U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

92–271 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 113–523 

INDIAN EDUCATION SERIES: ENSURING THE 

BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION HAS THE 

TOOLS NECESSARY TO IMPROVE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 21, 2014 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

JON TESTER, Montana, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

MARY J. PAVEL, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

RHONDA HARJO, Minority Deputy Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on May 21, 2014 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Barrasso ............................................................................... 2 

Statement of Senator Heitkamp ............................................................................. 16 

Statement of Senator Johnson ................................................................................ 13 

Statement of Senator Murkowski ........................................................................... 14 

Statement of Senator Tester ................................................................................... 1 

WITNESSES

Benally, Timothy, Acting Superintendent, Navajo Nation Department of Dine ́

Education .............................................................................................................. 31 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 33 

Brady, Thomas M., Director, Department of Defense Education Activity, U.S. 

Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7 

Brewer, Hon. Bryan, President, Oglala Sioux Tribe; accompanied by Dayna 

Brave Eagle, Director, Tribal Education Department ...................................... 21 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 24 

Monette, Melvin, President-Elect, National Indian Education Association ........ 41 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 43 

Roessel, Charles M., Director, Bureau of Indian Education, U.S. Department 

of the Interior ....................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 4 

APPENDIX

Horse, Jon Whirlwind, President, Dakota Area Consortium of Treaty Schools, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 60 

Nez, Angela Barney, Executive Director, Dine ́ Bi Olta School Board Association, Inc., prepared statement ............................................................................. 53 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Jon Tester to: 

Melvin Monette ................................................................................................. 66 

Charles M. Roessel ........................................................................................... 69 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to Charles 

M. Roessel ............................................................................................................. 71 

Tuba City Boarding School Governing Board, letter to Sally Jewell .................. 64 

Yazzie, Albert A., President, Crystal Boarding School Board of Education, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 62 

(1) 

INDIAN EDUCATION SERIES: ENSURING THE 

BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION HAS THE 

TOOLS NECESSARY TO IMPROVE 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 2014 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:03 p.m. in room 

628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

The CHAIRMAN. Now I want to call the Committee to come to 

order. Today the Committee will examine the issues and challenges 

facing the Bureau of Indian Education at the Department of the Interior. 

About 41,000 students are educated in BIE schools each year. It 

is critical that we make sure those students are getting the support 

they need to succeed in the classroom. This will be the Committee’s 

third haring on Indian education this Congress. The previous two 

hearings looked at early childhood education and education of our 

Indian students in public schools. I look forward to continuing 

these hearings and identifying a path forward, whether that is 

through legislation or administrative solutions, to improve education across Indian Country. 

Last year, the secretaries of Education and Interior convened at 

the American Indian Education Study Group to propose reforms to 

the BIE system that seeks to improve student achievement. Today, 

we will hear from the BIE on their proposal of redesign. 

I would like to note that while the Committee appreciates Dr. 

Roessel’s attendance here today, we are disappointed that Secretary Jewell was not able to attend in person. It was one year ago 

that she testified before this Committee and stated that Indian 

education is an embarrassment. This Committee has had hoped 

she would appear today to discuss the efforts being made by the 

Department to improve BIE and provide us a renewed commitment 

to improving Indian education. 

In addition to the BIE, we will hear from the Director of the Department of Defense Education Activity. The DoDEA and the BIE 

are the only two federally-operated school systems operating in the 

United States. While they have no schools in Indian Country, the 

2 

Department of Defense has approximately the same number of 

schools as the BIE. Yet their proposed replacement school construction budget for next year is $315 million, compared to the BIE’s request of $2 million. Clearly, there is a need for school construction 

in Indian communities. I am disappointed that we continue to have 

this conversation year after year. I hope the DoD can share with 

us information about their programs and perhaps provide some 

ideas on how to help the BIE improve their school systems. 

The Department of the Interior is not solely to blame for the 

challenges that the BIE faces. I often say that when you point a 

finger at someone there are three fingers pointing right back at 

you. So I look forward to working with our Committee members, 

tribes, tribal leaders and BIE and the Office of Management and 

Budget to ensure that every student in Indian Country has the 

tools necessary to succeed. 

I want to thank our witnesses for joining us today. I look forward 

to the testimony. Senator Barrasso, you have the floor. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would just like to second the comments that you made, and I 

appreciate your holding this hearing. We both know Indian children have a remarkable capacity to learn. Many Indian children 

excel at school, grow up to become teachers, business owners, doctors, lawyers, and government leaders. The Federal Government 

has important responsibilities in educating Indian children. But 

what we do not see is consistent, successful academic achievement 

at the Bureau of Indian Education schools. 

As you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, on May 15, 2013, in testimony 

before this very Committee, Secretary of Interior, Secretary Jewell, 

referred to Indian education as an embarrassment. In recent years, 

both the Government Accountability Office and the Department of 

the Interior Inspector General have echoed her comment. These offices have found a lack of consistent leadership. They have found 

deteriorating facilities. They have found poor management at the 

Bureau of Indian Education. 

So I look forward to hearing what progress the Department has 

made in addressing these issues and improving student achievement. 

With that, I want to welcome the witnesses and look forward to 

their testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do any other members have opening statements? 

Okay, I would like to welcome our first panel. I would like to remind the witnesses, you have five minutes. Your entire testimony 

will be part of the written record. If you stick close to that five minutes, we will be able to ask you some interesting questions. 

Dr. Roessel is the Director of the Bureau of Indian Education at 

the Department of the Interior, our first panelist. And then Mr. 

Thomas Brady, who is the Director of the Department of Defense 

Education Activity. These folks are going to be representing the 

Administration as the only two federally-operated school systems in 

the Nation. 

3 

Before you start your testimony, Dr. Roessel, well, go ahead. Just 

go ahead with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF CHARLES M. ROESSEL, DIRECTOR, BUREAU 

OF INDIAN EDUCATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Dr. ROESSEL. Good afternoon, Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman 

Barrasso and members of the Committee. Thank you for the invitation to testify and provide the Department of the Interior’s vision 

for Indian education. 

Indian education runs through my blood. I am a Navajo from 

Round Rock, Arizona, and I come from a family of educators. My 

parents helped begin the first tribally-controlled school and the 

first tribal college. I attended Rough Rock Demonstration School 

and later became the superintendent of this tribally-controlled 

school. 

I have taught at Navajo Community College, which is now Dine 

College. I view the Bureau of Indian Education not as just another 

school system, but my school system. 

Today we are here to answer, does BIE have the tools to improve. This begs the question: what are we crafting with these 

tools? Let me say what we are not trying to build with these tools. 

We will not build a bigger bureaucracy that ignores outcomes and 

accepts mediocrity. We will not bombard tribes with endless mandates and infringe on their sovereignty. We will not continue to 

fail. 

Every tool that the BIE employs must be for the explicit use of 

creating successful American Indian students to take on an everincreasing global society with a passion and pride, knowing their 

Native language, history and culture. 

In September, 2013, Secretary Jewell and Education Secretary 

Duncan convened the study group. To begin this process, we listened to more than 300 tribal leaders, principals, teachers, school 

board members, parents and even students from BIA operated 

schools as well as tribal schools. A lot of what we heard was not 

new. These challenges include difficulty attracting effective teachers to BIE schools in remote locations, attempts to comply with 23 

different States’ academic standards, resource constraints, organization and budgetary fragmentation, and finally, funding tribal 

grant support costs at only 67 percent. 

Based on the internal discussions and tribal consultations, the 

proposed redesign of the BIE focuses on the following four pillars 

of reform: highly effective teachers and principals, agile organization environment, budget that supports capacity-building mission, 

and a comprehensive support through partnerships. At the core of 

all four of these recommendations is the belief that tribes are full 

partners in the education of their students. 

I would like to take a minute to explain how these four pillars 

support each other and are not separate. Let’s look at pillar one, 

highly effective teachers and principals. The most important tool to 

students’ success is the teacher. BIE and tribes need tools to recruit, train and retain highly effective teachers. BIE and tribes also 

need an agile organization that is able to respond to the unique 

challenges with purpose and vision, to see around the corner so 

they can understand and analyze the demographic data that might 

4 

be needed in order to hire another kindergarten teacher or a 

change in standards where you may need another science teacher. 

But to make this work, we also need budgets that are aligned to 

the priorities of tribes, schools and the BIE. If the focus is on training the teachers we already have, then our BIE and tribal budgets 

must reflect the need for specific training in, say, the Common 

Core State standards. Once students, teachers and principals have 

done their jobs, assessments tell us how well. Yet in more than 60 

percent of our schools we lack the IT infrastructure, both in computers and bandwidth, to administer online assessments that are 

linked to Common Core standards. 

And without parental, community and tribal support, these efforts are doomed for failure. Our students need the collective support from not just schools, but from the tribal and Federal community. This is but one example of how these pillars are integrated 

to reform the BIE. 

In conclusion, the tools addressed today are not the tools we need 

for the new BIE. The BIE that reflects a gradual evolution from a 

direct provider of education to a provider of customized support to 

meet the unique needs of each school and tribes as they exercise 

their sovereignty through self-determination. We are building 

alongside the tribal nations the schools that reflect tribal self-determination as we fulfill our commitment to American Indian students 

attending our schools. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I would be happy 

to answer questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Roessel follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHARLES M. ROESSEL, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN

EDUCATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Good afternoon Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and Members of the 

Committee. Thank you for the invitation to appear today. 

I appreciate the opportunity to testify and provide the Department of the Interior’s (‘‘Department’’) vision for Indian education in schools operated or funded by 

the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE). This is an exciting time for the BIE. We have 

made a lot of progress during the past year and we are hopeful that we have 

reached a turning point in the BIE’s history. This Administration is committed to 

providing high-quality educational opportunities for students educated in BIE-funded elementary and secondary schools throughout Indian Country. 

The Bureau of Indian Education 

The BIE supports education programs and residential facilities for Indian students from federally recognized tribes at 183 elementary and secondary schools and 

dormitories. Currently, the BIE directly operates 57 schools and dormitories and 

tribes operate the remaining 126 schools and dormitories through grants or contracts with the BIE. During the 2013–2014 school year, BIE-funded schools served 

approximately 48,000 individual K–12 American Indian and Alaska Native students 

and residential boarders. Approximately 3,800 teachers, professional staff, principals, and school administrators work within the 57 BIE-operated schools. In addition, approximately twice that number work within the 126 tribally-operated 

schools. 

The BIE has the responsibilities of a state educational agency for purposes of administering federal grant programs for education. BIE responsibilities include providing instruction that is aligned to the applicable State academic standards set 

forth in the regulations; working with the Department of Education to administer 

education grants; and providing oversight and accountability for school and student 

success. BIE is also responsible for ensuring compliance with the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), among other federal laws pertaining to educating students. 

5 

The BIE faces unique and urgent challenges in providing a high-quality education. These challenges include: difficulty attracting effective teachers to BIE-funded schools (which are most often located in remote locations), the current Interior 

regulatory requirement that BIE-funded schools comply with the (23 different) 

states’ academic standards in which they are located, resource constraints, and organizational and budgetary fragmentation. A lack of consistent leadership—evidenced 

by the BIE’s 33 directors since 1979—and strategic planning have also limited the 

BIE’s ability to improve its services. Furthermore, over the years, federal American 

Indian education has been contracted or granted to tribes in approximately twothirds of the BIE school system, but the BIE’s management structure and budget 

have not evolved to match the BIE’s long-term trajectory of increased tribal control 

over the daily operation of schools. Currently, the Department is funding approximately 67 percent of the need for contract support costs for tribally-controlled 

schools. Each of these challenges has contributed to poor outcomes for BIE students. 

A New Vision for the BIE 

The challenges before us are daunting; however, we must have the courage to do 

what is morally right. The Department and the Obama administration are fully 

committed to improving American Indian education. In fact, in September 2013, 

Secretary Jewell and Education Secretary Duncan appointed a set of experts to 

identify the challenges and problems faced by the BIE-funded schools, and to develop and propose recommendations that will help promote tribal control while ensuring that all BIE students are ready for college and career. The team combines 

management, legal, education, and tribal expertise, ensuring that the recommendations are grounded in a comprehensive understanding of the federal government’s 

trust responsibility as well as the elements of effective teaching and learning. 

The team immediately went to work and conducted extensive listening sessions 

with tribal leaders, educators, and community members across Indian Country, and 

analyzed a wide range of primary and secondary data. Based on those discussions 

and that analysis, the team began work on a proposal to redesign BIE that reflects 

the BIE’s gradual evolution from a direct provider of education to a provider of customized support to meet the unique needs of each school and tribe. The BIE redesign would re-prioritize existing staff positions and resources to meet capacity-building needs in a timely manner, particularly in the areas of hiring effective teachers 

and leaders, strategic and financial management, and instructional improvement. 

In April, the team issued draft recommendations for purposes of tribal consultation that discuss the systemic challenges facing the BIE and how to resolve them. 

The proposed recommendations aim to provide an agile organization that is focused 

on three core areas: 

• Sovereignty and Indian Education: Building the capacity of tribes to operate 

high-performing schools and shape what children are learning about their 

tribes, language, and culture in schools. 

• School Improvement: Providing targeted, highly customized technical assistance 

to schools through School Improvement Solutions Teams that are embedded in 

the regions and in close proximity to schools. 

• Responsive Business Operations: Focusing on teacher and principal recruitment, acquisition and grants, facilities, educational technology, and communications under the direction of the Director, BIE, to ensure that the educational 

requirements in these business lines are addressed appropriately. 

We conducted four tribal consultations regarding the preliminary recommendations at BIE-funded schools in Arizona, South Dakota, Washington, and Oklahoma. 

The consultations provided valuable insight and comment on the team’s draft report 

and recommendations. The final report will incorporate feedback from tribal leaders 

and other BIE stakeholders. Although much work needs to be done, we have taken 

an important first step—the BIE and tribes have agreed on a general path forward 

for the BIE. 

Outline of the Proposed Recommendations 

Based on internal discussions and tribal consultation, the proposed redesign of the 

BIE focuses on the following four pillars of reform: 

• Highly Effective Teachers and Principals—We would identify, recruit, retain 

and empower diverse, highly effective teachers and principals to maximize the 

highest achievement for every student in all BIE-funded schools. 

• Agile Organizational Environment—We would develop a responsive organization that provides the resources, direction and services to tribes so that they can 

help their students attain high-levels of student achievement. 

6 

• Budget that Supports Capacity Building Mission—We would develop a budget 

that is aligned with and supports BIE’s new mission of tribal capacity building 

and scaling up best practices. 

• Comprehensive Supports through Partnerships—We would foster parental, community, and organizational partnerships to provide the emotional and social 

supports that BIE students need in order to be ready to learn. 

By focusing relentlessly on the four pillars identified above, the proposed redesign 

would allow us to achieve our ultimate goal: world-class instruction for all BIE students delivered by tribes and the BIE. 

This effort will focus especially on supporting and building the capacity of the 

tribally-controlled grants schools to improve educational outcomes. Tribally-controlled schools face numerous challenges in administering programs. DOI and the 

BIE will work with tribally-controlled schools to support implementation of improvements initiated from within tribal communities. 

