the Task Force actions which haveground rules for 

task force process. 

2. EDSEDS Sub-Committee: Another subcommittee was directed to examine the scope

ofof work for the Electronic Data Systems  (EDS) proposal. The Tribal Leaof work for the 

servingserving on thisserving on this subcommitteeserving on this subcommittee were Tim Martin

GeorgeGeorge Arthur, Geri George Arthur, Geri SmaGeorge Arthur, Geri Small, Ed Tho

subcommitteesubcommittee reviewed the EDS proposal and is subcommittee reviewed the E

commentingcommenting on the development of the Department s Strategic Plan for Tcomm

Reform.

3. LegislativeLegislative Sub-Committee: The Task Force recognized that The Task Force recog

interestinterest in trust reform legiinterest in trust reform legislinterest in trust reform 

government.government. This year, bothgovernment. This year, both the House Committee on 

Committee onCommittee on Indian Affairs have heldCommittee on Indian Affairs have held hea

ForceForce also recognized the need to develop a consensus among the various parties-

-the-the tribes,-the tribes, the allottees, the Department and the Congress-- if any legislation is to

bebe passedbe passed and effectively implemented. Therefore, in Phoenix, Arizona, the Task

ForceForce decided to establish the Legislative SForce decided to establish the Legislat
12

discussion.discussion. The members of the Legisladiscussion. The members of the 

Anoatubby-Chair,Anoatubby-Chair, Ervin Keeswood, AlvinAnoatubby-Chair, Ervin Keeswood, A

aandand Colleen Cawston. The Legislative Subcommittee will continue to reviand Collee

options for trust reform legislation and work with theoptions for trust reform legislation and work 

thethe develothe developmentthe development of any trust reform legislation. The 

Subcommittee,Subcommittee, Governor Anoatubby,Subcommittee, Governor Anoatubby, has ke

thethe Task Force s activities, invitedthe Task Force s activities, invited staff tothe Task Force s a

with key committees regarding hearings related to Task Force activity.

4. AlternativeAlternative Proposal Sub-Committee: Another subcommittee was formed to Another 

thethe alternativethe alternative proposalsthe alternative proposals to BITAM that had been sub

TribalTribal Tribal Leaders wTribal Leaders were, Alvin Windy Boy-Chair, Mike Jandreau, 

Thomas,Thomas, Ervin Keeswood, Ernie Stensgar, Ervin Carlson, Governor Anoatubby,

Grace Bunner, Ron Allen, Alvin Moyle, Rachel Joseph and Joe Garcia.

V. Creating a Better Alternative Than BITAM

ByBy tBy the end oBy the end of April, a total of twenty-nine separate alternative propos

submissionssubmissions with observations) had been received. These alternativesubmissions with ob

aa wide varietya wide variety of options for consideration; the options rangeda wide variety of options for 

DepartmentDepartment of Indian Affairs. The alternative proposals or comments wDepartment of 

following:

%Ï Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians

%Ï Agua Caliente
13

%Ï BIA Regional Directors

%Ï Cherokee Nation (OK)

%Ï Cheyenne River Sioux

%Ï Chippewa Cree

%Ï Cobell Plaintiffs Receiver 

%Ï Confederated Salish & Kootenai

%Ï Forest J. Gerard 

%Ï Fort Peck Business Council

%Ï Hoopa Valley

%Ï Hualapai and Yavapai

%Ï Intertribal Timber Council

%Ï Lower Brule

%Ï Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe

%Ï Native American Mutual

%Ï Navajo Nation

%Ï Nixon Peabody

%Ï Northwest Region

%Ï OST Advisory Board

%Ï Oglala Souix

%Ï RavenPack Central

%Ï Resolution Trust Corporation

%Ï Salt River Pima - Maricopa Indian Community
14

%Ï Bureau of Indian Trust Assets Management

%Ï Seminole Nation of Oklahoma

%Ï United South and Eastern Tribes (USET)

%Ï Van Ness

%Ï Senate Bill 2212

TheThe Task Force charged its Alternative ProposalsThe Task Force charged its Alternative Pro

ofof the proposals. Eachof the proposals. Each proposalof the proposals. Each proposal was reviewed f

proposalsproposals contain uniqueproposals contain unique features intended to address a varietypro

manymany common perspectives. Most of the proposals state oppmany common perspectives. Most of the 

SomeSome proposals state a preference to place the Department s trust responsibilities outside

ofof the Department. Some proposals address preferences for higher levels of authority

withinwithin the Departwithin the Departmenwithin the Department for officials charged with handlin

organizationalorganizational attributes suchorganizational attributes such as the need fororganizationa

systems,systems, or a focus on breach  issues identified by the District Court in the Cobell case.

