Final Report

Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country Initiative

May 2011-May 2013
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Visit PD&R’s website

www.huduser.org

to find this report and others sponsored by HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R). Other services of 

HUD USER, PD&R’s research information service, include listservs, special interest reports, bimonthly publications (best 

practices, significant studies from other sources), access to public use databases, and a hotline (800-245-2691) for help 

accessing the information you need.

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Final Report

Sustainable Construction in 

Indian Country Initiative

Prepared for:

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 

Office of Policy Development and Research

Prepared by:

Lynda Lantz

Laura Appelbaum

FirstPic, Inc.

May 2011-May 2013

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

i | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Acknowledgements

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country effort was funded under the U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD) Offices of Policy Development & Research. Contractor FirstPic, Inc. 

would like to thank former Assistant Secretary Dr. Raphael Bostic, Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy 

Development at the Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) Todd Richardson, and Deputy 

Assistant Secretary Rodger Boyd for their leadership on this effort. We also want to acknowledge that 

support and guidance provided by Michael Blanford, Government Technical Monitor, and Anna Lloyd, 

Government Technical Representative, and Kevin Fitzgibbons, Eastern Woodlands Office of Native 

American Programs (EWONAP) (retired).

We would like to thank the HUD Area Office staff who served as SCInIC contacts: 

David Vought, AKONAP (retired) 

Brian Gillen, EWONAP

Randy Akers, NPONAP

Tom Carney and Lisa Stewart, NWONAP

Michelle Tinnen, SPONAP

Sarah Olson, SWONAP

We would also like to thank the other members of the SCinIC technical team who shared their expertise 

with the demonstration projects and in telling the projects’ stories. 

Laura Appelbaum, FirstPic, Inc.

Kate Brown, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Building Research Council

Aaron Cooke, Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC)

Nathaniel Corum, Architecture for Humanity

Jonathan Heller, Ecotope

Daniel Glenn, 7 Directions Architects/Planners

Judith Grunau, CCHRC

Jack Hebert, CCHRC

Kevin Hinders, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Paul Knight, Domus Plus

Erma Maves, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Building Research Council

Ken McCown, University of Nevada at Las Vegas

Robert Nemeth, FirstPic, Inc.

Christine Velez, FirstPic, Inc.

Stacy Weibley, FirstPic, Inc.

Most of all, we would like to thank the housing authorities and departments, tribes, and communities of 

the demonstration projects, whose innovations and hard work give us inspiration.

Laurie Ann Cloud, Nez Perce Tribal Housing Authority

Retha Herne, Akwesasne Housing Authority

Linda Jestes, Housing Authority of the Pawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma

Henry Mark, Native Village of Kwinhagak

Mark Parrish, Department of Natural Resources, Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | ii

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Michael Reed, Cocopah Indian and Housing Development 

James Williams, Muscogee (Creek) Nation Environmental Services 

Eric Willis, Choctaw Housing Authority

Aneva J. Yazzie, Navajo Housing Authority

Disclaimer

The contents of this report are the views of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect the views or 

policies of the Department of Housing and Urban Development or the U.S. government.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

iii | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | iv

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Foreword

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has worked as a partner with Native 

American communities since the Department’s creation in 1965. The Native American Housing Assistance 

and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) of 1996 moved that partnership to a new level. NAHASDA 

emphasized flexibility that led directly to some of the wonderful examples of sustainable housing 

described in this report that are taking place in Indian Country. 

These innovations are needed now more than ever. Indian Country faces new challenges related to energy 

and climate. Although these challenges resonate globally, within the United States, Native American 

communities are more likely to be affected by these challenges because of their often-remote locations 

and disproportionately low income levels. American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages may already 

face high fuel costs because of their remote locations, and these costs are exacerbated by volatile fuel 

prices. Extreme weather conditions can also drive up fuel costs, cause additional fuel needs, and threaten 

housing stock. 

In implementing the Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative, HUD has found that many 

tribes and villages are already taking steps to weatherize their housing to increase consumer comfort 

and energy efficiency and to decrease utility and maintenance costs. Every HUD region has many exciting 

examples of Native American residential housing using sustainable technologies. These examples include, 

but are not limited to, the use of structural insulated panels in the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, lava block 

manufacture at the Pueblo of Isleta, straw bale construction at the Coeur D’Alene Tribe of Indians, and 

a geothermal system in a development of the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe. As part of the demonstration 

project selection process and training sessions, Native American communities shared their experiences 

in working together to gain the knowledge required to make informed choices about the sustainable 

technologies that are best adapted and most cost effective in their regions and communities. Even more 

communities asked how they could do the same.

Still, the distance that HUD has come in constructing new housing, renovating deteriorating units, and 

demolishing substandard housing may not always be remembered in the face of painful continuing 

concerns about overcrowding and substandard units. It can be hard to plan for the future when many 

pressing needs are in the present. Investments made wisely today, however, will contribute to increased 

prosperity, economic health, and an improved ability to meet housing needs tomorrow. HUD applauds 

these communities for their commitment to their communities and to the world. 

Katherine M. O’Regan

Assistant Secretary for

 Policy Development and Research
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

v | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................vi

Initiative Overview........................................................................................................................................................................vi

Key Findings ...................................................................................................................................................................................vii

Recommendations ......................................................................................................................................................................... x

Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................................1

Historical Reference to Sustainability in Native American Communities .....................................................................2

Overview ............................................................................................................................................................................................2

Stewardship and Living in Harmony......................................................................................................................................3

Traditional View of Nature.........................................................................................................................................................4

Social Marketing Related to Environmental Sustainability in Native American Communities............................6

Background.......................................................................................................................................................................................6

Social Marketing and Energy Conservation ........................................................................................................................7

One Native Community and Energy Efficiency Audits ...................................................................................................8

Effect on SCinIC.......................................................................................................................................................................................9

Relationship of HUD Housing and Native American Communities............................................................................... 11

United States Housing Act of 1937 and Establishment of the Office of Native American Programs....... 11

NAHASDA........................................................................................................................................................................................ 14

HUD Sustainable Support for Housing in Indian Country ......................................................................................... 15

Task Overview and Implementation........................................................................................................................................... 18

The Review of Current Activities .......................................................................................................................................... 18

National Impediments Meeting............................................................................................................................................. 18

Demonstration Projects............................................................................................................................................................ 19

Outreach.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 23

Training............................................................................................................................................................................................ 23

Findings and Recommendations From the Review of Current Activities................................................................... 26

Findings ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Ranking and Recommendations From National Impediments Meeting..................................................................... 29

Ranking............................................................................................................................................................................................ 29

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................... 30

Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 37

References.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix A: The Review of Current Activities (July 18, 2011)

Appendix B: National Meeting Report

Appendix C: Case Studies

Appendix C-1

Appendix C-2

Appendix C-3

Appendix C-4

Appendix C-5

Appendix C-6

Appendix C-7

Appendix D: Training Materials
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | vi

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Executive Summary

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country (SCinIC) initiative was a congressionally mandated effort 

of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Policy Development and Research, 

in partnership with the HUD Office of Native American Programs (ONAP). The initiative promoted and 

supported sustainable construction practices in Native American communities1 through a range of tasks. 

Initiative Overview

The initiative included four tasks.

•	 The review of current activities identified Native American communities that had or were 

developing on sustainable construction projects, funding resources, and technical assistance (TA) 

resources as of July 18, 2011. 

•	 A national impediments meeting identified impediments to sustainable construction practices 

and opportunities for TA and training for the Native American communities. 

•	 Demonstration projects were sought that could be featured in best practice case studies. These 

case studies will enable others to benefit from these best practices. 

•	 Training was made available to Native American communities based on results of the other 

initiative tasks.

Sustainability can be defined in many ways. For purposes of this contract, the initiative defined 

sustainability using the U.S. Green Building Council definition of green homes, as being generally 

“healthier, more comfortable, more durable, and more energy efficient and have a much smaller 

environmental footprint than conventional homes.”2

The SCinIC initiative was designed to provide types of assistance that can play a role in promoting 

understanding about the benefits of sustainable construction technologies. Between 2011 and 2013, it 

has—

•	 Educated demonstration project teams about the range of sustainable construction technologies 

available. 

•	 Provided supplemental TA to help tribes incorporate appropriate sustainable technologies into 

their residential construction projects.

•	 Helped build relationships among tribal staff and sustainability industry specialists that grow the 

capacity of both parties and facilitate sustainable design and implementation. 

•	 Promoted the use of available tools for helping tribes make informed decisions about which 

sustainable construction technologies to implement. Potential tools include free blower-door 

1 Native American communities refers to American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages. As defined in NAHASDA, the terms “tribe,” 

“Indian tribe” and “American Indian tribe” are used throughout to refer to Indian tribes, bands, nations and other organized groups or 

communities including Alaska Native villages or regional and village corporations.

2 U.S. Green Building Council (2007): 4.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

vii | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

testing through HUD ONAP, free modeling and benefit analysis software, and the U.S. Department 

of Energy’s Tribal Energy Program TA. 

•	 Highlighted regional best practice case studies of successful tribal sustainable projects.

•	 Supported tribes in collecting energy-related data for demonstrating energy and rehabilitation 

benchmarks and savings associated with sustainable technologies. This assistance can show 

savings for tribally designated housing entities (TDHEs) and residents.

Key Findings

Analysis of the SCinIC activities supports the following key findings. 

1. Many obstacles to sustainable development in Indian Country are the same as the obstacles 

to conventional development in Indian Country. 

These obstacles include disruptions to the—often short—building cycle; the length of time to 

navigate requirements imposed by federal programs, funding, and tribal leadership; staff turnover; 

land ownership and usage issues; and political roadblocks. 

2. The dilemma between more housing and better housing can undermine the desire for 

sustainable construction.

Overcrowding and pent-up desire for housing combine with limited housing authority budgets 

to complicate new housing production and rehabilitation decisions in many Native American 

communities. The upfront costs and sometimes the perceptions of sustainable construction as 

luxury can defeat efforts to make housing healthier, more durable, less expensive to operate, 

and more energy efficient. On the other hand, rehabilitating older housing with appropriate 

sustainable technologies might be a way to avoid some criticism and make similar gains in health, 

durability, and utility savings. 

3. Obstacles specific to sustainable development can also impede the adoption of 

technologies. 

Tribal housing authority staff, planners, and architects or engineers may not be familiar with the 

track record of different sustainable technologies within their climate. They may then disregard 

certain technologies or, if using them, fail to maintain them properly. Tribal force account3

construction crews and local non-Native construction teams may have to bring in outside 

specialists to assist with installation or construction, increasing costs and potentially decreasing 

employment opportunities for tribal members.

4. Obstacles to sustainable development are often rural development obstacles. 

Rural Native American communities often pay more for materials or have difficulty locating 

sustainable materials. Shipping materials long distances—when possible at all—can undermine 

the goal of decreasing the carbon footprint and can increase the development expenditures. 

3 Tribal force account refers to the method of construction controlled by the tribe or TDHE rather than contracted out. The tribe uses 

tribal employees or members to do construction work.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | viii

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Rural Native American communities also experienced difficulties locating affordable, nearby, or 

experienced installation or maintenance specialists. The cost and difficulty decreases the costeffectiveness or the lifetime of the technology. 

5. Resources exist to help alleviate some of the top obstacles specific to sustainabilty 

identified in the national meeting, including building codes, capacity building, and 

planning—but these resources are not adequate to need. 

An active federal interagency workgroup has been addressing issues of tribal building codes. TA 

and training, often regional in nature, exist to support capacity building, but tribes outside a region 

may not know what is taking place elsewhere. Federal and other opportunities exist to encourage 

master-planning efforts, but these resources are not well known and many more tribes need 

planning support than these resources can support. 

6. Training and technical support for new green residential construction for tribes is focused 

in Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and the Southwest. The opportunities for Native American 

communities to receive these needed services in other regions of the country are more 

limited. 

One of the critical factors in supporting and increasing sustainable residential construction in 

Indian Country is having several organizations that provide training and TA with new green 

construction projects. Although several organizations do a lot of work with tribes, relatively few 

organizations provide training and TA on new sustainable construction in Indian Country. For 

example, key informants often mentioned the same entities in a given region: Cascadia Green 

Building Council in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest, Cold Climate Housing Research Center 

in Alaska, and the Enterprise Green Communities program in the Southwest. Increasing the 

sustainability of existing homes has more support, with the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) and HUD offering training and regional workshops.

7. Educational groups, such as tribal colleges, can help tribal members acquire professional 

green building skills and foster tribal capacity building, another example of tribes helping 

tribes. Tribal colleges, however, are primarily clustered in the Great Lakes, the Dakotas, 

Montana, and the Southwest.

Educational organizations include Construction in Indian Country, in partnership with Arizona 

State University, and the College of the Menominee Nation. Although Red Feather Development 

Group and the Zuni Housing Authority have implemented successful models for increasing housing 

authorities’ capacity to do their own sustainable construction projects, they are the exception 

rather than the rule. Most tribes depend on local construction firms and use tribal members in 

only relatively unskilled capacities. Further, in at least one ONAP region, tribes reported difficulty 

accessing construction firms with experience in sustainable construction technologies.

8. Strong enthusiasm exists among those who are implementing sustainable technologies. 

At the training sessions and during the selection interviews, it became apparent that tribes that 

had already implemented sustainable technologies had champions who were strongly committed 

to the technologies and had the political ability to inspire others. This phenomenon seemed 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

ix | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

especially true in the Upper Midwest and the west coast. These champions frequently expressed 

interest in getting the word out to other Native American communities. 

9. More tribes wanted help with sustainable design and construction than were able to 

receive it.

This finding is positive in that it illustrates the enthusiasm for exploring sustainable technologies 

in Indian Country. It also shows, however, that more resources are needed—both TA and 

financing—than are currently available. 

10. Funding is still mostly limited to federal resources. 

Federal funding is still the source of the most capital for housing development or rehabilitation. 

The investment and housing finance industries, when they are familiar with Indian Country at all, 

hesitate to enter financial relationships because of political and land-ownership issues. Still, tribes 

are adding funding sources to their toolkits by working with Native community development 

financial institutions, among other solutions.

11. Capacity building can include a broad range of skill sets. 

Capacity building, which in the area of Native American housing development is often taken to 

mean the ability to construct housing inhouse, is an economic development tool. The adoption of 

new technology and the ability to take on housing projects sized to both address overcrowding 

and allow for economies of scale can strain inhouse resources, however. Capacity building also 

means knowing how to request and receive specific outcomes from potential consultants and 

subcontractors, manage subcontractors, control the quality of work, manage the process, and 

harness the data to gain educated estimates of cost-effectiveness. 

12. Sustainable features are often linked with cultural features. 

As indicated in the section, “Historical 

Reference to Sustainability in 

Native American Communities,” 

sustainability is integral to many 

Native American communities. 

Instances exist of reinvigorating 

traditional building styles to be 

better adapted to climate, as in the 

octagonal shape of a house in the 

Native Village of Kwinhagak (Alaska). 

Sustainable housing, however, also 

can include ensuring that culturally 

relevant features are part of the 

initial design, such as orienting 

duplexes for the Nez Perce Tribe of 

Indians to the east in accordance with 

past practices.

Native Village of Kwinhagak Energy Efficient Single Family 

Housing Under Construction

Image: Cold Climate Housing Research Center for HUD SCinIC
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | x

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Recommendations

Together with other federal agencies and other committed partners, this initiative has implemented 

strategies that led to a new perspective for some and a deeper understanding of green for others. The 

SCinIC activities scratched the surface of potential support, however. Additional changes to policy, 

continued education, tools to support change, and increased federal agency cooperation are needed to 

continue to support tribes in making their housing more sustainable. The following recommendations 

promote continuing support for sustainable construction.

1. Leverage available federal resources and materials to support tribes and TDHEs. 

Resources include, but are not limited to, the SCinIC case studies, the interagency Tribal Green 

Building Codes Workgroup, and the HUD grantees—especially tribal and rural grantees—under the 

Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities (OSHC) to increase knowledge of the benefits of 

sustainable construction. The past grantees may be able to provide voluntary advice, mentorship, 

or networking support. Federal entities may encourage tribes to participate in EPA tribal TA and 

training opportunities or disseminate available HUD materials, including SCinIC case studies. 

2. To support tribes in making informed decisions about when an investment is reasonable, 

assist tribes in accessing resources that will help them determine the true costeffectiveness of sustainable materials and strategies. 

This recommendation may include access to modeling and other software or certification services, 

but it may also include information on how to request needed services and evaluate data provided 

by sustainability professionals.

3. Encourage Native sustainable construction champions to participate in training and 

conferences to discuss their own projects, but also to assist in inspiring and training a new 

and larger wave of sustainable building proponents. 

The best examples for Native American communities are other successful Native American 

communities. As indicated in the recommendations, tribal representatives who use sustainable 

technologies and materials are eager to spread the word. Their words may be especially 

convincing to other communities that have not yet tested sustainable construction. 

4. Host a green building blog at HUD and use it to actively promote Native sustainable building 

models and conversations with tribes.

A blog can provide a low-cost, easily shared strategy for disseminating information about 

successes and challenges in Indian Country and providing a space for discussion.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

xi | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

5. Encourage green building within federal programs and funding sources. 

Federal programs often have flexibility to include incentives for green building in notices of 

funding availability. Additional flexibility exists in waiver opportunities that can be linked to 

sustainable construction and the ability to leverage federal funds to encourage private investment. 

Another way to encourage a longer term and interrelated view of development is by coordinating 

funding opportunities among federal agencies. 

6. Support funding for and partnerships with tribal colleges and other colleges and 

universities with a strong American Indian and Alaska Native presence in their efforts to 

create sustainable training programs.

Tribal colleges are one source of capacity building for the next generation of leaders in Indian 

Country. They are already taking steps to offer degree and certificate courses in sustainable 

construction that will strengthen economies in Native American communities and provide 

generations of young workers with critical green-collar economy skills that will be in demand on 

and off the reservation.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 1

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Introduction

In 2010, the first year of the Transformation Initiative (TI), the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development’s (HUD’s) Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriations Act made as much as 1 percent of program funds 

available for (1) research, evaluation, and program metrics; (2) program demonstrations; (3) technical 

assistance (TA); and (4) information technology. One 2-year program that Congress mandated through 

the TI was the Sustainable Construction in Indian Country (SCinIC) initiative. This initiative fulfilled many 

TI goals and brought increased attention to the issue of sustainable construction practices within Indian 

Country. 

TI is part of a reinvention of HUD that leverages technology and a new way of doing business to respond 

to the need for increased transparency and improved service delivery. The SCinIC initiative benefited 

from TI’s infusion of much-needed funding into the neglected areas of program demonstrations 

and innovative, crosscutting TA that goes beyond program compliance to improve grantee capacity, 

performance, and outcomes. HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) plays two roles in 

the TI, administering the research and demonstrations and serving as the technical lead department wide 

on TA projects. 

The purpose of SCinIC was to facilitate sustainable construction in Indian Country by providing TA 

and by documenting these activities and disseminating the results. PD&R undertook the following 

tasks to promote sustainable construction in Indian Country: (1) it selected specific qualified sites 

that volunteered as Indian sustainable construction demonstration partners, (2) it provided TA to the 

demonstration partners to assist them in using sustainable building techniques in housing developments, 

and (3) it documented the activities undertaken in this project and assisted in disseminating the 

demonstration results to a wider audience. 

This final report comprehensively documents activities, successes, and lessons learned during the 2-year 

course of this initiative. 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

2 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Historical Reference to Sustainability in Native American 

Communities4

Overview

Sustainable construction within the 

Native American world, as elsewhere, is 

implemented for cost savings, energy savings, 

enhanced durability, and environmental 

benefit. The practice of sustainability in 

American Indian tribes, however, also carries 

with it a strong cultural component that is 

both contemporary and traditional. Most 

North American Indian tribes practiced 

environmental sustainability, or respect 

for the environment. Environmental 

sustainability is the “philosophy and practice 

in which people do not extract more resources 

from the environment than necessary, leaving resources available for future generations.”5

 Thus, it was 

fully consistent when the executive director of the Akwesasne Housing Authority (AHA), Retha Herne, 

stated at a training session that AHA’s sustainable housing development, Sunrise Acres, expresses itself 

culturally through its use of renewable energy and its land use conservation practices.6

Tribal cultures express their view of nature and the environment in several ways. The concept of sevengeneration sustainability, which originated with the Iroquois, said that people must consider the effect 

of their actions on the seventh generation—that is, look into the future before they make decisions about 

the present. The Constitution of the Iroquois Nations: The Great Binding Law includes the passage, “Look 

and listen for the welfare of the whole people and have always in view not only the present but also the 

coming generations, even those whose faces are yet beneath the surface of the ground—the unborn of the 

future Nation.”7

Contemporary tribal leaders and advocates of many tribes articulate similar views. Oren Lyons, Chief of 

the Onondaga Nation, wrote, “We are looking ahead, as is one of the first mandates given us as chiefs, to 

make sure and to make every decision that we make relates to the welfare and well-being of the seventh 

generation to come.”8 Lyons’ viewpoint is not limited to a particular tribe. Lydia Sigo, a Suquamish Indian 

and Suquamish Museum archivist/curator, said, “In traditional cultures, we try to look to the next seven 

generations. My concern is trying to sustain the environment for those future generations.”9 Winona 

LaDuke, an environmental activist from the White Earth Reservation, stated, “Elders used to tell younger 

4 Native American communities refers to American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages. As defined in NAHASDA, the terms “tribe,” 

“Indian tribe,” and “American Indian tribe” are used throughout to refer to Indian tribes, bands, and nations or other organized groups or 

communities including Alaska Native villages or regional and village corporations. 

5 Sustainable UCR (2009).

6 Herne (May 8, 2013).

7 “Constitution of Iroquois Nation.” Available at http://www.indigenouspeople.net/iroqcon.htm (accessed April 29, 2013).

8 Lyons (1994).

9 Grimley (2008).

Sunrise Acres Housing on the St. Regis Mohawk Reservation

Image: Akwesasne Housing Authority
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 3

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

generations how to live in one location for 1,000 years without destroying the land” and that a similar 

care for the environment could be seen in some families adopting older traditions.10 In addition, Bonnie 

Butterfield wrote, “Many Native Americans had no concept of land ownership. Land was a gift from the 

creator and used in common by the whole society for survival and sustenance.”11

Stewardship and Living in Harmony 

The fundamental way that American Indians related to nature before the Europeans arrived has been 

described as follows.

Indians generally considered themselves to be just one among many entities in an animate world, 

living according to culturally defined canons of respect for other members, while nevertheless 

developing tools and technologies that allowed them to provide for their own subsistence.12

Native Americans, including Lakota lawyer and author Vine Deloria, Jr., Winona LaDuke, and others, 

believe “that Indians lived in accordance with ecological limits and limited the number of animals they 

hunted.”13 Carolyn Merchant quoted LaDuke as saying—

We have a code of ethics and a way of living on this land which is based on being accountable to 

[natural] law. That is the understanding of most indigenous peoples.14

The evidence strongly suggests that Native Americans have a historic tradition of environmental 

stewardship.

The native peoples of the Cahuilla tribe inhabited present-day San Diego County and eastern 

Riverside County near Palm Springs. The Cahuilla lived in a harsh desert environment and had 

little access to water; due to the scarcity of water, there was limited plant or animal life for food. 

The natives realized that if they were to survive in such an environment, they would have to live 

sustainably and make a minimal impact on the environment. Mesquite beans were a common 

ingredient in the Cahuilla diet. They harvested the beans and ground them into a powder. The 

Cahuilla realized that if they harvested all of the mesquite beans available at one time, there would 

be no seeds left to produce more trees. Thus, they understood that their own survival as a people 

was closely tied to the well-being of their surrounding environment, and saw that it was absolutely 

essential they preserve the planet.15

Another, broader example of sustainable behavior is the Native American use of fire ecology.

The native peoples of America often practiced fire ecology to prevent massive, uncontrollable 

forest fires. Dead plant material, such as leaves, bark, and branches naturally accumulates on the 

forest floor. If too much organic litter accumulates on the forest floor and it catches on fire during 

a lightning storm, the entire forest could be burned down. To prevent such dangerous forest fires, 

indigenous peoples regularly burned the underbrush in a controlled manner. Trees soon became 

10 Grimley (2008).

11 Butterfield (n.d.). 

12 Merchant (2007): 14-15.

13 Merchant (2007): 21.

14 Merchant (2007): 21.

15 Sustainable UCR (2009).
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

4 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

adapted to Native American fires; seeds of many tree species do not germinate unless they have 

been exposed to high temperatures that can only be provided by a fire.16

Many believe that Indians were the “original conservationists,” because of their reciprocal relationship 

with their natural environment and belief in the unity between their spiritual and physical worlds.17

Stuart G. Harris of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, described the traditional 

land ethic as “stewardship and kinship... equality of all species.”18 Talking about the environmental 

infrastructure, Harris stated—

My elders taught me to see the whole system. They taught me that our traditions and behaviors 

are conscious responses to rigorous environmental shaping. They understood the value of 

systematic observation and used inductive reasoning to determine the most probable reactions of 

very complex, interrelated ecosystem functions. They understand that ecological thermodynamics 

forms the basis of our resilient and adaptive holistic environmental management science. The 

application of this science has been codified into law and has been distilled into daily practice. This 

knowledge is still transferred between generations. Attention to and application of this knowledge 

means personal survival and enhancement of our ecology, culture and religion. Disregarding this 

knowledge can result in eating a poison, starving, degrading resources, or societal collapse.19

Nathan Sherrer and Tim Murphy stated that the typical Native American’s “entire method of living is 

inherently ecological because, to them, everything in the nature world was interrelated and shared the 

same life. Their lifestyles as well as their religion only served to emphasize this relationship between 

man and his environment.”20 Eve Darian-Smith said that scholars of Indian law and the anthropologists, 

sociologists, and historians who study Native Americans “have documented the role the environment 

plays in tribal jurisdictional authority, social organization, cultural property, religion, health, and 

economic and cultural stability.”21

Traditional View of Nature

The following quotations express some Native American views of nature in the past and in the present, 

orally and in writing.22

Treat the earth well. It was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. 

We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.

—Ancient Indian proverb

When all the trees have been cut down, when all the animals have been hunted, when all the 

waters are polluted, when all the air is unsafe to breathe, only then will you discover you cannot 

eat money. 

—Cree prophecy

16 Sustainable UCR (2009).

17 Anderson (n.d.).

18 Harris (n.d): 8.

19 Harris (n.d.): 9.

20 Sherrer and Murphy (2006):16.

21 Darian-Smith (2010):361.

22 United Association of HigaononTribes (n.d.).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 5

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the 

web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect. 

—Chief Seattle, 1854

Honor the sacred. Honor the Earth, our Mother. Honor the Elders. Honor all with whom we share 

the Earth: four-leggeds, two-leggeds, winged ones. Swimmers, crawlers, plant and rock people. 

Walk in balance and beauty. 

—Native American elder

I do not think the measure of a civilization is how tall its buildings of concrete are, but rather how 

well its people have learned to relate 

to their environment and fellow man. 

—Sun Bear of the Chippewa Tribe

You must teach your children that the 

ground beneath their feet is the ashes 

of your grandfathers. So that they will 

respect the land, tell your children 

that the earth is rich with the lives 

of our kin. Teach your children what 

we have taught our children, that the 

earth is our mother. Whatever befalls 

the earth befalls the sons of the earth. 

If men spit upon the ground, they spit 

upon themselves. 

—Unknown

Rain Garden in Yard at Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians

Image: Department of Natural Resources, Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

6 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Social Marketing Related to Environmental Sustainability and in 

Native American Communities

Developing case studies, creating promotional materials, and even selecting demonstration projects speak 

to the goal of the Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative to go beyond capacity building 

in the Native American communities with which the initiative has worked to inspiring and influencing 

other communities who come into contact with SCinIC products, activities, and demonstration project 

representatives. The message is not only that sustainable technologies have benefit and can be cost 

effective, but also that they are technologies appropriate to Native American communities and that Native 

American communities are implementing them to the benefit of the community and approval of tribal 

leadership and housing residents.

Background

Although social marketing has been implemented for more than 40 years, it has been used primarily 

in the area of health education. For some time, however, social marketing—in particular, message 

framing—has been used in the United States to raise understanding of the state of the environment 

and to encourage behavior that is environmentally sustainable.23 Cheng et al. noted that, “although the 

persuasive effects of message framing have been widely publicized in the field of social and cognitive 

psychology, there is a surprising dearth in the literature regarding the role of message framing as a 

strategy within the context of social marketing to influence environmentally sustainable behaviors.”24

SCinIC research found nearly no literature regarding message framing or social marketing in Native 

American communities in the area of environmental sustainability.

Social marketing uses marketing principles for the purpose of societal benefit rather than commercial 

profit.25 It is “the application of marketing to achieve specific behavioral goals for a social good.”26 Social 

marketing was “born” as a discipline in the 1970s, when Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman realized that 

the same marketing principles that were being used to sell products to consumers could be used to sell 

ideas, attitudes, and behaviors.27 Social marketing has been used extensively in international health 

programs and is being used more frequently in the United States.

 Social marketing—

...draws on psychology, sociology, economics and anthropology in an attempt to fully understand 

people. Once this understanding has been gained, it develops products, services and messages that 

provide people with an exchange they will value. This concept of exchange is really important if 

you want to achieve sustainable behavior change.28

Because people do not always behave in their own or society’s best interest, it is important to educate 

people about important health and environmental issues in the hope of effecting behavior change.

23 Cheng et al. (2011).

24 Cheng et al. (2011): 48.

25 Social Marketing National Excellence Collaborative (2002).

26 James (2010).

27 Weinreich (n.d.).

28 Merritt, Truss, and Hopwood (2011).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 7

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Social marketing typically addresses broad issues in health education, such as the use of condoms to 

prevent sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS, antismoking, breastfeeding, diabetes prevention 

and management, and so on. In a similar way, social marketing in Indian Country is focused primarily 

on health and safety—for example, HIV/AIDS prevention; methamphetamine use prevention; suicide 

prevention; mental health; and gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and transsexual support. Social 

marketing, however, is increasingly used for environmental sustainability.29

Social Marketing and Energy Conservation

One successful example of the use of social marketing in increasing energy conservation is the case of 

the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) in California. The company’s experiment, conducted in 

1990, gave homeowners a free home inspection and advice on ways to make their dwelling more energy 

efficient.30 The program was unsuccessful until auditors incorporated two behavior-change tools during 

their home visits. 