The BIE faces numerous infrastructure challenges. Of the 183 BIE schools, 34 

percent (63 schools) are in poor condition, and 27 percent are over 40 years old. 

These substandard conditions are not conducive to educational achievement, and 

impact learning opportunities for students. As part of the transformation strategy 

we will develop a six-year plan aimed at improving school facility conditions, similar 

to the six-year strategy used by the Department of Defense Education Agency to 

successfully replace and upgrade 70 percent of its schools in poor condition. 

Information Technology (IT) infrastructure is another major challenge. The current lack of broadband access in the majority of the BIE school system presents 

enormous challenges for the BIE. Many BIE-funded schools are located in the most 

remote locations in the country. Most schools have only a T–1 level of connectivity— 

entirely inadequate to meet the demands of 21st century teaching and learning. By 

helping connect teachers to students and parents—and helping schools share classes, curricula, and other resources—broadband-enabled teaching and learning has expanded educational opportunities for many students. Broadband access is particularly important for schools in remote locations because it can mitigate the devastating impact that geographic isolation can have on student achievement. It is especially critical for the BIE to effectively implement the Common Core State Standards as well as a 21st century, computer-based online assessment aligned to these 

new standards. Less than 30 percent of BIE-funded schools have the bandwidth and 

computers necessary to administer these assessments. Through this transformation, 

we will be looking at ways to improve broadband access. 

Conclusion 

This collective vision for BIE—a vision rooted in the belief that all children can 

learn and that all tribes can operate high-achieving schools—would allow the BIE 

to achieve improved results in the form of higher student scores, improved school 

operations, and increased tribal control over schools. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I would be happy to answer any 

questions the Committee may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your testimony, Dr. Roessel. 

You are up, Mr. Brady. 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS M. BRADY, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT 

OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

DEFENSE 

Mr. BRADY. Good afternoon, Chairman Tester and Vice Chairman Barrasso, and distinguished members of the Committee. 

Thank you for the invitation to appear today. 

The Department of Defense Education Activity is responsible for 

ensuring that children of our Nation’s active duty military families 

have the knowledge and skills required to meet the demands of today’s highly-globalized society. DoDEA is a quality school system 

built over the past 60 years to provide specific and critical service 

to our military and DoD civilian families across the globe. 

We have done this through the extraordinary efforts of our dedicated teachers, administrators, support staff and educational leaders. DoDEA schools are highly regarded by our military families for 

7 

the quality of life they provide worldwide, and our school system 

is recognized as a contributing factor in the military services’ ability to recruit and retain our high quality all volunteer force. 

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing and 

discuss the strategic initiatives DoDEA is implementing over the 

next five years to achieve our vision of becoming a world-class 

school system. We realize that achieving our vision requires improvement in two key fundamental areas. We must improve what 

we are teaching our students and we must improve how we are 

teaching it. 

To initiate this process we are increasing the rigor within our 

school system by implementing new and college career-ready academic standards. Our new standards will be complemented by new 

curriculum, instructional strategies and assessments. The three 

components will be closely aligned to the academic standards to ensure that teaching and learning in every classroom is focused on 

student mastery of not only grade-essential content knowledge, but 

also higher orderly thinking and communication skills. 

We are also assessing organizational changes to improve the support provided to our schools. Through these changes we will increase the instructional support provided to our teachers and students and improve the effectiveness and efficiency in which we provide those services. 

We recognize that for DoDEA to achieve new levels of excellence 

in student achievement, we must raise expectations and strengthen 

accountability throughout our organization. We will do so by creating an organization culture that stresses two essential conditions: 

a common belief that all our students can and will meet higher 

standards and a collective sense of urgency and obligation that focuses organizational capacity or achieving universal academic success. 

DoDEA’s increasingly constrained resource environment has underscored the need for our planning and budget process to be better 

aligned. We are not only striving to project program costs over the 

long term more effectively, but in anticipation of further budget 

cuts, we continue to identify and pursue opportunities to operate 

our school system more efficiently. 

DoDEA’s vision is ambitious and not without real challenges. But 

the Department of Defense and the DoDEA team stand committed 

to meeting those challenges. Within the next five years, we intend 

to be the national leader in preparing students for success at the 

next higher grade level and meet the high demands of today’s colleges, career and citizenship responsibilities upon graduation from 

high school. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brady follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THOMAS M. BRADY, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

EDUCATION ACTIVITY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Introduction 

Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and distinguished members of the 

committee, I would like to thank you for inviting me today to discuss the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA). DoDEA, as one of only two Federallyoperated school systems, is responsible for planning, directing, coordinating, and 

8 

managing prekindergarten through 12th grade educational programs on behalf of 

the Department of Defense (DoD). DoDEA is globally positioned, operating 191 accredited schools in 14 districts located in 12 foreign countries, 7 states, Guam, and 

Puerto Rico. DoDEA employs approximately 8,000 educators who serve more than 

82,000 children of active duty military and DoD civilian families. DoDEA is committed to ensuring that all school-aged children of military families are provided a 

world-class education that prepares them for postsecondary education and/or career 

success and to be leading contributors in their communities as well as in our 21st 

century globalized society. 

DoDEA—A Unified School System 

The DoDEA Headquarters (HQ) serves in several capacities that facilitate 

DoDEA’s ability to operate as a unified school system. In addition to serving as a 

DoD Field Activity, DoDEA HQ fulfills responsibilities commonly performed by 

State Education Agencies (SEA) and Local Education Agencies (LEA). Similar to an 

SEA, DoDEA HQ establishes system-wide policies, academic standards, assessments, and accountability. Similar to an LEA, DoDEA HQ establishes system-wide 

curriculum, instructional frameworks, professional development programs, and performs system-wide resource management, facility recapitalization, and strategic 

planning. By virtue of the HQ performing the functions of both an SEA and LEA, 

DoDEA is able to operate as a unified school system, achieving system-wide coherence and unity of effort in spite of its global geographic dispersion. 

Over the course of the next five years, DoDEA will implement its new strategic 

plan for achieving new levels of school system excellence, most importantly in the 

areas of school performance and student achievement. I would like to share with 

the committee the strategic reforms DoDEA is preparing to undertake that are essential to achieving excellence in these two areas. 

Pursuit of Excellence 

DoDEA’s path to achieving new levels of excellence in school performance and student achievement will largely be determined by our ability to successfully achieve 

three conditions in every DoDEA school: we must establish and communicate high 

expectations for all students; we must ensure all students have access to high-quality educational opportunities; and, most importantly, we must ensure all of our students achieve high academic standards. To achieve such aspirations, we have determined that we must focus our strategic efforts on mastering research-based fundamentals essential to improving what we teach and how we teach. A key facet of 

our strategic approach is the implementation of a school improvement model that 

establishes the capacity in each school to be an effective catalyst for higher-level 

student learning. The fundamental components of our school improvement model 

are summarized below. 

Standards-Based System: To fulfill our obligation to prepare all students to meet 

the higher demands of today’s colleges, careers, and citizenship responsibilities, we 

are taking necessary actions to establish a coherent standards-based educational 

system. Our standards-based system will enable our students to progressively master knowledge, skills, and dispositions essential for success at the next grade level 

and postsecondary success upon graduating. A complex yet critical condition of success for our standards-based system is to ensure system components—rigorous academic standards, curriculum, instruction, assessments, professional development, 

and technology—are properly aligned. 

Rigorous Academic Standards: Over the course of the next five years, DoDEA will 

join the majority of states in implementing the Common Core State Standards 

(CCSS) in mathematics and English language arts/literacy. Compared to DoDEA’s 

current academic standards, the CCSS are more rigorous and better define the essential content knowledge and higher-order thinking skills students should possess 

at the end of a course and/or grade level in order to remain on path for college and/ 

or career readiness upon graduating from high school. As such, the CCSS will form 

the foundation from which all other components of DoDEA’s standards-based system 

are aligned. 

Curriculum: To ensure our curriculum (course/subject area content) remains 

aligned to the new standards, we will further develop and implement a comprehensive, vertically- and horizontally-aligned prekindergarten through grade 12 curricular framework. The framework, by providing high-quality course content in 

sequenced units of instruction that establish a teaching and learning focus on targeted standards, will achieve quality and consistency in what is taught and learned 

in each course, grade level, and in each of our schools. 

Instruction: We recognize that the success of our curriculum ultimately depends 

on the ability of our teachers to deliver rigorous and relevant standards-based inVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:09 Jan 09, 2015 Jkt 092271 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\92271.TXT JACK
9 

struction that progressively develops student knowledge, skills, and dispositions. In 

order for our students to master rigorous standards, instruction must be equally rigorous in actively engaging and challenging students so that they develop a deep understanding of content knowledge and improve higher-order thinking and communication skills. Likewise, we will emphasize the importance of students understanding the relevance of what they are learning. To the greatest extent possible, 

lessons will require students to apply and demonstrate targeted knowledge, skills, 

and dispositions. 

Assessment: We will also establish a more comprehensive assessment system that 

provides the means to effectively and efficiently measure the level at which our students are learning to the more rigorous standards. We will consider a full range of 

assessments to accommodate the need for classroom assessments used by teachers 

to frequently check for student learning and the need for common assessments that 

objectively measure the level of student mastery of course and/or grade-level academic standards against established performance benchmarks. In short, our assessment system will be considered fully developed when it serves to effectively: (1) 

measure student-level proficiency in applying/demonstrating targeted knowledge, 

higher-order thinking and communication skills, and dispositions; and (2) improve 

the quality, consistency, and rigor of curriculum and classroom instruction. 

Teacher and Principal Professional Development: Research clearly demonstrates 

that teachers and principals have the most influence on student achievement within 

a school. For this reason, we will make the professional development of our teachers 

and principals a top priority. Our professional development effort will focus on ensuring our teachers and our principals, as instructional leaders, have the requisite 

skills, knowledge, strategies, and beliefs necessary to provide rigorous and relevant 

instruction. In addition to a robust professional development program, we will also 

establish a common instructional framework. The framework will promote and 

model research-based teacher and instructional leader practices and skills crucial to 

planning and preparing coherent lesson plans; delivering instruction in a studentfocused, individualized manner that actively engages and challenges each student 

to apply and demonstrate targeted knowledge and skills; and creating a classroom 

environment that enables student higher-level learning. 

Student Capacity and Motivation to Learn: Our students’ ability to successfully 

adapt to the increased rigor within our system will depend, in part, on our ability 

to build each student’s capacity and motivation to meet higher academic expectations. We recognize that there are many external factors that influence student dispositions and contribute to inequities in achievement levels. However, we also recognize there is much we can do in the school environment to better prepare our students for the learning process and once in-process, better meet the unique learning 

needs of each student. To do so, we will ensure our educators are more cognizant 

of the need to individualize instruction to account for differences in student learning 

styles and abilities, to check for student understanding and provide feedback on a 

more frequent basis, and create respectful classroom environments where students 

feel valued, safe, and at ease taking intellectual risks. 

Technology: We will increase our emphasis on integrating technology throughout 

our curriculum to improve the ability of our students to learn and create in a digital 

environment. We will do so by continuing our efforts to improve and standardize 

the technology infrastructure within our school facilities and by integrating the digital learning resources available to students at every grade level. Our transition 

from a teacher-centered, rote-learning model to a blended digital environment 

geared toward student creation hinges on three initiatives. First, we will provide 

high-quality digital materials that comply with federal accessibility standards and 

are accessible to all students and teachers, including persons with disabilities and 

English language learners. Secondly, we are implementing a learning management 

system where teachers can leverage their creativity in their lesson planning and delivery, providing a consistent student experience. Finally, we will provide teachers 

training on the use of collaborative digital tools that allow students to show not just 

what they know, but what they can construct with that knowledge. 

Partnerships: We strongly believe that the success of our school system and 

schools depends on our ability to cultivate the shared commitment of community 

stakeholders. We strongly emphasize the need to proactively establish partnerships 

with parents that empower them to be effective advocates and partners in their children’s education. As all DoDEA schools are located on military installations and 

central to our military communities, we place similar emphasis on the value and 

need for our schools to establish close military-community connections. Through 

community partnerships, our schools are able to leverage community resources that 

serve to improve student educational opportunities and help address student socialemotional issues related to the military’s transient lifestyle and parental deployVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:09 Jan 09, 2015 Jkt 092271 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\92271.TXT JACK
10 

ments. We also work closely with the Military Services to remain responsive to their 

constituents’ educational concerns and force restructuring and infrastructure consolidation efforts. Lastly, we will continue to pursue high-value partnerships with 

public, non-profit, and other DoD components that are an integral part of our strategy for providing relevant instruction that actively engages students, especially in 

the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. 

Academic Support Systems: In addition to our educational system components, we 

will also ensure the alignment of two priority academic support systems—the 

DoDEA Accountability and Data Management Systems. The two systems work together to convert student performance data into meaningful information that clarifies what is impacting student achievement and why, so that appropriate action(s) 

can be taken by the appropriate organizational level(s). 

Accountability System: Over the course of the next several years, we will strengthen our accountability system to focus the organization on achieving standards of excellence in the areas most important to becoming a high-performing school system. 

The accountability system framework will articulate ambitious (but achievable) performance expectations for our students, schools, and school system. The system will 

consist of a comprehensive set of school system performance indicators that: (1) provide evidence of student learning and whether students are on track to meet predictive benchmarks along the educational trajectory (e.g., reading proficiency at the 

end of the third grade); (2) identify students and schools in need of support; (3) establish a laser-like focus on the initiatives, programs, and systems most essential 

to improving student postsecondary readiness for all students, including students 

with disabilities and English language learners; (4) provide evidence of improved 

workforce and system capacity; and 5) facilitate acknowledgment of exceptional individual and organizational achievement. 

Data Management System: At the core of our school system’s continuous improvement efforts is the need for valid, reliable, and timely student performance data 

that reflects each student’s academic performance and progress by content area, 

grade, and standardized assessment. To ensure essential performance data is consistently available to the right system stakeholders in a meaningful way, especially 

teachers to facilitate timely instructional decisions, we plan to develop and implement a more comprehensive and responsive system-wide data management system. 

This system will serve as the ‘‘integrity linchpin’’ that reliably provides critical student performance data from our assessment system to our accountability system. 

Culture of Accountability and Raised Expectations: An imperative for achieving 

excellence throughout our school system is an organizational culture of accountability and raised expectations for all students and their families. We recognize that 

to grow from good to great, every part of our school system must become more accountable for improving student and school performance. We must also establish a 

common belief that all students with appropriate services and supports are capable 

of achieving higher academic standards and that our higher expectations will positively influence student outcomes. Furthermore, for students to achieve their full 

academic potential, we understand that our school system must also meet higher 

expectations in not only ensuring equal access to a rigorous curriculum, but in 

achieving universal student accomplishment and academic success as well. An important first step in ‘‘reculturing’’ our organization will be to develop the cultural 

competence of our workforce and to provide training that will enable the workforce 

to educate all children successfully. 