ToTo facilitate coTo facilitate consultationTo facilitate consultation To facilitate consultation withTo f

toto create several generic composite options that reflected the best features and major

elementselements presented by theelements presented by the entire body of the alternative proposals

onon high level positions responsible for providing policy direction for Americanon high level positions 

AlaskaAlaska NatiAlaska Natives proAlaska Natives programs. Following consultation, the Tas

SecretarySecretary of the Interior with comments and analSecretary of the Interior with comme
15

configurconfigurationconfiguration of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and its subordinate line mana

positions.

TheThe paragraphs that follow describe the alternative options identified by the

SubcommitteeSubcommittee for consideration by the Task Force. TheSubcommittee for conside

describedescribe some of the advantages and disadvantages associated wdescribe some of the adv

particularparticular option. However, the paragraphs that foparticular option. However, the parag

reflectreflect the totality of the discussion, study andreflect the totality of the discussion, study and con

ForceForce gave each generic option pForce gave each generic option prForce gave eac

consideration.

VI. Cross-Cutting Principles

InIn addition to the organizIn addition to the organizationalIn addition to the organizational options s

thatthat certathat certain crosthat certain cross-cutting principles be incorporated into any orga

receivingreceiving further consideration.receiving further consideration. Each option meritingreceiving 

these principles. These cross-cutting principles include: 

%Ï SupportSupport for the role of Tribal self-determination/self-governance (direct

service, Title I-638, and Title IV). 

%Ï Recognition that Tribal and individual Indian interests are closely related.

%Ï CreationCreation of an iCreation of an indepCreation of an independent oversight entit

for trust administration.

%Ï Phasing out of the Office of Special Trustee.
16

%Ï RegroupingRegrouping of operations-related functions currently under contrRegroupin

Special Trustee with other Bureau of Indian Affairs  functions.

%Ï Departmental auditing and internal and external controls capability.

%Ï AA clear definition of the DA clear definition of the DepA clear definition of the Depar

Indian trust assets.

VII. Options/Advantages/Disadvantages

%Ï OPTION 1(a): Create A New Department of Indian Affairs This 

alternativealternative envisioned a new Cabinet position andalternative envisioned a ne

AmericanAmerican Indian and Alaska Natives related functions within

the Department would be moved to this new organization. 

Advantages: " Higher profile within the Executive Branch.

 " " Consolidates Americ " Consolidates American In " Consolidat

functions into one Department.

 " " Improves coordination " Improves coordination between American 

Alaska Native programs.

Disadvantages: " Politically difficult to achieve.

 " Executive Branch implementation would be difficult.

 " Small Department, with inadequate clout.

WhileWhile this alternative hasWhile this alternative has attractive features,While this alte

needneed for further consultationneed for further consultation byneed for further consult

bebeingbeing being too difficult to pursue - it would take substantial effort and politica
17

capitalcapital to seek Departmental  status and the likelihood of capital to seek Depa

high. [See Option 1]

%Ï OPTION 1(b): Create A New Independent Agency Within The 

ExecutiveExecutive Branch Of GovernmExecutive Branch Of Government Th 

independindependentindependent independent agency, possibly temporary, outside o

wouldwould be dedicated to managing all of the Americanwould be dedicated to ma

Native-related trust functions within the Department.

Advantages: " Outside entity with line authority to make changes.

 " Improved ability to foster organizational change.

Disadvantages: " Tribal involvement may be constrained.

 " Executive branch implementation would be difficult.

 " Small organization with limited clout.

 While this alternative had attractiveWhile this alternative had attractive features,While this 

needneed for further consultation by the Task Force need for further consultation by 

reservations stated in 1(a). [See Option 1]

%Ï OPTIONOPTION 2: Create A New Deputy SecOPTION 2: Create A New Deput

alternativealternative envisioned the creation alternative envisioned the creation of a 

wouldwould be responsible for all of the Indian-related functions within the

Department. 

Advantages: " " " Raises profile of " Raises profile of American Indian and Alaska 

programs within the Department.

 " Makes span of control more manageable.
18

 " " Provides clear lines of a " Provides clear lines of authority " Provides c

 " " Improves coo " Improves coor " Improves coordination with 

Bureaus.

 " Ensures consistent policy of A " Ensures consistent policy of 

Alaska Native Affairs.

Disadvantages: " " Inconsistent with Reorganization Act (one Deput " Inconsistent w

 Secretary per Department).

 " Difficult to obtain sufficient support.