First, auditors began communicating with vivid, personal information. For instance, rather than 

simply point out cracks around doors, the auditor would compare the cracks to a hole the size of 

a baseball. ... Second, auditors were instructed to involve the customer during the home visit. For 

example, home owners might be asked to take measurements or read meters. This strategy was 

used to induce homeowners into making a commitment to weatherizing their homes.31

Doug McKenzie-Mohr, an environmental psychologist specializing in the behavioral aspects of 

sustainability and a leader in the field of social marketing for sustainability, presented an example of 

the effectiveness of social marketing on increasing energy conservation. In a 1994 study, he drew on 

the results of the PG&E study, identified social psychological variables relevant to residential energy 

conservation, and trained home auditors to use them.32 Techniques included—

•	 Capturing the householder’s attention; for example, by looking at utility bills and describing 

how much money is being lost by not retrofitting.

•	 Gaining the householder’s trust; for example, by wearing an identification badge and 

sending material to the house in advance that highlights the assessor’s training.

•	 Getting the householder to make a minor commitment; for example, agreeing to make 

changes by a certain date.

•	 Framing information in terms of loss rather than gain; for example, instead of focusing on 

the savings from retrofitting, telling the householder how much money is being lost by not 

weatherizing.

•	 Helping the householder understand household resource consumption; for example, 

explaining that visible devices like lighting consume fewer resources than less visible 

resources like water heaters and furnaces.

29 James (2010).

30 Community-Based Social Marketing (n.d.).

31 Community-Based Social Marketing (n.d.). 

32 McKenzie-Mohr (1994).
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

8 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

•	 Explaining the savings that the householder realizes from retrofitting.

These activities illustrate another motivator for change. Involving householders in the effort increased 

buyin by inspiring them to accept themselves as the type of people who care about energy efficiency and 

to take steps to save money and weatherize.33

McKenzie-Mohr reported that using social psychological knowledge increases the likelihood that 

people will engage in sustainable behaviors. The home auditors who were trained to use the techniques 

described previously rated themselves as significantly better able to encourage homeowners to adopt 

energy-conserving technologies.”34

Discussing information in terms of loss rather than gain is a technique supported by message framing. 

Message framing is a communication technique within social marketing. This technique assumes that 

a message can be created in such a way that a specific audience will interpret the message to create a 

specific response. This response is often hoped to be a change in behavior. 

Cheng et al. noted that loss-framed messages tend to be more effective in promoting environmental 

behavior. In particular, “loss frames were more effective for the low salience issue of energy conservation, 

whereas gain frames were more effective for the high salience issue of recycling. ”Also, “loss framing 

was most persuasive when the losses were emphasized on the current generation as opposed to future 

generations.”35 The authors, however, also found that certain audiences were more susceptible to loss or 

gain framing than others. This finding suggests that research might be required to determine if Native 

American audiences might be more likely to change their behavior based on a particular style of message. 

For instance, the American Indian cultural emphasis on future generations might suggest that Native 

audiences would be likely to respond to gain-framed messages that focus on future generations.

In another study, researchers used monthly feedback to reduce and control electricity use.36 Participants 

received a letter each month stating the percentage change in electricity consumption from the same 

month both 1 and 2 years ago. The letter also showed how much money participants saved or lost and 

the difference in kilowatt-hours. The letter arrived a few days after the utility bill every month. Although 

individuals were not aware that they were participating in this study, households that received the letter 

reduced their electricity by 4.7 percent. The authors stated that—

The results of this study demonstrate the effectiveness and practicality of this form of feedback. In 

total, approximately $16 was spent on this project, which is substantially less than other methods 

of attempting to reduce electricity such as advertisements and monetary payments.37

One Native Community and Energy Efficiency Audits

In 1995, a Canadian province conducted a successful social marketing campaign to promote energy 

efficiency in an Indian community. British Columbia’s BC21 PowerSmart was a provincewide project 

33 Heath and Heath (2010).

34 McKenzie-Mohr (1994).

35 Cheng et al. (2011): 53. 

36 Community-Based Social Marketing (n.d.b).

37 Community-Based Social Marketing (n.d.b).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 9

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

to conserve resources and create jobs.38 The project used energy audits and incentives to encourage 

residents to improve their energy and water efficiency. BC21 PowerSmart later used a similar approach 

in the Okanagan First Nations Community Project, a project for Canada’s Indian population living in the 

Okanagan Valley. In addition to creating jobs and conserving resources, the program focused on training 

First Nation members and improving their housing stock. 

The program specifically attempted to be respectful of First Nation culture and to engage First Nation 

members.

A BC21 PowerSmart Okanagan First Nations Committee, made up of representatives from each 

of the six participating bands, was established to provide input about the specific needs of the 

community. This was essential for the program’s success, as there were some very sensitive 

issues which needed to be addressed, including political friction between band chiefs and the 

government, and a general mistrust of the government within the community. It was important to 

introduce the program as being neutral. To help achieve this, the project manager’s office was set 

up in his home in the Okanagan Valley, rather than in a government or band council facility to help 

overcome skepticism about the project by householders. First Nations members were hired as 

staff.39

Professional installers provided on-the-job training to staff (that is, the home auditors) in “basic building 

technology, product installation, customer service, and documentation and reporting. This helped them to 

provide related services to their own community, and to compete for utility and government contracts.”40

After the audit was complete, the home auditors offered to install one of each energy-saving product 

needed per home. The products included the following:

•	 Hot water tank blankets.

•	 Pipe insulation.

•	 Weatherstripping.

•	 Caulking.

•	 Gasket plugs.

•	 Faucet aerators.

•	 Flush reducers.

•	 Low-flow showerheads.

Both the audit and the products were provided free of charge as an incentive to encourage households to 

participate in the program. Program participants said they were very satisfied with the products and the 

service they received. They were happy that the project provided services that benefited their community.

Effect on SCinIC

Research data are not available to prove that social marketing and message framing are especially 

effective at persuading Native American communities to adopt sustainable construction technologies. 

Research in behavior change, however, offers some concepts that point in the direction of the SCinIC 

38 Tools of Change (n.d.).

39 Tools of Change (n.d).

40 Tools of Change (n.d.).
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

10 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

activities. Chip Heath and Dan Heath, for example, discussed the ability of “bright spots” to serve as 

champions and avenues forward to success for others who might otherwise feel overwhelmed by the size 

of the change they are trying to create within their own community. “These flashes of success—these 

bright spots—can illuminate the road map for action and spark the hope that change is possible.”41 The 

SCinIC case studies, which emphasize the varied journeys that seven demonstration partners took in 

incorporating green technologies and materials into their housing, highlight these “bright spots.” This 

approach is intended to focus the reader on the ability of Native American communities to create their 

own sustainable change.

The “appeal to identity” referenced previously indicates that increasing the ability of communities that 

are already carrying out sustainable construction to tell their own story may be useful in appealing to 

other communities with an interest but no existing champion. The Native representatives involved in this 

initiative, and those encountered at training sessions and events, have an interest in sharing their journey. 

Other tribes that are at the beginning of a sustainable construction process may be especially receptive to 

their example and lessons.

41 Heath and Heath (2010): 40.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 11

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Relationship of HUD Housing and Native American Communities42

The federal government, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, has played a 

role in supporting housing in Indian Country since the 1960s. At times, this role has been somewhat 

prescriptive or perceived as such. With the passage of Native American Housing Assistance and SelfDetermination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA), the relationship of tribes, and their tribally designated housing 

entities (TDHEs), to HUD has changed enormously. NAHASDA has emphasized flexibility and a local focus 

that has enabled tribes and TDHEs, far more than ever before, to prioritize according community need, 

leverage funds, and incorporate cultural and sustainable features into housing, if so desired. It has opened 

the door to the type of sustainable activities that this initiative has documented.

United States Housing Act of 1937 and Establishment of the Office of Native 

American Programs

With its creation in the 1960s, HUD was assigned the task of providing affordable housing assistance to 

American Indians. The United States Housing Act of 1937 (1937 Act) was the primary vehicle for this 

early assistance.

The 1937 Act created the national public housing program for low-income households but did not initially 

address specific housing needs of Native populations living in Native American communities. In 1961, the 

Public Housing Administration, an agency that became part of HUD, issued legal opinions that American 

Indians living on reservations and in other Indian areas were eligible to participate in public housing 

programs. 

Administration

As a result of this determination of tribal eligibility, the Public Housing Administration created Indian 

housing authorities (IHAs) for maintaining, operating, and developing affordable housing in Native 

American communities. IHAs were designed to operate similarly to public housing agencies (PHAs).

By the 1970s, however, HUD recognized that Native American communities (later still, Native Hawaiian 

communities) faced unique housing conditions, in part, related to remote geographical locations, 

economic conditions, historical land issues, historical discrimination, and tribal cultural practices. PHA 

operational practices and programs also differed from those of IHAs, because they both operated in 

different relationships to their local communities and because they received some of their funding from 

different sources.

To provide Native American communities with an advocate within HUD for their community and housing 

development needs, HUD established the Office of Indian Programs in 1974. In 1984, HUD established 

the Office of Indian Housing as a part of the Department’s Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH). 

The Office of Indian Housing was renamed the Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) in 1992. 

This change included creating regional offices for administering Native American programs under the 

management of a central office. ONAP in 2013 consists of a headquarters office in Washington, D.C., and 

a network of six field offices in Chicago, Oklahoma City, Phoenix (and Albuquerque), Denver, Seattle, and 

Anchorage. ONAP’s mission is to—

42 This section on HUD and housing is largely adapted from HUD (n.d.b).
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

12 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

•	 Increase the supply of safe, decent, and affordable housing available to Native American families.

•	 Strengthen communities by improving living conditions and creating economic opportunities for 

tribes and Indian housing residents.

•	 Ensure fiscal integrity in the operation of the programs it administers.43

Programs

Under the 1937 Act, 14 programs provided funding to American Indian tribes and IHAs. They were 

administered in a variety of ways: competitive, noncompetitive formula, and first-come, first-served. The 

primary housing programs administered under the 1937 Act were—

•	 Low Rent (LR). Beginning in 1961, Native American communities gained access to the LR 

program, which closely mirrored the Low Rent Public Housing Administration Program. HUD 

funds would go to an IHA that used them to acquire the rights to land and to build new units—or 

to acquire and rehabilitate existing ones—for rent by income-eligible families. The IHAs then 

managed the properties and received additional HUD funds representing the difference between 

allowable operating costs and tenant payments toward rent.

•	 Mutual Help (MH). The MH program provided opportunities for lower income Native families 

to purchase decent, affordable housing beginning in 1962. As with the LR program, the IHA 

developed the housing with HUD funding. The individual homebuyer became responsible for 

all operating and maintenance costs after completing the purchase, however. The program was 

a lease-purchase arrangement that built equity in an MH equity account, which was applied 

toward the purchase price of the home or refunded if the family left the MH program before 

achieving ownership. Families did not actually gain title to their properties until all their payment 

obligations were met, they exercised their option to acquire title, and the tribe completed 

conveyance, generally a 25-year process. For as long as the home was administered by the IHA, the 

IHA was responsible for operation and maintenance costs using 1937 Act funds. The MH program 

was available to qualified low-income Indian families on Indian lands. The Indian Housing Act 

of 1988 also established a self-help component that allowed lower income Indian families to 

contribute a major portion of the labor necessary to build their homes.44

•	 Modernization Program. Another very significant HUD program for the IHAs was the 

modernization program, funded through the Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program 

(CIAP) and the Comprehensive Grant Program (CGP).

The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 expanded the allowable uses for CIAP beyond 

modernization for rental housing to include modernization grants for MH units and management 

improvement grants for other homeownership developments. CIAP was distributed through a 

competitive allocation process. CGP, which became effective in 1992, provided large PHAs and IHAs (250 

units or more) with a more flexible program distributed by a formula allocation.

43 HUD (n.d.a). 

44 HUD (n.d.c.).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 13

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Effect of the 1937 Act Program in Indian Country

These housing programs had a significant effect on the provision of housing in tribal areas in the decades 

after 1961.45 By the end of fiscal year (FY) 1997, more than 100,000 units were either complete or in 

various stages of the production pipeline—many of them replaced significantly substandard housing. In 

FY 1998, 41.3 percent of the units were LR and 57.6 percent of the units were MH. The MH program was 

very popular because of the strong preference for homeownership in Indian Country. 

The following table illustrates the housing inventory for the LR, MH, and Turnkey III (TK3) programs, as 

represented by the number of units in management by the six area offices at the beginning of FY 1998, the 

first year of NAHASDA.

Units Under Management by Six Area Offices

Area Office Low Rent Mutual Help Turnkey III Total

Alaska 903 5,038 0 5,941

Eastern/Woodlands 5,376 3,574 382 9,332

Northern Plains 9,635 6,572 322 16,529

Southern Plains 3,124 10,255 0 13,379

Southwest 8,425 12,674 53 21,152

Northwest 1,926 2,879 6 4,811

Total 29,389 40,992 763 71,144

Source: Indian Housing Block Grant Database, FY98FIN.spss file

Although these programs created a substantial amount of affordable, decent housing on Indian 

reservations, serious problems and concerns persisted. Some tribal governments objected to the 

structure of HUD programs, saying that the somewhat independent role of the IHA undermined tribal 

sovereignty, in part because the IHAs were compelled to comply with HUD regulations and practices, 

in some cases in contradiction to tribal practice. Some IHAs, on the other hand, complained about 

excessively involved tribal councils.46

Significantly substandard and overcrowded housing conditions persisted—in part exacerbated by federal 

rules and regulations that limited IHAs and tribes in exploring more efficient and creative solutions to 

resource allocation.47 Furthermore, HUD practices and regulations developed for urban settings did 

not always translate into often rural, Native American communities. Creating subdivisions, clustering 

housing units, and using non-Native architectural styles and materials contributed to housing abuse and 

deterioration, the growth of gang culture, and the loss of culture and clan relationships. These programs 

did not address the difficult land ownership issues that discouraged private investment in housing, land, 

and mortgage opportunities. 48

45 HUD (n.d.c.).

46 Biles (2000) and the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development (2008).

47 HUD (1996).

48 HUD (1996).
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

14 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

NAHASDA

The passage NAHASDA on October 26, 1996,49 signaled a new era in HUD’s relationship with American 

Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages, with significant practical and policy implications. From a policy 

standpoint, NAHASDA recognized the right of tribal self-governance and the unique relationship between 

the federal government and the governments of Indian tribes, established by longstanding treaties, court 

decisions, statutes, Executive orders, and the United States Constitution.50

NAHASDA eliminated several separate programs (including the LR, MH, TK3, and modernization 

programs) and replaced them with single block grant program: the Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG). 

NAHASDA created more flexible reporting rules, recognizing the different needs and conditions in 

different Native American communities and providing federal assistance for Indian tribes in a manner 

that recognized the rights of tribal self-governance. 

NAHASDA has been the primary housing program for tribes since FY 1998. Section 202 of NAHASDA lists 

the following eligible affordable housing activities.

•	 Indian housing assistance. Modernization or operating assistance for housing previously 

developed or operated by HUD’s former Indian housing programs.

•	 Housing development. Acquisition, new construction, reconstruction, and moderate or 

substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing. 

•	 Housing services. Housing-related services for affordable housing, such as housing counseling 

for rental or homeownership assistance, the establishment or support of resident management 

organizations, energy auditing, activities related to self-sufficiency, and other services. 

•	 Housing management services. Management services for affordable housing. 

•	 Crime prevention and safety activities. Safety, security, and law enforcement measures and 

activities appropriate to protect residents of affordable housing from crime.

•	 Model activities. Specifically HUD-approved housing activities that are designed to develop and 

support affordable housing. 

The style or design of the housing is not defined except as moderate design, defined in 24 CFR§1000.156 

as “housing that is of a size and with amenities consistent with unassisted housing offered for sale in 

the Indian tribe’s general geographic area to buyers who are at or below the area median income.” 

This definition relates to all affordable housing development activities, including acquisition, new 

construction, reconstruction, moderate or substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing, and 

homebuyer assistance and model activities.

In a project, units with the same number of bedrooms must be comparable with respect to size, cost, and 

amenities.51

49 Public Law No.104-330, 110 Stat. 4016 (codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. §§ 4101-4195 (Supp. IV 1998)).

50 HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing (2007).

51 66 FR 49790, Sept. 28, 2001.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 15

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

HUD Sustainable Housing Support in Indian Country

HUD has several mechanisms in place to support sustainable building technologies in Indian Country 

housing. 

Budgeting for developing affordable 

housing under NAHASDA is strongly 

shaped by total development costs 

(TDCs). TDC values are developed 

annually by ONAP based on average 

construction cost data from two 

sources, RSMeans Reed Construction 

Data and Marshall & Swift/Boeckh, 

leading suppliers of construction 

cost information. These construction 

cost data are adjusted by adding 

an additional 75 percent for site 

development. 

Tribes may develop their own standards of moderate housing design and may exceed TDC by up to 10 

percent before needing to seek approval.52

In addition, using the TDC variance request, tribes can include sustainable housing technologies in their 

eligible housing activities. Tribes and TDHEs have long been able to request variances to allow them to 

meet costs beyond allowable TDCs on a cost-per-unit construction basis. Beginning in 2006, however, 

green technology was mentioned specifically as a potential reason for waiver, provided the requester had 

also worked with the Area ONAP to lower the costs of the project.

Significant additional costs for incorporating green building, energy efficiency or other innovative 

practices, such as Indian Energy Resource regulation compliance.53

TDC variance for Alaska follows a somewhat different pattern. The PIH notice on TDCs for tribes 

automatically allows for a slight increase in published TDCs in Alaska to allow TDHEs, villages, and 

corporations to meet Alaskan energy efficiency standards.

Additionally, this Notice constitutes HUD approval for a 2% increase above the attached TDCs 

for construction projects in Alaska to meet Building Energy Efficiency Standards (BEES) 

requirements. BEES are only required when funds provided by the State of Alaska are used in 

conjunction with HUD funds.54

For certain sustainable technologies, tribes and TDHEs may also choose another approval option. Tribes 

and TDHEs may seek approval under NAHASDA for model demonstration activities. The cost cap in this 

case is the lesser of up to 20 percent of the grant or $2 million. 

HUD wrote incentives for sustainable construction into its American Recovery and Redevelopment Act 

52 Most recently authorized in PIH Notice 2011-63, described most recently in PIH Notice 2010-47.

53 PIH Notice 2006-17: 3.

54 PIH Notice 2010-47: 4.

Architectural Rendering of Planned Nez Perce Multifamily 

Construction

Image: 7 Directions Architects/Planners for HUD SCinIC
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

16 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

of 2009 (ARRA) notices of funding availability awarded in 2009. Under the IHBG competitive ARRA 

program, applicants could receive up to seven additional points for using ENERGY STAR products; 

having the units rated by a home energy rater as ENERGY STAR-qualified home; providing homebuyers 

with a housing counseling curriculum, including an energy conservation, budgeting, and ENERGY STAR 

component; and having the program certified under programs including—

•	 LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design).

•	 ENERGY STAR Plus Indoor Air Package.

•	 ENERGY STAR Advanced New Home Construction.

•	 Earthcraft.

•	 Enterprise Green Communities initiatives.

•	 National Association of Home Builders Green Building guidelines.

The Indian Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) program, an annual funding program, allows 

for energy efficiency and green development for either housing rehabilitation or public facilities. Public 

services “directed toward improving the community’s public services and facilities, including...energy 

conservation”55 are also eligible under ICDBG.

HUD has written support for energy efficiency and energy conservation into the ICDBG application 

process. An ICDBG application may receive a point for compliance with HUD policy priorities for 

sustainability provided it successfully addresses the following.

(1) Support and promote an energy-efficient, green, and healthy housing market by retrofitting 

existing housing or community facilities, supporting energy-efficient new construction, and 

improving home energy labeling. An applicant must demonstrate that the rehabilitation or 

construction of housing or community facilities at a minimum meets the standard for Energy Star 

for New Homes, or recognized green building rating standards utilizing one of several recognized 

green rating programs for new construction or substantial rehabilitation. An applicant should 

also identify the buildings or units that will include healthy design features that meet or exceed 

the mandatory requirements identified in a green building standard. The application must 

indicate which standard will be used by the applicant. Grantees will be expected to report on 

outcome measures including the number of housing units or community facilities rehabilitated or 

constructed to meet energy efficiency and green development standards, or the number of housing 

units or community facilities rehabilitated or constructed to meet healthy design standards.56

Applicants also gain points for developing feasible and measurable outcomes. HUD has written the 

potential for sustainability into this rating subfactor as well. Allowable outcomes that an applicant may 

cite as measurables for the project include the reduction of drug-related crime or health-related hazards 

and improved energy efficiency.

More language supporting HUD’s environmental sustainability priority is found in its housing standards 

policy. If an ICDBG applicant requests approval for housing standards less stringent than the Section 

8 Housing Quality Standards, the new standards the applicant develops must provide for “a livable 

home environment and an energy efficient building and systems that incorporate energy conservation 

measures.”57

55 http://portal.hud.gov/huddoc/2013icdbgnofa.pdf (accessed February 19, 2013).

56 http://portal.hud.gov/huddoc/2013icdbgnofa.pdf (accessed February 19, 2013).

57 http://portal.hud.gov/huddoc/2013icdbgnofa.pdf (accessed February 19, 2013).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 17

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Not all HUD sustainability grants are construction based. Just as the Sustainable Construction in Indian 

Country initiative worked with demonstration projects on issues related to planning and standards, 

HUD’s Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities has provided tribes, among others, with regional 

planning grants and partnered with federal agencies on community challenge planning grants. Tribes 

were among the awarded grantees in each of these grant programs between 2010 and 2013.

Between 2005 and 2008, HUD ONAP provided onsite assessments of mold and moisture conditions in 

a limited number of tribal housing units. In 2008, HUD expanded the program area to include energy 

assessments. The program included quarterly material dissemination, regional training sessions, written 

site visit reports with energy efficiency recommendations, and three Greener Homes National Summits, 

which brought tribes together for topics including energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. 

Between 2005 and March 2013, this contract assessed 616 housing units, providing tailored assessment 

and recommendations on rehabilitation and energy efficiency upgrades to 74 different American Indian 

tribes and Alaska Native villages. 

Within the limits of the current fiscal belt tightening, HUD is taking steps to demonstrate its commitment 

to policies and programs that support increasing sustainability and that nurture innovation in housing 

in Indian Country while also maintaining affordability and decreasing overcrowding. These steps are not 

enough to meet the need, however. 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

18 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Task Overview and Implementation

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative included four tasks.

•	 The review of current activities. Identifying American Indian and Alaska Native American 

communities that have or are working on sustainable construction projects, funding resources, 

and technical assistance resources.

•	 National impediments meeting. Conducting a national meeting to identify impediments to 

sustainable construction practices and opportunities for TA and training for Native American 

communities. 

•	 Demonstration projects. Seeking demonstration project partners that can be featured in best 

practice case studies. These case studies will enable other tribes to benefit from these best 

practices. 

•	 Training. Making available to Native American communities training based on experience and 

needs.

The Review of Current Activities

The statement of work assigned the contractor to “conduct a review of current activities promoting 

sustainable construction in Indian country.”58 This review set the stage for other activities under the 

contract by beginning the process of defining the TA and financial resources available for tribes seeking 

to implement sustainable technologies in their residential housing and by providing some insight into 

the amount of knowledge of and enthusiasm for sustainable technology on the part of federal, tribal, 

nonprofit and other organizations working with tribes. Interviewees also naturally described current and 

future sustainable residential construction or rehabilitation projects, which are also briefly described in 

the report. The report process, key informants, findings, and statistics on tribal projects are in the section, 

“Findings and Recommendations From the Review of Current Activities.” The full report was completed 

on July 18, 2011, and is reproduced in appendix A.

National Impediments Meeting

The Department of Housing and Urban Development conducted a meeting to explore impediments to 

sustainable construction practices and solutions to these impediments. The meeting consisted of two 

parts: (1) a set of focus groups and (2) a followup analysis session. The meeting was conducted at HUD’s 

third Greener Homes National Summit in Denver on September 28 and 29, 2011. Participants from 

governmental, nongovernmental, and tribal focus groups offered observations regarding impediments to 

sustainable construction in Native American communities. 

Representatives of the focus groups met the next day to analyze the primary obstacles identified by each 

group, prioritize these obstacles in terms of their effect on sustainable housing, and brainstorm potential 

solutions. Because several participants were from federal agencies, the group focused on steps that 

federal partners might be able to implement. HUD completed the draft report on this meeting on January 

29, 2011, and posted it on the HUD USER website. The full report is also reproduced in appendix B.

58 R-DEN-02502, Task Order No DEN-T0006 Sustainable Construction in Indian Country: 5.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 19

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Demonstration Projects

Selection Process

The selection process required the 

development of a request-for-projects 

letter, an interview protocol, and a 

set of selection considerations. HUD 

sent out a request for demonstration 

projects in November 2011. The mailing 

list included 788 tribes and tribally 

designated housing entities. HUD 

received 25 requests to be part of the 

program, and SCinIC team members 

conducted 17 interviews. 

More partnering sites would have benefited from TA than could be funded. The demonstration project 

selection process included diversity in climate regions, in Office of Native American Programs regions, 

in housing types, in sustainable technologies, and in completed versus planned projects. In addition, 

selection considerations included a determination that construction funding was secured, that tribal 

leadership was onboard with the project, and that the prospective demonstration was willing to 

receive TA and participate as a possible case study. Tribes received TA only and no funding was used for 

construction. 

At least one demonstration project was selected in each HUD ONAP region. The following table lists each 

project’s technologies and project types.

Cocopah Indian Housing and Development Multifamily 

Building Scheduled for Rehabilitation

Image: Cocopah Indian Housing and Development
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

20 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Demonstration Projects

Demonstrations Sustainable Technologies Project Type

Pokagon Band 

of Potawatomi 

Indians

Community master plan; Best Management 

Practices (BMP) in site plan including 

bioswales, cluster housing design, permeable 

pavement, use of prairie grass, and 

indigenous vegetation.

Completed 2004-2006. 

Sustainable water management 

and conservation in 

single-family housing 

subdevelopments.

Nez Perce 

Housing 

Authority

Hybrid straw bale construction with ductless 

minisplits; culturally adapted design; lowemissivity (low-E) windows; BMP in site 

plan.

Planned 2012-2013. New 

construction of 20 single-story 

duplex units.

Cocopah Indian 

Housing and 

Development

Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs); ENERGY 

STAR appliances; indoor and outdoor 

lighting.

Planned 2013. Rehabilitating 

three eight-unit multifamily 

buildings.

Navajo Housing 

Authority 

Green standards; green review process; 

green request for proposals .

Planned 2013. New 

construction and policies 

to support sustainable 

development.

Pawnee Housing 

Authority

 Insulating concrete forms (ICFs). Planned 2013. New 

construction of duplex units.

Akwesasne 

Housing 

Authority

Geothermal heating and cooling; ICFs; solar 

voltaic panels; solar domestic hot water.

Completed 2011. Five quadplex 

buildings for seniors within 

a community containing 

sustainable features.

Choctaw Housing 

Authority 

Structural insulated panels (SIPs); low-E 

windows and doors; CFLs; ENERGY STAR 

appliances.

Completed 2009-2012. Eight 

duplexes and 74 single-family 

houses. 

Native Village of 

Kwinhagak 

Monolithic spray foam envelope; 

aerodynamic shape; whole-house truss.

Planned 2012-1013. Five 

single-family houses.

Muscogee (Creek) 

Nation 

SIPs; geothermal heating and cooling; SIPs 

manufacturing plant.

Completed 2012. Housing 

development for seniors 

with 24 units and individual 

replacement houses.

Technical Assistance

HUD stipulated that TA be supplemental in nature. The TA providers were not to take a leading role in the 

demonstration project. 
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 21

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

The types of TA “necessary for the incorporation of sustainable construction techniques and technologies 

into Tribal projects” per the Statement of Work59 are broad in nature. Types of TA that the team 

recommended offering included—

•	 Assistance with developing procurement and bid announcements.

•	 Charrette implementation.

•	 Architectural design drafts.

•	 Existing design review and recommendations.

•	 Engineering schematic development.

•	 Appropriate sustainable product, material, and technique recommendations.

•	 Assistance with product, material, and technique installation.

•	 Education on the maintenance of products and materials.

•	 Assistance with the Green Communities and LEED for Homes designation processes.

•	 Assistance in developing or adopting a Green Development Standard.

•	 Energy modeling for the analysis of optimal systems, materials, orientation, openings, and energy 

use.

•	 Life-cycle analysis to assist in determining the costs and benefits of specific systems.

•	 Conceptual site plans.

•	 Postconstruction testing (blower door).

The tribes or TDHEs with projects already completed as of 2012 included the Pokagon Band of 

Potawatomi Indians, the Akwesasne Housing Authority, the Choctaw Housing Authority, and the 

Muscogee (Creek) Nation. These demonstration projects primarily requested postconstruction-related 

TA. In some cases, these demonstration projects requested assistance to benefit planned projects 

connected with the completed projects. 

The demonstration projects with forthcoming construction or rehabilitation primarily requested 

assistance in making their housing designs more energy efficient. This benchmark included a wide range 

of recommendations, from changes to site plans, to passive solar orientation, to the incorporation of 

sustainable materials and technologies. In one case, the TA included helping the housing entity link up 

with its utility provider to access programs for which the housing entity and tenants were eligible.

59 R-DEN-02502, Task Order No DEN-T0006 Sustainable Construction in Indian Country: 11.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

22 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Technical Assistance Provided

Demonstrations Technical Assistance Provided

Pokagon Band of Potawatomi 

Indians (Michigan, Indiana)

Appropriate sustainable product, material, and technique 

recommendations (geothermal costs and incentives); energy 

modeling; charrette assistance; design recommendations.

Nez Perce Housing Authority 

(Idaho)

Charrette implementation; energy modeling; appropriate sustainable 

product, material, and technique recommendations (straw bale); 

low-income housing tax credit application support; research into 

certification opportunities.