Educational Facility Capital Investment Program: DoDEA’s Educational Facility 

Capital Investment Program coherently identifies and prioritizes the sustainment, 

restoration, modernization, and replacement of our school facilities worldwide. By 

2021, DoD and DoDEA are committed to ensuring all DoDEA school facilities meet 

DoD’s acceptable condition standards and are accessible to persons with disabilities. 

The program includes centrally managed inspection, requirements determination, 

and prioritization processes that facilitate the inclusion of DoDEA’s facility capital 

investment requirements in the DoD Future Years Defense Program, which details 

DoD’s five-year (current year and following four years) program requirements. The 

DoD’s investment demonstrates its shared commitment with DoDEA to achieve and 

sustain quality DoD school facilities that provide safe and secure 21st century learning environments that are accessible to all of our students, staff, and their families. 

In summary, the strategic reforms DoDEA plans to implement over the next five 

years are ambitious and complex. While we understand the challenges in implementing the reforms are real and should not be underestimated, we clearly understand our moral obligation to be resolute in their successful execution. The stakes 

are too high for our students and our Nation not to be successful in this endeavor. 

11 

Conclusion 

Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I want to thank you and the members of this committee for the opportunity to provide an overview of DoDEA and our most important 

strategic reform initiatives. It is our honor and privilege to contribute to the education of the children of our military families. The education of all of the children 

of our Nation’s heroes must not be among the sacrifices our country asks of them. 

I look forward to your questions. 

The CHAIRMAN. And thank you for your testimony, Mr. Brady. 

I will start with teaching vacancies. The BIE has about 183 

schools, DoDEA has about 193 schools. Mr. Roessel, how many 

teaching vacancies do you have in the BIE schools? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Teacher vacancies? 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, how many positions do you have that aren’t 

filled? 

Dr. ROESSEL. I would not know that number off hand. It changes. 

Right now is when contract renewals are taking place. 

The CHAIRMAN. Any idea? Can you give me a ballpark figure? 

Can you give me a number, a percentage? 

Dr. ROESSEL. I would say based on previous knowledge, we probably have 15 to 20 percent vacancy right now. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, so you don’t have that broken out by elementary and high school and that kind of stuff? 

Dr. ROESSEL. No, we do not. 

The CHAIRMAN. How about DoDEA? How many vacancies do you 

guys have? 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At the beginning of the 

year it is usually about 7.5 percent. But during the year it is limited to about 1.5 percent because of people’s retirements and health 

issues. 

The CHAIRMAN. I got you. I believe both of you have housing programs, is that not correct? 

Dr. ROESSEL. That is correct. 

Mr. BRADY. We do not provide housing for our teachers. We provide housing allowances. 

The CHAIRMAN. You provide a housing allowance, not a house. 

Mr. BRADY. That is correct. 

The CHAIRMAN. So this question is more for the BIE. What percentage of your teachers live in tribal-supplied housing? 

Dr. ROESSEL. For the schools, we would not have that number, 

because a lot of our tribal schools, they operate their schools on 

their own. So we do not know exactly how many teachers are living 

lin tribal housing or BIE-funded housing or on their own. 

The CHAIRMAN. I got you. So here is what I would like to know, 

so you can get back to me. Get back to me with the solid figures 

on vacancies, and I don’t want to know them at the end of the year, 

I want to know them on average. You guys do student assessments 

and how many kids are in your schools, at the same time, tell me 

how many teachers you have. Tell me how many you are down, 

how many are out. And give me an idea on how many, what percentage of them housing is provided for. 

The point I am trying to make here is that every tribe is a little 

bit different. But housing is a big deal. If you don’t have housing, 

and it is obviously different in DoDEA schools. But if you don’t 

have housing, you are going to have a heck of a time finding a 

12 

teacher, that is all. So I kind of want to get a grasp or my hands 

around that, so when we are talking about budgeting, we are talking about dollars and how we are going to allocate them. Since 

money is tight, we need to make sure it works. If there is a big 

discrepancy here, we might be able to make the case to the folks 

on this Committee and others to be able to plus up some budgetary 

items. 

With that, I will turn it over to Senator Barrasso. 

Senator BARRASSO. I appreciate your line of questioning, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Mr. Roessel, your written testimony recites the significant work 

undertaken for the proposed redesign of the Bureau. This redesign 

will allow the Bureau to provide world class instruction for all Bureau students. Could you give me a little further information on 

the time lines, maybe the milestones, that are developed as part of 

your redesign? 

Dr. ROESSEL. There are some things that we have undertaken 

currently, things that we can do in-house, administratively, that 

are just common sense. Along those lines is the adoption of Common Core, aligning curriculum, aligning professional development. 

These are things that we can do in-house, internally, as well as 

then talk to tribes and try to work with tribes. 

So part of that process then is already undertaken. Now, what 

we are looking at, trying to do with the study group is that we 

have a few milestones. But we are hoping to try to get those recommendations, we have just finished consultations. We are still receiving written consultation and comments through June 2nd, so 

we haven’t finalized the actual recommendations. But again, without a definite time line, what we are looking at is trying to look 

at starting some more of the implementations with the new fiscal 

year. But we cannot afford to wait any longer, so we are trying to 

move forward as fast as we can. 

Senator BARRASSO. Just following up on what the Chairman had 

to say, one of the key features of education and the proposed design 

is recruiting and retaining highly effective teachers and principals. 

As you said, Mr. Chairman, housing is a big part and component 

of that. Some States are anticipating a teacher shortage in the near 

future. So I am interested in how the Bureau of Indian Education 

is going to implement your recruitment and retention strategy, particularly if there is this teacher shortage. 

Dr. ROESSEL. I think one of the things we are looking at is again, 

the BIE operates 59 schools. The rest are tribally-controlled, and 

those teachers in that system are sometimes employed by the 

tribes. So they have that information. We don’t necessarily have 

that information of what happens with the grant schools or tribally-controlled schools. 

So when we look at the BIE, we look at the openings that we 

have and we are looking for the vacancies, the expansion. But 

when a tribe is looking at trying to hire their teachers, they are 

not, we are not talking back and forth. They are doing that on their 

own. So we wouldn’t know the specific data from the tribes. 

Senator BARRASSO. Mr. Brady, your written testimony notes that 

teachers or principals really have the most influence on student 

achievement within a school. So for that reason, your educational 

13 

system focuses on professional development of the teachers, as well 

as the principals. Can you explain what successful recruitment and 

retention strategies your schools have implemented for these professionals? 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Senator. The 60 years in DoDEA has indicated that we are looking for high quality teachers who have a 

passion for service to the Nation, for geographical mobility. And we 

have a tremendous retention rate of teachers. They find a number 

of satisfactions, from working with the active duty military and the 

DoD team. 

Senator BARRASSO. And that effort there is one that makes a big 

difference in the schools for the students? 

Mr. BRADY. I believe that mission is instilled in every teacher 

that I have seen in classrooms. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. Senator Johnson? 

STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA 

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Roessel, I have met with several tribal educators from across 

the State that have repeatedly stated that there are budget shortfalls for facilities and maintenance funds. These schools have had 

to divert funds from ISEP in order to keep the lights on. Can you 

go into detail on how the BIE will address this issue? 

Dr. ROESSEL. The funding for O&M that comes to the schools 

passes through the BIE, but it originates from the BIA. Right now, 

maintenance is funded at 100 percent, while operations is funded 

at about 50 percent. Because of the uncommonly brutal winter that 

we had, a lot of our schools had to dip into ISEP. We have a contingency fund that we use to try to help alleviate some of that. But 

one of the things that we are doing right now is doing an assessment of all of our facilities to validate what is put into what we 

have as our data base for facilities to see if each school is getting 

the proper amount of money that they should be generating based 

on square footage. 

Senator JOHNSON. The Affordable Care Act expanded the FEHB 

coverage for tribal organizations carrying out programs under the 

P.L. 93–638 contracts. The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation originally gained control over its schools through 638 contracts, and 

then converted to 297 contracts. Dr. Roessel, can you explain how 

the Department came to the conclusion that 297 schools are not eligible, even though one of the base findings of the Tribally Controlled Schools Act was to enhance the concepts of the Indian SelfDetermination and Education Assistance Act? 

Dr. ROESSEL. When the Department looked at that situation, 

they saw that while the law was specific for the contract support 

or contract schools, schools under contracts, it was not specific for 

tribal grant schools. So we are looking, we are working with Committee staff to try to find a remedy for this. I believe it was just 

an oversight. But we are trying to find a way to get through this. 

But I think the other thing that is important is that the tribe has 

to first be the person, the entity that decides whether it has and 

wants Federal health benefits. And so we don’t want to put the 

14 

school in front of the tribe. So that is a concern that we have as 

we move forward in trying to find a remedy to this. 

Senator JOHNSON. As a follow-up, the tribal schools and my office 

have worked on this issue since 2012, and only just recently were 

we given the original 2012 Solicitor opinion. Why has the process 

been so delayed and how can we move forward on this issue? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, I can’t speak to why it has been so delayed. 

I can get something back to you in writing with that. But we are 

trying to move forward quickly. It is something that has been 

brought to our attention and we are trying to find a remedy for 

that as fast as we can. 

Senator JOHNSON. I would appreciate your written statement. 

Mr. Brady, as Chairman of the Mil-Con/VA Appropriations Subcommittee, I have been proud to work with DoDEA to fund military 

school construction. Can you share with the Committee how the 

DoD establishes priority lists to ensure facilities are in proper condition and what best practices you have learned to complete these 

improvements in a timely manner? 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Senator. In 2009, we hired a number of 

engineering firms to make independent assessments of all 191 of 

our schools: 134 of those schools were in category three or category 

four, fair to poor. So we began, thanks to the DoD effort and assistance to devise a five-year capital program that weighted the worst 

to best, in beginning a systematic approach to each one of those 

things, overseen by the troop redeployments, et cetera, so that we 

could best meet the needs of our young men and women. 

Senator JOHNSON. I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murkowski. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Roessel, let me ask you, as you know, in Alaska the situation 

on how we educate our Native students is different than we have 

here in the Lower 48. The Department of the Interior began pulling 

out of Alaska, beginning in the 1930s. In 1985 it formally turned 

over the last BIA school to the State of Alaska. Since that time, 

with the exception of Johnson-O’Malley funds, Congress has prohibited the Department from expending BIA funds in the State. 

The Federal trust responsibility then has flowed through the Department of Education to Alaska’s public schools. There is conversation going on now in the State as a result of a statement of 

regulation coming out of Assistant Secretary Washburn’s office that 

Alaska tribal lands may be considered eligible to be taken into 

trust. If Alaskan tribal lands are taken into trust by Department 

of the Interior, would BIE have the capacity to open BIE schools 

in the State of Alaska or otherwise provide for BIE funding for the 

education of Alaska Native students living in Indian Country? 

Dr. ROESSEL. I would not be the one to make that decision ultimately. But I think I can get back to you in writing in terms of 

what the Department is looking at with that, with the current 

funding, I think it would be very difficult to be at that level, just 

to be honest and frank with you. But I can get back to you in writing. 

15 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I would appreciate your looking into it. Because again, this is the discussion that is underway in the State. 

I have asked some very directed questions to Mr. Washburn about 

what land into trust for Alaska would mean, it would be a change 

in policy. So I am trying to understand not only the impact on our 

ANCSA lands, but the education piece as well. And it doesn’t appear to me to be very clear about whether or not there would be 

sufficient capacity, from everything that I have learned sitting on 

this Committee, in my 12 years here in the Senate. We are not enlarging the pie. And if we are not enlarging the pie and yet we are 

adding more to that in terms of responsibility, I am not quite sure 

how you make that happen. 

And I guess a further question would be, given the years of complaints about the BIE schools that we have had from Lower 48 

tribal communities, the chairman started off this hearing by noting 

the Secretary of Interior’s own comments about the poor shape that 

our schools are in. And really, the schools’ historic inability to prepare a majority of these young people to their full potential. It really does beg the question as to whether or not Alaska tribes and Native organizations should welcome BIE back to the State of Alaska. 

So I would appreciate your weighing in on this. There is a lot obviously that we need to discuss. There is clearly a lot that needs 

to be discussed within Mr. Washburn’s office. But if you can help 

us out with that, I would certainly appreciate it. 

One other question for you. You have testified that it is BIE’s intention to replace and upgrade 70 percent of these BIE schools that 

are in poor condition. Do you have a ballpark figure in terms of 

what that will cost, how many years it will take to complete this 

overhaul of the school facilities? 

Dr. ROESSEL. The school facilities, there was a report that was 

done through negotiated rulemaking that put that figure at about 

$1.3 billion to repair all of our current structures to bring them to 

a level of acceptable. So that would be about $1.3 billion. In terms 

of the IT infrastructure that we are talking about, around $40 million to $50 million is what we would need to bring them to a level 

where they could actually take the current assessment that is online. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Mr. Chairman, I had an opportunity to go 

to, I was in Point Hope in April, a very small whaling community 

in the northwestern part of the State. I decided that I wanted to 

test our fabulous capacity in our Native villages, so I Skyped, not 

Skype, it was VTC with Anuktuvuk Pass School in Barrow. It is 

a larger community. But I wanted to hear straight from the kids, 

because we back here in Washington, D.C. are patting ourselves on 

the back and saying, we are expanding our broadband capacity, our 

kids are coming into the 21st century. And to use the teenage 

vernacular, when I asked, how does this all work, they basically 

said, it sucks. 

And I apologize for the terminology, but this is what the kids are 

saying. They are saying, look we have great tools, but when you 

can’t access the internet because you have a basketball team from 

another village that has flown in and they are staying at the 

school, and 30 additional students tried to get on the system, it 

crashes. They were in the middle of MAP testing. 

16 

The first day, the entire system was down, so they couldn’t test. 

The second day, the system is up, they get 25 minutes into their 

testing, it goes down. It is out for 20 minutes. Okay, everybody 

come back again, they are scrambling. 

So when we talk about this great equalizer of what can come 

with broadband capacity, what comes with the tools and the apps, 

I think we need to be very cognizant that a lot of this is not coming 

together in application yet. We have a long ways to go before we 

are patting ourselves on the back when it comes to making sure 

that there is equal access out there. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Heitkamp? 

STATEMENT OF HON. HEIDI HEITKAMP, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

Senator HEITKAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, 

witnesses. Tough challenges. I know we have kind of glossed over 

that part of it, but only 52 percent of all Native American kids 

graduate. You have two-thirds of your schools are in poor or bad 

condition. We are failing. 

So I think we need to say that pretty plainly. We are failing as 

educators, and we are failing as leaders and really the school board 

in many ways, which is in this horseshoe. And we have to absolutely focus a razor-like attention on getting this done. Because 

education has always been the great equalizer in our Country. And 

these are kids who are getting left behind. 

And I just have a quick question, and I know the chairman 

raised some concerns about what is the level of commitment within 

the Administration, what is the level of commitment within DOE. 

These problems aren’t new. So when you looked at the President’s 

2015 budget, were you satisfied that the 2015 budget actually reflected the needs of the BIE schools? Dr. Roessel? 