 " Recruitment & confirmation of a Deputy Secretary. 

TheThe Task Force determined this option merited further The Task Force determine

Option 2]

%Ï OPTIONOPTION 3: Create An Organizational Structure WithOPTION 3: Create A

Secretaries This alternative envisione This alternative envisioned t This alternativ

Secretary sSecretary s posiSecretary s position tSecretary s position to manage portio

responsibilities. 

Advantages: " Higher profile within the Department.

 " Improved span of control.

 " Improved ability to focus on key program areas.

Disadvantages: " Too similar to the BITAM proposal.

 " May undermine BIA s historical trust obligations.

 " May result in confused chain of command.
19

AlthoughAlthough this option was not patternAlthough this option was not pattern

similaritysimilarity was sufficient for the Task Force to determinesimilarity was sufficient 

merit further consultation. [See Option 3]

%Ï OPTIONOPTION 4: Create An Organizational Subdivision At the Bureau Level

ThisThis alternative envisioned the subdivision of the This alternative envisioned th

subosubordinatsubordinatesubordinate organizations. The Subcommittee identified 

groupingsgroupings of current BIA functions - Education, Trustgroupings of current 

Resources,Resources, and TrustResources, and Trust ServResources, and Trus

reasonablereasonable sreasonable span of creasonable span of control  conside

increase management attention to key trust responsibilities. 

Advantages: " " Flexible organizationa " Flexible organizational " Flexible orga

options.

 " Improves program focus and accountability.

 " " Abilit " Ability " Ability to direct and coordinate Trust activities wi

otherother Bureaus of the Deother Bureaus of the Deparot

inincludingincluding the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureaincludi

LandLand Management, andLand Management, and tLand Ma

Service.

Disadvantages: " May be perceived as fragmenting Indian services.

TheThe Task Force determined this option merited further consultaThe Task Force de

Option 4]
20

%Ï OPTIONOPTION 5: Create A NewOPTION 5: Create A New Leadership Position of U

GrouGroupGroup BIA Functions This option envisions the creation of an Unde T

SecretarSecretarySecretary of Indian Affairs and the grouping of BIA functions into lo

units.units. In large part, it is a composite option reflecting the key features of

Option 2 and Option 4. 

Advantages: " New Under Secretary as single executive sponsor.

 " " Ability to direct " Ability to direct a " Ability to direct and coord

otherother Bureaus of the Deother Bureaus of the Deparot

includingincluding the Fish and Wildlincluding the Fish and Wildlif

LandLand MLand Management, and the Minerals Management

Service.

 " " Under Secretary position more likely to be approved

 (versus a new Deputy Secretary position).

 " " C " Coordinates all American Indian and Alaska Nat " Coordinate

functions within the Department.

 " " High-profile position elevates American Indian and

Alaska Native Affairs.

Disadvantages: " Recruitment & confirmation of an Under Secretary.

The Task Force determined this option merited further consideration. [See

Option 5]

VIII. Further Consideration of the Acceptable Options
21

TheThe Task Force recommended option 2,The Task Force recommended option 2, wh

SecretarySecretary for Indian Affairs, option 4,Secretary for Indian Affairs, option 4, which would create 

thethe Bureau Level, and option 5, wh, and option 5, which, and option 5, which would create a new 

Secretary and groupSecretary and group BIA functions, for consultation, consideration and inputfor c

Leaders.Leaders. The principal focus of further consultation involves the cLeaders. The principa

managementmanagement offmanagement officials, from top to bottom, in each alternative as well as 

staff support functions. 

IX. Line Management

MostMost duties andMost duties and responsibilities within the Department, including IndianMos

assigned by the President, Congress, or theassigned by the President, Congress, or the Courts toass

SecretarySecretary groups these functionsSecretary groups these functions into compatible groups a

susubordinatesubordinate Assistant Secretaries. The Assistant Secretaries further delegate msu

responsibilitiesresponsibilities to subordinate Bureau Dresponsibilities to subordinate Bureau Direr

lowerlower layers of the organization until the delegation rests with the individuals responsible

forfor implementing program responsibilities. In mostfor implementing program responsibilities. In mo

fromfrom high-level policy related decision making, through strategic/priority/budget decision

making, to field implementation. 

TheThe Task FThe Task Force suppoThe Task Force supports the continuation of a line m

wouldwould facilitwould facilitate trwould facilitate tribal self-determination through direc

contracting/compactingcontracting/compacting pursuant to self-determination contracting/compacting pu
22

thethe line managementthe line management structure for Indian Affairs involves five levels. The option

for further consideration include possible changes to the status quo.