Cocopah Indian Housing and 

Development (Arizona)

Liaison in linking to utility program; developing energy modeling; 

appropriate sustainable product, material, and technique 

recommendations.

Navajo Housing Authority 

(Arizona, Utah, New Mexico)

Assistance with developing procurement and bid announcements; 

design review and recommendations; creating green standards; 

recommendations for adding sustainability to request for proposals; 

recommendations for creating a green design review process.

Pawnee Housing Authority 

(Oklahoma)

Appropriate sustainable product, material, and technique 

recommendations (insulating concrete forms).

Akwesasne Housing 

Authority (New York)

Energy modeling; appropriate sustainable product, material, and 

technique recommendations (for rehabilitating older units). 

Choctaw Housing Authority 

(Mississippi)

Design review and recommendations; site plan recommendations.

Native Village of Kwinhagak 

(Alaska)

Design revisions and revised construction manual; assistance with 

product, material, and technique installation.

Muscogee (Creek) Nation 

(Oklahoma)

Postconstruction testing.

The energy modeling and postconstruction testing yielded TA resource reports that provided 

communities with useful information. Assessments of energy usage provided communities with 

completed projects with a baseline against which to measure and compare their future use. Those 

communities could also use the recommendations section with potential or estimated payback and other 

cost-effectiveness information to measure against the real-world costs or longevity of their own installed 

technologies. Likewise, communities planning future projects could use the recommendations sections to 

plan their budgets and determine how to invest the upfront dollars for a cost-effective return.

All demonstration projects with planned projects received TA, but not all reached their anticipated goals, 

for a variety of reasons. These reasons were reflective of the findings in the review of current activities 
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 23

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

and the national meeting and included—

•	 Need for additional TA.

•	 Need to scale back because of lack of anticipated funding, or need to pursue additional funding 

for added sustainable elements or additional specialists because tribe members or local area 

residents lacked training in specific techniques.

•	 Longer learning curve with new techniques or equipment. 

•	 Weather or archeological delays.

•	 Internal politics.

Case Studies

According to the statement of work, case studies were intended to “provide both technical and 

general information that will be of value and interest to ONAP and Tribes. The text shall be concise 

but informative with an emphasis on technologies and builders’ experience in both installation and 

operation after installation. It shall be presented in such a manner that stakeholders can learn from it 

and take action.”60 Although HUD is emphasizing best practices, “the case study shall include ‘challenges 

to’ implementation and strategies for addressing those challenges.”61 SCinIC team members conducted 

interviews and collected data and images from the Native Village of Kwinhagak, Muscogee (Creek) 

Nation, Nez Perce Tribal Housing Authority, Cocopah Indian Housing and Development, Pokagon Band of 

Potawatomi Indians, and the Akwesasne Housing Authority. These case studies are in appendix C.

Outreach

Early in the contract, the initiative established a web presence on the HUD USER website, at http://www.

huduser.org/portal/SCinIC/home.html. From this site, users could sign up for periodic e-mail updates, 

read updates on the progress of the demonstration partners, download TA documents developed under 

the contract, and learn about training opportunities or other events. 

On May 2, 2013, HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) and ONAP cosponsored a 

reception with Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. The event celebrated sustainable construction 

projects that were demonstration projects and case studies under both the SCinIC contract and the PD&R 

Small Grants Program. At the event, 21 communities with 25 projects were represented with case studies, 

posters, videos, speakers, and other materials. Invitees to the event included federal partners, green and 

affordable building industry representatives, tribes and TDHEs, and members of Congress. 

Training

Training topics were determined based on the outcomes of the national meeting, TA interactions with 

the demonstration projects, and discussions with trainers on what the next logical steps would be if the 

HUD Greener Homes regional trainings offered additional indepth information. As a result, HUD offered 

60 R-DEN-02502, Task Order No DEN-T0006 Sustainable Construction in Indian Country: 12.

61 R-DEN-02502, Task Order No DEN-T0006 Sustainable Construction in Indian Country: 12.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

24 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

training sessions titled “Sustainable Construction in Indian Country: Assessing Conventional-Built and 

Sustainable Buildings.” The training session materials are reproduced in appendix D.

Training task activities included site selection, developing an agenda and curriculum, identifying trainers, 

creating training material and a notebook, marketing, registration, and delivering training.

The curriculum included benchmarking, modeling, state and local utility funding opportunities and 

policies, and energy-reduction cost measures with a real-life focus on the TA provided to the cold-climate 

Akwesasne Housing Authority and the warm-climate Cocopah Indian Housing and Development. 

Two training sessions took advantage of economies of scale by adding a day of sustainable construction 

training after a Greener Homes regional training session. The trainer at all sessions was Kate Brown 

of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her co-trainer at Hogansburg, New York, was Kevin 

Fitzgibbons, consultant and former HUD official. Data on those trainings, speakers, and participants are in 

the following tables. 

December 13, 2012

Skirvin Hilton—Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (SPONAP)

Overall Rating: 100%

Number of Participants: 12

Attendees

•	 Comanche Nation Housing Authority.

•	 Housing Authority of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

•	 Housing Authority of the Pawnee Tribe.

•	 Muscogee (Creek) Nation Environmental Services.

•	 Osage Nation Housing Department.

•	 Sun’aq Tribe of Kodiak.

•	 HUD Southern Plains ONAP.

Speakers

•	 Tom Lance, Sun’aq Tribe of Kodiak, Alaska; James Williams, Muscogee (Creek) Nation.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 25

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

February 14, 2013

Marriott—Albuquerque, New Mexico (SWONAP)

Overall Rating: 100%

Number of Participants: 22

Attendees

•	 Consolidated Solar Technologies.

•	 Dry Creek Rancheria

•	 Energy Tech.

•	 Ho-Chunk Housing and Community Development Agency.

•	 Hopi Tribal Housing Authority.

•	 HUD—EWONAP.

•	 Native American Housing Consultants, LLC.

•	 Navajo Housing Authority.

•	 Navajo Nation Community Housing and Infrastructure Department.

•	 Ohkay Owingeh Housing Authority.

•	 Pueblo Acoma.

•	 Pueblo of Santa Ana Planning and Building Services.

•	 Sandia National Laboratories.

•	 Santo Domingo Tribal Housing Authority.

•	 Santo Domingo Tribe.

•	 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Speakers

•	 Chelsea Chee, Sandia National Laboratory; Ken Hughes, New Mexico Energy Conservation 

Management Division; Neil Whitegull, Ho-Chunk Housing and Community Development.

Part of the AHA’s new sustainable housing project included a training center. The AHA offered to provide 

complementary training space for sustainable construction training. To take advantage of the hands-on 

opportunities at this location, the training expanded to include a tour of the new sustainable housing and 

an optional tour of the Frank S. McCullough, Jr., Hawkins Point Visitors Center and Boat Launch, a source 

of renewable hydropower energy. Data on this training is in the following table.

May 7–9, 2013

Sunrise Acres Training Center—St. Regis, New York

Overall Rating: 100%

Number of Participants: 23

Attendees

•	 Akwesasne Housing Authority.

•	 Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

•	 Kickapoo Housing Authority.

•	 Mohawk Housing Corporation.

•	 Seneca Nation of Indians.

•	 St. Regis Mohawk Tribe.

Speakers

•	 Retha Herne, Executive Director, Akwesasne Housing Authority; John MacArthur, Beardsley Design Associates; two residents of the housing complex; staff from the Diabetes Center for Excellence.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

26 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Findings and Recommendations From The Review of Current 

Activities

Several clearly defined awards, organizations, and certification programs can help an observer locate 

sustainable residential construction and sustainable affordable residential construction activities—if 

not really define the universe thereof. They include the U.S. Green Building Council, Enterprise Green 

Communities, AIA/HUD Secretary’s Awards, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of 

Housing and Urban Development, Policy Development and Research Best Practices online, and the U.S. 

Department of Energy. Tribes and tribal organizations are eligible to participate, but not well represented, 

in these programs. Thus, it can be difficult to gauge the actual state of sustainable construction in India n 

Country. 

The review of current activities of the Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative aimed to 

identify sustainable construction projects, resources, and technical assistance within Indian Country. 

Team members interviewed 26 organizational representatives, conducted literature reviews, and 

followed up with reviews of websites as appropriate. The report reached out to federal agencies, regional 

tribal housing associations, green building industry organizations, educational organizations, and 

nonprofit organizations.

The report, completed in July 2011, reported on 37 green tribal residential projects in 18 states that were 

in the planning stages, in progress, or recently completed, as the following map shows. This list is not all 

encompassing but does provide a good indication of the scope and popularity of sustainable construction 

activities taking place in Alaska and the lower 48 states. The enthusiasm for sustainable building in Indian 

Country was also reinforced when the application process for demonstration projects began; 24 tribes 

in 15 states sought demonstration project status, nearly all self-selecting. (Of the tribes interviewed, five 

were listed in the review of current activities, although they did not necessarily seek assistance with the 

project described in the report.)

Findings

1. More green building services are targeted toward America Indian and Alaska Native 

American communities to meet needs related to existing housing projects than to meet 

needs related to new residential construction projects.

More organizations provide training and TA for increasing the sustainability of existing 

homes. For example, EPA conducts substantial training on assessment and remediation of 

indoor air quality and mold on existing homes. Since 2005, a HUD program focused on energy 

efficiency and rehabilitation has conducted approximately 12 energy assessments annually and 

conducted regional workshops. The federal Bonneville Power Administration has a low-income 

weatherization program for tribes in the Pacific Northwest.

Fewer organizations provided training and TA on new construction in Indian Country. Key 

informants often mentioned the same entities in a given region; for example, Cascadia Green 

Building Council in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest, Cold Climate Housing Research Center in 

Alaska, and the Enterprise Green Communities program for American Indians in the Southwest.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 27

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

2. Educational entities such as tribal colleges offer avenues for tribes to increase the number 

of members with professional green building skills.

The report found four tribal colleges and one branch of a state university in a tribal community 

that offered degree or certificate programs in areas related to green-collar construction jobs. 

The tribal colleges, however, geographically clustered primarily in the Great Lakes, the Dakotas, 

Montana, and the Southwest.

3. The ability of tribes to implement sustainable construction technologies may be limited by 

(1) their lack of internal residential construction capacity, coupled with (2) their inability 

in small and rural communities to hire general managers or construction firms with 

experience to implement the technologies.

Red Feather Development Group and the Zuni Housing Authority both have implemented 

successful models for increasing the capacity of housing authorities to carry out their own 

construction projects, but this model is not common in Indian Country. Most tribes work with the 

construction firms available in their area, and, when they use tribe members, it is usually in 

Sustainable Housing and Projects

In Indian Country

July 2011

Aleut Corporation

Anaktuvuk Pass

Native Village 

of Kwinhagak

Completed Sites

Planned Sites 

SITES Under Construction 

Navajo 

Nation (2)

Bishop 

Paiute 

Tribe 

Yurok 

Tribe

Pinoleville 

Pomo 

Nation

Coeur D'Alene tribe 

Tunica-Biloxi 

Tribe of Louisiana

Penobscot

Nation

Little Traverse 

Bay Bands of 

Odawa Indians

Pokagon 

Band of 

Potawatomi 

Indians

Sault Tribe of 

Chippewa Indians

Red Lake Band 

of Chippewa 

Indians

White Earth Band 

of the Minnesota 

Chippewa Tribe

Fond du Lac 

Band of Minnesota 

Chippewa Tribe

Mescalero 

Apache

Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo

Zuni Pueblo

Isleta Pueblo

Jicarilla Apache

Lumbee Tribe 

of North Carolina

Oglala Sioux tribe (2)

Sicangu Wicoti Awanyakapi 

Rosebud Sioux

Yerington 

Paiute Tribe

Wichita 

Tribe

Confederated 

Tribes of Siletz 

Indians

Coos Bay 

Confederated Tribes

Northwestern Band of 

Shoshone Nation

Menominee 

Indian Tribe of 

Wisconsin

Colville Indian Tribe

Lummi Nation

Makah Tribe

Puyallup 

Tribe

Port Gamble 

S'Klallam Tribe

Cowlitz Tribe

Lower Elwha 

Klallam Tribe
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

28 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

relatively unskilled capacities. In at least one region, tribes have had difficulty accessing 

construction firms with experience in sustainable construction technologies, which is especially 

true when they are required to use the lowest bidder.

4. Tribal funding sources are very limited.

Although regional funding sources such as the Alaska Finance Corporation and the Greater 

Minnesota Housing Fund exist, most of the funding for residential construction in Indian County 

comes from government sources such as Indian Housing Block Grant and the Indian Community 

Development Block Grant. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds used between 

2010 and 2012 were a tremendous creator of sustainable residential housing in Native American 

communities. Housing authorities and tribally designated housing entities typically combine 

funding from several of or all these sources in conjunction with state or private financing (for 

example, the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority). 

5. Tribes interviewed expressed a desire for TA.

Tribes were interested in hearing about the initiative and about resources for additional support 

and TA. 

Recommendations

The report did not include recommendations because it was an exploration of activities and 

opportunities. The following are two recommendations drawn from the findings to support the continued 

development of sustainable construction in Indian Country.

1. Increase national support for TA.

Elevate support for TA to a national level in areas including design, construction management, 

procurement, materials, and certification to provide support for geographic areas with fewer 

resources.

2. Increase support for educational resources. 

Partner with and support colleges and universities serving significant numbers of Native students, 

including tribal colleges and universities.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 29

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Ranking and Recommendations From National Impediments Meeting

This section summarizes the results and recommendations generated by focus groups and the 

coordination meeting that made up the national impediments meeting.

To help ensure that trainers and technical 

assistance providers were aware of what 

factors tribes and organizations working 

with tribes perceive as impediments 

to sustainable construction practices, 

an opening task of this initiative was 

to conduct a meeting to explore the 

impediments and the solutions to these 

impediments. Invited participants from 

governmental, nongovernmental, and 

tribal focus groups offered observations 

regarding impediments to sustainable 

construction in Indian and Alaska Native 

American communities. Participants in a 

followup coordination meeting ranked the 

impediments associated with sustainable 

construction and brainstormed about 

potential solutions. The full report of the 

meeting is in appendix B.

Ranking

This list cannot be considered exhaustive because it was developed from small focus groups, but it is 

indicative of concerns that the TA team members encountered in the field and that training participants 

echoed. Working from the wide variety of impediments identified by the focus groups, members of the 

coordination meeting ranked these four impediments to sustainable construction as most important.

1. Building codes.

2. Costs and funding.

3. Capacity building.

4. Planning.

The following graphic provides a brief summary of these impediments.

SIP House Subdivisions on the Mississippi Band of 

Choctaw Indians Reservation

Image: Pritchard Engineering
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

30 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Highest Ranking Impediments to Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Building Codes:

Communities develop building codes to protect health and safety, but also to 

show commitment to particular issues. Minnesota and Washington States, 

for instance, require compliance with green building codes or standards. 

Tribes have the ability to adopt existing green building codes or standards, 

or to create their own. The balancing act with a building code is to avoid 

being overly strict or posing undue cost burden and, thus, inhibiting desired 

growth.

Costs and 

Funding: 

Sustainable construction is perceived as more expensive, but this is not 

always true. Some sustainable construction technologies require more 

expensive upfront costs; however, the energy savings and more durable 

housing can offset the higher costs or lead to savings later. Some sustainable 

construction technologies are more expensive and lack a payoff time that 

is practical for communities with a strong need for affordability. Some 

sustainable construction technologies do not add additional construction 

costs. Education can change the perspective and life cycle assessments and 

benefit analyses can provide tools to determine the technologies that provide 

the greatest bang for the affordable buck.

Capacity Building: 

Tribal housing authorities may have difficulty building capacity or even 

maintaining levels of capacity due to understaffing and staff turnover. New 

elections in tribal council or decreased Federal budget funds can lead to 

enormous changes in staffing. Some smaller tribes may not have the staffing 

on a regular basis to carry out the housing development their community 

needs to keep pace with housing need. Repeated training, onsite training, and 

partnerships with other organizations are ways to build lasting capacity.

Planning:

Sometimes tribes find themselves planning projects simply because Federal 

funds are suddenly available. This can lead to a mismatch in community need 

and available resources—land, staff time, housing, funds, etc. Long-term 

planning, on the other hand, can help rebalance that mismatch, and support 

a tribe’s overall goals, such as creating a cohesive “place” with increased 

opportunity for all residents, increasing healthier housing, supporting 

economic development, and moving toward energy self-sufficiency. 

Recommendations

Because the participants in the coordination meeting were primarily from federal agencies, they 

primarily developed recommendations of what federal agencies may do to assist in resolving these 

impediments. Given the time constraints and the focus on sustainability, the group primarily limited 

its recommendations to the first four (the highest ranking) impediments related to the sustainable 

construction process. 
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 31

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

1. Building codes

Green building codes or standards are a topic of interest for tribes in some parts of the country. 

Green building standards already affect several tribes. In Minnesota, tribes must abide by state 

green building codes when they incorporate certain types of state funding into affordable housing 

projects. In Washington State, tribes must abide by the energy code. 

These standards comprise another area in which tribes have the freedom to develop standards 

that reflect their cultural priorities, and they have the option to be more stringent than state 

standards. The Pinoleville Pomo Nation developed its own green building standards between 2008 

and 2012 with TA from the interagency Tribal Green Building Codes Workgroup. One issue they 

encountered was difficulty getting their units insured.62 If tribes do not always know that they can 

develop their own codes and standards, then the housing industry is not always sure what to do 

with these codes—just as they struggle to incorporate new types of sustainable housing such as 

straw bale.

In addition, the process does require caution because too much strict regulation can inhibit 

construction. One possibility is to adapt the International Green Construction Code to each 

individual tribe’s needs. Federal agencies can provide incentives to tribes to implement green 

practices and to meet green standards. Another part of the process includes considering ways to 

build tribal capacity to enforce building codes. The level of interest in green building standards at 

the tribal level is evident in the work of the Tribal Green Building Codes Workgroup. 

62 Chee (2013).

Best Practices: Building Codes

The interagency Tribal Green Building Codes Workgroup, begun in March 2010, includes more 

than 50 representatives from federal and tribal agencies and nonprofit organizations engaged 

in exploring how tribes can adopt or adapt sustainable building codes or standards to support 

housing that meets “the environmental, social and cultural priorities of Tribal people” (National Tribal Green Building Codes Summit statement). Building codes shape federally funded 

housing standards in Indian Country, but not all tribes have building codes or standards that 

express their priorities. 

The workgroup held its first summit June 23 and 24, 2011, when it developed a set of priorities that included—

•	 “It is important to maintain clarity about the need to have tribally-driven and culturally-based 

process.”

•	 “Our emphasis needs to be on the development of a process rather than a product, from which 

tribally determined green building codes, and, or tribe-specific systems can develop.”

•	 “Codes need to support each Native Nation’s sovereignty, and be reflective of the community 

and culture.”

For more information, contact Michelle Baker at 415–972–3206 or baker.michelle@epa.gov, or 

Laura Bartels at 970–379–6779 or laura@greenweaverinc.com.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

32 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

2. Costs and funding

Costs and funding are constants, especially in an economic period focused on reduction rather 

than on growth. The group suggested options for doing more with less, which promote the use of 

sustainable construction practices from two directions.

•	 Education. The first direction can show tribes how sustainable investments can save money 

and how tribes can get their money’s worth. Each session of the Greener Homes and the 

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country training provided information on how participants 

could identify federal, state, and utility funding for sustainability. The SCinIC trainings also 

included information on contacting state energy offices, locating information on net metering 

and policies through American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, carrying out online 

benchmarking programs, and accessing data sheets to evaluate payback on sustainable 

investments.

•	 Federal program use. The second direction, a thorough understanding of federal programs, 

reveals built-in supports to sustainable construction practices. 

Education-related recommendations included letting tribes know how the health benefits of 

sustainable housing can spill over into savings in other arenas. For example, healthcare costs 

can decrease when people live in healthier buildings, and maintenance costs can decrease when 

materials are more durable. 

Other suggestions included creating tools to help tribes make smart energy improvement 

choices, such as cost-benefit analysis tools or a matrix for tribal housing that shows the energy 

improvements with the greatest returns on investment, similar to the matrix for public housing 

agencies available at http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=affordable_housing.affordable_

housing_phas. In addition, federal agencies could develop a matrix that enumerates potential 

governmental funding sources for green improvements. In addition to the funding coordination 

listed in the previous text 

box, federal agencies could 

incentivize sustainable 

building practices in their 

grant programs, as they did 

American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act grant 

programs. 

Some other education 

suggestions involved federal 

agencies reaching out to other 

housing industry entities 

such as banks and lenders, 

insurance companies, and 

appraisers to educate them 

on the added value in energyefficient homes. 

Muscogee (Creek) SIP House

Image: FirstPic, Inc. for HUD SCinIC
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 33

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Federal programs have flexibility and credibility. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

(HUD) funding is still often seen simply as housing money, but it is also a tool that tribes can use to 

leverage other funds. Leveraging can be written into grants as a matching requirement, but HUD 

staff can also emphasize it in training, when reviewing Indian Housing Plans and when working 

with tribes. Sustainable building components can be added into existing HUD training curricula. 

Federal agencies together can ensure that their training and TA efforts cross-reference and 

consistently provide information on federal efforts such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

green labeling programs, HUD’s green construction programs, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s 

weatherization and energy efficiency programs. In addition, although it might also be useful for 

total development costs to include life-cycle costs, tribes are already eligible to apply for a variance 

to exceed the TDC with area-office approval based on the incorporation of sustainable building 

technologies.63

3. Capacity building

To expand the capacity of the tribes seeking to develop sustainable housing and communities, 

participants suggested expanding the services provided by nongovernmental organizations and 

supporting an increase in the capacity and number of community development corporations 

(CDCs). Some suggested that the number of Native CDCs with the specific mission of serving Native 

American communities might be increased. One underused resource may be tribal colleges. Tribal 

colleges are not only providing critically important training certificates and degrees in sustainable 

building vocations, they are, in many cases, leading the way in educating their communities and 

regions about sustainability from a long-term Native perspective. See the following text box for a 

brief overview of sustainability efforts at one tribal college, the College of Menominee, Sustainable 

Development Institute.

63 PIH Notice 2010-47.

Best Practices: Federal Agency Funding Coordination

An exciting example of federal agencies joining forces to standardize requirements, combine 

funding sources, and enhance collaboration is the groundbreaking cooperation between the 

HUD Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities, the Department of Transportation (DOT), 

and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the Interagency Partnership on Sustainable 

Communities. This partnership promotes better access to affordable housing, more transportation 

options, and lower transportation costs.

It has also led to coordination planning, policy, and investment such as in the Transportation 

Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) II grants. In TIGER II, for the first time, DOT 

and HUD jointly awarded grants for local planning activities that will eventually lead to integrated 

transportation, housing, and development.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture and the EPA also assisted with the grant program.

For more information, visit http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov/
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

34 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

During this meeting, a few participants reacted to the need for education because of frequent 

leadership and other turnover and also to help leadership embrace quality, which would decrease 

the need to rebuild as frequently. These recommendations, similar to suggestions mentioned 

previously, include providing incentives and rebates for sustainable construction, developing 

baselines and collecting comparison information on efficiencies and savings, adapting analyses on 

sustainability in other communities for Native American communities, and getting the word about 

model tribal projects out to other tribes. One suggestion was for a tribal college version of the 

solar decathlon, where college teams compete to build innovative, affordable houses—often rooted 

in their regional culture or meeting a regional need—powered with solar energy. For sustainable 

building to be successful, educating prospective homeowners is as important as educating 

leadership, because they will live in and need to maintain the final product.

Tribal capacity building also refers to the need to develop specific technical skill sets that will 

enable Native American communities to control some costs of sustainable construction by doing 

the work inhouse. 

The partnership of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and American Indian tribes in 

Oklahoma offers a different model, wherein smaller tribes that lack the capacity and staffing to 

carry out aspects of a construction project can collaborate with USACE. USACE takes on some of 

the technical aspects and wins quality and cost gains for the tribes. 

Best Practices: Capacity Building and Sustainability Education

The College of Menominee, Sustainable Development Institute (SDI) is one example of a college 

creating a rounded approach to sustainability by increasing campus efficiency, educating and 

inspiring students and regional communities in sustainability efforts, and providing training in 

green-collar careers. SDI—

•	 Provides financial assistance to student interns researching sustainability issues, such as campuswide baseline conditions including energy benchmarking and greenhouse gas emissions, 

vermiculture, and indoor air quality.

•	 Has increased the environmental education units in all areas of study and is engaging the 

campus community on campus sustainable development through nine visioning sessions with 

more than 90 participants.

•	 Has engaged Great Lakes-area tribes in climate change education and outreach.

•	 Supports carpooling and other efforts among staff and on campus.

•	 Conducts applied, participatory action research as identified by tribes, including the sustainability indicators research project.

For more information, contact Beau Mitchell at 715–799–5600, ext. 3145 or 

bmitchell@menominee.edu.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 35

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Best Practices: Capacity Building

Smaller tribes do not always have the capacity or staffing to manage construction projects. In 

Oklahoma, because of a memorandum of understanding between HUD and USACE, allowed by 

10 U.S.C. 3036d, the Chief’s Economy Act, tribes can partner with USACE to help with their grant 

applications and project management. 

USACE will work with tribes to provide supporting documentation for their project applications, 

which adds credibility to the package. This documentation can include floor and site plans, a letter 

of support, and cost estimates. If the project is awarded, the tribe enters into a contract to pay 

USACE approximately 6 percent of a grant. 

USACE, as is typical, will provide the tribe with request for qualifications and interview support, 

documentation for the audit process, analysis of prospective subcontractor cost proposals, and 

design review. USACE has structural, mechanical, and architectural engineers on staff. 

During the project, USACE provides tribes with multiple quality assurance inspections, which have 

led to an increase in the quality of materials used in projects and an increase in the square footage 

of projects. They review the pay application to ensure that anticipated work is completed before 

payment is made, ensure that the punch list is completed, and conduct a warranty inspection 

slightly before a year after completion.

For more information, contact Cynthia Kitchens at 918–669–7042 or 

cynthia.kitchens@usace.army.mil.

4. Planning

Sustainable construction does not mean simply adding energy efficiency to individual housing 

units, it also means planning for long-term community development. Many tribes are already 

creating long-term plans with their communities to guide land purchases, housing development, 

and funding and site placement decisions. The Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians have been 

conducting long-term planning since 2004, whereas the Pine Ridge Oglala Lakota Sioux approved 

their first long-term plan in 2012. The Navajo Nation has long had planning sessions within its 

10 chapters, and the chapters have developed their own plans—with varying degrees of success. 

During 2010 and 2013, however, the Navajo Nation, through the Navajo Housing Authority, has 

launched a comprehensive planning project to identify available land for construction, collect 

information from residents about types of housing and site uses desired, and evaluate barriers to 

land use and siting. The process takes time and is likely to change as chapter needs change and 

residents learn more about planning. In addition, without TA to support the resolution of some 

barriers to development, the housing so urgently needed by the community is not likely to be built. 

Participants in the coordination meeting suggested that the federal government was well 

positioned to encourage and support long-term sustainable planning by informing tribes about 

available resources. These resources include Indian Community Development Block Grant funds, 

Economic Development Administration public works planning grants, and Administration for 

Native Americans grants that support long-range planning. In addition, federal agencies can let 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

36 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

tribes know about their own regional planning commissions, which may have technical staff 

available to support communities with needs such as community comprehensive planning, grant 

preparation and assistance, mapping services, hazard mitigation planning, and environmental 

assessments. They can also alert tribes to planning assistance training opportunities available 

through organizations including the National American Indian Housing Council and the Native 

Learning Center. 

The Mayor’s Institute on City Design is a National Endowment for the Arts initiative that helps 

transform communities through design by preparing mayors to be the chief urban designers of 

their cities. Participants suggested that federal agencies could team up to create a tribal version to 

bring sustainable development concepts to more tribal leaders. 

5. Federal coordination.

Participants also offered some overarching recommendations to facilitate better information 

sharing and resource use among federal agencies.

•	 Identify the right contact person in other agencies to provide TA or services. Federal agency 

staff do not always know their counterparts in other agencies or realize who offers what 

services within a federal agency. Regional contact lists could help. 

•	 Coordinate and schedule trainings and meetings jointly rather than having multiple meetings 

with tribes. 

•	 In a similar way, coordinate among agencies to align agency visits to tribes. 

•	 Support local and regional training with multiple-agency presence.

•	 Implement a joint project wherein agencies work together on, for example, a master plan, a 

green building toolkit, or a green building codes or standards toolkit.

•	 Develop a clearinghouse of meetings on sustainability topics relevant to tribes.

•	 Conduct interagency meetings or establish an interagency workgroup. 
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 37

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Conclusion

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative has provided education, training, and technical 

assistance in sustainable technologies to Native American communities both for new building and for 

increasing the sustainability and health of existing homes. Between 2011 and 2013, the initiative helped 

build relationships among tribal staff and sustainability specialists, and it promoted the use of available 

tools for helping Native American communities make informed decisions about which sustainable 

construction technologies to implement. For example, tribes received free blower-door testing and free 

modeling and benefit-analysis software, which enabled them to make the most cost-effective choices. 

Further, the initiative supported and highlighted regional best practices in case studies that will inspire 

and educate tribes.

Key findings identify both impediments to and supports for sustainable construction in Indian 

Country. Many obstacles to sustainable development in Indian Country are the same as the obstacles to 

conventional development in Indian Country, including an often short building cycle, staff turnover, land 

ownership and usage issues, rural location, and political roadblocks. 

Some obstacles are specific to sustainable construction. Of potential concern is that the upfront costs 

will result in the construction of fewer units in areas with housing shortages and pent-up demand. 

Tribal housing authority staff and local planners and architects may not be familiar with sustainable 

construction techniques or have the capacity to adequately maintain sustainable homes. Further, local 

construction teams may not have expertise or experience in building with the new technologies. Finally, 

although more options are becoming available, at present, funding is still mostly limited to federal 

resources.

The initiative also identified supports and rewards for sustainable construction. Strong enthusiasm 

exists among tribes that already have implemented sustainable technologies, and they are eager to share 

their experiences with other tribes. Several organizations are providing training and TA for sustainable 

building in Indian Country, as are several colleges and universities serving substantial American Indian 

and Alaska Native populations. 