Dr. ROESSEL. The short answer is no. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Right. And I think we hear that all the time 

here at this table, where you represent the Administration, and so 

we are a little tough on you. But we expect you to be an advocate 

within that organization and we expect the Administration to respond to these concerns. You will never solve this problem if you 

don’t reflect a solution, not only in collaboration and all the things 

we are talking about today but in budget. 

You can’t fix a school on good hope. You can’t hire a teacher on 

please come. You have to be able to get all of the resources put together, and that is going to require an increase in dollars. I forget 

the number you provided, but 67 percent of total costs, there is no 

other way to get those costs made up. And when you do have an 

unseasonably cold winter, and we saw it in our State, where you 

are taking, you are laying off staff, maybe you are not cleaning the 

school until Friday because you have to pay the propane bill. 

So we want you to be an advocate for education. And I met you 

in my office, I was very impressed, very hopeful that we are on a 

path forward. I want to just build on what Senator Murkowski is 

saying. We talked about the importance of teachers, and everybody 

knows, in education it really is about teachers. But it also is about 

facility. It is also about broadband. Can you tell me what you are 

17 

doing, the E–RATE program has been successful in connecting 

some of more remote locations to a broadband opportunity. Obviously libraries, who has a library any more, you have the internet. 

And if you don’t have the internet, you don’t have a library. So that 

is how critical this program is. 

Most of us represent, most of us left here represent States that 

are very remote, not as remote as Alaska, I am learning every day 

about the challenges of providing services in Alaska. But we want 

to know what you are doing to encourage the FCC, what you are 

doing to build up broadband. 

Dr. ROESSEL. I think one of the challenges that faces all of our 

BIE schools, whether it is a BIE-operated school or whether it is 

a tribal grant school, is that to fill out those E–RATE applications 

is very difficult. It is very specific. And a lot of our schools, even 

schools that are in areas where they have a greater capacity, they 

don’t have the people that can specifically look at those applications and build an infrastructure that might be needed at a school. 

So what we have done is try to work with the Department to provide that resources to these schools out in the field to allow them 

to do that. I think the other thing is that we have been working 

through this study group, working very closely with FCC to try to 

find a way that we can address this issue. We have to do it in two 

areas. One is, a lot of our schools don’t know what they don’t know. 

So we need to build that capacity so they can build and create the 

type of school they want. Because a school in Arizona may look different than a school in North Dakota. So that capacity is needed. 

At the same time, we need to be able then to link partnerships 

in terms of what kind of education they want that E–RATE to buy. 

I think that is something that a lot of schools, they never get to 

that question. They are too busy fumbling through the application 

process and then the deadline passes. We need to fix that first 

problem, which is getting the capacity to fill out these applications, 

but also to have a concerted effort where we know where we are 

going with technology. 

I think one of the problems is just as bad, is you get all of this 

and it just sits in a closet somewhere. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Is there any capacity-expanding that can be 

done on private-public partnership or within the philanthropic 

world that can actually provide that assistance to your agency or 

the assistance to various schools? 

Dr. ROESSEL. That is part of the study group has looked at how 

we can build those partnerships, pillar four is all about partnerships. And one of those things is to deal with, how do we get those 

partnerships in those areas. People want to give to areas that are 

not served some times. So we are trying to build that, and that is 

a big part of this redesigned BIE. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Just one last comment. There is an incredible 

urgency to this. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes. 

Senator HEITKAMP. An incredible urgency to this. And I will tell 

you this. You tell kids they are valued every day, but they go to 

a school that is in poor condition, they don’t feel valued. So if we 

really are going to begin that process, building capacity, building 

the next generation of powerful leaders, we have to change what 

18 

we do in education. I know you personally feel that commitment, 

and we stand ready to help you in any way we can to make that 

happen. But we are going to judge this Administration on what 

goes in that budget document. And we want you to be a strong advocate for these kids. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am going to ask another round, if you guys 

want you can, or we can go to the next panel. But I have some 

questions. 

Mr. Brady, when it comes to rebuilding schools or new school 

construction, do you have a schedule for that? Do you have a list? 

Mr. BRADY. Yes, sir, we do. We have a nine-year projected list, 

identified by schools, with some capability to, obviously, make 

changes. 

The CHAIRMAN. And that includes retrofit or new construction? 

Mr. BRADY. Absolutely, yes, sir. Either renovation or new construction based on projected needs. 

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Roessel, do you have a list of retrofits or new 

construction from the Department of the Interior? 

Dr. ROESSEL. We have a priority construction list from 2004 that 

we have just now funded for the final school, Beatrice Rafferty 

School, to begin the design process. Beyond that, we do not. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, so how many years out do you have it? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, it was 2004, so you are talking about, we are 

behind. So we don’t have a list going forward for new construction. 

The CHAIRMAN. I got you. And I think it is pretty important to 

dovetail onto what Senator Heitkamp was talking about. Twothirds of your schools are fair to poor. And if you don’t plan for the 

future, you certainly aren’t going to be able to address that issue. 

I am not saying the DoD is doing a marvelous job, but they are certainly doing a better job in a nine-year program out. 

We have to demand better. We just have to demand better. If we 

don’t, we are never going to pull Indian Country out of poverty. It 

is never going to happen. It is just never going to happen. Maybe 

it is because I am a former teacher that I say that, but the truth 

is, this is the key. And by the way, the Department of Defense has 

some advantages you don’t have, truthfully. A lot of folk here don’t 

understand trust responsibility. They do understand what happens 

when you put soldiers in the field. But that is not an excuse. You 

have to stay diligent. 

I have another question. It deals with the study group on education that was done with the Department of the Interior and Department of Education. They were issued some recommendations. 

I am sure you are familiar with the study group. Propose incentives for tribes to assume school operation functions from the Bureau, can you give me any idea what kind of incentives we are talking about, are we talking money or are we talking something else? 

Dr. ROESSEL. We are talking about money. We are talking about 

trying to get tribes to assume, I think tribes have historically been 

able to operate schools, but now we are trying to get them to do 

additional things. 

The CHAIRMAN. So are we talking a per student allowance, or are 

we talking per tribe allowance? How are these incentives allocated? 

19 

Dr. ROESSEL. I think the incentives we are looking at right now 

is to begin by offering it as a competitive grant. Because only those 

tribes that would want to engage in that process to be able to initiate those reform efforts. 

The CHAIRMAN. So it would be a lump sum figure? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am just trying to flesh out how far along they 

are. Have they developed criteria to determine which tribes are 

ready for it? Because some tribes could take it over and it would 

be worse. Some tribes could take it over and it could be a heck of 

a lot better. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes. Well, we have looked at that. We have looked 

at a way to not only start that process, but it also has to be sustainable. One of the problems we have is that we give a grant, we 

start and then it ends. So what we have looked it is trying to find, 

how do we make that sustainable. We have done that by saying, 

a tribe that has three or more schools, they inherently are able to 

probably operate as a school district and then it becomes sustainable. 

The CHAIRMAN. Were you in on the consultation that happened 

on this proposal? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. What was the tribe’s perspective on the grant 

process? On granting dollars versus per pupil? 

Dr. ROESSEL. In terms of this incentive grant, most of them were 

supportive of it. They were supportive of that, yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Of the incentive grant? 

Dr. ROESSEL. The idea behind at least the concept of it. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. One more thing here. This is for you, Mr. 

Brady. It deals with what you are doing as a federally-operated 

school versus what the Department of the Interior is doing. And I 

know we are comparing apples and oranges. We are comparing 

areas that are in much more severe poverty than others. But are 

there things that you do from a DoDEA standpoint that you could 

offer to the Department of the Interior that might offer them some 

success, opportunity for success, I should say? 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are certainly working 

and coordinating with the BIE. It is a remarkably complex issue, 

but I think in the strategic planning area and the commitment to 

resourcing area and the excellence at the school level, we can certainly pass along our best practices, absolutely. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would appreciate that. 

Senator Johnson, do you have anything else? 

Senator JOHNSON. One more question for Mr. Roessel. I noticed 

you made reference to competitive grants. It sounds like to me 

Race to the Top, which is entirely unpopular in South Dakota. Because they tend to reward great grant writers and great grant writers don’t necessarily lead to education improvements where they 

are needed. 

Could you comment on that? Is there a correlation between grant 

writers and grants? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, I agree with the comment. I think though 

what we are trying to do here is something which is a little different in that the purpose of this grant would be to actually allow 

20 

tribes that ability to operate and exercise sovereignty over their 

school system. So it is not so much a grant-writing process, it is 

looking at, what are those ideas, what are those problems and challenges that have kept our school systems from succeeding. And 

some of them are structural. Some of them are that we have 127 

directions. 

So what we are trying to do is see how we can help the tribe be 

able to better control and operate their schools. That is a very different concept than Race to the Top. What we are saying to tribes 

is, how can we try to help you do a better job of operating your 

schools, not having the BIA come in and tell you, do this or do that. 

So I think it is not so much based on a grant writer, it is more 

based on the idea. I think tribes know how to exercise their sovereignty, they understand what it means for self-determination. 

So I think what we are trying to do is something very different 

from rely on just a grant writer. But we are trying to actually empower by saying, what do you want. How do you want to control 

your education. What do you want your students to look like at the 

end of the sixth grade, twelfth grade, college. And empowering 

them to give that money so that they can create that structure 

within their tribe. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Johnson. 

Before I let you go, I love you both. I think you both do great 

work. But let me give you some statistics. My staff contacted the 

Department of the Interior 30 days ago to let the Department know 

this hearing was going to take place. We sent an official invitation 

19 days ago. I took this issue up with Secretary Jewell when she 

was in Montana a few months ago. The Department once again 

was unable to provide this Committee with testimony in a timely 

manner. 

And I will tell you, Committee aside, it almost appears that we 

have a systemic problem here. The problem is that we don’t have 

lists on school construction, we don’t have lists on teachers that are 

not there, this is pretty basic stuff. We don’t get our Committee 

hearing stuff in on time so we can take it and scrutinize it. And 

I am telling you, I don’t like to beat up on administrative officials. 

You guys have a tough job. I have an incredible amount of respect 

for Secretary Jewell. 

But by the same token, sitting beside you is the Department of 

Defense, who was able to provide the testimony by the requested 

deadline, and quite frankly, I am growing weary of the fact that 

when we have hearings, the Department should know by now we 

have an Indian Affairs Committee meeting every week. It is a rare 

exception when we don’t. And we would like to get the testimony 

in one time. I think it is a courtesy to my staff, to the minority 

staff and to the members of this Committee that it gets in on time. 

I would just like you to take that message back. Because it is not 

going to get better with time if we continue to be tardy with this 

stuff. It is important. We need it. And I appreciate your work, I 

really do. You do good work and I appreciate both of your work. 

We need to be prouder of it. 

So thank you both. I appreciate your coming in very, very much. 

Thank you. 

21 

Now we will get the second panel up. I would like those folks to 

come forward. Our first witness is the Honorable Bryan Brewer, 

President of the Oglala Sioux Tribe in South Dakota. Our second 

witness is Mr. Timothy Benally, who is the Acting Superintendent 

of the Navajo Nation Department of Dine Education. And finally, 

Mr. Melvin Monette is the President-Elect of the National Indian 

Education Association from the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa 

Indians of North Dakota. 

I want to welcome you here today. I would ask Senator Johnson 

if he has any comments about Bryan Brewer, and I would also ask 

Senator Heitkamp if she has any comments about Melvin Monette. 

Senator Johnson? 

Senator JOHNSON. President Bryan Brewer is an excellent leader 

of the Oglala Sioux Tribe. He has been at it for several years, and 

welcome, President Brewer. 

Senator HEITKAMP. I would just say that the Turtle Mountain 

Band of Chippewa have a rich history of producing greater tribal 

leadership, especially in education. We know your people well. My 

niece and nephew were enrolled. And I certainly appreciate all the 

leadership you provide, especially on this critical issue. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, both Senator Johnson and Senator 

Heitkamp. I want to welcome all of you. You have five minutes for 

your testimony. Your full written testimony will be a part of the 

record. If you can keep it to five minutes, it would be good. 

With that, you may begin, President Brewer. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BRYAN BREWER, PRESIDENT, OGLALA 

SIOUX TRIBE; ACCOMPANIED BY DAYNA BRAVE EAGLE, 

DIRECTOR, TRIBAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT 

Mr. BREWER. Thank you. [Greeting in native tongue.] 

I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman, and I 

would like to thank the members of the Committee. It is an honor 

to be here. This is my first time ever, and I must say that I am 

a little nervous. 

I would like to say that I have been the President of our tribe 

for a year and a half. I am a formally educated teacher, principal, 

just like Mr. Tester. So I think we both know the challenges of 

those positions. 

I would like to also say that I am the Secretary of the Great 

Plains Tribal Chairmen’s Association, and I am speaking for many 

of those tribes. 

The first thing I want to say is, and I know we get tired of saying 

this, but we are here because of our treaties. And we ask the Federal Government to honor that, to meet our treaties, to meet that 

trust responsibility. This hearing, the title of this hearing, I believe 

is wrong. I believe it should be, how do we ensure that our tribal 

schools have the tools necessary to improve educational opportunities for our students. 

I worked for the BIE for many years. I have been frustrated a 

good part of those years with the funding that we received. It was 

not good. One of the things that we fail to note, the Pine Ridge 

Reservation, we are the second largest tribe in the United States, 

next to the Navajo. But yet Pine Ridge is the poorest tribe in the 

22 

United States. With that comes the poverty and the many problems 

and the ills that go with that. 

I see our children coming to school every day with problems. 

They come in abused, physically abused, mentally abused, sexually 

abused. They come to school hungry. 

As an educator, this is very difficult. Because of everything that 

we already do, and all the rules that we have to follow, the laws, 

we are not able to meet those students’ needs, our children’s needs. 

How can they learn when they come to school with these problems? 

Yet the BIE does not recognize this, and makes no attempt to 

meet the needs of these children that come to school with those 

problems. How can our children learn when they are hungry or 

they have been abused? 

Yet we don’t worry about that. We talk about other things. No 

Child Left Behind, we need another assessment. We have many 

problems. 

One of the things the BIE, they control, they administer. This 

has been one of the problems that we face. It is time that the Native people, we say it is time for us to decide what our children will 

learn and how they will learn it. Because it has been a failure so 

far. 

We said that 50 percent of our children do not graduate from 

school. That is even worse for our children that live off the reservation. As the president of the tribe, I am concerned about the children on the reservation, and I am also concerned about our children who live off the reservation. In Rapid City, there are 15,000 

Indians who live there, and the dropout rate is 85 percent. 

They are going to Rapid City, and not to point fingers, but what 

can we do, even with our problems, we have our children in Rapid 

City and urban areas that we are losing. They are receiving a lot 

of Impact Aid monies, but where does our money go? Does it go to 

help the children? No, it builds new track fields, new buildings, 

things like that. So there are a lot of things. 

Mr. Roessel is here, and I want to work with him, we need to 

work with him. But I want Mr. Roessel to be our superstar. Because we haven’t had a superstar in a while. We need someone to 

come before this, we need someone to fight for us and demand. I 

know it is difficult and I talked to Dr. Roessel about this before, 

and we have our own people. It makes it tough because we have 

to protect the program. But he has to protect the BIE. I think it 

is time that the BIE work with the tribes and become the fighter 

for us, give us our rights. We have trust responsibility of our people. 