X. Changes Needed at Successive Levels of Authority

%Ï LevelLevel 1: Secretary of the Interior Be Beca Because the Task Force determine

therethere wasthere was no need for further consultationthere was no need for further con

IndianIndian Affairs and Independent Agency options, no changeIndian Affairs and I

recommendedrecommended atrecommended at this level. TheThe creation of a separate 

UnderUnder Secretary of Interior for Under Secretary of Interior for Indian AffUnder S

IndianIndian Affairs within the Department. These positions wouldIndian Affairs within the 

authorityauthority over all aspects of Indianauthority over all aspects of Indian Affairs wit

thethe coordination of trust reform efforts across all relevant agenciethe coordination 

programs,programs, such as the U.S. Fisprograms, such as the U.S. Fish and Wilp

involveinvolve theinvolve the Department making formal changes to theinvolve the Depart

toto clearly designate the current (or incumbent) Deputy Sto clearly designate the c

singlesingle accountable executive in charge of Indian Trust responsibilities within

thethe Department on an ongoing basis. Currently,the Department on an ongoing basis

thethe Dethe Deputhe Deputy Secretary with these responsibilities, in addition to bein

ChiefChief Operating Officer forChief Operating Officer for theChief Operating Officer fo

thethe creation of a separate Deputy Secretary for Indian Affairs position. A

similarsimilar similar prsimilar provision, sponsored by Senators Daschle and McCain, 

includedincluded in Senate Bill 2212. As mentioned earlier, this position may be
23

difficult to obtain. 

OptionOption 5 would not alter the duties of the DOption 5 would not alter the dut

accomplish the sameaccomplish the same objective of elevating Indian Affairsaccomplis

of an Under Secretary forof an Under Secretary for Indian Affairs. This new Under Sec

bebe responsible for coordinating and directing all Indian Affairs programs

withinwithin the within the Department, including the various bureaus, and would 

positionedpositioned above the Assistantpositioned above the Assistant Secretary for Ind

recognizedrecognized that the creation of a new Under Secretary may be more readily

achievableachievable than creating a second Deputy Secretary position within a

cabinet agency.

%Ï LevelLevel 2: Assistant SecretLevel 2: Assistant Secretary The Task Force deter

needneed for further consultation on the bifurcationneed for further consultation on the bif

the Assistant Secretary level. The Task Force andthe Assistant Secretary level. The Ta

rejected the subdivisionrejected the subdivision ofrejected the subdivision of Indian trust 

AssistantAssistant Secretaries as was suggested by the BITAM proposal.Assistant Secret

allall options for further consideraall options for further consideration enall options fo

Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs.

%Ï LevelLevel 3: Bureau DireLevel 3: Bureau Director C Currently, the Bureau Di

CoCommiCommissionerCommissioner (which has been vacant) and Deputy Commissi
24

TaskTask Force has discussed a number of oTask Force has discussed a number 

organizationorganization (see Option 4 for more details). Depending upon the results of

furtherfurther consultation, the Bureau Director level could involfurther consultation, th

OfficeOffice Directors), separate organizations wiOffice Directors), separate organizat

of Deputy Assistant Secretaries in lieu of Bureau Directors.

%Ï LevelLevel 4: Regional Directors Currentl Currently, Currently, the BIA h

managementmanagement structures for variousmanagement structures for various purp

regions.regions. Law Enforcement also hasregions. Law Enforcement also has five reg

subdividedsubdivided into twelve (12) differentsubdivided into twelve (12) different region

a Regional Director. 

EachEach trust program s regionalEach trust program s regional office is responsible for m

wiwithinwithin a geographical area. Within the regional boundaries, Regional

DirectorsDirectors are Directors are reDirectors are responsible for representing the 

Tribal,Tribal, State andTribal, State and local governments, other Federal agencies,Tribal

andand directing and assisting in the applicationand directing and assisting in the applica

policiespolicies and programs by agency and field offices, along with a number of

otherother coordinating roles. Regional officesother coordinating roles. Regional office

and, in some cases, by discrete field offices.

%Ï LevelLevel 5Level 5: AgenLevel 5: Agency Offices Currently, there are approxima
25

agencyagency offices throughoutagency offices throughout the BIA. agency offices throu

aa Superintendent, a Superintendent, represent geographical subdivisions within eacha S

AgencyAgency offices representAgency offices represent the BIAAgency offices represe

bodies,bodies, municipal and county governments, otbodies, municipal and county governm

thethe general public. the general public. The the general public. The Agency Superin

specialists, directs andspecialists, directs and supervises the operation of programs adm

byby the BIA and monitors, supports andby the BIA and monitors, supports and provides 

tribaltribal governments when antribal governments when an agencytribal governments 

determinationdetermination award. Agency determination award. Agency ofdeterm

agency offices.