Although these types of supports tend to focus in certain regions of the country—primarily Alaska, the 

Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest—they represent a major step in building capacity for funding, 

selecting, designing, and building sustainable projects. In addition to providing more affordable and 

healthy housing, sustainable construction is integral to many Native American communities. Not only do 

most tribes value and respect the environment, sustainable construction enables them to incorporate 

culturally relevant features in their designs.

The findings of the initiative have resulted in recommendations for continuing support for sustainable 

construction. One set of recommendations is to encourage tribes to adopt sustainable construction by 

having experts champion sustainable strategies in conferences, trainings, blogs, and other outreach 

efforts. Financial recommendations include leveraging available federal resources and materials to 

support tribes and tribally designated housing entities, encouraging green building within federal 

programs and funding sources, and supporting funding for and partnerships with local tribal colleges 

and other colleges and universities with a strong Native presence in their efforts to create sustainable 

construction programs.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

38 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

The results of this initiative also recommend supporting tribes in making informed decisions about the 

cost-effectiveness of different sustainable strategies by providing software and analyses that give them 

concrete information about anticipated outcomes and costs.

Increasing the use of sustainable construction technologies in Indian Country, as in the rest of the country, 

carries an appeal for additional financial incentives to support the incorporation of these technologies. 

A change in perspective, however, may be equally critical to encouraging acceptance of and desire for 

sustainable construction technologies. This new perspective includes the following insights.

•	 Sustainable housing does not have to be in conflict with issues of overcrowding or the replacement 

of substandard housing. As one meeting participant framed it, “Housing development that is not 

sustainable perpetuates the current problem. It impoverishes families with high energy costs, high 

maintenance costs, and health issues.”

•	 Sustainable housing does not have to be more expensive over the life of the housing unit. The 

inclusion of cost-effective sustainable technologies does require making informed choices based 

on the availability of materials, the suitability of materials to climate and housing unit, the return 

on investment, and budget considerations.

•	 Sustainable housing offers health and financial benefits for residents. The savings from reduced 

energy costs or doctors’ visits—in the case of decreased asthma attacks, for example—can be 

redirected to other family needs.
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 39

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

References

Anderson, Terry L. n.d. “Conservation Native American Style.” Available at http://perc.org/articles/

conservation-native-american-style-full (accessed April 29, 2013).

Biles, Roger. 2000. “Public Housing on the Reservation,” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 24 

(2): 49-63.

Butterfield, Bonnie. n.d. “Native Americans: The True Story of Sacagawea and her People.” Available at 

http://bonniebutterfield.com/indian-culture.htm (accessed August 15, 2012).

Chee, Chelsea. 2013. Presentation. Sustainable Construction in Indian Country training session, 

Albuquerque, NM, February 14.

Cheng, Tania, et al. 2011. “The Use of Message Framing in the Promotion of Environmentally Sustainable 

Behaviors,” Social Marketing Quarterly 17: 48–62.

Community-Based Social Marketing. n.d.a. “Improving Energy Conservation with Effective Home Audit 

Programs in California Using Communication and Commitment.” Available at http://www.cbsm.com/

cases/improving+energy+conservation+with+effective+home+audit+programs (accessed 8/20/2012). 

———. n.d.b. “Reduction of Residential Consumption of Electricity Through Simple Monthly Feedback,” 

Available at http://www.cbsm.com/cases/reduction+of+residential+consumption+of+electricity+throug

h+simple+monthly+feedback_125 (accessed 8/20/2012).

Darian-Smith, Eve. 2010.“Environmental Law and Native American Law,” Annual Review of Law and Social 

Science 6: 359–386.

Grimley, Brynn. 2008. (March 9, 2008), “Activist: Old Native Ways Can Be Used in New Sustainability 

Efforts,” Kitsap Sun, March 9. Also available at http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2008/mar/09/usingold-ways-to-create-a-new-environment/?print=1 (accessed April 29, 2013).

Harris, Stuart G. n.d. “A Native American Perspective on Sustainable Infrastructures.” Available at http://

www.iiirm.org/publications/Articles%20Reports%20Papers/Environmental%20Protection/envprot.

htm (accessed August 15, 2012).

Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development. 2008. The State of Native Nations. Oxford 

University Press.

Heath, Chip, and Dan Heath. 2010. Switch: How To Change Things When Change Is Hard. New York: 

Broadway Books. 

Herne, Retha. 2013. Presentation. Sustainable Construction in Indian Country training session, 

Hogansburg, NY, May 8.

James, Rachel. 2010. Promoting Sustainable Behavior: A Guide to Successful Communication. Berkeley, CA: 

University of California, Berkeley, Office of Sustainability. Also available at http://sustainability.berkeley.

edu/os/pages/talkinglouder/docs/Promoting_Sustain_Behavior_Primer.pdf. 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

40 | Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report

Lyons, Oren. 1994. “An Iroquois Perspective,” In American Indian Environments: Ecological Issues in Native 

American History, edited by Christopher Vecsey and Robert W. Venables. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University 

Press: 173–174.

McKenzie-Mohr, Doug. 1994. “Social Marketing for Sustainability: The Case of Residential Energy 

Conservation,” Futures 26 (2): 224–233.

Merchant, Carolyn. 2007. American Environmental History: An Introduction. New York: Columbia 

University Press.

Merritt, Rowena, Aiden Truss, and Toby Hopwood. 2011. “Social Marketing Can Help Achieved Sustainable 

Behaviour Change,” The Guardian, March 17. Also available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainablebusiness/blog/social-marketing-behaviour-change. (Accessed 8/20/2012)

“Native American Sustainable Land Use Practices: A Comparative Perspective between Indigenous 

Americans and Invasive Europeans throughout the Ages, posted by Sustainable UCR on December 19, 

2009 at 5:22 PM. (Accessed May 4, 2012). Available at https://sites.google.com/site/facilityportfolios/

american-way-of-sustainability

Sherrer, Nathan, and Tim Murphy. 2006. “Probing the Relationship Between Native Americans and 

Ecology.” http://www.bama.ua.edu/~joshua/archive/aug06/Nathan%20Sherrer.pdf (accessed July 3, 

2013.

Social Marketing National Excellence Collaborative. 2002. “Social Marketing: A Resource Guide.” Available 

at http://socialmarketingcollaborative.org/smc/pdf/social_marketing_101.pdf.

Tools of Change. n.d. “BC21 PowerSmart.” Available at http://www.toolsofchange.com/en/case-studies/

detail/625 (accessed April 30, 2013).

U.S. Green Building Council. 2007. LEED® for Homes Pilot Rating System v.1.11a 

U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 1996. Assessment of American Indian Housing Needs and 

Programs: Final Report. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Also available at http://www.

huduser.org/portal/publications/hsgspec/native.html.

———. n.d.a. “About ONAP.” Available at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/

public_indian_housing/ih/codetalk/aboutonap (accessed January 28, 2013). 

———. n.d.b. Indian Housing Operating Cost Study. Draft dated April 23, 2008.

———. n.d.c “Mutual Help Homeownership Opportunity Program for Indian Areas.” Available at http://

portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/programdescription/muthelp (accessed January 22, 2013).

HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing. 2007. Office of Native American Programs: Report to Congress, 

Fiscal Year 2006. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

United Association of Higaonon Tribes. n.d. “Native American Quotes About Nature.” Available at http://

www.unahi.org/quotes/native-american-quotes.htm (accessed August 15, 2012).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 41

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Weinreich, Nedra Kline. n.d. “What Is Social Marketing?” Available at http://www.social-marketing.com/

Whatis.html (accessed April 30, 2013).
Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | 42

Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix A

Appendix A: 

Review of C

(Jul

urr

y 18, 2011)

ent Activities 
+ 

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

Contract: C-DEN-02370; Task Order DEN-T00006 

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

Task 1a - Current Demonstration, Technical Assistance and Training 

Activities Letter Report 

Submitted 

July 18, 2011 

Submitted to: 

Mike Blanford, GTM 

Anna Lloyd, GTR 

Millie Egan, CO 

Submitted by: 

FirstPic, Inc. 

2614 Chapel Lake Drive 

Gambrills, MD 21054 

DC Office: 202-393-6400 
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

Task 1a - Current Demonstration, Technical Assistance and Training Activities 

Executive Summary 

Description of Work 

FirstPic, Inc. completed Task 1a and produced a letter report consisting of an executive summary 

and two products. The first is a comprehensive list of key informants with extensive knowledge 

about sustainable residential construction projects in American Indian and Alaska Native 

(AIAN) communities. This listing was developed in consultation with the Government Technical 

Monitor Mike Blanford, Eastern/Woodlands Office of Native American Programs Administrator 

Kevin Fitzgibbons, and members of the FirstPic, Inc. team.1

There was a systematic effort to 

include key informants from diverse sectors, and to contact not only organizations that provide 

training, technical assistance and/or funding, but also who are highly knowledgeable about other, 

less visible entities working in Indian Country, and about sustainable construction projects that 

currently are underway or recently have been completed. 

Key informants represent federal and regional government (for example, the U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) Area 

Offices, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Department of Energy), nongovernmental organizations (for example, regional housing associations and housing councils), 

research centers (for example, Cold Climate Housing Research Center and Construction in 

Indian Country), tribal colleges, and a range of other affiliations. 

The key informants, in turn, provided many additional contacts and organizations which are 

catalogued on the second product: a list of organizations that provide training, technical 

assistance, and/or funding to support sustainable construction activities in Indian Country. It was 

compiled from the information obtained in the key informant interviews, augmented by the 

material on their organizations’ Web sites, FirstPic’s follow-up research, and the 2011 Healthy 

Homes Summit. The list consists of two categories: organizations that provide funding for 

sustainable construction, and organizations that offer training and/or technical assistance to 

support sustainable construction. Entities that offer both funding and training are listed in both 

sections to facilitate identifying which organizations supply each of these services. 

In order to provide the most useful picture of the services being offered in Indian Country, each 

of the two listings includes: 

 Contact information 

 General description of services 

 Region served (if known) 

 Tribes served – note that an entity may serve more tribes than we were able to name 

 Other information –more details about the services offered and/or key informants’ 

perspectives on sustainable construction in Indian Country 

 

1

 FirstPic, Inc. team members involved in development of the initial informant list included Kate Brown, Daniel 

Glenn, Jim Anderson, Robert Nemeth, Lynda Lantz, Christine Velez, Laura Appelbaum, and Mindi D’Angelo.
3

Overview of Findings

There appear to be fewer “green” building services targeted toward AIAN communities for new 

resident construction projects as compared to existing home projects. There are a limited number 

of organizations providing training and technical assistance on new construction in Indian 

Country. Key informants often mentioned the same entities in a given region: for example, 

Cascadia Green Building Council in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest, Cold Climate Housing 

Research Center in Alaska, and the Enterprise Green Communities program for Native 

Americans in the Southwest. 

A greater number of organizations provide training and technical assistance for increasing the 

sustainability of existing homes. For example, the EPA does a lot of training on assessment and 

remediation of indoor air quality and mold on existing homes. HUD conducts 12 energy 

assessments annually as well as regional workshops which focus on energy efficiency and 

rehabilitation. The federal Bonneville Power Administration has a low-income weatherization 

program for tribes in the Pacific Northwest. 

Educational entities such as tribal colleges are a good way for tribes to increase the number of 

members with professional green building skills, but tribal colleges primarily are clustered in the 

Great Lakes, the Dakotas, Montana and the Southwest. Red Feather Development Group and 

Zuni Housing Authority both have implemented successful models for increasing the capacity of 

housing authorities to carry out their own construction projects, but this is not common in Indian 

Country. Most tribes work with the construction firms that are available in their area, and when 

they use tribal members it is usually in relatively unskilled capacities. In at least one region, 

tribes have had difficulty accessing construction firms with experience in sustainable 

construction technologies. This is especially true when they are required to use the lowest bidder 

While there are regional funding sources such as the Alaska Finance Corporation and the Greater 

Minnesota Housing Fund, most of the funding for residential construction in Indian County 

comes from government sources such as Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG), Indian 

Community Development Block Grants (ICDBG), and American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act (ARRA) funds. Occasionally, funding for residential housing construction is tied into a 

larger Community Development Plan; this is the case with the Thunder Valley Project in the 

Pine Ridge Reservation. Housing Authorities and tribally designated housing entities (TDHEs) 

typically combine funding from several or all these sources in conjunction with state or private 

financing (for example, the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority). 

Other Information

As part of the data collection process for Task 1a, we compiled a list of sustainable residential 

construction projects that tribes recently have completed, are currently underway with, or are 

planning. Although this is not intended to be a comprehensive inventory, it does provide a good 

indication of the scope of sustainable construction activities taking place in Alaska and the lower 

48 states. This list will be provided this week. 
4

KEY INFORMANTS ON SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY 

JULY 18, 2011 

Federal Organizations

Organization: Alaska ONAP 

Contact Name: David Vought 

Title: Native American Program Specialist 

Phone: 907-677-9862 

Email: david.vought@hud.gov

Organization: Bonneville Power Administration 

Contact Person: Nathan Dexter, Tribal Affairs Manager or

Carrie Nelson, Low-Income Weatherization for Tribes 

Phone: 503-230-7306; 503-230-4125 

Email Address: nldexter@bpa.gov

Both out spoke with: Molly Moreland at 503-230-7685 

Organization: Department of Energy Tribal Energy Program 

Contact Name: Lizana Pierce 

Title: Director

Phone: 303-2754727 

Web Address: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/tribalenergy/about.cfm

Organization: Eastern Woodlands ONAP 

Contact Name: Brian Gillen 

Title: Native American Program Specialist 

Phone: 800-735-3239 or 312-913-8626 

Email: Brian.Gillen@HUD.gov

Organization: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 

Contact Name: Alfreda Mitre 

Title: Region 8, EPA Director, Tribal Assistance Programs 

Phone: 303-312-6343 

Organization: Northern Plains ONAP 

Contact Name: Randall Akers 

Title: Administator 

Phone: 303-672-5160 

Email: Randall.R.Akers@hud.gov
Key Informants 

5

Organization: Northwest ONAP 

Contact Name: Tom Carney 

Title: GM Director 

Phone: 206-220-6204 

Email: tom.carney@hud.gov

Organization: Southern Plains ONAP 

Contact Name: Michelle Tinnin 

Title: Native American Program Specialist 

Phone: 405-609-8532 

Email: Michelle.K.Tinnin@hud.gov

Organization: Southwest ONAP 

Contact Name: Carolyn J. O'Neil 

Title: Administator 

Phone: 602-379-7235 

Email: Carolyn.J.O'Neil@hud.gov 

Organization: ONAP, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Contact Name: Robert Lamp 

Title: Title VI Loan Guarantee Specialist 

Phone: 202-402-4134 

Email: Robert.A.Lamp@hud.gov

National Non-profit Organizations

Organization: Enterprise Green Communities 

Contact Name: Rose Marquez 

Phone: 505-216-0928 

Email: rmarquez@enterprisecommunity.org

Web Address: http://www.enterprisecommunity.org/programs/native_american/

Organization: National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) 

Contact Name: John D. Siegnemartin 

Title: Training and Technical Assistance Program Director 

Phone: 850-939-4256 

Email: jseignemartin@naihc.net

Web Address: http://www.naihc.net/
Key Informants 

6

Organization: National Tribal Healthy Homes Assessment, Training and Technical Assistance 

Support Center 

Contact Name: Mike Vogel 

Title: Executive Director 

Phone: 406-581-2432 or 406-994-5417 

Email: mvogel@montana.edu

Web Address: http://tribalhealthyhomes.org/

Regional Non-profit Organizations

Organization: Association of Alaska Housing Authorities 

Contact Name: Dan Duame 

Title: President 

Phone: 907-563-2146 (work); 907-441-9313 (cell) 

Email: dan.duame@aleutian-housing.com

Organization: Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) 

Contact Name: Jack Hebert 

Title: President and CEO 

Phone: 907-457-3454 

Email: jack@cchrc.org

Web Address: http://www.cchrc.org/

Organization: Corporation for Supportive Housing, American Indian Supportive Housing 

Initiative 

Contact Name: Zoe LeBeau and Leah Lindstrom 

Title: Senior Program Managers 

Phone: 612- 418-0769 (cell) 

Organization: Nevada-California Indian Housing Association 

Contact Name: Phil Bush 

Title: President 

Phone: 530-596-4127 

Email: bushconsulting@thegrid.net or modoclasseniaj@thegrid.net

Organization: Northwest Indian Housing Association (NWIHA) 

Contact Name: Joe Diehl 

Title: Executive Director 

Phone: 206-290-5498 

Email: nwiha@aol.com

Web Address: http://www.nwiha.org/index.html
Key Informants 

7

Organization: Southern Plains Indian Housing Association 

Contact Name: Billy E. Komahcheet 

Title: President 

Phone: 405-547-2402 ext 231-work; 405-334-2184-cell 

Email: bkomahcheet@iowanation.org

Web Address: http://www.spiha.org/default.aspx

Organization: Southwest Tribal Housing Alliance 

Contact Name: Michael Chavez 

Title: President 

Phone: 505-782-4550 or 505-782-4564 

Email: mchavez@pozha.org

Organization: United South and Eastern Tribes (USET) Environmental Liaison Office 

Contact Name: Steve Crawford 

Title: Natural Resources Chairman 

Phone: 207-853-2600 x 238 

Web Address: http://www.usetinc.org/Programs/USET-Environmental/HomeELO.aspx

Educational Organizations

Organization: College of Menominee Nation 

Contact Name: Dr. Holly YoungBear-Tibbetts 

Title: Dean of External Relations 

Phone: 505-466-3206 

Email: Tangram@hughes.net

Web Address: http://www.menominee.edu 

Organization: Construction in Indian Country (CIIC) in partnership with the Arizona State 

University, Del E. Webb School of Construction 

Contact Name: Kim Silentman-Kanuho 

Title: Senior Coordinator

Phone: 480-727-3105 

Email: ciic@asu.edu

Web Address: http://construction.asu.edu/ciic/index.html
8

ORGANIZATIONS CONDUCTING TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ON 

SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY 

JULY 18, 2011 

Organization: Alaska Building Science Network (ABSN) 

Contact Person: Scott Anaya, Executive Director 

Phone: 907-562-9927 

Email Address: absn@alaska.net

Web Address: http://www.absn.com/

Type of Activity: Training and technical assistance 

Region Served: Alaska 

Tribes Served: Under Village End Use Efficiency Measures (VEUEM), ABSN worked in 

Arctic Village, Atmautluak, Brevig Mission, Chignik, Chitina, Crooked Creek, Ekwok, False 

Pass, Hughes, Kipnuk, Kwethluk, Lower Kalskag, Levelock, New Stuyahok, Nightmute, 

Nikolski, Pedro Bay, Saint Michael, Stebbins, Steven's Village, Stoney River, Takotna, 

Tooksook Bay, Tuluksak, Tuntutuliak, Unalakleet, Upper Kalskag, White Mountain 

General Description of Services: Each year, ABSN conducts over 100 trainings all throughout 

Alaska for a variety of audiences such as residential contractors, housing authority staff, 

mechanical contractors, energy raters, home owners, vocational technical students, rural facility 

and maintenance managers, Real Estate agents, home inspectors, carpenters, and other groups 

who request trainings. In addition to fee classes, ABSN gets funding from Alaska Housing 

Finance Corporation, Alaska Eenergy Authority, Denali Commission, and the Environmental 

Protection Agency to help facilitate many of their classes, especially those they conduct in rural 

Alaska. Each year ABSN also provides technical assistance to dozens of individuals and entities 

on a variety of building science topics. 

ABSN's Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) consists of energy efficiency audits, 

training and upgrades performed primarily in rural Alaskan community buildings. ABSN's CEEP 

Program started in January 2005. ABSN conducted work under an AEA’s VEUEM with funding 

from the Denali Commission. From January 2005 to December 2010, ABSN completed work in 

49 villages throughout Western and Interior Alaska to help them achieve energy savings by 

replacing or installing energy-efficient lighting, switch boxes, motion sensors, set back 

thermostats, weather stripping and low mass boilers.
Training and Technical Assistance 

9

Other Information: With high fuel prices, villages are working in cooperation with ABSN to 

expand their work, providing in-kind labor, free housing, and additional supplies. As a result, 

significant progress toward community energy efficiency is being achieved. Whenever possible, 

ABSN hires local labor and provides project-specific training along with boiler maintenance 

training (from Web site). ABSN publishes a quarterly newsletter, provides technical training 

workshops, continuing education credits, can perform energy audits, make energy efficiency 

recommendations, and train construction crews, building owners, maintenance workers and 

occupants. 

Their technical assistance ranges from simply answering an email or phone call, to proofing 

building plans and energy systems, to providing hands-on technical training or inspection of the 

building envelope or mechanical systems. For the most recent completed fiscal year, ABSN 

provided technical assistance on approximately 175 occasions. Sample clients include: AHFC, 

Energy Raters, Housing Authorities, Building America project in Hydaburg, Tribal 

Governments, Habitat for Humanity, homeowners, Residential Contractors, and a variety of 

other professions and entities. 

Sample topics include: boiler sizing, vapor retarders, green building products, XPS foam, ice 

dams, AkWarm, non VOC paint, energy savings, lighting, tax credits, Remote Wall Systems and 

Outside Insulation Techniques, wet spray cellulose, ground source heat pumps, windows, attic 

and crawlspace ventilation, water heaters, soy-based insulation, Building Energy Efficiency 

Standards (BEES), duct leakage testing, EnergyGauge, blower door testing questions, thermal 

loss for heated sidewalks, blueboard, caulks and foams, radiant heat, heat recovery ventilators, 

boiler fuel use, green design, and a whole host of other building related topics. 

2010 - 2012 Update: ABSN has new funding, over $3.4mil for work in 48 communities across 

Alaska. In the next two years they will train approximately 175-200 local workers in these 48 

Villages to conduct lighting and weatherization upgrades on their community buildings. Part of 

this program is also funded through a partnership with the Bristol Bay Native Association and 

they will conduct the same efforts in 14 communities in the Bristol Bay Region. ABSN also will 

work in partnership with the Alaska Works Partnership and AHFC to develop a trained work 

force in these communities that can conduct the energy efficiency upgrade work thoroughly and 

safely. The communities ABSN will be working with include: Aleknagik, Chignik Lake, Clark's 

Pt., Ekuk, Ekwok, Koliganek, Levelock, Manokotak, Naknek, New Stuyahok, Nondalton, 

Portage Creek, Togiak, Twin Hills, Deering, Kiana, Shishmaref, Teller, Chignik, King Cove, 

Kokhanok, Akutan, Cold Bay, False Pass, Port Heiden, Buckland, Elim, Kobuk, Koyuk, noorvik, 

Saint Michael, Selawik, Shakoolik, Shungnak, White Mountain, Houston, Kachemak, Seldovia, 

Gustavus, Hydaburg, Klawock, Pelican, Petersburg, Tenakee Springs, Thorne Bay, Aleknagik, 

Clark's Pt., Dillingham, Egegik, and Newhalen. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

10 

Organization: Alaska Craftsman Home Program (ACHP) 

Contact Person: Rob Jordan, Executive Director 

Phone: 907-258-2247 

Email Address: achp@alaska.net

Web Address: http://www.achpalaska.com/index.html

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Alaska 

General Description of Services: Since its beginnings, ACHP has and continues to provide 

education in energy-efficient building technology throughout the State of Alaska. All ACHP 

workshops, publications, and projects are designed specifically for Northern regions. They offer 

workshops for professionals, as well as free workshops for the public to do or direct energy 

efficient improvements.

Other Information: The Alaska Craftsman Home Program, Inc. is an educational building 

industry alliance that promotes energy-efficient housing that is cost-effective, healthy, and 

durable . ACHP is the first program of its kind in the United States. It was formed in 1987 with 

the assistance of the State of Alaska Office of Energy Programs, in conjunction with the 

University of Alaska Cooperative Extension service, Energy Rated Homes of Alaska, and the 

Alaska State Home Builders Association. ACHP was formed in 1987 (from Web site). It offers 

Building Performance Institute Analyst Training, professional workshops, and classes.
Training and Technical Assistance 

11 

Organization: Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) 

Contact Person: Mimi Burbage, Energy Specialist ; Scott Waterman, Energy Specialist 

Phone: 907-330-8192 (Mimi); 907-330-8195 (Scott) 

Email Address: mburbage@ahfc.us ; swaterma@ahfc.us

Web Address: http://www.ahfc.state.ak.us

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: Alaska 

General Description of Services: AHFC is a self-supporting public corporation with offices in 

16 communities statewide. It provides free classes for potential homebuyers and statewide 

financing for multi-family complexes, congregate facilities, and single-family homes, with 

special loans for first-time home buyers, low- and moderate-income borrowers, veterans, 

teachers, nurses, public safety officers, and those living in rural areas of the state. AHFC is also a 

key provider of energy and weatherization programs in the state. According to David Vought, 

they are a "very significant housing partner throughout the state." 
Training and Technical Assistance 

12 

Organization: Bonneville Power Administration 

Contact Person: Nathan Dexter, Tribal Affairs Manager 

Phone: 503-230-7306 

Email Address: nldexter@bpa.gov

Web Address: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/About_BPA/tribes/

Type of Activity: Funding, training and technical asistance 

Region Served: Northwest 

Tribes Served: Colville, Coeur d'Alene, Kalispel, Kootenai, Nez Perce, Spokane, Umatilla, 

Upper Columbia United Tribes, Warm Springs, Yakama, Blackfeet, Burns Paiute, Ft. 

McDermitt, Confederated Salish and Kootenai, Shoshone Bannock, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, 

Cedarville, Chehalis, Confederated Coos Lower Umpqua & Siuslaw, Coquille, Cow Creek, 

Cowlitz, Ft. Bidwell, Grand Ronde, Hoh, Jamestown S’Klallam, Klamath, Lower Elwha, 

Lummi, Makah, Muckleshoot, Nisqually, Nooksack, Pit River, Port Gamble S’Klallam, 

Puyallup, Quileute, Quinault, Samish, Sauk-Suiattle, Siletz, Shoalwater Bay, Skokomish, 

Snoqualmie, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish, Suquamish, Swinomish, Te-Moak of Western 

Shoshone, Tulalip, Upper Skagit 

General Description of Services: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has a Tribal Energy 

Group that provides training and funding for energy audits and whole house assessments. They 

work with Tribes in Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. The local power company has to be 

affiliated with Bonneville in order for the community to receive training and/or funds. 

Other Information: BPA, a nonprofit federal agency, has two types of programs. It funds 

energy efficiency measures through its public utilities. The public utilities select projects in their 

service areas. There are also set asides for low-income weatherization projects for tribes. This 

was how the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe installed ductless heat pumps in 30 percent of their 

housing units. These were installed by the Clallam power utility district. The program was so 

popular that the tribe funded the installation of additional units through its general fund.
Training and Technical Assistance 

13 

Organization: Building Science Academy (BSA) 

Phone: 616-887-2311 

Web Address: http://www.buildingscienceacademy.com

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Michigan 

Tribes Served: Keweenaw Bay Indian Community 

General Description of Services: Building Science Academy is a licensed Michigan Proprietary 

School with the State of Michigan that is committed to providing every individual with the skills 

to enter the energy efficiency and green jobs work force. This includes entry level workers with 

no experience in construction or energy auditing. They are committed to not just preparing 

students for certification but with giving them the knowledge and hands-on experience and 

capabilities to put their certification to work. 

BSA students have access to over 300 hours of building science curriculum preparing them for 

careers in the energy efficiency and the new green job economy. BSA is an affiliate training 

organization of the Building Performance Institute (BPI) to provide Building Analyst and 

Envelope Professional training courses for individuals who want to pursue a career related to 

utility programs, weatherization programs or with contractors as energy auditors. In addition, 

they offer Air Sealing and Insulation and Contractor Installation training courses. Their Web site

provides detailed information about all of the training that they offer. 

BSA has a Tribal Training Director. 

Other Information: BSA assists community colleges and universities in implementing energy 

efficiency programs. In addition, BSA can accommodate the needs of many non-profits 

specializing in renewable energy, recycling, and the environment by conducting specialized 

training or expanding their existing training programs. They also partner with government 

agencies and non-profits who are seeking federal grants in energy efficiency. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

14 

Organization: Cascadia Green Building Council, a chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council 

Contact Person: Mark Mastellar, Alaska Director 

Phone: 907-373-2723 

Email Address: mark@cascadiagbc.org

Web Address: http://www.cascadiagbc.org

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Oregon, Washington, British Columbia and Alaska, but also includes members 

from as far away as Idaho and Montana. Helps the U.S. and Canada Green Building Councils 

meet their goals in the Pacific Northwest 

General Description of Services: Sponsors trainings and seminars. They are running a 

competition for the Association of Alaska Housing Authorities, which wants to encourage green 

building and reduce housing costs. The contest is for Living Aleutian Home Design Competition. 

The competition will begin at the end of 2011 in partnership with the Aleutian Housing 

Authority. The contest will be open October 1, 2011-January 18, 2012. They are seeking a 

“practical, affordable and replicable” design that is suited to the harsh landscape and high energy 

and materials costs in the Aleutian tribal communities. 

Cascadia does advocacy, research and technical consulting, outreach, education and training 

(through lecture series and workshops). 
Training and Technical Assistance 

15 

Organization: Cold Climate Housing Research Center 

Contact Person: Jack Hebert; Michele Doyle 

Phone: 907-457-3454 

Email Address: jack@cchrc.org; michele@cchrc.org

Web Address: http://www.cchrc.org

Type of Activity: Research and housing design; education; training available in the future 

Region Served: Alaska 

Tribes Served: Anaktuvuk Pass, Native Village of Kwinhagek, Atqasuk 

General Description of Services: The Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) is an 

industry-based, nonprofit corporation created to facilitate the development, use, and testing of 

energy-efficient, durable, healthy, and cost-effective building technologies for people living in 

circumpolar regions around the globe. Located in Fairbanks, Alaska, the Research Center was 

conceived and developed by members of the Alaska State Home Builders Association and 

represents more than 1,200 building industry firms and groups. Ninety percent of CCHRC's 

charter members are general contractors from across the state. 