So I am asking Mr. Roessel, be our superstar. Work hard for us 

and demand that our treaties be met. Demand that our children be 

given what they need. That is what is going to happen, and I have 

faith in him. Because he has been through this. He has experience 

and he has the background. 

One of the things I want to talk about is the immersion. I know 

Mr. Ryan Wilson has been before all of you. And in 25 years, the 

Lakota in Pine Ridge are going to lose their language. We need 

help. We need help with this. Yet the BIE has been teaching the 

Lakota language in our school since the early 1970s. And the BIE 

23 

has not produced one single speaker yet. Because they don’t listen 

to us. 

Turn that over to the tribes. Let us decide how our children will 

be taught the Lakota language. Right now they are getting schools, 

when they are babies, we are getting them into our day care centers, and we have Lakota speakers with them. So the babies, they 

are listening to the Lakota language and they are learning. And 

most of the parents are young, and we would like to see our young 

people learn with their children, learn our language, have programs for them. Then when they do get to school, there will be a 

curriculum built for them. When all of our curriculum on the reservation, the things that I would really like to talk about is getting 

tribal control of our schools. One of our six different schools plus 

the BIE, the BIE, my mind is going everywhere here, the schools, 

we have to control, we have to say what is there. They are doing 

different curriculums. We are not meeting the needs of our children. We have so many children that go from school to school, just 

because of the housing. 

I testified that last year, on housing, I said my tribe, we need 

4,000 homes. When I got back and I got accurate data, which it is 

hard to get, and I found out that I don’t need 4,000 homes, I need 

12,000 homes to meet our needs of our people. It is very difficult 

when you have three families living in a home. I feel for our young 

ladies that don’t have a room of their own. 

I know when my daughter was growing up, I was lucky, my 

daughter had her own room, she had her own space, which many 

of our children don’t. And then there is alcohol and drugs and this 

is where we get some of our problems with our young girls being 

abused. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brewer follows:] 

24 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BRYAN BREWER, PRESIDENT, OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE; 

ACCOMPANIED BY DAYNA BRAVE EAGLE, DIRECTOR, TRIBAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT


521a1.eps
25 


521a2.eps
26 


521a3.eps
27 


521a4.eps
28 


521a5.eps
29 


521a6.eps
30 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, President Brewer. You have a lot to 

say and I appreciate it. You are over time. 

Mr. BREWER. I thank you, and I wish there was a way this Committee could come to our reservation, or to the Midwest and listen 

to us, not only listen to the leaders, but also listen to some of our 

educators, talk to some of our students who have made it. We do 

have success stories. And talk to the ones that didn’t make it. 

The CHAIRMAN. We appreciate your bringing your reservation to 

us. Thank you very much, and we appreciate the invitation. Thank 

you for your testimony. 

Tim, you are up. 


521a7.eps
31 

STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY BENALLY, ACTING 

SUPERINTENDENT, NAVAJO NATION DEPARTMENT OF DINE 

EDUCATION 

Mr. BENALLY. Chairman Tester and members of the Committee, 

my name is Timothy Benally, Acting Superintendent of Schools at 

Navajo Nation Department of Education. Thank you for this opportunity to present testimony on ensuring the Bureau of Indian Education has the tools necessary to improve. 

Seventeen school districts operate on the Navajo Nation, with a 

total of 244 schools. Thirty-eight thousand one hundred nine Navajo students attend these schools. Over 60 percent of these students attend public schools. Of the rest, approximately 21 percent 

attend 31 BIA-operated schools. And approximately 18 percent attend 32 grant and one contract school. 

BIE operated, contract and grant schools comprise approximately 

20 percent of all schools on the Navajo Nation. These schools operate under different sets of curriculum and accountability standards 

from Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and BIE. The Navajo Nation best 

understands the needs of its children but currently lacks the ability 

to effectively lead the education for Navajo children. 

For over 140 years, BIE and State public schools have dominated 

education on Navajo Nation. Today, Navajo students on BIE 

schools are the lowest-performing in the Country. My written testimony demonstrates the steadily declining student achievement at 

BIE-funded schools on Navajo. With so many accountability systems on Navajo, we cannot get a full picture of how our children 

are performing. We have a shortage of highly-qualified teachers, 

lack professional development opportunities and teacher turnover 

is high. Teacher evaluation forms are inconsistent and in some 

cases, are the same as those used for non-instructional staff. 

We have seen some improvement with BIE. BIE has been more 

than proactive in inviting Navajo to the table. BIE realignment of 

the Navajo agency has helped people focus on academics and improve fiscal management. BIE seems committed to a focus on building capacity. Making reading and math coaches available to assist 

with content knowledge and instruction methods has the potential 

to improve student achievement. Within the last two years, BIE 

has been working closely with Navajo to bring teams into the 

school to work on professional development. It will likely take a 

few years before we see results from these efforts. 

Schools on Navajo Nation are in an education crisis. The BIA 

schools and public schools are only responsible for our children 

until they turn 18. When they fail to be productive citizens, we are 

left to pick up the pieces. Our efforts to improve education have 

seen results. Student outcomes for students attending tribally-controlled schools on Navajo who have consistently enrolled with Navajo Nation have improved at a greater rate than schools that have 

not. 

Tribally-controlled schools who have participated in using data 

processing, UDP training offered by Navajo Nation, have demonstrated greater student outcomes than schools that have not 

worked with the Navajo Nation. Tribally-controlled schools that 

have implemented instruction with cultural content infusion in 

32 

math and science have greater academic gains than schools that 

have not implemented cultural infusion content. 

We have plans to improve education on Navajo Nation, but we 

require your help and support. First, Navajo Nation seeks to acquire State education agency status for the Department of Dine 

Education. Navajo Nation must have first access to the minds of 

its children. The Navajo Nation is committed to the exercise of sovereignty over the education of Navajos. It has established Dine 

education content standards curricula and assessment tools in the 

Navajo language, culture, history, government and character development. ESEA data will provide uniformity in the currently fragmented education system at the tribally-controlled schools on Navajo. 

Second, Navajo Nation has submitted an alternative accountability workbook, as authorized under No Child Left Behind. The 

accountability workbook includes the Dine content standards. This 

will enable us to exercise a greater degree of authority over education at our tribally-controlled schools. 

Third, we must be able to meaningfully evaluate student performance. The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, FERPA, 

must be amended to allow tribes to access their student data. 

Fourth, language and cultural programs are critical for the success 

of Navajo students. Our research shows that Navajo students 

grounded in understanding of their language and culture perform 

better academically. Congress must provide greater support for 

these important programs. 

Fifth, support higher education funding for scholarship, so that 

we can build capacity on the Navajo Nation. We need an educated 

workforce with professional skills necessary to be highly qualified 

teachers. Navajo Nation provides scholarships to eligible students, 

but less than 50 percent of eligible students actually receive an 

award. Tribal priority allocation scholarship funding should be 

fully funded. 

Lastly, as Congress works on updating the ESEA tribal rights to 

exercise sovereignty, education must be respected and encouraged. 

Thank you for your time today. I look forward to answering your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Benally follows:] 

33 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY BENALLY, ACTING SUPERINTENDENT, NAVAJO

NATION DEPARTMENT OF DINE ́ EDUCATION


521b1.eps
34 


521b2.eps
35 


521b3.eps
36 


521b4.eps
37 


521b5.eps
38 


521b6.eps
39 


521b7.eps
40 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, we appreciate your testimony, Mr. 

Benally. Thank you very much. 


521b8.eps 521b9.eps
41 

We will turn it over to you, Mr. Monette. 

STATEMENT OF MELVIN MONETTE, PRESIDENT–ELECT, 

NATIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 

Mr. MONETTE. Chairman Tester, Senator Johnson, thank you for 

convening the hearing on tools needed to improve the Bureau of Indian Education. 

I am Melvin Monette, and I, like Dr. Roessel, do call the BIE 

tribal grant schools and tribal colleges and universities my education system. And certainly, looking at the faces behind you and 

the faces behind me, the BIE has a number of successes that we 

can count as ours. 

I am President-Elect of the National Indian Education association, and a citizen of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. NIA was founded in 1969, and has a mission to advance comprehensive educational opportunities for all American Indians, 

Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians throughout the United 

States. 

I also want to thank you for hearing the collective call of tribes 

and Native communities regarding the need to address the current 

state of Native education. As the Nation celebrates the 60th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision, we must highlight that our communities are still fighting for 

equal educational opportunities in Native-serving schools. The renewed commitment of this Committee to improve the education 

system serving Native students is critical, as we look to end current disparities and create equitable educational opportunities for 

our students. 

As all of us realize, Native education is in a state of emergency. 

Unfortunately, the Federal Government’s own studies encompassing Native test scores, treaty-based appropriation decreases, 

and Government Accountability Office reports, among others, illustrate the continued inability of the Federal Government via the 

BIE to uphold the trust responsibility. 

The BIE has been failing its mission for years and should no 

longer be in the business of providing direct education services to 

tribal communities. Instead, the BIE should shift its capacity to 

providing educational resources that support tribes who wish to administer education services to their students. To support this reform, change is critically needed within the Department of the Interior to fix the BIE’s broken system and ensure tribal self-determination is strengthened as well as address the persisting issues 

in the BIE. 

Tribes understand the children’s needs best and are suited to 

provide the most effective and efficient services in their communities. However, IE reform that supports tribes must begin locally 

and at the direction of our tribal leaders and Native education 

stakeholders. This effort cannot be a top-down approach, but a 

measure created through grassroots support at the tribal level. The 

current proposal for BIE reform, while well-intentioned, was not a 

direct result of tribal consultation, but a Department-led initiative 

that has caused concerns to tribes. We appreciate the efforts and 

ideas, but without tribal support at the local level, we cannot expect BIE reform to succeed. 

42 

The following recommendations are based on membership resolutions and through our work with tribal leaders in Native communities. However, it is important to note that NIA is still awaiting 

input from our stakeholders who attended the recent consultation 

sessions on BIE reform. This testimony is to serve as input for improving the BIE and not formal comments on the Department’s reform proposal. 

Key among our recommendations is that the BIE should be 

transformed into an entity that provides technical assistance to 

build tribal capacity where lacking for the administration of education services. Assimilation and termination robbed tribes of their 

ability to administer education. As the era of self-determination 

progresses, now is the time for the BIE to alter its focus on education delivery into an entity that disseminates technical expertise 

similar to a regional education laboratory that would work in partnership with tribes, tribal colleges and universities, school districts 

and State departments of education to utilize data and research 

and distribute best practices for improving their students’ academic 

outcomes. 

But as the BIE alters its capacity, this reform should not increase the administrative burden or drive funds away from local 

assistance. Reforms should not be an internal Bureau-wide capacity-building effort set on hiring an influx of staff in Washington. 

Rather, we need a BIE restructuring that supports collaborators 

who will sit with tribal leaders to find local tribal solutions. 

As the ESEA, the BIE must have the resources necessary to increase its ability to assist tribal schools, whether they are implementing full-day language immersion or developing high-speed 

internet connectivity. To support such efforts, there must be internal support within DOI. We propose this Committee work to create 

a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Education position within 

the DOI. Tribes have spoken clearly that Indian education belongs 

within the Department of the Interior to ensure the Federal trust 

responsibility is upheld. 

While scaling up staff in Washington is unnecessary, we need an 

appointed leader to pursue education reform at the top levels of the 

administration. Our students need a Federal leader who understands Native education and has the ability to address colleagues 

and the President on the Federal Government’s trust responsibility. 

Further, we request that the DOI form a tribal education budget 

council, so education leaders and Federal officials have the opportunity to formally address difficult issues facing Native education 

and the BIE. Too often, education falls aside as tribal leaders are 

forced to prioritize more pressing issues like fire prevention or community violence. Providing a formal negotiating body to address 

Native education and BIE issues will ensure DOI recognizes persisting problems, such as the lack of BIE budget authority. I realize 

BIE reform and the state of Native education is a difficult issue, 

but please know that we are here to work with you, to provide 

ideas for addressing these problems. Together, we can make sure 

that the BIE has tools necessary to strengthen tribal self-determination and support programs that create student success, like 

language immersion. 

43 

1 National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, United States Department of Education. National Indian Education Study 2011. (NCES 2012–466). http:// 

nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nies/ 

NIA appreciates the continued leadership of this Committee. For 

a full list of BIE recommendations, please see our written testimony. Thank you again, and I look forward to addressing your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Monette follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MELVIN MONETTE, PRESIDENT-ELECT, NATIONAL INDIAN

EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and members of the Committee, 

thank you for inviting the National Indian Education Association (NIEA) to testify. 

I am Melvin Monette, President-elect of NIEA and a citizen of the Turtle Mountain 

Band of Chippewa Indians. On behalf of NIEA, I am grateful for this opportunity 

to provide testimony for the record on ‘‘Ensuring the Bureau of Indian Education 

(BIE) has the Tools Necessary to Improve,’’ as part of the Committee’s Indian Education series. I would also like to thank the Committee for hearing the collective 

call of tribes and Native communities regarding the need to address the current 

state of Native education. The renewed commitment of this Committee to focus on 

improving all education systems serving Native students is critical as we work together to ensure equitable educational opportunities. 

NIEA, founded in 1969, is the most inclusive Native organization in the countryrepresenting Native students, educators, families, communities, and tribes. NIEA’s 

mission is to advance comprehensive educational opportunities for all American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians throughout the United States. From 

communities in Hawaii, to tribal reservations across the continental U.S., to villages 

in Alaska and urban communities in major cities, NIEA has the most reach of any 

Native education organization in the country. 

Native Education Crisis Due to Federal Mismanagement 

As all of us realize, Native education is in a state of emergency partly due to the 

inability of the Federal Government to uphold its trust responsibility. Native students lag behind their peers on every educational indicator, from academic achievement to high school and college graduation rates. Just over 50 percent of Native students are graduating high school, compared to nearly 80 percent for the majority 

population. For students attending BIE schools, rates are even lower. According to 

the latest results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 

BIE schools are among the worst performing in the nation. The Federal Government’s continued inadequacy in directly educating our students hinders our children 

from developing a strong education foundation that prepares them for future success. 

Native Student Demographics Snapshot 1

• 378,000, or 93 percent of Native students, attend U.S. public schools, with the 

remainder attending federally-funded BIE schools. 

• As of the 2011–2012 school year, there are 183 Bureau-funded elementary and 

secondary schools, located in 23 states, serving approximately 41,051 Indian 

students. 

• Of all Native students, 33 percent live in poverty, compared to 12 percent of 

Whites (2011–2012 school year). 

• 29 percent of these students attend high-poverty city public schools, compared 

to 6 percent of Whites (2009–10 school year). 

• Only 52 percent of Native students live in two-parent households, compared to 

75 percent of Whites (2011). 

• After the most recent census, only 65,356 Natives ages 25 years and older had 

a graduate or professional degree. 