TheThe Task Force supports the continuation of a The Task Force supports the continuat

wouldwould facilitate directwould facilitate direct services to tribes as well as activities pursuant to self-d

agreemagreements.agreements. As Option 4 demonstrates, there are several approaches for pro

managmanagementmanagement direcmanagement direction at the Bureau Director level. There ar

disadvantagesdisadvantages to each approach. Commentsdisadvantages to each approach. Commen

help thehelp the Task Force define more clearly the most beneficial wayhelp the Task Force define m

DirectorDirector level andDirector level and below. Following consultation, the Task Force will provide th

ofof the Interior with additional comments and analysis of the optioof the Interior with addition

configuration of the BIA in its regional and agency positions.

XI. Key Program Staff Positions
26

EachEach layer of lineEach layer of line management may be supported by one or moreEach l

thesethese staff support positions may range from Seniorthese staff support positions may range from 

toto lower-graded positions (General Schedule (GS) grades 5 - 15) to lower-graded positions (Gen

program and location. 

IndianIndian Education programs report directly to the AssiIndian Education programs repo

Affairs,Affairs, and the Task Force did not discuss any change in this repAffairs, and the Task Fo

OtherOther key support functions, currentlyOther key support functions, currently reporting to the Deput

into the following program areas:

%Ï Administration

%Ï Facilities Management and Construction

%Ï Tribal Services

%Ï Trust Responsibilities

%Ï Law Enforcement

%Ï Indian Gaming Management

%Ï Economic Development

%Ï Planning, Budget and Management Support

%Ï Information and Technology Support

DependingDepending upon the resultsDepending upon the results of the consultation process, 

bebe gbe grouped in other ways at the Bureau level. An assessment of the BIA suggests that

therethere are significant commonalities in the program staff offices (and functions) located in

thethe Regional Offices and Agency Office levels.the Regional Offices and Agency Office l
27

 Information Information and Technology Support  function may have subordinate staff attention Informa

Regional and Agency organizational levels.

PendingPending decisions on the Bureau level functions and higher, the TaPending decisions 

notnot yet addressed the lower-level staff organizations in detail. Once the hnot yet addressed t

organizationalorganizational decisions are made, it is the intent of the Deporganizational decisio

detaileddetailed information needed to facilitate organizationaldetailed information needed to facilitate 

levelslevels andlevels and tolevels and to discuss the results with the Task Force. To the extent practica

bebe mabe made to streamline decision making and to align program functions betbe made 

organizational layers.

XII. Evaluation Criteria

TheThe Task Force also discussed a set of criteria, and is planning tThe Task Force also 

criteria,criteria, to evaluate various organizational options. A summary of the kcriteria, to evalua

presented below to facilitate further consultation:

'V Does the optionDoes the option ensure that the United StatesDoes the option ensure tha

dutiesduties to tribal governmentsduties to tribal governments as sduties to tribal g

Orders and case law?

'V Does the option support tribal self-determination and self-government?

'V DoesDoes the option ensure fullDoes the option ensure full andDoes the option ensure 

of Indian trust assets?

'V Does the option address the various costs of implementation?
28

'V DoesDoes the option ensure that individuals responsible for Does the option ensure t

management are adequately trained?

'V Does the option deal with potential conflicts of interest?

'V Does the option address the key issues identified in the Cobell litigation?

'V DoesDoes the optionDoes the option allow for sufficient flexibility to accommodate tribal 

special laws or treaties?

ThisThis summary of the criteria iThis summary of the criteria is not eThis summary of th

questionsquestions designed to evaluate various organizational proposals. However, the criteria

listlist does indicate a rigorous process to evaluate the strengthlist does indicate a rigorous proce

currentcurrent organizacurrent organization ancurrent organization and the potential to impro

organizational change.

XIII. Conclusion

ThisThis reportThis report is intended to facilitate consultation with theThis report is intended to f

TheThe package presents severalThe package presents several high-level optionsThe package pres

Department of the Interior. Upon making decisions on the higher-levelDepartment of the Interior. Upo

tthethe Department and the Task Force can proceed to make lower-level decisions at tthe Departm

RegionalRegional and Agency level of the organization. Many questions remain. HoweveRegional a

usefuluseful touseful to makeuseful to make some decisions along the way. The views of Indian Coun

toto ensureto ensure well-informedto ensure well-informed organizational decisions are made, which w

term success of the Department s trust reform efforts.
29