CCHRC has its own architectural team to do housing design, and the Sustainable Northern 

Communities program focuses on green building. CCHRC has sponsored prototype homes in a 

number of communities (see Alaska ONAP and other information). CCHRC provides 

information and education on solar power, solar thermal, wind power, heating systems and 

energy efficiency. David Vought reported that they are trying to get funding to create designs for 

tribes, because one design won't meet the needs of every part of Alaska. 

Other Information: The Sustainable Northern Shelter project was initiated in 2008 to address 

the needs for sustainable rural housing in northern climates. The project investigates, develops 

and incorporates many sustainable solutions that will benefit northern communities by 

demonstrating a culturally designed, affordable, replicable and simply constructed home that 

uses very little water or energy. As interest in the program grew, the title was changed to 

Sustainable Northern Communities to reflect the many projects now being done in different areas 

of the state. The Tagiugiullu Nunamiullu Housing Authority (TNHA) is partnering with CCHRC 

to develop a design for affordable, energy efficient, healthy, homes in six North Slope villages. 

The homes feature a unique foundation system adapted to the permafrost conditions in the high 

arctic. Up to four homes will be constructed in the community of Atqasuk, with plans to expand 

design and construction in the communities of Wainwright, Point Lay, Nuiqsut, and Kaktovik. 

This project includes the prototype homes that were built in Anaktuvuk Pass and Kwinhagek. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

16 

Organization: College of Menominee Nation 

Contact Person: Dr. Holly Youngbear-Tibbetts 

Phone: 505-466-3206 

Email Address: Tangram@hughes.net

Web Address: http://www.menominee.edu

Type of Activity: Research and education 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: Menominee is internationally recognized for their work in 

sustainable construction. They have a sustainable residential building systems technical diploma. 

They partner with the U.S. Forest Service to do sustainable forestry research and education, and 

they have an extension center (with the Forest Products Lab). 

Other Information: Tribal colleges are a good way to move the message of sustainable 

construction forward for two reasons: (1) Campuses are using green materials and design in the 

construction of their buildings and are excellent demonstration sites, and (2) Tribal colleges offer 

a building trade program that includes application of green materials, technology, and design. 

There are 36 tribal colleges clustered in few areas: Great Lakes (11), New Mexico (1), Arizona 

(2), Montana (7), North Dakota (4), South Dakota (5), Pacific Northwest (1). A list of tribal 

colleges can be found at: http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/list/whtc/edlite-tclist.html
Training and Technical Assistance 

17 

Organization: Construction in Indian Country (CIIC), Arizona State University, Del Webb 

School of Construction 

Contact Person: Kim Kanubo 

Phone: 480-727-3105 

Email Address: ciic@asu.edu

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Southwest 

Tribes Served: Navajo 

General Description of Services: Mission is to promote positive construction in native 

communities and to educate Native Americans. Offer workshops through annual construction 

convention held each April or May. Completed 8th annual conference this past April. This year 

adding mobile seminars -- go to communities and provide information on "Construction 101" --

they teach people about the construction process. They provide training to tribes and contractors. 

Other Information: (1) They are working on becoming a clearinghouse for all the construction 

needs in Indian Country -- want to be a one-stop shop, the go-to place for Indian construction. 

(2) They have not focused on sustainable construction training, but Kim stressed that they have 

the capacity to put together training on any construction issue. They tailor their seminars to the 

needs of their audience. They use a network of speakers who can train in the areas of interest. (3) 

They will be charging for workshops and training, with cost starting at $5,000. 

Their annual conference included one session titled Indigenous Materials and Sustainable 

Practices. The panel featured a construction company which uses sustainable design and 

construction practices; an overview by a company which uses geothermal energy for commercial 

scale projects on tribal lands leading to cost and water saving and other environmental benefits; 

and a Native-owned photovoltaic solar development company which specializes in turnkey solar 

solutions in Indian Country. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

18 

Organization: Denali Commision (The) 

Contact Person: Karen Johnson, Program Manager 

Phone: 907-271-3036 

Email Address: karenj@denali.gov

Web Address: http://www.denali.gov

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: Alaska 

General Description of Services: The Denali Commission has placed job training at the center 

of its comprehensive plan for economic growth in Alaska. This includes construction. In just a 

few short years, the Commission has made significant strides in assisting rural communities with 

their workforce development needs. As the Commission funds projects for new clinics, roads, 

and tank farms, it also builds sustainability into those projects by providing training for local 

residents to maintain and operate the new facilities.Types of projects funded include 

infrastructure related energy cost reduction and renewable and alternative energy. 

Other Information: Introduced by Congress in 1998, the Denali Commission is an independent 

federal agency designed to provide critical utilities, infrastructure, and economic support 

throughout Alaska. With the creation of the Denali Commission, Congress acknowledged the 

need for increased inter-agency cooperation and focus on Alaska's remote communities. Since its 

first meeting in April 1999, the Commission is credited with providing numerous cost-shared 

infrastructure projects across the State that exemplify effective and efficient partnership between 

federal and state agencies, and the private sector. Under "project database" on their Web site, 

can click on the State of Alaska icon to view an interactive map of all Denali Commission 

projects by funding year, location, and program area. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

19 

Organization: Development Center for Appropriate Technology 

Contact Person: David Eisenberg, Executive Director 

Phone: 520-624-6628 

Email Address: strawnet@gmail.com

Web Address: www.dcat.net

Type of Activity: Training and technical assistance 

General Description of Services: Education through publications, presentations at conferences, 

universities, and speaker series; Web-based resources, including: Forum for information, referral, 

and communication for sustainable building issues; Referrals to human and technical resources 

on alternative technologies, natural building, and code issues; Consulting services on alternative 

building systems, such as straw bale construction and on integrated design processes; Technical 

workshops on alternative building materials & methods for local, regional, state, and national 

building code organizations; Training for the building and design communities on code-related 

issues. 

Other Information: Tribal building codes specialist
Training and Technical Assistance 

20 

Organization: Enterprise Green Communities, National Rural and Native American Initiative 

Contact Person: Rose Marquez 

Phone: 505-216-0928 

Email Address: rmarquez@enterprisecommunity.org

Type of Activity: Funding and training 

General Description of Services: The National Rural and Native American Initiative funded the 

Sustainable Native Communities Collaborative. Some of their other rural projects, (like Chuska 

Apartments in Gallup, NM), may benefit Native Americans but are not developed with tribes. 

They conduct some training sessions at conferences. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

21 

Organization: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 (construction waste) 

Contact Person: Ms. Dolly Tong 

Phone: 312-886-1019 

Email Address: Tong.Dolly@EPA.gov

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Eastern/Woodlands 

General Description of Services: Dolly Tong heads-up the Region V Tribal Solid Waste and 

Pollution Prevention initiative, which includes construction waste. She has conducted numerous 

presentations and training for tribes including recycling and reuse, waste reduction, and funding 

sources. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

22 

Organization: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Regions 8 and 9 

Contact Person: Michelle Baker, EPA Region 9; Alfreda Mitre, EPA Region 8 

Phone: 415-972-3206 

Email Address: baker.michelle@epa.gov

Web Address: http://www.epa.gov/region4/recycle/green-building-toolkit.pdf

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: EPA Region 9 provides grants for pilot projects. They have 

developed a training workshop, fostered partnerships with other federal agencies such as HUD 

and DOT, and coordinated with non- governmental agencies such as Green Building Council. 

They work to respect tribal sovereignty and support tribal vision for sustainable construction. 

They have developed a Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit that is available for 

download from the Web (not tribal specific). Region 8 has partnered with HUD to provide 

training on Green Building Codes. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

23 

Organization: Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College 

Web Address: http://www.fdltcc.edu/academics/departments/certificate/clean-energytechnology.shtml

Type of Activity: Training 

General Description of Services: Clean Energy Technology Certificate emphasizes alternative 

and renewable energy systems paired with conventional electrical courses. Offers students the 

ability to work in the field of clean energy in a residential, tribal community, or business setting. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

24 

Organization: Greater Minnesota Housing Fund 

Contact Person: Janne Flistrand 

Web Address: www.mngreencommunities.org/about/index.htm

Type of Activity: Funding and technical assistance 

Region Served: Minnesota 

General Description of Services: Green charettes and technical assistance to Minnesota 

projects. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

25 

Organization: Green Native Council 

Contact Person: Tony Monroe 

Phone: 509-575-3898 

Email Address: tmonroe@northwestnativearchitecture.com

Web Address: http://www.greennativecouncil.com/

Type of Activity: Technical Assistance, training, education 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: Yerington Paiute, Yurok, Yakama 

General Description of Services: Green Native Council provides technical assistance, training, 

and consulting services to assist AIAN communities to create sustainable housing solutions. It 

teaches affordable, replicable, and sustainable approaches to commercial and home design and 

construction. Green Native Council organizes programs and works alongside tribal members to 

design and build needed sustainable homes. The Council provides technical expertise to help 

local tribes, government designers, and builders implement requirements; administers impartial 

third-party inspection and verification, which ensures the program requirements have been met; 

and issues certification that projects have been constructed to the green building requirements. 

Green Native Council has developed a reviewer and inspector certificaton training program. This 

training program certifies local area reviewers and inspectors in quality assurance methods 

designed for construction. This includes either online or classroom training and passing the 

Green Native Council exam. Green Native Council can also provide custom training. (Web site) 

Other Information: Prior to any project, Green Native Council staff conducts informational and 

educational seminars on the Reservation to educate tribal members about sustainable 

construction techniques and community planning. In addition, Green Native Council can assist 

tribal members with the complicated mortgage process and collaborates with Indian Housing 

Authorities to facilitate individual homeownership. Once a project is complete, there is ongoing 

collaboration between tribal homeowners, TDHEs, and Green Native Council, as each home or 

facility serves as an example for the rest of the Reservation Community of how to create a 

beautiful, super-insulated, affordable home. Green homes incorporate environmental 

considerations and resource efficiency into every step of the building and development process 

to minimize environmental impact. The design, construction and operation of a home must focus 

on energy and water efficiency, resource efficient building design and materials, indoor 

environmental quality, and must take the home's overall impact on the environment into account. 

However, many of the processes and technologies that go into a green home happen behind the 

scenes and behind the walls. (Web site)
Training and Technical Assistance 

26 

Organization: ONAP, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: Greener Homes Summit. Planning for third year. Provides 

overview of sustainable technologies and renewable energy. Presenters include communities 

with sustainable residential projects. 

ONAP also conducts energy audits in each of the six regions and regional training workshops on 

improving air quality and energy efficiency in tribal housing. These sessions focus more on 

rehabilitation rather than new construction. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

27 

Organization: Intertribal Council of Arizona (ITCA) 

Phone: 602-258-4822 

Web Address: http://www.itcaonline.com/program_weather.html

Type of Activity: Technical assistance and training 

Region Served: Arizona 

General Description of Services: The ITCA Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) 

coordinates weatherization upgrades for low income households on tribal lands with the goal of 

lowering the annual utility bills for low income families. Tribes may coordinate the entire 

program with reimbursement provided for work completed on each eligible home or choose to 

have the ITCA coordinate and manage the program, with ITCA directly contracting the 

weatherization work. ITCA will train the tribe to do its own weatherization. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

28 

Organization: Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College 

Contact Person: Dan Owens 

Phone: 715-634-4790 

Email Address: dowens@lco.edu

Web Address: http://www.lco.edu/catalog/deg/gbc.html

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: Has a Green Building Carpentry Certificate Program that 

includes classroom and on-site activites. The Green Building Carpentry Certificate is designed 

for students to develop skills needed to perform carpentry tasks in compliance with green 

residential construction. The courses are taught in classroom, lab, and actual building sites so 

students are more fully prepared to gain sustainable employment. 

Also has a Renewable Energy Certificate that offers coursework on the installation and 

maintenance of renewable enrgy systems. This program is designed to introduce students to the 

field of renewable energy (RE) and also provide a means to develop hands-on skills for installing 

and maintaining RE systems. The program provides a foundation for students preparing for 

employment in the RE industry. When coupled with business training, this program can prepare 

the graduate for a career as a RE self-employed business owner. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

29 

Organization: Leech Lake Tribal College 

Contact Person: Saul Saucedo 

Phone: 218-335-4287 

Email Address: saul.saucedo@lltc.edu

Web Address: http://lltc.edu/academics/degreeprograms/carpentryelectrical.htm

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: Provides 1-year Construction Trades or 2-year Electrical 

Trades Diplomas with some coursework in sustainable design, interior and exterior 

environmental design. Students participate in building an Eco-Affordable house which is sold 

and transported to a local homebuyer. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

30 

Organization: National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) 

Contact Person: John Siegnemartin, Training and Technical Assistance Program Director; 

Dennis Daniels, Deputy Director 

Phone: 850-939-4256 (John); 202-454-0912 (Dennis) 

Email Address: jseignemartin@naihc.net; ddaniels@NAIHC.NET

Web Address: http://www.naihc.net/

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: NAIHC recieves set-aside money from Indian Housing Block 

Grant program. The bulk of NAIHC's training and technical assistance is provided through a 

cooperative agreement with IHBG for training in how to run a housing program, financial 

management, board development, etc. NAIHC does very little work on sustainable development. 

Most of their sustainable development training is classroom training delivered through 

subcontractors. This year, they are working with a new contractor (see TRAVOIS) to provide an 

introduction to the concept of sustainable construction. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

31 

Organization: Native American Housing Services (NAHS) 

Contact Person: Sharon Wise 

Phone: 405-990-0066 

Type of Activity: Funding, technical assistance and can put trainings together 

General Description of Services: (1) Sharon doesn't do training but she knows who can, and 

she can put trainings together. (2) She is a certified CDHO. (3) Her organization administers 

HOME funds, tax credits and leveraging. Based on mission, works with other groups to develop 

affordable housing. (4) Specifically, according to NAHS' mission statement, they provide 

technical assistance to TDHEs to strengthen organizational and individual capacity; create 

Homebuyer Education curriculum; and provide property management and "lease to own" 

programs to create avenues to homeownership. 

Other Information: Based on the mission statement, they may not do training in sustainable 

construction; however, they help put together and fund affordable housing projects and do 

homebuyer education.
Training and Technical Assistance 

32 

Organization: Native Learning Center 

Contact Person: Holly Tigers Bowers 

Phone: 954-966-6300 

Email Address: Htiger@SemTribe.com

Web Address: http://www.nativelearningcenter.com/

Type of Activity: Training 

General Description of Services: The Native Learning Center strives to strengthen the Native 

American tradition of living in harmony with nature through supporting planet-friendly and 

sustainable practices by using today’s newest tools. The Housing Strategies curriculum offers a 

variety of courses on ways in which tribes can build and maintain sustainable and affordable 

housing within their communities, including an introduction to LEED. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

33 

Organization: Nevada-California Indian Housing Association 

Contact Person: Phil Bush, President 

Phone: 530-596-4127 

Email Address: bushconsulting@thegrid.net

Web Address: http://nv-cal.org

Type of Activity: Education and training, project management 

Region Served: Nevada and California 

General Description of Services: The Nevada-California Indian Housing Association 

represents member Indian Tribes, Indian Housing Authorities, and TDHEs from Nevada and 

California. The association seeks to accomplish its objectives through exchanging information 

and providing education and training opportunities for its membership. Because a number of its 

member tribes are very small, the housing association provides project management from start to 

finish on the projects of some of their members. They get the funding for the project and make 

sure the project is completed and gets Energy Star certified. They do all the contract 

administration. “We do it all.” While Phil Bush said that green building was too expensive for 

tribes, he does work with tribes to get Energy Star certification. They work with architects, 

engineers and tribes to ensure that their projects get Energy Star Certification. This certification 

affects the entire structure – foundation, windows, doors, insulation, vapor barriers, attics, 

ductwork, light fixtures, appliances, etc. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

34 

Organization: Northwest Inupiat Housing Authority and the Chukchi Campus of the College of 

Rural and Community Development, University of Alaska, Fairbanks 

Contact Person: Dan Duame, Association of Alaska Housing Authorities 

Phone: 970-563-2146 

Email Address: dan.duame@aleutian-housing.com

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Alaska 

Tribes Served: Northwest Inupiat 

General Description of Services: Have a joint project funded by HUD to construct a prototype 

super energy efficient house as part of the Campus's Construction Technology Trades program. 

It is in the design stage this summer (2011) and will be built next summer. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

35 

Organization: Red Feather Development Group 

Contact Person: Cindy Owings, Executive Director 

Phone: 406-585-7188 

Web Address: https://www.redfeather.org/

Type of Activity: Training and construction 

Region Served: Southwest and Northern Plains 

Tribes Served: Hopi, Northern Cheyenne, and neighboring tribes who want to participate in the 

Indigenous Builders Exchange. 

General Description of Services: Red Feather’s American Indian Sustainable Housing Initiative 

combines community outreach with hands-on, volunteer friendly straw bale home construction, 

as a feasible means for communities to use their own resources to improve housing. Red Feather 

homes are used as a training site for individuals to learn about construction practices utilizing 

three educational components, comprised of: Red Feather’s Straw Bale Construction emphasis, 

which promotes a construction technique focused on economic and environmental sustainability; 

the Solar Energy Initiative, which brings energy efficiency and long-term affordability to the 

homes they build; and the Indigenous Builders Exchange, which provides paid training for 

American Indians from their partner communities to learn and utilize construction skills. 

Other Information: The Indigenous Builders Exchange (IBE) brings tribal members into one 

another’s reservations to build homes for native families in need. IBE introduces participants to 

sustainable straw bale home construction in a mentorship situation and offers a cultural exchange 

among participating tribal members and Red Feather’s volunteers. Red Feather’s ultimate goal is 

to empower individuals, families and communities through meaningful projects that teach skills 

in sustainable construction and introduce understanding of how to organize and motivate a 

volunteer-based organization.
Training and Technical Assistance 

36 

Organization: Rural Community Innovations (RCI) 

Contact Person: Michael Utter, Chief Executive Officer 

Phone: 406-587-0783 

Email Address: michael@rci-usa.org

Web Address: http://www.rci-usa.org/index.html

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

General Description of Services: Non-profit organization that provides solar, wind and waste 

energy development, and grant funding at the community level, not necessarily the individual 

residential level. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

37 

Organization: Southern Plains ONAP 

Contact Person: Michelle Timmin 

Phone: 405-609-8532 

Email Address: Michelle.K.Tinnin@hud.gov

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Southern Plains 

General Description of Services: With a non-profit, did training for the Southern Plains Indian 

Housing Group -- talked about LEED training. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

38 

Organization: Stardust Center for Affordable Homes and the Family, Arizona State University 

(ASU) 

Phone: 602-496-1460 

Type of Activity: Technical Assistance 

Tribes Served: Navajo 

General Description of Services: ASU (and Daniel Glenn) worked with the Navajo Nation 

Housing Authority in 2005 to develop a sustainable demonstration LEED house using Navajo 

flexcrete and cultural design features. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

39 

Organization: Sustainable Native Communities Collaborative, Enterprise Green Communities' 

National Rural and Native American Initiative 

Contact Person: Rose Marquez 

Phone: 505-216-0928 

Email Address: rmarquez@enterprisecommunity.org

Web Address: http://www.sustainablenativecommunities.org/Projects-Database.html

Type of Activity: Technical Assistance 

Region Served: Southwest and Northwest 

Tribes Served: Doing six case studies. They will provide design and planning assistance to case 

study teams and work with tribal developers to create and implement a long-term, sustainable 

development plan. Tribes: Ohkay Owingeh, Santo Domingo, Navajo, Northwest Band of 

Shoshone, Jicarilla -- sixth tribe will be added. 

General Description of Services: Sustainable Native Communities Collaborative is a group of 

community designers, architects, development leaders and sustainability advocates who work 

with communities to develop "a road map to sustainable development." They provide technical 

assistance with planning and development during the design phase. They focus on green 

affordable housing in rural tribal communities. They are working with six tribes that have 

housing developments in the design and planning stage. They will provide training in particular 

aspects of sustainability that tribes want to include in their construction projects. At this time, 

they also are doing two other projects in Indian Country -- (1) working with Indigenous 

Community Enterprises, a non-profit housing developer, in Flagstaff, Arizona, on constructing 

permanent supportive housing for urban Indians (Navajo) using tax credits. (2) Working with the 

First Nations Community Health Source in Albuquerque, New Mexico on constructing 

permanent supportive housing for urban Indians. Both projects are green. 

Other Information: (1) Created a green project database for tribal housing projects currently 

under development or recently completed in the southwest region. The database has extremely 

useful descriptiojns of projects by tribe; (2) Next, will do six case studies of housing 

developments that are in the design and planning stage.
Training and Technical Assistance 

40 

Organization: Travois 

Contact Person: Greg Bland, Director of Travois Environmental Services 

Phone: 816-994-8970 

Email Address: gregb@travois.com

Web Address: http://www.travois.com/default.asp?page=about

Type of Activity: Technical Assistance 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: Red Lake, Standing Rock Sioux, San Carlos Apache, Wichita, Yavapai-Apache, 

Nex Perce, Menominee, and Pleasant Point Passamaquoddy. 

General Description of Services: Travois is a for-profit consulting firm that provides housing 

and economic development services in Indian Country. Travois provides the sustainable 

construction training offered by National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC). Their 

environmental services for tribes and TDHEs include Environmental Site Assessments by 

employees qualified under ASTME 1527-05 guidelines, consulting on sustainability 

improvements (solar, geothermal, biomass, biofuels, wind and other renewable and sustainable 

energy sources on or near Indian reservations), inspections and testing of mold, lead, asbestos 

and vapor intrusion, sampling and handling of hazardous materials. They also provide technical 

assistance on the Low Income Tax Credit Program. 

Other Information: Subcontractor to NAIHC to deliver basic training on sustainable 

construction, e.g. materials and product availability, resources, etc.
Training and Technical Assistance 

41 

Organization: Tribal Healthy Homes Project, Montana State University 

Contact Person: Mike Vogel 

Phone: 406-581-2432; 406-994-5417 

Email Address: mvogel@montana.edu

Web Address: http://tribalhealthyhomes.org/

Type of Activity: Training and technical assistance 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: Offers training and technical assistance on existing homes. 

Work nationally with all 500+ federally-recognized tribes. (1) capacity building -- enhance 

tribe's capacity to conduct healthy homes assessments; (2) conduct 3-day regional training 

sessions with technical assistance follow-up for tribal leaders from housing program, 

environmental health program, tribal extension department and Indian Health Services. "This 

Center will enable tribal communities to assess homes for common indoor health hazards such as 

mold and moisture, carbon monoxide, household chemicals, unsafe drinking water, lead, 

asbestos, pesticides, radon, dust and dust mites, common allergens, asthma triggers, and fire and 

safety hazards and septic systems" (from organization Web site). 

Other Information: Mike Vogel thinks that building new sustainable construction is a good fit 

with their current assessment training.
Training and Technical Assistance 

42 

Organization: U.S. Department of Energy, National Tribal Energy Program Training 

Workshops 

Contact Person: Lizana Pierce 

Phone: 303-275-4727 

Web Address: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/tribalenergy/upcoming_events.cfm

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: The Tribal Energy Program promotes tribal energy 

sufficiency and fosters economic development and employment on tribal lands through the use 

of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. The program, part of DOE's Office of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, provides financial and technical assistance to tribes to 

evaluate and develop their renewable energy resources and reduce their energy consumption 

through efficiency and weatherization. The program also offers education and training 

opportunities to help build the knowledge and skills essential for sustainable energy projects. The 

2-day annual training covered energy efficiency and weatherization in housing as well as 

renewable resources. 

Other Information: They put on a big conference with the Intertribal Environmental Council in 

June 2011. Discussed solar, wind, photovoltaix and biomass energy. (2) Had a Tribal Roundtable 

to discuss issues of environmental quality in Indian Country. The Tribal Energy Program is small 

but it is flexible enough to provide training based on need. The program has focused mostly on 

renewable energy. The Tribal Energy Program has funded feasibility and other studies with 

tribes for years.
Training and Technical Assistance 

43 

Organization: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Community Planning and 

Development 

Web Address: 

http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/training/web/energy/help/courses.cfm

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: Resource to annual conferences including sustainable 

construction training. A list of energy efficiency courses and conferences offered by agencies 

external to HUD can be found on the HUD Community Planning and Development Web site. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

44 

Organization: U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) 

Phone: 800-795-1747 

Web Address: http://www.usgbc.org

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: The U.S. Green Building Council is a 501(c)(3) non-profit 

community of leaders working to make green buildings available to everyone within a 

generation. They focus on the certification process for LEED building, and develop all the rating 

systems that buildings use to go through the LEED certification process. "Leadership in Energy 

& Environmental Design (LEED) is an internationally recognized green building certification 

system, providing third-party verification that a building or community is environmentally 

responsible, profitable and a healthy place to live and work... USGBC is the source for LEED 

and green building knowledge – whether a professional is preparing for a LEED exam, 

maintaining their credential, seeking support while working on a LEED project, or simply 

looking to expand their LEED and green building knowledge. With the most innovative and 

highest-quality LEED and green building knowledge and training, a USGBC education helps 

green building professionals across all market sectors build the capacity to build their careers." 

(USGBC Web site). The Green Building Council provides lots or workshops, webinars and 

online courses. Participants learn how to become LEED accredited professionals, and also how 

to do LEED-certified projects. 

Does not have any tribal focus.
Training and Technical Assistance 

45 

Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), School of Architecture 

Contact Person: Lynne Dearborn or Kevin Hinders 

Email Address: dearborn@illinois.edu 

Type of Activity: Technical Assistance 

Tribes Served: Pokagon Band of the Potawatomi Indians

General Description of Services: UIUC provided design expertise to assist the Pokagon Band 

of the Potawatomi Indians in realizing their vision of sustainability in single family homes and 

prototypes for construction. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

46 

Organization: University of Wisconsin at Madison 

Contact Person: Sue D. Thering 

Phone: 608-263-6506 

Email Address: SAThering@wisc.edu

Type of Activity: Training 

Region Served: Eastern/Woodlands 

General Description of Services: Sue Thering, University of Wisconsin, has a Cooperative 

Extension Program. She pulls teams together to deliver training in sustainable construction. 
Training and Technical Assistance 

47 

Organization: Washington State, Department of Commerce 

Contact Person: Eunice Herron, Tribal Weatherization Project 

Phone: 360-725-5083 

Email Address: eunice.herron@commerce.wa.gov

Web Address: http://www.commerce.wa.gov/site/506/default.aspx

Type of Activity: Funding and training 

Region Served: Washington 

General Description of Services: Funding, training and oversight of weatherization, energy 

audits, and training of tribal staff to do assessments and weatherization. 
48 

ORGANIZATIONS PROVIDING FUNDING 

FOR SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY 

JULY 18, 2011 

Organization: Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) 

Contact Person: Mimi Burbage, Energy Specialist ; Scott Waterman, Energy Specialist 

Phone: 907-330-8192 (Mimi); 907-330-8195 (Scott) 

Email Address: mburbage@ahfc.us; swaterma@ahfc.us

Web Address: http://www.ahfc.state.ak.us

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: Alaska 

General Description of Services: AHFC is a self-supporting public corporation with offices in 

16 communities statewide. It provides free classes for potential homebuyers and statewide 

financing for multi-family complexes, congregate facilities, and single-family homes, with 

special loans for first-time home buyers, low- and moderate-income borrowers, veterans, 

teachers, nurses, public safety officers, and those living in rural areas of the state. AHFC also 

provides energy and weatherization programs, low-income rental assistance in 17 communities, 

and special programs for the homeless. According to David Vought, they are a "very significant 

housing partner throughout the state.
Funding 

49 

Organization: Alaska ONAP 

Contact Person: David Vought 

Phone: 907-677-9862 

Email Address: david.vought@hud.gov

Type of Activity: Funding and partnering 

Region Served: Alaska 

General Description of Services: Developed two demonstration homes that are affordable, 

durable and highly energy efficient. (1) Anaktuvuk Pass -- partnered with the Cold Climate 

Housing Research Center (CCHRC) to build this home, which received a national ONAP award 

at the Greener Home Conference. The Anaktuvuk Pass Housing Authority is working on putting 

this home into production. They want to use the design to build 42 houses, beginning this 

summer. (2) Native Village of Kwinhagek, which has 700 residents. There is an extreme housing 

crisis in the community because one-third of the housing stock is structurally unsound because of 

moisture problems. They paid CCHRC $60,000 to design the home and $40,000 to manage 

construction. There is detailed information on this home on CCHRC's Web site under 

"sustainable northern shelter." According to the CCHRC Web site, energy costs dropped by 80 

percent at the two demonstration houses. Because the two houses were built at half the cost and 

use 80 percent less energy, they can build a lot more of these houses. 

Other Information: David especially works with Alaska native villages and small communities 

that are off the grid in terms of energy and transportation, so the costs of development are 

extremely high, particularly in subsistence communities. There are tremendous challenges in 

developing sustainable housing in Alaska because they need to reduce construction costs while 

increasing the quality of housing. Houses have to be highly energy efficient so people can afford 

to live in them.
Funding 

50 

Organization: Bonneville Power Administration 

Contact Person: Nathan Dexter, Tribal Affairs Manager 

Phone: 503-230-7306 

Email Address: nldexter@bpa.gov

Web Address: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/About_BPA/tribes/

Type of Activity: Funding, training and technical asistance 

Region Served: Northwest 

Tribes Served: Colville, Coeur d'Alene, Kalispel, Kootenai, Nez Perce, Spokane, Umatilla, 

Upper Columbia United Tribes, Warm Springs, Yakama, Blackfeet, Burns Paiute, Ft. 

McDermitt, Confederated Salish and Kootenai, Shoshone Bannock, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, 

Cedarville, Chehalis, Confederated Coos Lower Umpqua & Siuslaw, Coquille, Cow Creek, 

Cowlitz, Ft. Bidwell, Grand Ronde, Hoh, Jamestown S’Klallam, Klamath, Lower Elwha, 

Lummi, Makah, Muckleshoot, Nisqually, Nooksack, Pit River, Port Gamble S’Klallam, 

Puyallup, Quileute, Quinault, Samish, Sauk-Suiattle, Siletz, Shoalwater Bay, Skokomish, 

Snoqualmie, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish, Suquamish, Swinomish, Te-Moak of Western 

Shoshone, Tulalip, Upper Skagit 

General Description of Services: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has a Tribal Energy 

Group that provides training and funding for energy audits and whole house assessments. They 

work with Tribes in Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. The local power company has to be 

affiliated with Bonneville in order for the community to receive training and/or funds. 