The Trust Responsibility to Native Education 

NIEA’s work for more than forty years has centered on reversing these negative 

trends. We are making sure our communities have the future leaders needed to help 

tribes thrive as well as preserve and strengthen local cultural and linguistic traditions. This begins by providing our future generations’ equal educational opportunities that prepare them for academic success no matter where they attend school— 

44 

tribal grant and contract, charter, or public. As tribes work to increase their footprint in education, there must be support for that increased participation. The Federal Government must uphold its trust responsibility. Established through treaties, 

federal law, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions, this relationship includes a fiduciary 

obligation to provide parity in access and equal resources to all American Indian 

and Alaska Native students, regardless of where they attend school. 

The Federal Government’s trust corpus in the field of Indian Education is a 

shared trust between the Administration and Congress with federally-recognized Indian tribes. To the extent that measurable trust standards in Indian education can 

be evaluated, NIEA suggests this Committee refer to the government’s own studies 

encompassing Native test scores, treaty-based appropriation decreases, and Government Accountability Office (GAO) Reports, among others, which illustrate the continued inability of the Federal Government via the BIE to uphold the trust responsibility. 

Recommendations to Improve the Bureau of Indian Education 

The BIE’s mission, as stated in Title 25 CFR Part 32.3, is to provide quality education opportunities from early childhood through life in accordance with a tribe’s 

needs for cultural and economic well-being, in keeping with the wide diversity of Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages as distinct cultural and governmental entities. The BIE is to manifest consideration of the whole person by taking into account 

the spiritual, mental, physical, and cultural aspects of the individual within his or 

her family and tribal or village context. 

Unfortunately, the BIE is failing its mission by inadequately educating our children. Reform, without abrogating the federal trust responsibility and treaty obligations, is needed within the Department of the Interior (DOI). Agency reform should 

begin locally in BIE schools and at the direction of our tribal leaders and Native 

education stakeholders. To ensure the support of our communities, the Federal Government must work with tribal leaders and experts in order to ensure change addresses the concerns and prerogatives tribes have called for over the last several 

decades. Tribally controlled contract and grant schools are the future of Indian education and as such, those institutions of self-determination must be supported based 

on local needs, not at the direction of the Department or the Administration. 

The following recommendations are based on resolutions passed by our membership as well as through local work with tribal leaders and Native communities. 

However, it is important to note that NIEA is still awaiting additional input from 

our stakeholders who attended recent consultation sessions on BIE reform. This testimony should not be considered our comments on the Indian Education Study 

Group’s report on the BIE. This testimony is to serve as general recommendations 

for improving the federal education system serving Native students to make sure 

the system has the tools necessary for strengthening and supporting tribal self-determination. 

I. Strengthen Tribal Self-Determination 

The Federal Government implemented assimilation and termination policies in 

the 19th and 20th Centuries by breaking down traditional family patterns in Native 

communities and forbidding the use of cultural traditions. Education systems, such 

as boarding schools, supported these efforts and restricted traditional family structures. The United States then separated Native children from their parents and 

tribal families in order to destroy cultural kinship. Through these systems, the U.S. 

robbed tribes of their ability to educate their children. 

As tribes fought and achieved the ability to once again exercise their inherent 

rights as sovereign governments in the latter 20th Century, tribes began contracting 

with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to administer education functions under the 

Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (P.L. 93–638). 

However, as a result of history and legal statutes, the Federal Government had positioned itself as the direct education provider for many Native communities. 

Through this context, the Federal Government created an inability for BIE reform 

to succeed internally because the system functioned and continues to operate under 

a model rooted in outdated practices that often run counter to tribal self-determination. 

Precedence of Self-Determination 

Even as tribes reasserted their ability to perform some education functions under 

statutes, such as the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988, other legal barriers 

such as those under Public Law 107–110, the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act (ESEA), continue to drive the Bureau’s means for working with tribes, families, 

and students. As a result, BIE schools working with local communities have developed an internal bureaucratic mentality that tribes often work to support local BuVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:09 Jan 09, 2015 Jkt 092271 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\92271.TXT JACK
45 

reau schools rather than BIE schools serving tribes and supporting self-determination. 

Congress should create federal policy and ESEA reform that ensures the BIE collaborates with and supports tribes in their self-determination, rather than dictating 

local educational policy on tribal communities. To facilitate the critical reform that 

is needed, Congress should provide BIE the tools and resources necessary for developing its capacity to support tribes as they administer education functions and ensure that self-determination statutes take precedence over ESEA and other restrictive mandates. 

II. Support and Strengthen Native Language and Culture 

Native language revitalization and preservation is a critical priority to tribes and 

Native communities because language preservation goes to the heart of Native identity. In many ways, language is culture. Learning and understanding traditional 

languages helps Native students thrive and is a critical piece to ensuring the BIE 

is serving Native students effectively. Immersion programs not only increase academic achievement, but guarantee that a student’s language will be carried forward 

for generations. Our communities’ unique cultural and linguistic traditions are crucial for the success of our students and are critical cornerstones for providing relevant and high quality instruction as part of an education that ensures Native students attain the same level of academic achievement as the majority of students. 

NIEA requests the Committee work with tribes and the BIE to ensure that reform 

strengthens the ability of the Federal Government to support tribes in the delivery 

of culturally-relevant curricula. 

Expansion of Language Immersion and Congressional Intent 

NIEA supports expanding immersion opportunities in BIE supported schools. P.L. 

100–297, Tribally Controlled Grant Schools Act, and P.L. 93–638, Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act, as well as P.L. 109–394, Esther Martinez 

Native American Languages Preservation Act of 2006, all promote a policy of both 

self-determination and investment in Native languages—specifically language immersion schools. Further, the White House Initiative on American Indian and Alaska Native Education promises to support expanding opportunities and improving 

outcomes for Native students by promoting education in Native languages and histories. 

NIEA acknowledges that exemplary immersion models, such as those at Niigaane 

Ojibwemovin Immersion Program and School serving the Leech Lake Band of 

Ojibwe and Rough Rock Community School serving the Navajo Nation, have won 

the prestigious NIEA cultural freedom award for their efforts in full-day language 

immersion. However, federal agency interpretation and administrative procedures 

often restrict tribes from running schools, such as Niigaane and Rough Rock, by creating barriers to tribal self-determination. To begin addressing this issue, NIEA requests that congressional intent of legal statutes, rather than agency interpretation, 

be utilized so that tribes can deliver effective education programs. 

III. BIE Internal Reform 

BIE as a Technical Service Provider 

As the Administration progresses its reform agenda for the BIE, Congress should 

work with tribes and the Administration to ensure the BIE becomes a technical assistance provider that has the ability to strengthen tribal self-determination in education. The BIE should become an entity that assists tribes who wish to participate 

in the delivery of their children’s education by working with tribes as they strengthen their education agencies. Since the late 20th Century, Congress has worked to 

strengthen tribal capacity to directly serve their citizens in other services. In this 

spirit, tribes should have the same ability as state and local education agencies to 

administer education. To assist those efforts, the BIE should become a central nexus 

that provides technical assistance to its local BIE contract and grant schools, charter, and even public schools where requested. 

The BIE should become an entity similar to a Regional Educational Laboratory 

(REL) that would, rather than providing direct education to Native students, work 

in partnership with tribes, tribal colleges and universities, school districts, and state 

departments of education, to be a technical and best practices provider that collects 

and utilizes data and research to help tribally-administered schools improve the 

academic outcomes of Native students. 

BIE Capacity Transition 

In order to successfully reform the BIE into a technical provider and capacity 

builder, DOI and the BIE staff need a fundamental shift in thinking in Washington 

46 

and regionally. Some staff at the BIE have served their communities for decades, 

which builds experience and expertise. However, that expertise is based on a flawed 

and outdated model that has yet to decrease the achievement gap among our students and the majority population. NIEA suggests that DOI ensure educators and 

administrators understand the needs of their local Native communities and prepare 

them to engage and work with tribes and their education agencies. 

BIE reform should not be an internal, Bureau-wide capacity building effort set on 

hiring an influx of new thought leaders in Washington. Rather, we need a change 

in capacity and a restructuring that supports community collaborators who will sit 

with a principal chief in Oklahoma or a pueblo governor in New Mexico to find solutions to local problems. Simply, we need the right people in the right positions supporting tribal capacity to administer education services. Tribal leaders understand 

their children best and tribal communities can better address a child’s unique educational and cultural needs. Rather than directly educating Native students, the 

BIE should be situated to provide support services to tribal leaders and education 

agencies, similar to the Indian Health Service’s (IHS) relationship with tribes as 

they administer health services. 

IV. BIE Funding 

As tribes work with Congress and the Administration to reform education institutions and increase tribal responsibility in administering education, federal leaders 

should also increase treaty-based appropriation levels for tribal governments and 

Native education institutions in order to repair the damage caused by shrinking 

budgets and sequestration. Historical funding trends illustrate that the Federal 

Government is abandoning its trust responsibility by decreasing federal funds to 

Native-serving programs by more than half in the last 30 years. These shortfalls 

persistently affect the ability of the BIE to provide transportation services, construct 

new buildings, and effectively educate Native students. These issues would be unacceptable in any other school system and must be addressed now if we are to systemically improve the BIE’s ability to serve our communities and strengthen self-determination. 

BIE Budget Authority 

For too long, bureaucratic issues between the BIA and the BIE have decreased 

the ability of the BIE to meet the educational needs of our youth. Congress and federal agencies should fund Native education programs that strengthen tribal self-determination, such as tribal education agencies, and ensure adequate resources are 

appropriated to the BIE to address tribal concerns and needed systemic changes. To 

start, the Department of the Interior should transfer budget authority from the BIA 

to the BIE to increase its efficiency and effectiveness by decreasing the bureaucracy 

inhibiting funds from positively impacting Native students and tribal self-determination. 

As a result of BIA authority over the BIE budget, the BIE is often low in priority 

when compared to other programs. Recently, internal BIA FY 2014 Operating Plan 

reallocations reduced BIE Johnson O’Malley Assistance Grants by $170,000 as well 

as cut BIE higher education scholarships. While the reduced lines were under tribal 

priority allocations, such reductions were not authorized by tribal leaders but were 

a result of internal redistributions in the agency. Although the reductions are small 

as compared to the overall increase in the BIA budgets after Congress postponed 

sequestration, rescissions without appropriate consultation are unacceptable. Providing the BIE the ability to develop its own budget would ensure the BIA cannot 

reallocate funds from the BIE as it would be a separate Bureau with its own budget 

authority. 

BIE Grant Pilot 

As the BIE works to support tribes and their education agencies, BIE reform 

would be strengthened by providing funds for a competitive grant pilot that 

incentivizes capacity building in tribally-controlled grant and contract schools. This 

grant program would be modeled on best practices from existing competitive grants 

in use within the Department of Education. For $3 million, the BIE would administer a pilot to spur urgent and abrupt systemic reform that would substantially improve student success, close achievement gaps, improve high school graduation 

rates, and prepare students for success in college and careers. 

The three-year competitive incentive-based grant, similar to existing Race to the 

Top initiatives for which BIE continues to be excluded, would provide resources to 

tribes for accelerating local reforms and aligning education services to tribal education priorities that include language and culture. Further, performance metrics for 

the grant would include student attendance rates, graduation rates, college enrollment rates, and measures on educator accountability. In order to catalyze reform 

47 

efforts and create a set of high-performing, tribally-controlled grant schools, the BIE 

would also provide on-going technical assistance to build the capacity of those 

schools that applied for, but did not receive, a grant. 

Tribal Grant Support Costs 

NIEA was happy to see Indian Health Service and BIA contract support costs 

fully funded under self-determination and self-governance contracts and compacts 

this year. However, Public Law 100–297 grant or Public Law 93–638 self-determination contracted BIE schools were exempt from full funding, which will result in 

budget shortfalls. Full funding for tribal grant support costs in FY 2015 and subsequent years is just as important as full funding for contract support costs as these 

dollars help tribes expand self-determination and tribal authority over education 

programs by providing funds for administrative costs, such as accounting, payroll, 

and other legal requirements. The BIA currently funds only 65 percent of support 

costs in the 126 tribally managed schools and residential facilities under the BIE 

purview. This forces the schools to divert critical classroom education funding in 

order to cover unpaid operational costs, which make it unrealistic to improve educational outcomes and bridge the achievement gap among Native and non-Native 

students. 

Connect BIE Schools to Educate 

The President’s goal in the ConnectED Initiative is to connect 99 percent of America’s students to the Internet through high-speed broadband by 2018. Unfortunately, 

tribal areas are already far behind their counterparts due to geographical isolation, 

ineligibility, and inadequate capacity to apply for funds. The BIE recently reported 

130 to 140 BIE schools applied for and received E-rate funds over the last nine 

years-out of a total 183 BIE entities. However, of the E-rate funds committed for 

these BIE schools over the past nine years, only 60 percent was actually spent. Furthermore, many eligible BIE schools did not apply because they did not meet the 

80 percent threshold to receive a discount. These statistics illustrate persistent gaps 

in E-rate adoption among BIE schools that are similarly prevalent in other Nativeserving institutions due to their geographical isolation and inability to meet Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) guidelines. If BIE schools are, on 

average, spending just 60 percent of E-rate awarded funds then there should be further collaboration among Congress, the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC), and BIE to ascertain these reasons and work to ensure internal broadband 

capacity is present. 

We must work together to make sure tribes and Native-serving schools benefit 

under this initiative. Limited data already suggests overall connectivity funding for 

schools and libraries on tribal lands is disproportionately low and inadequate for 

connectivity. To prevent tribal nations and their citizens from becoming the one percent that remains disconnected, this Committee should work with the FCC, the BIE, 

and tribes to decrease barriers that hinder tribal participation in the E-rate program and 21st Century education. 

V. Elevate Native Education 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Education 

Tribes have spoken loudly that Indian education belongs within the Department 

of the Interior in order to ensure the federal trust responsibility is upheld. Unfortunately, DOI continues to fail at including education experts and educators in key 

policy and budget decisions. As we work to find ways to increase the effectiveness 

of the BIE and improve the state of Native education, we must have people leading 

in Washington who understand the needs of our students and have the authority 

to drive successful reform. 

Our students need a federal leader to address colleagues and the President on the 

Federal Government’s trust responsibility to Native education. We request this 

Committee pursue a means to create a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Education in order to elevate the needs of our students. While the recent attention on 

the BIE is welcome and necessary, this focus often ebbs and flows. There should 

be an advocate in DOI that works with tribes to maintain this focus and ensure our 

Native students become the highest-achieving students in the country and that the 

BIE is supporting tribes who are running state of the art schools. 

DOI Tribal Education Budget Council 

We also request that DOI create a Tribal Education Budget Council that functions 

similar to the Tribal Interior Budget Council and is presided by tribal leaders and 

the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Education. This would help guarantee that 

education issues do not fall in priority. Tribal leaders are often forced to choose beVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:09 Jan 09, 2015 Jkt 092271 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\92271.TXT JACK
48 

tween issues and focus on providing for present-day emergency measures, such as 

fire prevention or medical funds, as compared to long-term preventative solutions 

to education. Providing equity to education and a venue to address our students’ 

needs is crucial to elevating Native education and ensuring that persistent issues 

are addressed. 