Other Information: BPA, a nonprofit federal agency, has two types of programs. It funds 

energy efficiency measures through its public utilities. The public utilities select projects in their 

service areas. There are also set asides for low-income weatherization projects for tribes. This 

was how the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe installed ductless heat pumps in 30 percent of their 

housing units. These were installed by the Clallam power utility district. It was so popular that 

the tribe funded the installation of additional units through its general fund.
Funding 

51 

Organization: Denali Commision (The) 

Contact Person: Karen Johnson, Program Manager 

Phone: 907-271-3036 

Email Address: karenj@denali.gov

Web Address: http://www.denali.gov

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: Alaska 

General Description of Services: The Denali Commission has placed job training at the center 

of its comprehensive plan for economic growth in Alaska. In just a few short years, the 

Commission has made significant strides in assisting rural communities with their workforce 

development needs. As the Commission funds projects for new clinics, roads, and tank farms, it 

also builds sustainability into those projects by providing training for local residents to maintain 

and operate the new facilities. 

Other Information: Introduced by Congress in 1998, the Denali Commission is an independent 

federal agency designed to provide critical utilities, infrastructure, and economic support 

throughout Alaska. With the creation of the Denali Commission, Congress acknowledged the 

need for increased inter-agency cooperation and focus on Alaska's remote communities. Since its 

first meeting in April 1999, the Commission is credited with providing numerous cost-shared 

infrastructure projects across the State that exemplify effective and efficient partnership between 

federal and state agencies, and the private sector. Under "project database" on their Web site, 

can click on the State of Alaska icon to view an interactive map of all Denali Commission 

projects by funding year, location, and program area. 
Funding 

52 

Organization: Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE) 

Web Address: http://www.dsireusa.org/

Type of Activity: Funding 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: Project of the North Carolina Solar Center and the Interstate 

Renewable Energy Council (IREC), DSIRE provides searchable information on national, state, and local 

utility incentives and rebates for energy efficiency and renewable energy. Entries can be separated into 

residential and commercial. There are no tribal specific searches, but tribes may qualify for state or local 

utility company incentives. 
Funding 

53 

Organization: Enterprise Community Partners, an initiative of Enterprise Green Communities 

Contact Person: Trisha Miller, Director 

Phone: 410-964-1230 

Web Address: http://www.greencommunitiesonline.org/tools/funding/grants/

Type of Activity: Funding 

General Description of Services: Provides funds and expertise to enable affordable housing 

developers to build and rehabilitate homes that are healthier, more energy efficient, and better for 

the environment. In addition to loans and other funding options, Green Communities offers 

Charrette and Sustainability grants to help cover the costs of planning and implementing green 

components of affordable housing developments, as well as tracking their costs and benefits. 
Funding 

54 

Organization: Enterprise Green Communities, National Rural and Native American Initiative 

Contact Person: Rose Marquez 

Phone: 505-216-0928 

Email Address: rmarquez@enterprisecommunity.org

Type of Activity: Funding and training 

General Description of Services: The National Rural and Native American Initiative funded the 

Sustainable Native Communities Collaborative. Some of their other rural projects (like Chuska 

Apartments in Gallup, NM), may benefit Native Americans, but are not developed with tribes. 

They conduct some training sessions at conferences. 
Funding 

55 

Organization: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Regions 8 and 9 

Contact Person: Michelle Baker, EPA Region 9; Alfreda Mitre, EPA Region 8 

Phone: 415-972-3206 

Email Address: baker.michelle@epa.gov

Web Address: http://www.epa.gov/region4/recycle/green-building-toolkit.pdf

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: EPA Region 9 provides grants for pilot projects. They have 

developed a training workshop, fostered partnerships with other federal agencies such as HUD 

and DOT, and coordinated with non- governmental agencies such as Green Building Council. 

They work to respect tribal sovereignty and support tribal vision for sustainable construction. 

They have developed a Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit that is available for 

download from the Web. Region 8 has partnered with HUD to provide training on Green 

Building Codes. 
Funding 

56 

Organization: Greater Minnesota Housing Fund 

Contact Person: Janne Flistrand 

Web Address: www.mngreencommunities.org/about/index.htm

Type of Activity: Funding and technical assistance 

Region Served: Minnesota 

General Description of Services: Green charettes and technical assistance to Minnesota 

projects. 
Funding 

57 

Organization: Indigenous Communities Enterprises (ICE) 

Contact Person: 

Phone: 928-522-6162 

Web Address: http://www.franke.nau.edu/ice/ 

Type of Activity: Funding 

Region Served: Southwest 

Tribes Served: Navajo 

General Description of Services: ICE was created in 2001 as a non-profit organization that 

specializes in providing affordable and culturally appropriate housing for low-income elders and 

single families in the Navajo Nation area. ICE utilizes NAHASDA grants. These federal funds 

are restricted to low- to moderate-income families. Clients are required to provide additional 

funds to match ICE NAHASDA funds. ICE collaborates with Navajo Partnership for Housing 

(NPH). NPH conducts client financial assessments. These assessments help to determine the loan 

amount and the type of home the client qualifies for. ICE also collaborates with other entities 

such as USDA Rural Development, Navajo Nation Chapters and Veterans Affairs, etc. These 

entities have their own clients with funding sources that can be matched with ICE NAHASDA 

funds for new home construction. They refer their clients to ICE for collaboration. 

Other Information: Ongoing Straw Bale project and work with the U.S. Forest Service, using 

small diameter ponderosa logs to make traditional hogans.
Funding 

58

Organization: Native American Housing Services (NAHS) 

Contact Person: Sharon Wise 

Phone: 405-990-0066 

Type of Activity: Funding, technical assistance and can put trainings together 

General Description of Services: (1) Sharon doesn't do training but she knows who can, and 

she can put trainings together. (2) She is a certified CDHO. (3) Her organization administers 

HOME funds, tax credits and leveraging. Based on mission, works with other groups to develop 

affordable housing. (4) Specifically, according to NAHS' mission statement, they provide 

technical assistance to TDHEs to strengthen organizational and individual capacity; create 

Homebuyer Education curriculum; and provide property management and "lease to own" 

programs to create avenues to homeownership. 

Other Information: Based on the mission statement, they may not do training in sustainable 

construction; however, they help put together and fund affordable housing projects and do 

homebuyer education.
Funding 

59 

Organization: Rural Community Innovations (RCI) 

Contact Person: Michael Utter, Chief Executive Officer 

Phone: 406-587-0783 

Email Address: michael@rci-usa.org

Web Address: http://www.rci-usa.org/index.html

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

General Description of Services: Non-profit organization that provides solar, wind and waste 

energy development, and grant funding at the community level, not necessarily the individual 

residential level. 
Funding 

60 

Organization: U.S. Department of Energy, National Tribal Energy Program Training 

Workshops 

Contact Person: Lizana Pierce 

Phone: 303-275-4727 

Web Address: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/tribalenergy/upcoming_events.cfm

Type of Activity: Training and funding 

Region Served: National 

Tribes Served: All 

General Description of Services: The Tribal Energy Program promotes tribal energy 

sufficiency and fosters economic development and employment on tribal lands through the use 

of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. The program, part of DOE's Office of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, provides financial and technical assistance to tribes to 

evaluate and develop their renewable energy resources and reduce their energy consumption 

through efficiency and weatherization. The program also offers education and training 

opportunities to help build the knowledge and skills essential for sustainable energy projects. The 

2-day annual training covered energy efficiency and weatherization in housing as well as 

renewable resources. 

Other Information: (1) Put on a big conference with the Intertribal Environmental Council in 

June 2011. Discussed solar, wind, photovoltaix and biomass energy. (2) Had a Tribal Roundtable 

to discuss issues of environmental quality in Indian Country. The Tribal Energy Program is small 

but it is flexible enough to provide training based on need. The program has focused mostly on 

renewable energy. The Tribal Energy Program has funded feasibility and other studies with 

tribes for years.
Funding 

61 

Organization: U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development, Housing and Community 

Facilities Programs (HCFP) 

Phone: Housing programs national office: 202-720-4581 

Web Address: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/RD_Loans.html

Type of Activity: Funding and technical assistance 

Region Served: National 

General Description of Services: Housing and Community Facilities Programs helps rural 

communities and individuals by providing loans and grants for housing and community facilities. 

Provide funding for single family homes and apartments for low-income persons or the elderly. 

In partnership with non-profits, Indian tribes, state and federal government agencies and local 

communities, HCFP creates packages of technical assistance and loan and grant funds to assist 

more rural communities and individuals. More specifically, they offer loans and grants to 

provide homeownership opportunities, and they finance improvements to make homes decent, 

safe and sanitary. They also have residential energy programs. 
Funding 

62 

Organization: Washington State, Department of Commerce 

Contact Person: Eunice Herron, Tribal Weatherization Project 

Phone: 360-725-5083 

Email Address: eunice.herron@commerce.wa.gov

Web Address: http://www.commerce.wa.gov/site/506/default.aspx

Type of Activity: Funding and training 

Region Served: Washington 

General Description of Services: Funding, training and oversight of weatherization, energy 

audits, and training of tribal staff to do assessments and weatherization. 
Projects 

63 

INDIAN TRIBES WITH SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 

JULY 21, 2011 

Tribe: Aleut Corporation 

Contact: Dan Duame, Executive Director, Aleutian Housing Authority 

520 East 32nd Ave., Anchorage, AK 99503 

P: 907-563-2146 (work); 907-441-9313 (cell) email: dan.duame@aleutian-housing.com

Project Description: Sponsoring the Aleutian Living Home competition. Also completing Alaska 

Housing Finance Corporation professional single-family home and completion of another single family 

home in the Nelson Lagoon. 
Projects 

64 

Tribe: Anaktuvuk Pass Village 

Contact: Jack Hebert, Cold Climate Housing Research Center, 907-457-3454 

P: Nunamiut Corporation 907-661-3220; Village of Anaktuvuk Pass 907-661-2575 

Project Description: With Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC), built affordable, 

durable and highly energy efficient demonstration home. It received a national ONAP award at 

the Greener Home Conference. The Tagiugmiullu Nunamiullu Housing Authority is working on 

putting this house into production. They want to use the design to build 42 houses, beginning 

this summer. There is detailed information on this home on CCHRC's Web site 

(http://www.cchrc.org) under "sustainable northern shelter." 

Timeline: June-July 2009 

Contractors: CCHRC

Other Information: Part of Sustainable Northern Communities Program, which focuses on green 

building. 
Projects 

65 

Tribe: Bishop Paiute Tribe 

Contact: Robert Vance, Executive Director, Community Development Office 

270 N. See Vee Lane, Suite 5, Bishop, CA 93514 

P: 760-872-4172 

Project Description: Production and use of Structurally Insulated Panels. The panels are constructed offsite in a protected environment and then moved to the building site. They are incorporating as many 

energy saving methods as possible. Under current construction is a housing site with six two-story, fourplex buildings, two- and three-bedroom apartments, a meeting room, laundry facilities, a basketball court 

and a fenced playground. There will be some handicapped-accessible apartments. The apartments are 

intended for low- to moderate -income tribal members. 
Projects 

66 

Tribe: Coeur D'Alene 

Contact: Tim Negri, Facilities Construction Director, Coeur D'Alene Housing Authority

850 A Street, Plummer, ID 83851 

P: 208-686-1600 

Project Description: The Coeur d'Alene Tribe of Idaho has received a $500,000 Indian Community 

Block Grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The tribe will use the money to 

renovate and install energy-saving upgrades and rehabilitate 35 rental homes. The new family housing 

development is called the Gathering Place. The 20-unit subdivision, which is located off Agency Road 

near the old tribal headquarters, uses straw bale construction techniques (which is a "green" building 

method) built with native workforce. 

Funding Source: ARRA, Indian Community Block Grant from HUD 

Amount: $2,000,000 ARRA Competitive; $500,000 ICDBG 
Projects 

67 

Tribe: Colville Indian Tribe 

Contact: Elena Bassett, Executive Director, Colville Indian Housing Authority 

P. O. Box 528, Nespelem, WA 99155 

P: 509-634-2162 email: Elena.bassett@colvilletribes.com

Project Description: Inchelium, WA: Constructed 27 single-family homes and a community building. 

The construction incorporated passive solar design, surface water management, reduced heat-island 

effect, and included a walkable neighborhood and construction waste management 

Funding Source: $3 million in stimulus funds, $7 million project cost. The remaining financing came 

through a complicated investment tax credit program with Key Bank as the principal participant. 

Amount: $877,253 ARRA Formula; $3,000,000 ARRA Competitive; $240,000 AHP Grant; $1,500,000 

LIHTC; $1,625,000 IHBG 

Timeline: Project opened June 1, 2011 and took 18 months to complete 

Other Information: The low-income housing project has homes in the $160,000 to $180,000 range. 

Twenty of the units will be rentals, with four units going to qualified owners. Three units will be used to 

house professional staff who work on the reservation. Qualified tribal members will pay rental fees based 

on their incomes. 
Projects 

68 

Tribe: Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians 

Contact: Sami Jo Difuntorum, Executive Director, Tribal Housing Department 

555 Tolowa Court, P.O. Box 549, Siletz, OR 97380 

P: 541-444-8312 email: samijod@ctsi.nsn.us

Project Description: Siletz Tribal Energy Program (STEP): The Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians 

was awarded a grant in the fall of 2009 from the Administration for Native Americans to create an energy 

management program. Tribal staff are working with federal, state, and local partners, tribal member 

partners and others to learn about and implement the conservation of natural resources. They are 

providing education and assistance for home weatherization, energy conservation and lead poisoning 

prevention. 
Projects 

69 

Tribe: Coos Bay Confederated Tribes 

Contact: Linda Malcomb, Tribal Housing Department 

Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians 

1245 Fulton Ave, Coos Bay, OR 97420 

P: 541-888-7510 email: lmalcomb@ctclusi.org

Project Description: Qaxas Heights: Construction of 17 new units and rehabilitation of 3 units using 

green and energy efficient features. Construction incorporated solar tubes and sun tunnels for each unit to 

maximize the use of natural sunlight and reduce use of electricity; reuse of maple wood flooring from the 

Coos Head Naval facility gym; high efficiency water heaters (compact, tankless water heater provides 

instant hot water and lower energy bills); insulated house wrap installed under siding which prevents 

energy loss through walls; insulated hot water pipes; energy efficient household appliances and Low-E 

double paned windows. 

Funding Source: ARRA, IHBG, USDA/RBEG 

Amount: $280,824 ARRA Formula; $1,998,800 ARRA Competitive; $500,000 IHBG; $200,000 

USDA/RBEG 
Projects 

70 

Tribe: Cowlitz Tribe 

Contact: Jerry Hause, Weatherization Manager, Cowlitz Tribe 

P.O. Box 2547, Longview, WA 98632 

P: 360-864-7002 or 360-864-8720 ext. 102 email: jhause@toledotel.com

Project Description: The Cowlitz Indian Tribal Weatherization Assistance Program provides energy 

savings measures to help conserve energy and save on electricity and heating costs. The program will 

insulate walls, ceilings, attics and crawl spaces; weather strip, caulk and seal windows and doors; install 

ventilation fans in kitchens and bathrooms; replace windows and doors; replace refrigerators and water 

heaters; and fix or replace heating source. 
Projects 

71 

Tribe: Fond du Lac Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe 

Contact: Ms. Amy Wicklund, Economic Development Planner 

1720 Big Lake Road, Cloquet, MN 55720 

P: 218-878-2631 email: AmyWicklund@FDLRez.com

Project Description: (1) Built 24 units, including an apartment building, 2 townhomes and a small 

community building. The units are senior supportive housing, which includes both housing and social 

services. They used the Minnesota Green Building Communities standards. (2) Completing a 10-unit 

assisted living building for elders which meets Minnesota Green Building Communities standards. Green 

features include: energy efficient buildings that exceed HERS minimum requirements; Energy Star rated 

appliances, HVAC equipment and light fixtures; low VOC adhesive and sealants; insulated cold water 

piping; concrete slabs on grade with a vapor barrier; and Green Label flooring of hard surface marloleum 

to reduce dust and mold. 

Funding Source: (1)Minnesota Green Communities and approximately 15 other funding sources; (2) 

ARRA competitive grant 

Timeline: (1)Opened July 1, 2010; (2) Opening August 1, 2011 

Contractors: (1)Architect: DSGW; Contractor: Shingobee; (2) Architect: DSGW; used different 

contractor than (1) 
Projects 

72 

Tribe: Isleta Pueblo 

Contact: Isleta Pueblo Housing Authority, Po Box 1290 Isleta NM, 87022 

P: 505-869-4153 

Project Description: Lava Rock construction is done on site. 

http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/stories/2010/08/23/story4.html

Edward P. Torres recently left as executive director. 
Projects 

73 

Tribe: Jicarilla Apache 

Contact: Ronald Garcia, Planning Development Coordinator 

42 Hawks Drive, Dulce, NM 87528 

P: 575-759-3459 

Project Description: Building 10 homes. They will be Energy Star rated manufactured housing. These 

are high performance building envelopes using water conservation methods such as low flow plumbing 

fixtures and rain water harvesting. 
Projects 

74 

Tribe: Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians 

Contact: Ken Harrington, Tribal Chairman 

7500 Odawa Circle, Harbor Springs, MI 49740 

P: 231-242-1400 

Project Description: LEED for Homes Gold certified multifamily project in Michigan. Uses ICF, 

recycled cellulose insulation at high density, Low E-windows, CFLs, high efficiency heat pumps and 

water heaters, and rain gardens. 

Funding Source: ARRA, Tribal Funds, BIA 
Projects 

75 

Tribe: Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe 

Contact: John Williamson, Director, Lower Elwha Housing Authority 

2851 Lower Elwha Road, Port Angeles, WA 98363 

P: 360-457-5116 ext. 304 

Project Description: Installed ductless heat pumps in existing housing with a grant from the Department 

of Energy and Clallam County Public Utility District. Forty-two heat pumps were installed under the 

grant but the program has been so popular that the Tribe has funded an additional 15 installations. About 

one-third of tribal homes now have the heat pumps. 

Funding Source: Department of Energy and Clallam County Public Utility District 
Projects 

76 

Tribe: Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina 

Contact: Celen Pasalar, PhD 

NC State University, College of Design, Campus Box 7701, Raleigh, NC 27695-7701 

P: 919-515-8952 email: celen_pasalar@ncsu.edu

Project Description: North Carolina State University's College of Design, Laboratory for the Design of 

Healthy and Sustainable Communities, developed Lumbee home design guidelines and designed three 

prototype houses as part of the Home Environments Design Initiative. The partnership has produced a set 

of home design guidelines and four prototype home designs. Six Lumbee Home Designs are now under 

construction or complete. 

Other Information: http://www.ncsu.edu/extension/engaging_with_comm-1.html
Projects 

77 

Tribe: Lummi Nation 

Contact: Diana Phair, Executive Director, Lummi Nation Housing Authority 

2828 Kwina Road, Bldg. X, Bellingham, WA 98226 

P: 360-312-8407 

Project Description: The Evergreen Standard requires all Tribes in Washington to incorporate 

sustainable activities into their construction. This tribe is on the list because they actually had very quick 

turn around with their ARRA funds. Kwina Village construction included 72 multi-family units and a 

community building. 

Funding Source: ARRA, IHBG, Community Center built by youth apprenticeship 

Amount: $7,000,000; $1.2 million Department of Labor (DOL) YouthBuild Grant provides salary and 

hands-on construction training. 
Projects 

78 

Tribe: Makah Tribe 

Contact: Wendy Lawrence, Executive Director, Makah Housing Authority 

PO Box 115, Neah Bay, WA 98357 

P: 360-645-2864 

Project Description: The Sail River Heights project is in the planning/pre-construction stage for nine 

charettes. 

Funding Source: Some HUD funding and Washington State Funding 
Projects 

79 

Tribe: Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin 

Contact: Betty Jo Wozniak, Director, Menominee Indian Tribe Housing Department 

Day Care Road, PO BOX 910, Keshena, WI 54135 

P: 715-799-3236 ext. 1516 email: bwozniak@mitw.org

Project Description: The Tribe is planning a sustainability redevelopment of approximately 300 units. 
Projects 

80 

Tribe: Mescalero Apache 

Contact: Timothy E. Horan, Executive Director, Mescalero Apache Housing Authority 

101 Central, P.O. Box 227, Mescalero, NM 

P: 505-464-9235 

Project Description: The tribe built a new community called I-Sah'-din-dii, which was designed and 

constructed to reduce impact on the environment. The project is a 30 unit, green, single-family 

subdivision for very low-income families. The subdivision will have a community center and childcare, 

employment and health services. The project utilized passive solar and lighting, is energy efficient, 

utilizes water conservation methods, and materials designed to improve indoor air quality. Specifically, 

the project's features include rainwater collection, energy-efficient windows, doors and appliances, lowimpact building materials and solar placement. 

Funding Source: New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority provided tax credits and other funds, and the 

tribe used IHBG funds 

Timeline: Broke ground July 2008; project has been completed 
Projects 

81 

Tribe: Native Village of Kwinhagak 

Contact: Jack Ebert, Cold Climate Housing Research Center 

P: 907-457-3454 

Project Description: Native Village of Kwinhagek has 700 residents. There is an extreme housing crisis 

in the community because one-third of the housing stock is structurally unsound because of moisture 

problems. They paid Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) $60,000 to design the home and 

$40,000 to manage construction. There is detailed information on this home on CCHRC's Web site 

(http://www.cchrc.org) under "sustainable northern shelter." 

Amount: Targeted cost of $220,000 

Timeline: Started in September 2010 

Contractors: CCHRC designed the home and managed the construction. 

Other Information: Part of Sustainable Northern Communities Program, which focuses on green 

building. 
Projects 

82 

Tribe: Navajo 

Contact: Aneva J. Yazzie, CEO 

P.O. Box 4980, Window Rock, AZ 86515 

P: 928-871-2600 

Project Description: 

(1) Constructing permanent supportive housing for urban Indians in Flagstaff, Arizona and Albuquerque, 

New Mexico. Use of FlexCrete Building Systems. Navajo Housing Authority has identified new 

construction being done with ARRA funds and housing will be LEED certified. 

(2) The Nageezi House is the Stardust Center's first Affordable and Sustainable Demonstration Home. It 

is featured in Global Green USA's Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing (Island Press, 2007), and 

was selected as part of the regional LEED for Homes Pilot program. The home was completed in July 

2005. The family's dilapidated home was demolished and the new home was rebuilt on the original slab. 

Navajo students in the ASU College of Design were an integral part of the design and construction of the 

home, and the effort evolved into a partnership between the Stardust Center, the Navajo Housing 

Authority and Navajo FlexCrete. The home's innovative design reflects the traditional structures of the 

Navajo, including the hooghan (home) and the chahash'oh (shade structure), The Stardust Center 

monitored the house for one year to determine its thermal performance. Overall, the home exceeded 

performance predictions, demonstrating a 60% reduction in energy use compared to a conventionallyconstructed house of the same size. 

Funding Source: (2) Demonstration house: volunteer labor and donated materials 

Contractors: 

(1) Jonathan Robertson, CEO, Flex Crete Building Systems. http://www.navajoflexcrete.biz

(2) Stardust Center for Affordable Homes and the Family, Arizona State University, 234 N. Central 

Avenue, Suite 9401, Phoenix, AZ 85004-2510 p: 602-496-1469 

Other Information: The Stardust Center is working with the Navajo Housing Authority to develop 

production versions of the Nageezi House for construction across the reservation. 
Projects 

83 

Tribe: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation 

Contact: Jon Warner, Executive Director, Northwestern Band of Shoshone Housing Authority 

707 N. Main Street, Brigham City, UT 84302 

P: 435-723-3013 email: jondsho@yahoo.com

Project Description: Rehabbed 9 units, 3 of which ensured compliance with American with Disabilities 

Act. Rehabbed units are Energy Star certified for windows, exterior doors, storm doors, storm windows 

and window film, programmable thermostats and Energy Star rated appliances 
Projects 

84 

Tribe: Oglala Sioux, Pine Ridge, North Dakota 

Contact: Nick Tilsen, Executive Director, Thunder Valley CDC 

P.O. Box 290, Porcupine, SD 57772 

P: 605-455-2700 email: nick@thundervalley.org

Project Description: As part of HUD's Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program, 

Thunder Valley Community Development Corporation received a HUD Sustainable Communities Grant. 

Thunder Valley has a community development project which will include a sustainable housing sector. 

These homeownership units will be built with renewable energy practices and use the natural elements 

support heating and cooling. The neighborhoods will be designed with sidewalks, bike paths, small parks 

and outdoor community spaces for people to gather. The majority of these homes will be three to four 

bedroom homes sitting on an acre or half-acre of property. Once the lots are created, they will be able to 

use new types of lending like the Wells Fargo Native American lending program (which uses a BIA 184 

guaranteed loan). This type of lending has been successful on Pine Ridge, but many families are lacking 

the land to build their homes. 

Funding Source: HUD grant to support more livable and sustainable communities; ARRA. 

Amount: $996,100, which will be used to create a regional plan for sustainable development for Thunder 

Valley Community Development Corporation on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. 

Other Information: Construction of 18 units for low income families using Energy Star rated appliances 

and products. 
Projects 

85 

Tribe: Ohkay Owingeh 

Contact: Daryl Woolems, Project Manager 

P.O. Box 1059, Ohkay Owingeh, NM 87566 

P: 505-852-0189 

Project Description: This is a rehabilitation project within the historic core at the Pueblo established 

centuries ago. A historic preservation plan was developed with the Housing Authority Cultural Advisory 

Team and Tribal Council. The renovation work includes indigenous materials such as adobe and mud 

plaster. Construction is now underway for 21 homes. 

Other Information: http://ohkayowingehhousingauthority.org/index.html
Projects 

86 

Tribe: Penobscot Nation 

Contact: Craig Sanborn, Director Penobscot Indian Nation Housing Authority 

6 River Road, Indian Island, ME 04468 

P: 207-827-7776 or 207-817-7372 email: Craig.Sanborn@Penobscotnation.org

Project Description: 12 LEED certified single-family homeownership units. 
Projects 

87 

Tribe: Pinoleville Pomo Nation 

Contact: Ryan Shelby, Scholar, UC-Berkeley 

450 Sutardja Dai Hall, Mail Box #17, Berkeley, CA 94720 

P: 510-761-6192 email: ryan_shelby@berkeley.edu

Project Description: Native Community Assessment of Renewable Energy & Sustainability (CARES) is 

housed at Berkeley University. They partnered with Pinoleville Pomo Nation on a co-design project. 

Funding Source: NativeCARES 
Projects 

88 

Tribe: Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians 

Contact: Mark Parrish, Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians 

P: 269-782-9602 email: mark.parrish@pokagonband-nsn.gov

Project Description: Pokagonek Edawat is part of a master plan for the Band for creating a sustainable 

community. University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign worked with the Pokagon Band of the 

Potawatomi Indians in 2006-2007 to develop 16 single family homes and prototypes for construction. The 

sustainable buildings were designed to be energy efficient and healthy using passive systems, 

environmentally friendly materials, and strategies to improve indoor air quality. 

Other Information: http://www.semcog.org/Data/lid.report.cfm?lid=132

http://www.sustainabledevelopmentinstitute.org/TribalGreenDesign/GreenDesignPDF/PokagonbandPota

watomi.pdf
Projects 

89 

Tribe: Puyallup Tribe 

Contact: Annette Bryan, Executive Director of Puyullap Tribal Housing Authority 

2806 E. Portland Ave., Tacoma, WA 98404 

P: 253-573-7956 

Project Description: Constructing 20 housing units, community building and longhouse using solar hot 

water and photovoltaic panels, high energy efficient heating systems, Energy Star appliances, low flow 

faucets and showerheads, hiqh quality windows and wildlife habitat awareness and natural landscaping. 

LEED Gold/Platinum certification. The longhouse project is the first tribal building to be certified LEED 

Platinum – a very challenging certification to achieve. In order to qualify for this high standard, the 

housing project is using Styrofoam insulated wall panels, geothermic ground-sourced heating and all 

locally created products and services. 

Funding Source: ARRA, IHBG 

Amount: $883,573 ARRA Formula; $3,000,000 ARRA Competitive; $1,200,000 IHBG 

Timeline: Site work and construction began in October, 2010. More than halfway completed in midJune, 2011 

Contractors: Keeping employment in-house through TERO, which is Tribal Employment Rights Office, 

and the Puyallup Tribal Housing Authority. This means that a lot of Native Americans are working on 

this project and being trained in the construction field. 

Other Information: The first phase of the longhouse project includes construction of 10 housing units, 

upgrades to the existing gymnasium, and installation of an outdoor cultural dancing circle and 

playground. Five of the units are one-story, one-bedroom units, and the other five are two-story, twobedroom units, catering to individuals, couples and small families in need of affordable housing. The 

second phase of the longhouse project will include construction of another 10-unit building for 

individuals and small families, as well as renovations and weatherization upgrades to the existing 27-unit 

Northeast Tacoma apartment complex. Currently working on grant funding for phase two, which could 

start as soon as the next fiscal year. 

“We want the two projects to match each other and be visually pleasant, but weatherization and energy 

efficiency is the primary focus.” Annette Bryan, Executive Director of PTHA. 
Projects 

90 

Tribe: Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians 

Contact: Jane Barrett, Executive Director, Red Lake Housing Authority 

P.O. Box 219 Highway 1 East, Red Lake, MN 56671 

P: 218-679-3368 

Project Description: The Tribe’s Division of Energy contracts with Ashland County Housing Authority 

to provide basic weatherization services to eligible households. The Tribe also has constructed green 

housing using innovative techniques. 
Projects 

91 

Tribe: Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians 

Contact: Joni Talentino, Director, Sault Ste. Marie Housing Authority 

154 Parkside, Kincheloe, MI 49788 

P: 906-495-1454 (work), 906-440-4191 (cell) email: JRTalentino@SaultTribe.net

Project Description: Housing Rehabilitation 

“’The home upgrades will include the installation of new Energy Star rated windows, high efficient 

furnaces/boilers, water heaters, vinyl siding and exterior doors. These improvements will greatly reduce 

the heating costs for tribal residents and prolong the useful life of the homes,’ said Talentino”

http://www.sooeveningnews.com/news/x2084232057/HUD-officers-tour-tribal-housing-in-Eastern-U-P 

Funding Source: ARRA
Projects 

92 

Tribe: Sicangu Wicoti Awanyakapi, Rosebud Sioux 

Contact: Amos Prue, CEO, Rosebud Tribal Housing 

P.O. Box 69, Rosebud, SD 57570 

P: 605-747-2203 email: rstha@gwtc.net

Project Description: Installed 100 solar panels on individual homes on reservation. 

Funding Source: The Rosebud Sioux Tribe is being provided funds to support the Solar Heat Panel 

Installation Training Project #2 through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) 

Amount: $337,111 

Timeline: Awarded 11/30/2009; as of 3/30/2011, project is less than 50% completed. The project has 

been operating at a slow pace due to the number of price quotes that are needed before 

supplies/equipment can be purchased. 

Contractors: New personnel were hired to complete the installation of the solar panels; the new hires 

also completed the following training: carpentry, electrical, customer service, equipment inventory, and 

data reporting. Jobs created: 10-Solar Panel installation certified trainees: install solar panels on preselected homes within the Rosebud Reservation. 
Projects 

93 

Tribe: Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 

Contact: Barrett Schmanska, Executive Director, Port Gamble Housing Authority 

32000 Little Boston Road NE, Kingston, WA 98346 

P: 360-297-6226 

Project Description: Built new Teekalet neighborhood, located next to Little Boston Creek, which feeds 

into Port Gamble Bay. Project includes 15 single-family homes, two apartments and a community center. 

Exterior design includes a series of rain gardens and filtration systems throughout the property as well as 

pervious pavers in the parking areas. These measures significantly limit the amount of stormwater runoff 

that can reach the Creek. The same environmental concerns drove the interior design: solar shades are 

fitted to heat the homes in the winter and keep them cool in the summer. Every unit has energy efficient 

lighting and appliances. Teekalet meets Washington State's Evergreen Sustainable Development 

standards for affordable housing. 

Funding Source: Worked with the Washington State Housing Trust Fund, HUD, Indian Housing Block 

Grant Program and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on grants for funding 

Timeline: 2009-March, 2011 

Contractors: For aspects of the design, Tribe's Natural Resources department worked with civil engineer 

Ahmis Loving, PE of Seattle. Tormod Hellwig Architects designed the project and J.M. Grinnell 

Contracts did the construction, in consultation with the Tribe's Teekalet Housing Authority Board of 

Commissioners. 

Other Information: Goal was that Teekalet would not adversely affect the land, wildlife, or water 

quality of Port Gamble Bay. Teekalet Housing Development was designed to be an ecologically‐ and 

financially‐friendly alternative for low‐to‐middle income S'Klallam Tribal residents. A dedication 

ceremony occurred on March 3, 2011. 
Projects 

94 

Tribe: Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana 

Contact: Sylvester Joe Barbry, Director, Tunica-Biloxi Housing Authority 

151 Melacon Drive, Marksville, LA 71351 

P: 888-242-3115 or 318-253-9767 email: jbarbry@tunica.org

Project Description: Their housing code requires that all new housing on reservation must be renewable. 

For example, they use solar panels and Polaris for roofing because it has foil to radiate heat out of the 

house. On February 26, 2009, HUD staff from the Southern Plains Office of Native American programs 

attended the Grand Opening of a "solar home" constructed by the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe in Marksville, 

Louisiana. This cutting edge green construction project integrates energy-smart features. The home's 

construction incorporates energy efficient building materials such as 2 x 6 framing and a heat-barrier 

membrane along with renewable energy technology including solar panels (made of a hail resistant 

material to prevent damage and are designed to withstand winds in excess of 100 mph) and a solar water 

heater (sunlight strikes and heats an "absorber" surface within a "solar collector"). Heated water is stored 

in a separate preheat tank or a conventional water heater tank until needed. Roof-mounted solar panels are 

the primary source of electricity for the home, which will cut the monthly electricity bill from $120 to 

about $30, according to Sylvester "Joe" Barbry, the tribe's housing authority director. If the panels 

generate excess electricity, this power is returned to the power grid and may reduce the energy bill 

further. Should the home need power beyond that produced by the panels, standard electrical service is 

available. 

Funding Source: Solar home funded in part by Indian Housing Block Grant. 

Amount: Solar home -- 3-bedroom home cost the Tribe about $115,000 to build. Once HUD assistance 

is included, the home will cost about $85,000 for tribal members. 

Timeline: Solar home was ready February 6, 2009. 

Other Information: The tribe intends to track and evaluate the performance of its first solar home and 

make the future homes it builds even more energy efficient. Mr. Barbry hopes to erect a new and even 

greener home every year. 
Projects 

95 

Tribe: White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe 

Contact: Mr. Ben Bement, Human Services Director 

Family Investment Center, P.O. Box 70, Naytahwaush, MN 56566 

P: 218-935-5554 email: BenB@WhiteEarth.com

Project Description: Dream Catcher Homes Project. Told that this contains sustainable elements. If a 

development uses MN Housing Finance Agency dollars there are green standards and then a MN Housing 

green overlay criteria that the development will have to meet. 

http://documents.csh.org/documents/mn/A4-DreamCatcherHomes%20MN.pdf
Projects 

96 

Tribe: Wichita Tribe 

Contact: Mr. Ben Hatfied, Executive Director, Wichita Housing Authority 

1 Coronado Circle, Anadarko, OK 73005 

P: 405-247-7470 email: wichitahousing@suddenlinkmail.com

Project Description: The Tribe just completed a sustainable housing project. They have designed 

neighborhoods using sustainable techniques. 

http://www.recovery.org/projectdetails.aspx?pid=ANT:12501506&gloc=US*US (5/18/2010) 

Past project: 

http://www.nativetimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2490:wichita-housingproject-earns-apex-award&catid=54&Itemid=30 (October 2009)
Projects 

97 

Tribe: Yerington Paiute Tribe 

Contact: Mr. Jack Buchold, Tribal Manager, Yerington Paiute Tribe 

171 Campbell Lane, Yerington, NV 89447 

P: 775-463-3301 email: tribalmanager@ypt-nsn.gov

Project Description: The Green Native Council worked with the Tribe to build a new senior duplex. 
Projects 

98 

Tribe: Yurok Tribe 

Contact: Judith Marasco, Executive Director, Yurok Inidan Housing Authority 

15540 US Hwy 101 North, Klamath CA 95548-9351

P: 707-482-1506; 800-281-4749 

Project Description: Green Native Council worked with the Tribe to build new homes. In addition, the 

Tribe is currently working on converting two-story homes in the Klamath Townsite to be more energy 

efficient. 
Projects 

99 

Tribe: Zuni Pueblo 

Contact: Michael Chavez, Executive Director, Zuni Housing Authority 

P.O. Box 710, Zuni Pueblo, NM 87327 

P: 505-782-4550 or 505-782-4564 email: mchavez@pozha.org

Project Description: The tribe uses Quad Lock construction. They just completed several ARRA funded 

projects 

Funding Source: ARRA, IHBG, ICDBG 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix B

Appendix B: 

National Meeting Report 
+ 

Impediments to Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

White Paper 

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Initiative 

January 20, 2012 

 
Table of Contents 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 3

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 6

FOCUS GROUP FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 7

ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 12

RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 13

SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 17

APPENDIX A: MEETING NOTES ............................................................................................. 19

APPENDIX B: ORIGINAL INVITEES ....................................................................................... 41

 

2 
SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY INITIATIVE 

Impediments to Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

White Paper

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative is a congressionally mandated effort of 

the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Policy Development 

and Research (PD&R), in partnership with the HUD Office of Native American Programs 

(ONAP). The initiative seeks to promote and support sustainable construction practices in Native 

communities. One task under this initiative was to conduct a meeting to explore impediments to 

sustainable construction practices and solutions to these impediments. Participants from a 

governmental, a nongovernmental, and a tribal focus group offered observations regarding 

impediments to sustainable construction in Native communities. Participants in a follow-up 

coordination meeting ranked the impediments associated with sustainable construction and 

brainstormed about potential solutions. Appendix A offers the detailed notes from each focus 

group and the analysis meeting with participants. 

Working from a wide variety of impediments identified by the focus groups, these four 

impediments to sustainable construction ranked most important: 

• Building codes 

• Costs/funding 

• Capacity building 

• Planning 

The graphic on the next page provides a brief summary of these impediments. 

3 
4 
Since the participants in the coordination meeting were primarily from Federal agencies, they 

developed recommendations, primarily, of what Federal agencies may do to assist in resolving 

these impediments. A brief summary of these recommendations follows: 

Building codes 

Tribes have the ability to develop building codes and standards or adapt codes such as the 

International Green Construction Code to their own needs. They may not have always taken up 

this opportunity because, historically, they have been excluded from Federal assistance for 

building code development. Additionally, many tribes are located in rural areas, which are less 

likely to have existing building codes. Federal agencies can provide incentives that encourage 

tribes to implement green practices/meet green standards. Federal agencies are already 

supporting tribes in reducing this form of barrier with their participation in the interagency Tribal 

Green Building Codes Workgroup. 

Costs/Funding 

To assist tribes in making the most of funding resources and cutting costs, Federal agencies can 

help tribes and the housing industry move beyond a perception of cost or luxury in sustainable 

housing. One strategy is to demonstrate how to calculate benefits of sustainable construction 

practices and link audiences to tools, such as cost benefit analyses, that can help them develop 

sustainable projects most effectively. Benefit analysis tools, including free software, is available 

at http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/tools_directory/ on the Department of Energy (DOE) 

Web site. Cost analyses might also be adapted to factor in social and cultural benefits of 

sustainable construction, which are not traditional components of cost-benefit analyses. 

Federal funding programs may be diminished, but they offer the flexibility and credibility to 

leverage funds. Grants may be written to provide matches for sustainable construction activities. 

Tribes are eligible to apply for a variance to go above the total development cost (TDC), the 

ceiling for cost per unit construction, with Area Office approval based on the incorporation of 

sustainable building technologies (Notice PIH 2010-47). 

Capacity building 

The suggestions related to tribal capacity building focused on expanding the services provided 

by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and increasing the number and capability of 

community development corporations. Additional suggestions included encouraging adoption of 

sustainable practices through rebates and incentives, dissemination of analyses on sustainability 

in other communities as adapted for tribal communities and of model tribal projects. One 

suggestion was for a tribal college version of the solar decathlon, where college teams compete 

to build innovative, affordable houses—often rooted in their regional culture or meeting a 

specific need – e.g. homes for victims of natural disasters, southern examples featuring large 

porches. Additionally, Federal agencies encourage specific capacity building by incentivizing 

green building in existing programs and prioritizing tribal green building in program 

development and delivery. 

Planning 

Some funds are available to assist tribes in planning for long-term community development. The 

Federal government has relationships and methods of dissemination that can inform tribes about 

available planning resources and funding opportunities. Federal agencies might also partner to 

5 
create a tribal version of the Mayor’s Institute on City Design, a National Endowment for the 

Arts initiative that helps transform communities through design by preparing mayors to be the 

chief urban designers of their cities. 

INTRODUCTION 

HUD’s Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative, administered by PD&R, in 

partnership with ONAP, seeks to ensure that tribes have access to and support in using 

sustainable construction practices. The initiative includes four tasks: 

• Identifying Native communities that are working on sustainable construction projects. 

This task was completed. 

• Identifying impediments to sustainable construction practices and opportunities for 

technical assistance (TA) and training for the Native communities. This task is on-going. 

• Seeking demonstration projects that can be featured in best practice case studies. These 

case studies will be made widely available to the Native communities, allowing others to 

benefit from these best practices. This task is on-going. 

• Making training available to tribal communities. This task has not begun. 

This report provides a summary of the comments and recommendations of participants involved 

the second task. HUD conducted a meeting exploring impediments to sustainable construction 

practices and solutions to these impediments. The meeting was held in conjunction with the 2011 

HUD Greener Homes National Summit. 

The meetings consisted of three focus groups and a follow-up meeting to analyze focus group 

findings and make recommendations. HUD invited participants to two of the focus groups: a 

governmental and a nongovernmental group. The third focus group, the tribal focus group, was 

open to any tribal member attending the Summit. To ensure that tribes were aware of this 

opportunity, HUD conducted outreach to the regional Indian housing associations and also to the 

tribal communities which were award winners at the Greener Homes National Summit. 

Invited representatives attended the follow-up coordination meeting. Many of these 

representatives had also participated in the focus groups. As part of this meeting, participants 

prioritized the impediments identified by the focus group by importance based on the potential 

negative impact on the development of sustainable housing in Native American communities., 

and also sorted them into impediments to residential construction in general and impediments to 

green construction in particular. They also brainstormed about some areas where change could 

be undertaken. Appendix B contains a list of invited participants for each group. 

When discussing impediments, the focus groups identified both general residential construction 

process and green residential construction process impediments without distinguishing between 

them. It is reasonable to assume that impediments to residential construction also will affect any 

green construction process. Nonetheless, to make the best use of their time, members of the 

coordination meeting, separated general construction and green concerns, and focused their 

discussion on the impediments to green construction. 

6 
Specific to green construction practices, participants across the focus groups identified the need 

for an increased availability of sustainable construction models adapted to tribal needs and tribal 

communities. This included not only providing access to case studies of tribal communities with 

sustainable construction projects, but also providing hands-on training and identifying model 

houses that tribes can visit and examine in the field. 

This report contains an executive summary of the meeting and the detailed summary and 

recommendations. The appendices contain full notes from each focus group and the analysis 

meeting with participant lists, and a list of invited participants for each group.

FOCUS GROUP FINDINGS

The three focus groups—governmental, nongovernmental, and tribal—received similar questions 

to answer. Both the questions and their responses were influenced by their relationships to 

construction projects in tribal communities—some as funding sources and grant administrators, 

housing developers, housing administrators, trainers and technical assistance providers. 

Discussion covered many areas, reflecting the complexity of construction in Indian Country and 

its association with community development and community well-being. 

Governmental Focus Group

Governmental focus group participants identified two major categories of impediments to 

developing sustainable construction projects in native communities: lack of education about the 

benefits of green building and internal tribal impediments. 

Tribal leadership and tribal members need to be educated about the long-term benefits of green 

construction. While green construction is more expensive initially, it is more cost effective in the 

long run, over the life cycle of the homes. In addition to the energy savings, green homes can be 

healthier homes. Families can reduce health care costs by living in homes that are free of mold, 

mildew, and other health hazards – and green homes can reduce the contributing factors to those 

hazards. Green construction typically can be higher quality as well, so that the goal of the design 

and construction of the homes is to be more sustainable and longer lasting. These are important 

lessons to teach when working with mutual help or rental unit residents: it is difficult to gain 

homeowner or resident buy-in for the maintenance of energy efficient upgrades or amenities in 

situations where the occupant is not paying for the upgrade or amenity. Tribes and homeowners 

also need to be educated about what someone referred to as “presolarizing”: that there is a lot 

they can do in small steps and for little cost. They can implement relatively inexpensive options 

into new construction, and modify existing homes. 

In addition to educating tribal leadership on the long-term benefits, a related concern that 

combined both education and internal tribal impediments was that although the Native American 

Housing and Self Determination Act (NAHASDA) is more than 10 years old, tribes do not 

always recognize the full extent of their sovereignty with regard to housing and community 

development. Tribal leadership may not realize that, to promote the tribe’s own vision of 

sustainable construction and reflect cultural values, the tribe could enact building codes or 

conduct long-range planning beyond the requirements of the Indian Housing Plan (IHP). 

7 
Other impediments related to education include the perception of green housing as a want or 

luxury rather than a need; issues related to planning and budgeting where Federal agencies might 

be able to influence change, such as looking at life cycle costs as a way to balance higher upfront 

costs; weighing quantity vs. quality; standardization of rules and regulations, permitting, etc. 

across agencies; and need for green building codes or standards. 

Another impediment to sustainable construction in Native communities is tribal capacity. 

Turnover among tribal leaders and tribal staff is often high; this can necessitate multiple efforts 

to educate leadership about the advantages of green building and decreased housing development 

as new leaders and staff may also need additional time to develop capacity. Other issues related 

to tribal capacity include: 

• The large number and broad diversity of tribes decreases the ability of Federal agencies 

to provide adequate support to tribes. 

• Remoteness, especially in Alaska, means that in some cases there is no or insufficient 

infrastructure for green building. 

• More generally, remote housing locations increase the cost of transporting materials to 

construction sites, also increasing the cost of on-site technical education, and reducing the 

availability of knowledgeable contractors. 

Given these impediments to developing sustainable construction projects, native communities 

need location specific assistance which is not being addressed. 

The most important gaps include: 

• Providing more information and support to tribes in planning for and funding green 

construction. 

• Greater interagency collaboration and cooperation in educating tribes and providing 

technical assistance in all aspects of green construction. 

• Generally more and better coordination of services to tribes. 

Solutions that the team came up with where Federal expertise could be utilized include: 

• Increasing formal and informal interagency cooperation to promote opportunities for 

tribes, incentivizing sustainability. 

• In grant programs, increasing reciprocity across agency lines and regularizing 

requirements. 

• Creating combined funding for grant programs. 

Participants also suggested promoting the White House Executive Order which allows greater 

flexibility for tribes in terms of paperwork requirements. While that involves ensuring more 

documents are available on-line to facilitate affordability, the other side of the equation is 

bridging the digital divide to ensure that tribes have access to the Internet. The technology theme 

appears again when considering ways to provide training or capacity building that allow for costeffective reach to remote communities, such as webinars. The tribal focus group later noted that, 

while webinars are available, some tribes may need to be walked through use of this unfamiliar 

technology. 

8 
One suggestion that also promotes economic development and self sufficiency included 

providing increased training in areas such as energy analysis and weatherization. This can 

assist tribes in 1) providing green collar jobs for residents and 2) conducting their own testing 

for energy efficiency. Labor force training is a critical component as many communities lack the 

expertise/skilled labor force to make sustainable construction practices a reality. Bringing in 

outside labor increases construction costs. 

Nongovernmental (NGO) Focus Group

Nongovernmental focus group participants identified unmet community assistance needs. These 

needs fall into two basic areas: education and training, and funding. Tribes need support in 

development planning and green building, especially through technical assistance that is 

provided in-person and on-site. Training and TA providers cited the need for flexible, targeted, 

one-on-one TA from HUD and specific industry groups that can provide a type of capacity 

building that regional off-site training sessions cannot. Training and technical assistance should 

be targeted to specific projects, and ideally the consultants/TA providers will stay with the 

project until it is completed. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers provides a similar service to 

tribes in Oklahoma that allows smaller tribes to take on projects they otherwise lack capacity to 

perform; see sidebar page 16. In addition, a tribal community often may send only one person to 

a training session. That person then has the responsibility for “translat[ing] it back” to the rest of 

the community. In contrast, with on-site training there is an opportunity for broader, immediate 

tribal buy-in. Participants emphasized the importance of repeated and on-site training again 

during the coordination meeting, where they noted that such training increased the likelihood of 

community acceptance of energy efficiency and other sustainable construction practices which 

are not always priority issues. 

Participants said that, if HUD doesn’t offer a specific kind of TA or training, tribes need to be 

allowed to pay other sources for the training and TA that they need. 

Specific areas where communities need education include: 

• Home maintenance 

• On-site models that communities/builders can examine, information about how to build 

homes, and providing house plans 

• Long-term planning/master planning 

• More NAHASDA training 

The other major gap in community assistance is in financing. Tribes need to be educated about 

the construction loans that are available, and given assistance in grant writing and throughout the 

application process. Tribes also need technical assistance in how to leverage funding sources. 

Consistent with the above needs, NGO participants’ suggestions about what Federal agencies can 

do to support them in helping tribes implement sustainable construction generally focused on 

funding. Participants want the Federal government to provide: 

• More funding for all phases of green construction, including matching grants. 

• Federal and private partnerships to develop creative funding. 

9 
• Money from veteran’s agencies, labor departments, etc. for employing construction 

workers. 

• Directing funding toward self-sufficiency (sweat equity, self-help training). 

• Create pilot/demonstration projects with project evaluation/testing to provide technical 

data on payback, savings, etc. 

• Setting aside money for tribes rather than making them get funding through their State or 

municipality. 

In addition, participants reiterated the importance of helping tribes get funding and of building 

local capacity to fund projects. One way to do this is for Federal agencies provide a TA person 

like a Community Builder to assist tribes with developing local capacity to obtain program 

money. 

Participants suggested that Federal agencies should provide Federal support for sustainable 

policies by requiring that projects reach a “standard” for sustainability or encouraging 

performance-based development, such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) green 

labeling programs. 

Further, some NGO focus group participants stated that Federal policymakers needed to revive 

previous interest in the institutional, physical, and structural infrastructure of rural America. The 

group noted that the training and education organizations once focused on rural community 

policy and development have been disbanded or defunded – while the need in Native 

communities remains. 

The NGO focus group identified the following major impediments to working with tribes on 

sustainable construction: 

• Cultural concerns – green building needs to reflect cultural values. 

• Need to build community consensus around green building. 

• Lack of master planning; communities need to develop comprehensive housing plans 

rather than plans that meet requirements for specific funding sources. 

• Turnover of personnel at key tribal agencies and also in Federal agencies hampers having 

a consistent voice/direction. 

• Land issues. 

• “Low bid” requirements. 

• Insufficient funding. 

The areas where the NGOs felt they could provide increased education included a range of 

financial areas (housing loans and financing, leveraging Federal funds, using innovative funding 

tools, understanding how to deal with less common credit and income situations) and increasing 

access to self help housing (plans and financing). Several focus group participants, especially in 

the NGO focus group, cited the difficulty of getting tribes to attend trainings or getting the 

training to the specific people who need it. 

10 
Tribal Focus Group

Answers to the first question—what participants would change about their own or community 

housing to make it green—demonstrated an understanding on the part of participants of the range 

of topics encompassing sustainability. Comments ranged from building envelope fixes, to 

location and landscaping elements, to development issues and education to ensure durability. 

From the question regarding support and training, participants expressed the need for specialized 

education in how to become more fluent in the language of sustainable building, and how to 

adapt it to tribal cultures in order to pass an understanding of sustainability, its costs and its 

benefits, both up to tribal leadership and throughout the community to encourage community 

buy-in. The language of sustainability can be different, but so is the time frame. The community 

and leaders might be familiar with basing their approval on upfront or construction costs. They 

may not have had the experience of evaluating a unit’s cost based on long-term life cycle costs, 

where the savings in utilities or in material durability leads to lowers higher initial upfront costs. 

These are areas where education can lead to a change in perspective. 

Tribal focus group participants described the types of support and training they need to develop a 

sustainable construction project. One major theme was a comprehensive education program: 

educating everyone from tribal leadership to tribal members to maintenance workers to the 

regional housing association, etc., about the value of green construction. Participants also 

emphasized the need for training, especially hands-on, on-site training, in a number of areas 

including: 

• Training residents about green practices, green building technologies, and the benefits of 

green building 

• Training in community planning 

• Workforce training 

Specific training and technical assistance needs range from very basic training in planning 

and development to more project-specific support, for example: 

• How to develop a master plan. 

• How to define a project and write a request for proposal. 

• Assistance in developing own building standards. 

• Checklist for procuring green construction materials. 

• Energy training. 

• Local workforce training. 

Additional suggestions for support needed include rebates and incentives as well as funding; 

having access to appropriate housing designs and to charettes to ensure community input in these 

designs; and flexibility in Federal regulations and policies. 

Participants identified a number of impediments to developing sustainable construction projects. 

These include: 

• Lack of homeowner, decision-maker, and general community education about the 

benefits of green building. 

11 
• The cost of green building. 

• Not enough available land for building. 

• Multiple environmental review requirements. 

• Lack of availability of energy efficient products in rural areas. 

• Funding. 

• Manpower including maintenance and construction workers. 

The participants also described cultural and political issues impediments to green building: 

• Conflicts between using traditional methods versus incorporating modern technology. 

• Perception that pushing back to traditional ways is a step back to poverty. 

• Barriers to using new housing designs. 

• There is not always a need for housing where tribal council members want it. 

• Lack of cooperation with adjacent communities. 

Participants in this group noted the complications that can arise from the short building season in 

Alaska and other northern climates. This reinforces the urge to replicate the “tried and true” 

models rather than launch a more innovative project. Local builders and planners are more 

confident they can fit the approval, planning, construction, etc, of the standard planned house 

into this building cycle. Another environmental complication discussed in this group as well as 

the governmental group is the difficulty of locating or transporting specialized sustainable 

materials to remote communities. In some cases, however, the sustainable materials could help 

solve a problem because they may be lighter and more easily transported than some standard 

building materials. 

ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS 

The group, which consisted primarily of governmental participants and several representatives 

from a regional Indian housing association, recognized that the results list was generated based 

on the questions asked during the focus groups and by the attendees of the focus groups. It 

therefore did not include the entire universe of possible responses. Operating from the available 

results, participants separately prioritized impediments that were general to the construction 

process within Indian Country and impediments that were specific to sustainable construction 

process.

The group identified the top five impediments to the general construction process in Indian 

Country as: 

• Lack of money/flow of funds 

• Tribal capacity – turnover, knowledge sharing and transfer. Change in leadership, shortstaffed. 

• Land issues 

• Short-term versus long-term focus 

• Fragmentation within the tribe 

12 
The major categories of impediments specifically related to the sustainable construction process 

are: 

• Building codes 

• Costs/funding 

• Capacity building 

• Planning 

• Benefit analysis 

• Infrastructure 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This section discusses recommendations that could be encouraged or implemented, in particular, 

by governmental entities. Given time constraints and the focus on sustainability, the group 

primarily limited recommendations to the first four (the highest ranking) impediments related to 

the sustainable construction process. 

Best Practices: Building Codes 

The Tribal Green Building Codes workgroup, begun March 2010, 

includes more than 50 representatives from Federal and tribal agencies, 

and non-profit organizations engaged in exploring how tribes can adopt 

or adapt sustainable building codes or standards to support housing that 

meets “the environmental, social and cultural priorities of Tribal people” 

(National Tribal Green Building Codes Summit Statement). Building 

codes shape federally funded housing standards in Indian Country, but 

not all tribes have building codes or standards that express their 

priorities. 

The workgroup held its first summit June 23-24, 2011, where it 

developed a set of priorities, which include: 

• “It is important to maintain clarity about the need to have 

tribally-driven and culturally-based process.” 

• “Our emphasis needs to be on the development of a process

rather than a product, from which tribally determined green 

building codes, and, or tribe-specific systems can develop.” 

• “Codes need to support each Native Nation’s sovereignty, and be 

reflective of the community and culture.” 

For more information, contact: Michelle Baker, 415-972-3206, 

baker.michelle@epa.gov or Laura Bartels, 970-379-6779, 

laura@greenweaverinc.com 

Building codes 

Green building codes or 

standards are a topic of 

interest for tribes in some 

parts of the country. A 

number of tribes are already 

impacted by green building 

standards in Minnesota 

when they incorporate 

certain types of State 

funding into affordable 

housing projects and the 

energy code in Washington 

State. These standards are 

another area where tribes 

have the freedom to develop 

their own standards that 

reflect their cultural 

priorities, and they have the 

option to be more stringent 

than State standards as well. 

At the same time, the 

process does require caution 

because too much strict 

regulation can inhibit 

construction. One possibility 

is to adapt the International 

Green Construction Code to 

each individual tribe’s 

13 
needs. Federal agencies can provide incentives to tribes to implement green practices/ meet green 

standards. Another part of the process includes consideration of ways to build tribal capacity to 

enforce building codes. The level of interest in green building standards at the tribal level is 

evident in the work of the interagency Tribal Green Building Codes Workgroup. 

Costs/Funding 

Cost and funding are constants, especially in an economic period focused on reduction rather 

than growth. The group suggested options for doing more with less which promote the use of 

sustainable construction practices from two directions: 

• Education. This can show tribes how sustainable investments can save money and/or how 

they can get their money’s worth 

• Federal program use. A thorough understanding of Federal programs reveals built in 

supports to sustainable construction practices. 

Education related 

recommendations 

included letting 

tribes know how 

the health benefits 

of sustainable 

housing can spill 

over into savings 

in other arenas. 

For example, 

health care costs 

can decrease 

when people live 

in healthier 

buildings; 

maintenance costs 

can decrease 

when materials 

are more durable. 

Other suggestions 

included creating 

tools to help tribes 

make smart 

energy 

improvement choices such as cost-benefit analysis tools or a matrix for tribal housing with 

information similar to a matrix for public housing agencies that shows the energy improvements 

with the greatest returns on investment: 

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=affordable_housing.affordable_housing_phas. In 

addition, Federal agencies could develop a matrix that enumerates potential governmental 

funding sources for green improvements. In addition to the funding coordination listed in the box 

above, Federal agencies could incentivize sustainable building practices in their grant programs 

as they did American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant programs. 

Best Practices: Federal Agency Funding Coordination 

An exciting example of Federal agencies joining forces to standardize 

requirements, combine funding sources, and enhance collaboration is the 

groundbreaking cooperation between the HUD Office of Sustainable Housing 

and Communities, the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the Interagency Partnership on 

Sustainable Communities. This partnership promotes better access to 

affordable housing, more transportation options, and lower transportation 

costs. 

It has also led to coordination planning, policy, and investment such as in the 

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) II grants. 

There, for the first time, DOT and HUD jointly awarded grants for local 

planning activities which will eventually lead to integrated transportation, 

housing, and development. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the EPA also assisted with 

the grant program. 

For more information, visit: http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov/ 

14 
Some education suggestions involved Federal agencies reaching out to other housing industry 

entities such as banks and lenders, insurance companies, and appraisers to educate them on the 

added value in energy efficient homes. 

Federal programs have flexibility and credibility. HUD funds are still often seen simply as 

housing money, but they are also a tool that tribes can use to leverage other funds. This can be 

written into grants as a matching requirement, but HUD staff can also emphasize this in training, 

when reviewing IHPs and when working with tribes. Sustainable building components can be 

added into existing HUD training curricula. Federal agencies together can ensure that their 

training and TA efforts cross reference and consistently provide information on Federal efforts 

such as the EPA’s green labeling programs, HUD’s green construction programs, and DOE’s 

weatherization and energy efficiency programs. In addition, while it might also be useful for 

total development costs to include life-cycle costs, right now tribes are eligible to apply for a 

variance to go above the total development cost (TDC) with Area Office approval based on the 

incorporation of sustainable building technologies (Notice PIH 2010-47). 