Conclusion 

NIEA appreciates the continued support of this Committee and we look forward 

to working closely with its members under your leadership. We share your commitment to Native education. 

Strengthening our partnership will ensure all Native-serving schools are as effective as possible and that tribes have more access to administer education services. 

We must make sure BIE has the tools necessary to improve and assist tribes and 

Native communities in providing services to our citizens, but only if that is supported by the local community. This effort cannot be a top-down approach, but a 

measure created through grassroots support at the tribal level. The current proposal 

for BIE reform, while well intentioned, was not a direct result of tribal consultation. 

We appreciate the efforts and ideas, but without tribal support, we cannot expect 

BIE reform to succeed. 

To achieve success, there must be collaboration among all entities that touch a 

Native child’s life and at all levels—tribal, federal, state, and local. We appreciate 

this 2014 education series because it is difficult to speak of increasing the success 

of Native students when addressing only one facet of the education system. Only 

by working with all stakeholders in all education systems will we increase our students’ preparedness for success. Once again, thank you for this opportunity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Monette, thank you very much. 

Let me just say this. Your last point about working together we 

saw is a fact. That is not us with you or you with us, it is the Department and you and us and tribal leaders and everybody getting 

together that can make a big difference. I do appreciate Dr. Roessel 

staying and listening to the testimony. I very much appreciate 

that. 

Senator Johnson, did you have some questions? 

Senator JOHNSON. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

President Brewer, thank you for your excellent testimony before 

us today. Can you expand on how students are impacted by budget 

shortfalls for facility maintenance and construction funding? 

Mr. BREWER. Thank you for that question, Senator Johnson. 

Dayna Brave Eagle is the Indian Education Director from Pine 

Ridge. If it would be possible, could I bring her up and have her 

answer? 

The CHAIRMAN. Absolutely. 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. Good afternoon. I would like to respond to 

that question, Senator Johnson. Because of the shortfalls in facility 

and operations, schools are having to use instructional dollars to 

cover these costs. We are not going to allow our children to go hungry or without adequate transportation or without heating the 

school buildings. So a potion of the instructional funding is used to 

cover these shortfalls, thus causing shortfalls in academic resources, updated curriculum and highly-qualified teachers. 

Unsafe conditions of current school buildings is creating an nonconducive learning environment for our students. These are the 

shortfalls we are experiencing because of facilities. 

Senator JOHNSON. Have you been forced to use ISEP money in 

exchange for propane gas and transportation issues? 

Mr. BREWER. When I was teaching, we couldn’t do that. But now 

they are doing it. And what happens is the school has to make a 

49 

decision to buy fuel or to lay off a teacher. And that is what is happening. Instructional money is being used to cover these costs. 

Senator JOHNSON. President Brewer, how is the BIE creating 

barriers for tribes when it comes to self-determination and what 

are some of the programs that your schools would like to implement but cannot? Either one of you. 

Mr. BREWER. I will turn this over to Dayna. But the biggest 

thing is funding. That is the biggest issue right there, is we are not 

able to do any of those programs or anything, or meet the needs. 

Senator JOHNSON. Besides language instruction, what other programs can you do, Dayna? 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. One of the biggest programs that the BIE I 

know as a part of the BIA is the Maximal program, which does the 

facilities. It used to be called the FEMA system and then they 

switched over to Maximal. Well, Maximal is not fully functioning 

right now, so a lot of our schools are unable to log into the Maximal 

and log in all their backlog on facilities. That is a program that has 

been imposed on school systems but is not fully functional. 

The other thing is partnership. The tribal education agencies 

have formed partnerships with the BIE and have MOAs and agreements with the BIE that are not upheld also. These MOAs are in 

school improvement grants, such as professional development, curriculum building, teamwork and partnership with the Bureau, 

which have not been fully implemented or successful at the partnership. 

Senator JOHNSON. President Brewer or Dayna, what are some of 

the key priorities that you would like to see included in the BIE 

reform plan? Has the BIE consulted with you? 

Mr. BREWER. One of the things I have to say, Senator, is that we 

are against the reform plan. We believe that the tribes should be 

empowered to make these decisions. We really feel that when you 

look at it, the end result is giving more power to the BIE director. 

I believe that power should be with the tribes, let us make those 

decisions, empower us. 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. I have two solutions to some of the things 

that came up. One solution on facilities, we do understand that facilities comes through the BIA. We are asking that it comes 

through the BIE. We are asking that it be forward funding, like all 

of our other instructional dollars that adhere to P.L. 100–297 and 

that our schools, our educational entities, receive forward funding 

in facilities. 

Another suggestion on the FEHB is that the Bureau, the BIE ask 

their solicitor to reconsider her opinion, her legal opinion that our 

297 schools are not 638 contracts, that that opinion be reconsidered 

with all the documents that have come forward. 

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you. My time is expired, but I suggest 

that you, the Chairman and the Ranking Member pay close attention to what these individuals have to say. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Johnson, and we will. 

Mr. Benally, I want to talk about the BIA proposed redesign with 

you. Could you briefly tell me your opinion of the proposal, and 

what its impacts might be on the Navajo Nation? 

Mr. BENALLY. We have been visiting on this last couple of weeks 

with the consultation, I think it was within the last year that it 

50 

was initiated. One of the things that was mentioned here earlier 

about incentive grants, we have received nothing in writing. It has 

been verbally shared with us. So to that extent and the criteria 

that it has, we are not sure about that. 

The other thing is that as far as 297–638, the contract grant 

school authority that rests with those laws, doesn’t really give more 

authority to the tribe. Do we have fiscal and academic authority 

that increases those authorities in those areas, we don’t know that. 

So until we see what the criteria are in there, we won’t know what 

it holds for us. 

The CHAIRMAN. Your testimony mentioned issues related to 

teacher retention at BIE-funded schools. Your assessment of why 

the teacher turnover rate is so high? 

Mr. BENALLY. Teacher turnover rate, I have been a teacher, I 

have been a principal, I have been a superintendent. We recruit all 

the way to Indiana, Florida and all the way up into the northeast. 

We bring teachers from there onto Navajo. But for whatever reason, we are pretty isolated. When you say rural, Webster’s definition of rural school, I don’t think it really means what it means. 

When you take it to the third exponent, that is where we are in 

some of these schools. So when it is pretty quiet and when the 

wind is talking, maybe it is a little bit scary to some of these teachers. They stay there one year or two years, and they leave. 

So one of the solutions that I mentioned is that our scholarship, 

we have 16,000 applicants, but only half of those are granted. So 

people from the same area, people from there educate them, because they are from there, they have no place else to go. So if we 

have that, we are hoping that that is going to be fulfilled. 

And another thing too is that because of these requirements, 

some of these laws, some of these laws, No Child Left Behind, and 

highly-qualified, some of those laws, because we have to do that, 

we have to take a teacher out of a classroom or take a sub that 

is doing good out of a classroom to put somebody else new in there 

because of some of these laws. So the law is good, it has a good 

intention, but at the same time, we hurt our children. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let’s talk a little bit about No Child Left Behind. 

Your testimony talks about clarifying what is meant by alternative 

definitions of AYP in the Reauthorization Act, the Elementary-Secondary Education Act. What sort of reforms are you looking at? 

Mr. BENALLY. One specific point that I want to bring out, and 

one of my colleagues has shared that, dropout rate. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Mr. BENALLY. Our children are in an identity crisis. Over here 

is grandpa, and over here is mainstream. And our children are in 

there somewhere. As far as their purpose, of knowing where they 

want to belong, there is a confusion. So our intent from here is that 

within that alternative formula, as far as calculation, as far as content, we want to put character education in there. We want to 

mandate it such that the school has to do it. Because they say that, 

well, it’s at home, but our children leave, and they are at school 

at 8 o’clock, and they come back at 6 o’clock, 4 o’clock in the 

evening. So in those, weighing those options, it seems that at 

school, that is where it needs to happen. That is where they have 

51 

for the purpose of doing that, so the identity crisis is not there, 

that you know your purpose when you go to the school, it is there. 

So that is one of the unique things of the alternative formula 

that is going to be embedded in there, that we requesting an 

amendment to that law for Indian Country. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Benally. 

Mr. Monette, does NIEA have a position on the reform plan, the 

proposal? 

Mr. MONETTE. Yes. Yes, we do. We believe that there does need 

to be a reform at all levels within the DOI, all the way down to 

the BIA ands BIE. Since the late 20th century, Congress has 

worked to strengthen tribal capacity to directly service citizens and 

other services. So in this sphere, tribes should have the same ability to manage their own education systems. 

As tribes work to increase self-determination, we need a BIE 

that can support tribes in their efforts and provide technical assistance rather than providing direct educational services. 

The CHAIRMAN. So let me ask you this. Local control is good, especially when it comes to education. 

Mr. MONETTE. Yes, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Are you concerned about capacity of the tribes, 

to be able to take care of the education at the local level? And I 

am talking overall. Are you concerned about that issue, or that is 

not a problem? 

Mr. MONETTE. We are concerned about that issue, and we do 

plan to work in consultation with the BIE on that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Perfect. I think it is very, very important. 

Let me talk a little about your testimony. You talked about the 

problem with the BIE being low on the priority list of the BIA 

budget, which is a double negative, it takes it down quite a ways. 

You recommend that the Department of the Interior transfer the 

BIE budget authority to the BIE itself. What response, first of all, 

have you floated this out to the department and if you have, what 

has been the response? 

Mr. MONETTE. I can’t answer that question as President-Elect. 

As a board member, our executive director can certainly get that 

question back to you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would love that if you could, just try to get an 

idea. 

Let me go back to you, Mr. President Brewer. In your testimony, 

you had concerns about the hiring functions at BIE. As I understand it, currently BIA staff, BIA staff with no background in education conduct the hiring process for BIE. I am going to tell you, 

this puts the BIA staff at a tremendous disadvantage. If you don’t 

have a background in education, I think that is a problem. I think 

this is a minimum change that we could all agree on. 

What is your perspective on that? 

Mr. BREWER. The BIE, we have one school that is BIE-operated 

at Pine Ridge. Their turnover is very low because they have good 

salaries there, Federal employees. So they have very low turnover. 

The CHAIRMAN. That is good news. 

Mr. BREWER. Yes, it is. But our grant schools, they have a problem there. When you asked Dr. Roessel the number of vacancies, 

right now we have almost a third of our total teachers who are vaVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:09 Jan 09, 2015 Jkt 092271 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\92271.TXT JACK
52 

cancies right now. I believe that is over 40, close to 40 vacancies 

that we have right now and that we have to fill before this new 

school year starts. That is a problem there. 

The CHAIRMAN. I just want to say thank you all very much for 

your testimony. I very much appreciate it. Dayna, thank you for 

joining the panel. 

We have issues here. One last thing I will say, as far as language 

immersion goes, I happen to have a little bill that might be able 

to help you guys out, and we are going to push that. So thank you 

for bringing that up. 

Stay involved, this is a critically important issue if we are going 

to break the cycle of poverty in Indian Country and bring it up to 

where it can be. So thank you all very, very much. 

Again, I just want to thank the witnesses for their testimony, 

and Dr. Roessel, thank you very much for sticking around. I very 

much appreciate that. I think it speaks to your commitment to 

being a superstar. So we thank you for that. 

The hearing is going to remain open for two weeks for any additional comments. With that, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:28 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(53) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ANGELA BARNEY NEZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DINE ́ BI

OLTA SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION, INC. 


521c1.eps
54 


521c2.eps
55 


521c3.eps
56 


521c4.eps
57 


521c5.eps
58 


521c6.eps
59 


521c7.eps
60 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JON WHIRLWIND HORSE, PRESIDENT, DAKOTA AREA

CONSORTIUM OF TREATY SCHOOLS

Introduction 

Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and members of the Committee on Indian Affairs, my name is Jon Whirlwind Horse, and I am an enrolled member of 

the Oglala Sioux tribe and President of the Dakota Area Consortium of Treaty 

Schools (DACTS). 

There are fifteen tribes from Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota represented by our member schools: Oglala Sioux, Omaha Nation, Santee Sioux, Winnebago, Spirit Lake Sioux, Turtle Mountain Chippewa, Mandan, Hidatsa & Arikara 

Nations, Standing Rock Sioux, Cheyenne River Sioux, Rosebud Sioux, Yankton 

Sioux, Crow Creek, Lower Brule, Flandreau Sioux, and Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux. 

Since 1994, DACTS has been advocating in Congress and the Executive Branch 

for quality school facilities for Indian students so they might pursue the best education possible. On behalf of DACTS, I submit this Prepared Statement for the 

Record and want you to know how much our member tribes appreciate your holding 

this important hearing. 

Background and History of the School Construction Bond Concept 

Beginning in 1994, the DACTS began working with our friends in Congress to address the sad state of school facilities in Indian country. The fact is that for many 

Native kids, the poor condition of their schoolhouses makes getting a solid education 

extremely difficult. Leaky roofs and shabby school construction make life in the cold, 

harsh winters on the Plains difficult. 

Over these twenty years, the executive and legislative branches have made efforts 

to get new school facilities built by appropriating additional funds to the Interior 

Department. From fiscal years 2001 to 2009, $2.013 billion was appropriated for replacement school construction and facilities improvement and repair. Beginning 

with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 (‘‘ARRA,’’ a/k/a the Stimulus Act) through fiscal year 2014, $708 million was appropriated for these two accounts. 


521c8.eps
61 

While we appreciate the additional appropriations, DACTS also proposed a creative way to finance more new school construction in a much faster way. The proposal was to authorize Indian tribes to issue bonds to raise capital and, in turn, use 

the funds raised to build new schools. Unlike traditional bond financing, the purchasers of these bonds would receive tax credits in lieu of interest which they would 

use to offset taxes from income. 

Congressional Support for School Construction Bonds 

In the early 2000s, Senators Tim Johnson, Thad Cochran, and Patty Murray and 

former Senators Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Tom Daschle introduced legislation 

to authorize the establishment of this bonding mechanism. While these bills were 

not enacted, they laid the groundwork for partial success which came with passage 

of the ARRA. 

The ARRA contained authority for Indian tribes to issue $400 million in tax credit 

allocation for 2009 and 2010. While no tribe took advantage of the program, DACTS 

is reliably informed by the Congress that this $400 million remains available for 

use. One thing the ARRA bond program did not include was an escrow account the 

issuing tribes would use to repay principal once the bonds are issued. 

Like the readers of this article, I am frustrated and saddened by the lack of 

progress Congress is making on any number of fronts. With the $400 million in tax 

credit authority still on the books, all that is left to do is establish the escrow account. I believe the time is right for Congress and the Administration to make this 

a priority in 2014. 

When she testified before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in May 2013, 

Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said that the state of Indian education—student performance as well as the condition of Bureau of Indian Education facilities—is ‘‘an 

embarrassment to you and to us.’’ 

After becoming Chairman of that Committee in February 2014, Senator Jon Tester issued a very strong opinion piece about the importance of Indian education. He 

said that ‘‘education is the foundation for sound life choices that increase economic 

security and helps us climb the ladder of success.’’ 

These statements by the Secretary and the new Chairman demonstrate that we 

have friends in high places, as they say. 

That, together with the bi-partisan, bi-cameral support Indian issues traditionally 

have enjoyed, makes me believe success and hope for new schools for Indian kids 

are just around the corner. 

Thank you for your leadership on these important matters and your ongoing support for the well-being of Native people across the country. 

62 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ALBERT A. YAZZIE, PRESIDENT, CRYSTAL BOARDING

SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION


521d1.eps
63 


521d2.eps
64 

TUBA CITY BOARDING SCHOOL GOVERNING BOARD—LETTER TO SALLY JEWELL, 

SECRETARY—INTERIOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND KEVIN

WASHBURN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY

RE: American Indian Education Study Group Tribal Consultation: Proposal to Redesign the U.S. Department of Interior’s Bureau of Indian Education 

Dear Secretary Jewell and Assistant Secretary Washburn: 

As the Navajo Nation Local Control Education Governing Board we are very 

thankful to be given the opportunity to provide additional comments on the ‘‘Draft 

Proposal to Redesign the U.S. Department of Interior’s Bureau of Indian Education 

(Dated: April 17, 2014).’’ In many respects, we are very supportive of the goals, objectives, and statements contained in the draft proposal, especially with its emphasis on promoting tribal control, achieving high performing schools, as well as and 

increasing and improving services and support that builds tribal capacity. In line 

with these goals, the Navajo Nation reiterates its prior position regarding the American Indian Education Study Group and expresses strong support for a Navajo Nation State Education Agency, the Navajo Nation’s alternative definition of Adequate 

Yearly Progress (AYP), and Navajo Nation’s Alternative Accountability Workbook. 

In particular, we strongly support the goals contained in the working draft because it: 

1. Promotes Tribal Control 

• Align BIE’s path forward with President Obama’s policy of self-determination 

for tribes because tribes understand the unique needs of their communities best. 

• With a careful transition plan in place, gradually transform BIE’s mission from 

running schools to serving tribes to conform with the reality that most BIE 

schools are now operated by tribes. 

2. Achieve High-Performing Schools 


521d3.eps
65 

• Ensure BIE meets its responsibility that all students attending BIE-funded 

schools receive a world-class and culturally appropriate education, are prepared 

for college and careers, and can contribute to their tribe and country. 

• Provide necessary resources and support (e.g., facilities and human capital) to 

schools so that they can meet the demands of 21st century teaching and learning. 

3. Increase and Improve Services and Support that Tribal Build Capacity 

• Scale up best practices in successful tribally controlled schools to other schools. 

• Support chronically failing schools with adequate support and research-based 

interventions, if necessary. 

• Provide pathways for tribes that wish to take over control of remaining BIEoperated schools by providing technical assistance and guidance on operating 

high-achieving schools. 

• In the December 2011 White House Tribal Nations Conference Progress Report, 

the Obama administration expressed strong support for a proposal to enhance 

the role of tribal educational agencies through a new pilot authority, called the 

State Tribal Education Partnership (STEP) grant,5 which would support tribal 

educational agencies in working closely with public school districts and schools 

located on reservations. This pilot authority and grant presently allows the 

Navajo Nation to enter into collaborative agreements with State of New Mexico 

and two of the largest public school districts serving Native American students 

in the United States and to assume responsibility for some state-level functions 

in administering ESEA programs. 

We also agree with key priorities highlighted in the draft proposal because it also 

provides for: 

• World Class Instruction for all BIE Students—Challenge each student to 

maximize his or her potential and be well-prepared for college, careers and tribal/global citizenship. 

• Highly Effective Teachers and Principals—Help tribes to identify, recruit, 

retain and empower diverse, highly effective teachers and principals to maximize the highest achievement for every student in all BIE-funded schools. 

• Agile Organizational Environment—Build a responsive organization that 

provides the resources, direction and services to tribes so that they can help 

their students attain high-levels of student achievement. 

• Budget that Supports Capacity Building Mission—Develop a budget that 

is aligned with and supports BIE’s new mission of tribal capacity building and 

scaling up best practices. 

• Comprehensive Supports through Partnerships—Foster parental, community and organizational partnerships to provide the emotional and social supports BIE students need in order to be ready to learn. 

In line with those goals, we also recommend: 

1. In line with identifying, recruiting, retaining highly effective teachers/principals, and building teacher/principal capacity (human capital) we strongly recommend that the BIE and other appropriate government agencies to enact a 

teacher/principal scholarship program that is very similar to the Indian Health 

Service (IHS) scholarship program. Ever since the IHS Scholarship Program’s 

creation in 1977, the program has successfully supported thousands of American Indian and Alaska Native students in their quest for a health/medical professions degree leading to a career in Indian health. A scholarship program that 

is specifically targeted to identify, recruit, and support teachers, including principals, especially in hard-to-fill Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics 

(STEM) areas, would significantly help our schools to meet the demand and 

need for highly effective teachers/principals. Not only would such a scholarship 

program enable tribes to build capacity, because scholarship recipients would be 

committed to serving several years on the Navajo Nation or in other Native 

American schools. 

2. Changing, amending, or waiving rules, regulations that negatively impact 

rural schools such as the regulation [25 C.F.R. § 36.11(a)(5)] that limits the 

number of days that schools can employ long-term substitute teachers. Because 

of extreme remoteness and difficultly hiring highly effective and fully qualified 

and licensed teachers, many of our schools have little to no choice but hire longterm substitute teachers who may need to teach students much longer than the 

existing regulation allows. Changing, amending, or waiving this regulation may 

66 

allow our schools to provide the continuity in instruction that students need 

until a fully qualified and licensed teacher can be hired to fill that position. 

3. Any education plan to reform and restructure the BIE must also provide 

strong support, including funding, to identify, recruit, and enhance the role and 

capacity of highly effective bilingual teachers. There is statistically significant 

research that shows that students who are educated in their language and culture perform better academically, while also reinforcing their self-identity, and 

preserving their language and culture. At the moment, many of the existing bilingual teachers who possess strong content knowledge, including the ability to 

effectively teach Navajo language and culture, are on the verge of retirement 

or leaving our schools, which further complicates attempts by tribes to preserve 

and maintain our language and culture. The Navajo Nation has lead the way 

in many respects, by working with 3 different states to enact alternative teacher 

licensing regulations, which presently allows persons who are knowledgeable 

and competent in Navajo language and culture to teach in our schools. We have 

also enacted the Navajo Nation’s Five (5) Content Standards (Navajo Language, 

Culture, History, Government, (Character), which can readily be incorporated 

into many school’s curriculums because it also complements the Common Core 

State Standards (CCSS). 

4. In light of the recommendations provided in the draft proposal to build tribal 

control of education and capacity, we also recommend that the BIE (or other 

appropriate government entities), to consult and meet with tribes such as the 

Navajo Nation to conduct an evaluation/assessment of a tribe’s existing capacity 

or provision of funding to accomplish that objective. 

As we move forward with redesigning/transforming the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) and improving the quality of education that our Navajo/Native American students receive, it is extremely important to remember that we are fighting 

for the lives of our children and that we can no longer afford to lose another generation of young people to a failing education system or to continue to make excuses 

for failure and low expectations. We must always put the needs of our children and 

students first; not adults, special interests, or politics. When we put the needs of 

our students first, it will make many of the tough decisions that must inevitably 

be made, easier, clearer, and worth the fight. Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

MARIE B. ACOTHLEY, TUBA CITY WNA BOARD PRESIDENT

JUANITA BURNS-BEGAY, VICE-PRESIDENT

SARANA RIGGS, SECRETARY

FRANK BILAGODY, MEMBER

IRVIN BEGAYE, MEMBER

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JON TESTER TO

MELVIN MONETTE

Question 1. Do you think the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) has the internal 

ability to serve tribes as a capacity builder? If not, what Departmental reforms are 

needed? 

Answer. Not presently. BIE’s internal structure inhibits the agency from supporting tribal self-determination and increasing tribal capacity to deliver education 

services. Although tribes administer education services via tribal grant and contract 

schools under P.L. 100–297, Tribally Controlled Grant Schools Act, and P.L. 93–638, 

Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act, BIE systemic issues inhibit the federal school system from providing the necessary support. 

A fundamental shift, both in Washington and in the field, is required in order for 

the BIE to successfully become a capacity builder for tribes. Some Department of 

Interior (DOI) and BIE staff members have served their communities for decades 

building experience and expertise. Yet, much of the past work experience is based 

on a flawed and outdated model that has yet to decrease the achievement gap between our students and the majority population. Research and models illustrate 

that Native education success and the health of Native communities in general, are 

best supported by culturally-relevant education models. Thus, DOI should ensure 

the BIE has the ability to shift personnel in order to guarantee that tribes and their 

education representatives are working with educators and administrators who are 

willing to utilize education strategies that include and strengthen the cultural needs 

of their local communities. 

Further, NIEA remains concerned with the BIE budget structure. Control of BIE’s 

budget, procurement, hiring, and facilities maintenance and construction reside not 

67 

within BIE but within the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Deputy Assistant 

Secretary-Management (DAS–M). This structure is problematic because of the 

added bureaucracy and abstraction. We maintain that change is necessary for leadership stability and accountability within the BIE and hope DOI will provide those 

who best understand the education system more autonomy from the BIA. We also 

recommend that DOI, BIA, and BIE include and consult with tribes throughout any 

process to ensure active engagement and inclusion of local funding needs. 

Additionally, a DOI transfer of budget authority would support tribal self-determination goals. Budget authority is crucial for ensuring the necessary resources are 

provided to tribes under the BIE. If placed in the hands of those directly utilizing 

the resources, the most efficient and effective allocation decisions can be made. This 

budget authority should not create a new budget office within the BIE or increase 

duplication with BIA. Rather, it should allow the BIE director and staff to have the 

ability to fund areas of need and act as an internal advocate for the agency. Decades 

of budget authority within the BIA has allowed the BIE to continue underfunded 

and underrepresented within the DOI and in negotiations with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 

Question 2. Why were only 60 percent of E-rate funds spent over the last nine 

years and what do you think the solution is to make sure Indian Country can benefit from this Initiative? 

Answer. There is no definitive reason provided from the BIE. Given the other internal issues with BIE, technical reporting of E-rate may have fallen aside since the 

BIE provided their information without any explanation. Regardless, statistics illustrate persistently low levels of E-rate adoption and spending among BIE schools, 

which are similarly prevalent in other Native-serving institutions due to geographical isolation and inability to meet the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) guidelines. The top three barriers to participation in E-rate are lack 

of awareness, uncertainty of eligibility, and a complicated application process. 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has continually emphasized that 

Indian Country represents some of the most unserved and underserved areas of the 

U.S. The data highlighted in our full May 21, 2014 testimony regarding tribal participation in the E-rate program is just a glimpse of this disparity. Part of this can 

be attributed to the rural nature of many tribal lands and the consequent difficulty 

of broadband deployment to tribal schools, including BIE, and libraries. A prevalent 

lack of knowledge about the E-rate program also exists as does a pervasive absence 

of training for tribal schools and libraries in regards to the application process and 

USAC reporting requirements. 

Resources should be expended to close this education gap for tribal school and library administrators. First, the FCC should direct its Office of Native Affairs and 

Policy (ONAP) to develop educational materials as part of the FCC’s Native Learning Lab. Native Learning Labs are instrumental in acquainting participants with 

the Commission’s web-based resource systems and applications. Many tribes have 

found the Native Learning Lab to be an important tool for educating themselves 

about FCC policies and programs. Unfortunately, the Native Learning Lab does not 

contain resources to assist in E-rate compliance. Adding such materials would introduce tribes to the program while providing essential guidance on the application 

and reporting processes. 

Second, the FCC should direct USAC to appoint a formal ‘‘Tribal Liaison’’ for the 

sole purpose of assisting tribes in E-rate matters. This assistance must take multiple forms. In partnership with ONAP, the USAC Tribal Liaison should be charged 

with the following: 

• Conducting outreach to tribes, especially those who have not previously participated in the E-rate program; 

• Providing basic training and developing modules for the E-rate program; 

• Attending significant national and regional tribal meetings where BIE, tribal 

school, and library administrators are present; 

• Developing educational materials that will be part of the Native Learning Lab, 

and providing these material directly to tribes via web portal or physical hard 

copy; 

• Providing assistance to tribal school and library awardees to comply with E-rate 

regulations; and 

• Ensuring accessibility to tribes during critical times of the annual funding cycle 

to answer questions and provide additional assistance as needed. 

Most importantly, the USAC Tribal Liaison must be someone whom Indian Country can trust to assist them. Throughout the years, Indian Country has come to 

68 

trust that the staff of ONAP is there to provide assistance on all Universal Service 

Fund matters. It is important that the USAC Tribal Liaison also be committed to 

working with Indian country in a similarly respectful manner. 

Question 3. What have you seen as the biggest impact recent budget shortfalls 

have had on the ability of the BIE to provide quality education? Is it teacher turnover, condition of schools facilities and transportation, materials, etc.? 

Answer. Budget shortfalls have a wide-ranging impact on the ability of the BIE 

to effectively educate Native students. No one impact should be compared to others 

since BIE education programs should be fully funded as part of the federal trust 

responsibility to tribes. With that said, however, a student cannot learn, instructors 

cannot effectively teach, and a school cannot attract effective personnel if the structure itself is inadequate and in a state of disrepair. 

Insufficient school replacement funding has a wide-ranging effect on a number of 

issues affecting Native student outcomes in BIE schools—including those mentioned 

in the question. Therefore, in the NIEA FY 2015 budget document, we expressed 

the need for school construction and repair funding to be set at $263.4 million to 

ensure adequate funds for new school construction, facilities improvement and repair, and replacement school construction. Piecemeal construction projects are not 

sufficient with the scope of repairs needed in many schools. There must be funding 

to replace schools where it is needed in order to increase the education services provided to Native communities. Likewise, there must be accountability in funding allocation so that funds can be used efficiently and effectively. Transparency is the key 

to highlighting the correlation between funding new schools and increased academic 

achievement, so the BIA must distribute the relevant information to tribes, school 

administrators, Native community leaders, and appropriators. 

Question 4. Your testimony mentions that the BIE is low on the priority list within the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) budget, and therefore, suggest transitioning 

BIE budget authority from the BIA to the BIE. What response have you received 

from the Department of the Interior about this suggestion? 

Answer. NIEA has not received a response from the Department of the Interior 

regarding our recommendation to transfer budget authority from the BIA to the 

BIE. There has been some concern expressed within OMB that any internal DOI 

shift must not create two separate construction offices in each Bureau in order to 

avoid duplication of services. NIEA’s proposed solution would not require a separate 

office within the BIE but would provide BIE leadership the ability to work with 

BIA, DAS–M, and the OMB during funding negotiations. 

69 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JON TESTER TO

CHARLES M. ROESSEL


521d4.eps
70 


521d5.eps
71 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. TOM UDALL TO

CHARLES M. ROESSEL


521d6.eps
72 


521d7.eps
73 


521d8.eps
74 

Æ 


521d9.eps