Capacity Building

To expand the capacity of the tribes seeking to develop sustainable housing and communities, 

participants suggested expanding the services provided by NGOs and supporting the increased 

capacity and an increased number of community development corporations. Some suggested that 

the number of Native CDCs with a specific mission of serving Native communities might be 

increased. One under utilitized resource may be in tribal colleges. Tribal colleges are not only 

providing 

critically 

important training 

certificates and 

degrees in 

sustainable 

building 

vocations, but are, 

in many cases, 

leading the way in 

educating their 

communities and 

regions about 

sustainability from 

a long-term Native 

perspective. See 

below for a brief 

overview of 

sustainability 

efforts of one 

tribal college, the 

College of 

Menominee 

Sustainable 

Best Practices: Capacity Building and Sustainability Education 

The College of Menominee Sustainable Development Institute (SDI) College is 

one example of a college creating a rounded approach to sustainability by 

increasing campus efficiency, educating and inspiring students and regional 

communities in sustainability efforts, and also to provide training in green collar 

careers. SDI: 

• Provides financial assistance to student interns researching sustainability 

issues, such as campus-wide baseline conditions including energy 

benchmarking and greenhouse gas emissions, vermiculture, and indoor 

air quality. 

• Has increased the environmental education units in all areas of study 

and is engaging campus community on campus sustainable development 

through nine visioning sessions with more than 90 participants. 

• Has engaged Great Lakes areas tribes in climate change education and 

outreach. 

• Supports car pooling and other efforts among staff and on campus. 

• Conducts applied, participatory action research as identified by tribes 

including the sustainability indicators research project. 

For more information, contact Beau Mitchell, 715-799-5600, ext 3145 

15 
Development Institute. 

During this meeting, a few participants reacted to the need for education due to frequent 

leadership and other turnover, and also to help leadership embrace quality since this will 

decrease the need to rebuild as frequently. These recommendations, similar to suggestions 

mentioned earlier, include providing incentives and rebates for sustainable construction, 

developing baselines and collecting comparison information on efficiencies and savings, 

adapting analyses on sustainability in other communities for tribal communities, and also getting 

the word about model tribal projects out to other tribes. One suggestion was for a tribal college 

version of the solar decathlon, where college teams compete to build innovative, affordable 

houses—often rooted in their regional culture or meeting a regional need—powered with solar 

energy. To be successful, educating prospective homeowners is as important as educating 

leadership, 

since they 

will live in 

and need to 

maintain the 

final product. 

Tribal 

capacity 

building also 

refers to the 

need for the 

development 

of specific 

technical skill 

sets that will 

allow tribal 

communities 

to control 

some costs of 

sustainable 

construction 

by doing the 

work inhouse. 

The 

partnership of 

COE and 

tribes in Oklahoma offers a different model. Here, smaller tribes who lack the capacity and 

staffing to carry out aspects of a construction project can collaborate with COE. COE takes on 

some of the technical aspects and wins quality and cost gains for the tribes. 

Best Practices: Capacity Building 

Smaller tribes do not always have the capacity or staffing to manage 

construction projects. In Oklahoma, because of a memorandum of 

understanding (MOU) between HUD and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(COE), (allowed by 10 U.S.C. 3036d, the Chief’s Economy Act) they can 

partner with COE to help with their grant applications and project management. 

The COE will work with tribes to provide supporting documentation for their 

project applications that add credibility to the package. These can include floor 

and site plans, a letter of support, and cost estimates. If the project is awarded, 

the tribe enters into a contract with COE. COE is paid approximately 6 percent 

of a grant. 

Typically, COE will provide the tribe with request for qualifications and 

interview support, documentation for the audit process, analysis of prospective 

subcontractor cost proposals, and design review. The COE has structural, 

mechanical, and architectural engineers on staff. 

During the project, COE provides tribes with multiple quality assurance 

inspections. These have led to an increase in the quality of materials used in 

projects and an increase in the square footage of projects. They review the pay 

application to ensure that anticipated work is completed before payment is 

made, insure that the punch list is completed, and conduct a warranty inspection 

just before a year after completion. 

For more information, contact Cynthia Kitchens, 918-669-7042, or

Cynthia.Kitchens@usace.army.mil

16 
Planning 

Sustainable construction does not simply mean adding energy efficiency to individual housing 

units, but also planning for long-term community development. Participants suggested that the 

Federal government was well positioned to encourage and support long-term sustainable 

planning by informing tribes about available resources. These include Indian Community 

Development Block Grant (ICDBG) funds, Economic Development Administration (EDA) 

public works planning grants, and Administration for Native Americans grants that support longrange planning. In addition, Federal agencies can let tribes know about their own regional 

planning commissions that may have technical staff available to support communities with needs 

such as community comprehensive planning, grant preparation and assistance, mapping services, 

hazard mitigation planning, and environmental assessments. They can also alert tribes to 

planning assistance training opportunities available through organizations including the Native 

American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) and the Native Learning Center. 

The Mayor’s Institute on City Design is a National Endowment for the Arts initiative that helps 

transform communities through design by preparing mayors to be the chief urban designers of 

their cities. Participants suggested that Federal agencies could team up to create a tribal version 

to bring sustainable development concepts to a greater number of tribal leaders. 

Federal Coordination 

Participants also offered some overarching recommendations to facilitate better information 

sharing and resource use among Federal agencies: 

• Locate the right contact person in other agencies to provide TA or services. Federal 

agency staff do not always know their counterparts in other agencies or realize what who 

offers what services within a Federal agency. Regional contact lists could help. 

• Coordinate/schedule trainings and meetings jointly rather than have multiple meetings 

with tribes. 

• Similarly, coordinate among agencies to align agency visits to tribes. 

• Support local regional training with multiple agency presence. 

• Implement a joint project – agencies work together on, e.g., a master plan, a green 

building toolkit or a green building codes or standards toolkit. 

• Develop a clearinghouse of meetings on topics relevant to tribes for sustainability. 

• Conduct interagency meetings or establish an interagency workgroup. 

SUMMARY

Increasing use of sustainable construction technologies in Indian Country, as in the rest of the 

country, carries an appeal for additional financial incentives to support the incorporation of these 

technologies. However, what may be even more critical to encouraging acceptance of and desire 

for sustainable construction technologies is a change in perspective. This new perspective 

includes the following insights: 

• Sustainable housing does not have to be in conflict with issues of overcrowding or the 

replacement of substandard housing. As one meeting participant framed it, “Housing 

17 
development that is not sustainable perpetuates the current problem. It impoverishes 

families with high energy costs, high maintenance costs and health issues.” 

• Sustainable housing does not have to be more expensive over the lifetime of the housing 

unit. Inclusion of cost-effective sustainable technologies does require making informed 

choices based on availability of materials, suitability of materials to climate and housing 

unit, return on investment, as well as budget considerations. 

• Sustainable housing offers health and financial benefits for residents. The savings from 

reduced energy costs or doctors’ visits, in the case of decreased asthma attacks for 

example, can be redirected to other family needs. 

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative is designed to provide types of 

assistance that can play a role in promoting understanding about the benefits of sustainable 

construction technologies: 

• Providing supplemental technical assistance that can help tribes incorporate appropriate 

sustainable technologies into their residential construction projects. 

• Educating demonstration projects about the range of sustainable construction 

technologies available. 

• Promote use of available tools for helping tribes make informed decisions about which 

sustainable construction technologies to implement. Potential tools include free blower 

door testing through HUD ONAP, free modeling and benefit analysis software, and the 

Department of Energy’s Tribal Energy Program TA. 

• Highlight regional best practice case studies of successful tribal sustainable projects. 

• Support tribes in collecting energy-related data for demonstrating energy and 

rehabilitation benchmarks and savings associated with sustainable technologies. This can 

show savings for TDHEs and residents. 

Together with other Federal Agencies, and other committed partners, this initiative can 

implement strategies that will lead to a new perspective for some and a deeper understanding of 

green for others. 

18 
APPENDIX A: MEETING NOTES

All of the focus groups used U.S. Green Building Council’s definition of “green building”: 

Sustainable construction has as its goal residential housing that is healthier, more comfortable, 

more durable, more energy efficient, and with a much smaller environmental footprint than 

conventional homes.” 

The focus groups used a brainstorming process. 

Focus groups had similar agendas: 

• Introductions 

• Focus Group Process 

• Purpose 

• Discussion/comments 

• Next Steps 

Cielo Gibson facilitated the meetings with assistance from Lynda Lantz, both of FirstPic, Inc. 

GOVERNMENTAL FOCUS GROUP 

9 am-10:30 am 

Participants: 

Randy Akers HUD Northern Plains Office of Native American 

Programs (NPONAP) 

Mike Blanford HUD Policy Development and Research 

Nova Blazej Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)Region 9 

Rodger Boyd Deputy Assistant Secretary ONAP 

Kate Brown University of Illinois Urbana Champaign 

Kevin Fitzgibbons Eastern/Woodlands ONAP (EWONAP) 

Brian Gillen EWONAP, Region V Sustainability Officer 

Rebecca Halloran HUD ONAP Office of Loan Guarantee 

Jed Harrison EPA tribal advisor 

Cynthia Kitchens U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Younes Masiky U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Tribal Energy 

Program 

Carrie Nelson Bonneville Power Administration DOE Energy 

Weatherization Program 

Marty Nee HUD Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard 

Control (OHHLHC) 

Lizana Pierce DOE Tribal Energy Program 

Michelle Tinnen Southwest ONAP (SWONAP) sustainable and green 

development 

19 
Question 1: From your perspective as a Federal agency, what are the impediments to 

developing sustainable construction projects in native communities? 

Participants noted the following impediments: 

• Resident Investment-ownership. Someone else is paying for it so not as invested in 

making changes. There is a cost to investing in housing and energy. Homeowner buy-in 

is needed. 

• Need 

• Money 

• Green Building is perceived as a luxury. 

• Quality vs. quantity (is it better to do more or to do it better?) 

• The initial cost vs. the life cycle cost. There is a big initial investment which will pay off 

in the long run. 

• Educating the public about the short-term cost vs. the long-term savings benefit 

• Getting information to the tribes about industry financing vs. government financing 

• Media. The perception of green home being a want vs. a need 

• Limited number of native architects/culturally relevant/sensitive green design 

• Leadership priorities - regulation and banking not going well together 

• Appraisal value - impeding costs of remoteness. For example, getting an appraiser out to 

a location can be costly. 

• Permitting and recording 

• Tribal transition - staff turnover 

• Council turnover 

• Fragmentation within the tribe (ownership/responsibility) 

• Availability and development of green building codes - what are the benefits or 

deterrents. How do you sell it to the tribes? 

• Standardization of rules and regulations and processes across agencies 

• Tribal empowerment - lack knowledge of exercising their sovereignty; they don't always 

know they have the ability to legislate in that area. Tribes don't realize they have the 

authority and ability to do things, that they have more freedom of decisions. 

• As agencies, we could incentivize green building. There is a lack of encouragement. 

• Remoteness, especially in Alaska. Sometime the infrastructure does not exist. 

• The number of tribes and the diversity of tribes 

• The large number of tribes and the limited number of Federal staff 

• Coordination with tribal groups/ NGOs is not as good as it could be 

• Cost - such as the impact of Total Development Cost, Dealing with small tribes is not 

cost efficient. The program with the Corp of Engineers has been able to provide economy 

of scale. Smaller tribes need the benefit of collaboration 

• Education - "Presolarizing" educating the tribes and the homeowners that there is much 

that can be done in small steps and at little cost. You can do the little things before you do 

the big things. For example, you can change the light bulbs or do blower testing in your 

home before you think about putting solar panels on. There are inexpensive options. Also 

there are inexpensive options that can be incorporated into new construction. Also at both 

the tribal and Federal level, there needs to be an understanding of what all the agencies 

can do. 

20 
• Codes and permitting - sometimes there are codes that are not mandated and getting 

people to do things that are not mandated is hard. 

• Weighing benefits to dollars. Part of the education piece is to see that green homes mean 

healthy homes. In the long run, there are financial, social and health benefits. You can 

save money on health care costs if you have healthy homes free of mold, mildew, and 

other health hazards. Educating the public that green equals healthy. 

• Quality Assurance - the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) program is a good 

example of how there can be guidance which provides quality assurance and expediting 

processes. SWONAP has a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the COE. The 

COE assists tribes preparing their RFP/RFQ, engineer experience, etc. They help the 

tribes with complicated processes. 

• Laws and regulations governing each agency differ. Managing each agency/program 

requirement on a big, complex project is difficult. It would be better if there were 

common interagency requirements. For example, it would be nice to have one definition 

of income limits. The programmatic structure and funding streams have to be streamlined 

and consistent. The differences in statutory requirements require a lot of coordination. 

• Tribal capacity – turn-over, staff changes, tribal changes, knowledge sharing and 

knowledge transfer. They have change in leadership, short-staffed. They need to have 

people on the ground. 

• Dissemination of information - Looking at what publications the other Federal agencies 

are printing and distributing. There are good documents that should be disseminated, but 

the government is no longer printing many documents. Can this be done electronically as 

a spreadsheet? Do tribes all have access? There needs to be education at both the tribal 

and Federal agency level. 

• Physical inventory - Sometimes agencies cannot provide TA because there was no 

physical inventory. There is a lack of information about the actual housing stock and its 

conditions. 

• Construction time and the availability of contractors. 

• It is okay to go “deeper green” - the cutting edge of what is happening in green building 

construction 

Question 2: What type of technical assistance (TA) and financial assistance does your 

agency currently provide or plan to provide in the future? 

Participants identified the follow current and future resources: 

CURRENT PLANNNING FOR 

NAHASDA (HUD) 

SECTION 184 (HUD) 

TITLE VI (HUD)

 ICDBG (HUD) 

Other HUD (Healthy Homes/RI/etc) 

Connecting communities for regional planning 

(Office of Sustainable Housing and 

Communities) 

Proforma creation 

Radon grants (EPA) 

Healthy Homes Production (HUD OHHLHC) 

SHHIP Certification (Safe Healthy Homes 

Investment Partnership) gets additional points 

in NOFA (HUD OHHLHC) 

NAIHC - Green Building 2012 

NAIHC - emergency response program 

NAIHC - discussing poor performance - 

TDHE - could expand into green construction, 

develop training on emergency response, 2012 

green building. 

21 
GAP grants 

Smoke-free buildings 

Guidance on Smoke free buildings and 

ordinances (HUD) 

State resources for technical assistance 

Technical assistance through NAIHC to 

expand to green construction 

West - RHED Green Training - 6 sessions 

(USDA) 

Use of green materials: DOE, roof decking, 

light bulbs, solar water, green fair. 

IAQ - guidance training, scholarships, test 

shadowing, Web portal linking 

Networking among tribes share resources: 

Tribal Champions, Tribal Mentorships. 

Planning/Org for EE and renewable energy and 

capacity building, feasibility studies, retrofits, 

training. (DOE) 

Weatherization (3 tribal allocations); tribes 

must coordinate with States. (DOE) 

Weatherization training centers, i.e., Alaska. 

Also (ARRA) - 15 centers nationally, not 

specific to tribes (DOE) 

Retrofit training for auditors and inspectors 

and health/safety and weatherization (BPA) 

Funds equipment and weatherization materials; 

assist Washington tribes leverage funds with 

State grants (BPA) 

Supporting tribal green building codes working 

group (EPA) 

EPA standards and guidances are voluntary 

Utilities (e.g. PG&E in CA) provide 

weatherization training and do some outreach 

to tribes 

Meet in person with tribes as part of TA 

Collaboration with the natural resources dept 

Green Homes Fair - existing and new 

homeowners 

New Construction standards or labeling of 

Indoor Air Plus 

Tax credits and utility incentives 

Workshops, FOA's, TA, information, 

education (DOE) 

Try to adjust regulations to allow tribal access 

directly (DOE) 

EPA/HUD/Other? outreach to ICDBG and 

IHBG recipients re: green building/healthy 

homes/weatherization options (EPA) 

Interagency collaboration on Web sites and 

through trips to tribes and conferences and 

training, such as USDA, HUD, EPA, BPA, 

DOE. Field level coordination (e.g. Denver 

office) 

Policy: Incentive based coordination 

Intertribal Environmental council has a tire 

clean up - are there other such resources that 

can be tapped into 

TA to provide a list of resources in the State 

Healthy Home Fair 

Need a convener to facilitate pulling people 

together - issue of sustainability is a shared 

responsibility across the entire tribe 

Question 3: What kinds of assistance do communities need that are not being provided? 

Federal agency participants identified the following needs: 

• More education and information on sustained capacity building 

• Information/technical assistance to tribes (limited because of travel to remote areas) 

• Partnerships with TC&U, tribal colleges and universities 

22 
• Paper materials should be on-line (White House Administrative Executive Order 

flexibility for tribes) and tribes should know where these sources are. 

• Limited infrastructure/Internet access 

• More examples of best practices - tribal case studies and tribes learning from each other 

• Assistance for leveraging colors of money. 

• Multi Agency TA - TIGER TEAMS; strategic planning teams - work in advance on 

putting money together 

• INTRA/INTER agency coordination vs. being siloed. Also coordinate with Indian Health 

Service (IHS) - healthy families=healthy homes 

• Education and buy-in of agency staff and tribes on the importance of energy efficiency 

and green building 

• Business code/legal infrastructure training 

• Skilled workforce (green job skills) and job creation. More resources for workforce 

development, especially job skills 

• Planning money 

• Broader interagency collaboration - how to share information with tribes about technical 

assistance, conferences, via grass roots which can then inform higher level agency. 

• Increased tribal capacity of how to conduct their own testing (weatherization, infrared, 

blower door, for example) 

• Certified training of staff: purchasing equipment, utilizing equipment, (lead-based paint 

(LBP)/asbestos/radon, DOE, Native Workplace, etc) 

• Curriculum development - weatherization plus health, indoor air quality, Healthy Homes, 

gas testing, backdrafting into house, moisture control 

• Increased partnerships with Community Assistance Program (CAP) agencies 

• Model codes 

• Adjust regulation so that tribes can access directly 

• More coordination with regional entities 

• Partnership with tribal culture and agencies 

• Assistance with developing infrastructure for Web development and access. 

• Trainings provided through Webcast 

• Leveraging – multi-agency strategic planning teams. 

• Health and Human Services (HHS) coordination 

• More education for our own agencies as to the importance and effects of green building. 

Overcome the “green is a fad” thinking. 

• Development of building codes 

• More resources for workforce development 

• Centralized Web site that would include best practices, program resources, notices, 

publications (like an expand Codetalk) 

• Coordinating the links so you can link back to the original resource site 

• Expand the technical assistance that is currently being offered at SWONAP from the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers for other tribes, build capacity of grant applications and 

managing processes 

• There needs to be a holistic approach to sustainable housing. That is, it needs to involve 

the entire tribal community and agencies in a collaborative effort 

• Build the capacity of grant applications 

23 
• Relationship development (State, tribal, intertribal agencies) - how to develop a 

continuum to weather tribal changes. Continuum of programs and services. 

• Green outreach - light bulb giveaway. It is easier to go where people are already gathered 

- e.g. pow wows 

• Efforts needs to be comprehensive across agencies and tribal departments 

• Certified training for tribal staff - e.g. radon mitigation 

• Demographic and physical assessment tribe's housing inventory. E.g. BIA used to have a 

template, a checklist - spec sheet whereby you had a profile of the characteristics of a 

home. 

• There are overlapping conferences that compete with each other - it is better for it to be a 

partnership and conducting trainings together. Exploring/Partnering with agencies on 

conferences and training- maybe expanding a day to prevent overlapping. For example, 

DOE energy conference last month and the HUD conference this month. 

• Partnering with intermediaries (tribal colleges, CAP agencies, State initiatives, regional 

housing meeting) 

Question 4: What groups do you serve? Tribes, non-profits, housing authorities? 

• DOE and EPA said mostly to tribes. 

• Whoever asks for the assistance. 

• It varies among agencies. 

NONGOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES FOCUS GROUP 

10:45 am – noon 

Participants: 

Mike Blanford HUD PD&R 

Lacey Gaechter Trees, Water and People 

Judith Grunau Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) 

Katie Hoyt National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) 

Russell Kaney Enterprise Rural and Native Initiative 

Jason La Fleur AES 

Beau Mitchell College of Menominee Nation 

Stewart Sarkozy-Banoczy HUD Office for International and Philanthropic 

Innovation 

Nick Tilsen Thunder Valley CDC 

Holly Youngbear Tibbets College of Menominee Nation 

Question 1: What types of technical assistance and financial assistance does your 

organization currently provide or plan to provide in the future? Who do you serve? 

Nongovernmental organization participants identified the following services they offer currently 

or plan to offer in the future: 

24 
CURRENT PLANNNING FOR 

Renewable energy – straw bale construction – 

hands-on (Trees, Water and People) 

Constitution reform – in person, on-site, 

conference, webinars 

Tax – webinar - 40 people 

Annual/mid-year – variety of topics – target to 

resolution 

Planning – inclusion, survey, focus group 

Social media – only good at times – as many 

off reservation as on who follow it 

Community dialogue – they get input from 

community members to develop a plan. They 

work with the people, not with organizations. 

Reservation-wide opportunities for 

organizations to connect with each other 

Formal and community training/education in 

building trades – specializes in sustainable 

development (Menominee) 

Research on viable applications for the region 

(Menominee) 

Material construction and product testing, 

research, application in Circumpolar North 

(CCHRC) 

Community-based design of affordable, 

sustainable, culturally-appropriate housing 

(CCHRC) 

Instruction in building methods and building 

science – on-line, print and in-person 

(CCHRC) 

Partnership with tribes, housing authorities, 

village corporations and financial institutions 

(CCHRC) 

International education on sustainable forest 

management (SDI – part of Menominee) 

Financial assistance to student interns doing 

research for the college (SDI) 

Engage campus community on campus 

sustainable development (SDI) 

Engage Great Lakes tribes in climate change 

education, outreach (SDI) 

Applied, participator action research as 

identified by tribes (SDI) 

Training and competency development on 

design side 

Technical assistance on green building, 

Energy efficiency 

Livelihood development with renewable 

energy focus/green jobs – business 

development, environmental stewardship 

Planning for housing—holistic support/training 

Housing for 300-500 people (on the Pine Ridge 

Reservation) 

Training for trades people, existing builders, 

middle-level professionals – insurance, 

appraisers, mortgage lenders, etc., tribes in 

Great Lakes (Menominee) 

Facility for sustainable northern community 

development – an interagency 

/interorganizational collaboration space and 

opportunity (CCHRC) 

Training and competency development on 

supply side but expand to construction trades 

Green Group trainings (Enterprise) 

25 
financial (Enterprise) 

Technical assistance registry on-line 

(architects, engineers, etc. vetted by Enterprise 

on “green credentials) (Enterprise) 

Grants for green charettes (Enterprise) 

Grants for organizational capacity building 

(Enterprise) 

Architectural “green” workshops (Enterprise) 

Who do you serve? 

• Tribal leaders (elected) from member tribes – Federal/state

• Training center focused – from tribes – Great Plains

• Oglala Sioux tribe – people – Oyate

• Tribes in the Great Lakes region

• The Circumpolar North

• Tribal THDEs

• Tribal non-profits

• Tribal CDCs

• Tribal Human Services

Question 2: What types of assistance do communities need that isn’t being provided? 

Participants identified the following assistance: 

 

• More education on available housing loans and how to apply for them – assistance 

through the application process 

• More education on home maintenance 

• Innovative financing mechanisms – revisit double declining depreciation declining 

depreciation schedules used previously 

• Actual on-site models that communities/builders can examine 

• More information to communities on how to build own home – construction loans and 

house plans available 

• Institutional resources to enable preparation of skilled builders 

• Multi-income families/households need help showing combined income of multigenerational household 

• Grant writing assistance 

• TA in how to leverage Federal/non-Federal funding sources – focus on helping NGOs 

learn this: 

- How HUD plans to leverage funds – share with NGOs 

- Need an assessment tool/framework to determine what NGOs can handle – some 

kind of tool to help NGOS build their internal capacity 

• Utilization of networks – systematic way for HUD to connect with/use the networks that 

already exist on reservations 

26 
• Need in-person, on-site training. This is really important. If tribal members go elsewhere 

for training, then they need to “translate it back” to the others in their tribe. If they get onsite training, they get immediate tribal buy-in. 

• More NAHASDA training 

• More financial assistance—and learning to leverage what’s there 

• Flexible and targeted training and TA for projects/programs from HUD and also from 

specific “industry” groups. Bring housing authorities and NGOs together to work on 

specific projects. There is strong support for focusing training and TA on specific 

projects rather than general training. 

• HUD’s environmental assessment requirements are very specific, and HUD doesn’t 

provide TA on how to get through their process. More generally, HUD needs to: 

- Provide more permanent TA for HUD grantees 

- If HUD doesn’t offer a specific kind of TA or training, tribes need to be allowed 

to use their grant money to pay other sources for the training and TA that they 

need. 

• Long-term planning – master planning or strategy on development 

• Pre-development funding for market analysis, demographics, technical reports, etc. 

• One-on-one on-site specific/community specific consultants/TA to stay with project 

• Focus on culturally-specific aspects unique to community 

• Comprehending impacts and opportunities associated with climate change 

• Peer-to-peer training 

Question 3: What can we (NGOs) do better?

• Engagement on appropriate nation-nation level to set agendas

• Needs assessments focused on community dialogue

• Relationship building

• Occupant education

• Green Home Fairs

Question 4: What can Federal agencies do to support you in helping tribes implement 

sustainable construction? 

Some responses overlapped with responses to questions 2 and 3. The participants identified the 

following Federal support needed: 

• Have Veteran’s agencies, labor departments, etc., provide money to employ construction 

• Provide business development assistance 

• Provide TA person from HUD/DOE/etc. to help with getting specific program money to 

reservations and build local capacity to do so. Teach tribes best practices on how to 

access programs. Have “champion”/”community builder” – but don’t just add this job to 

someone’s existing workload because staff are spread too thin 

• Set aside money for tribes rather than making tribes get funding through their 

State/municipality. Dedicate money to tribes so tribes don’t have to compete with States 

27 
for money. Agencies need to better understand the sovereign status of tribes and how to 

interact with them. 

• Share data/grant programs – application process 

• HUD set “standard” for sustainability. Difficult with sovereignty status but could force 

tribes to do green building. 

• Pay serious attention to the institutional, physical, and structural infrastructure of rural 

America, e.g., Rural Development Institute – no education/training component 

• Provide matching grants – community raises amount of money and Federal agencies 

match it 

• Federal and private partnerships for creative funding 

• More funding toward training within community of sustainable building practices and 

techniques 

• Provide intellectual capital and labor for on the ground tribal-driven planning and 

projects 

• Don’t take away funding, but direct it towards making people more self-sufficient (sweat 

equity self-help, training) 

• Encourage, through resource allocation, performance-based development, which focuses 

on operations and maintenance 

• Multiple funding opportunities throughout the year for planning, pre-development, 

visioning but allocated in climate areas across the county 

• Federal support for fully qualified TA providers, materials, methods, i.e., standards and 

best practices 

• Pilot/demonstration projects/homes, etc. with project evaluation/testing after to provide 

technical data on payback, savings, etc. 

• Agencies listen, learn and apply traditional designs and values of tribal structures specific 

to “place.” 

• Ask the community how they think it would be best for the future of the community to 

use funding to develop sustainability 

Question 5: What are the major impediments to working with tribes on sustainable 

construction? 

Participants identified the following impediments: 

• Lack of money and flow of funds 

• Lack of connection between private sector innovation to Federal efforts 

• Building codes – capacity building – regulation 

• Do training, then no jobs for tribal members afterwards 

• Getting the right person/people to attend trainings and meetings 

• Cultural barriers – tribes have adapted to the “HUD house mentality.” 

• Existing units are unsustainable – need to commit to fixing old houses (disposition 

regulations). 

• House design that is currently not focused geographically, culturally, climatically – 

commit to specific HUD support. Make a new, full commitment that replaces the 1960s, 

1970s homes. 

28 
• Lack of local plan –difficult to do relocation for rehabilitating or redeveloping locations. 

• Lack of master planning. Allocate more funding for tribes to do their Indian Housing 

Plans, so they can develop comprehensive housing plans rather than just meet 

requirements for using housing funds 

• Transition from one “administration” to another – consistent voice; turnover of personnel 

at key tribal agencies/positions and Federal agencies 

• Short-term versus long-term focus; need incentives to tribes to look long term at 

materials, etc; i.e., fewer restrictions on design, mandated materials, “low-bid” mentality 

undermines housing durability– want housing to have more durable life cycle 

• Determining who owns land and what land is available for development and who has 

already done environmentals on the land. Also, often politics within communities among 

Village Corporations, tribes, and cities limit the land for sale, because they don’t work 

together to get more housing, or no one wants to sell land 

• Letting existing water/sewer/roads/electric limit sustainable development and creativity 

• Need to meet with the community many times to get dialogue going and planning 

developed, and travel to remote communities is very expensive. Relationship building – 

who do you trust? 

• Lack of funding to consolidate fractional heirship interested on allotted reservations 

• Institutional resources for research and development 

• Flexible funding – quantity of restrictions, e.g., multi-generational units, etc. 

• Consensus building is much needed – dialogue, ask/listen to community 

• Use appreciative inquiry for engagement 

TRIBAL FOCUS GROUP 

2:45 pm – 4 pm 

There were about 16 participants (about 1/5 were Federal agency representatives like EPA and 

HUD). Tribes represented included the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi, Kalispell Band of Indians, 

Choctaw Housing Authority, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, as well as representatives of Alaska and 

southwest tribes. 

Question 1: What would you change in your existing homes to make them green? 

Participants identified the following items that were intended to get them thinking about 

sustainability and give a sense of what how much they already know about sustainability: 

• Weatherization: roofs, windows, doors (2) 

• Durability; make sure the homes last -- that they don't fall apart in a short time 

• Solar power (2) 

• Landscaping- more native plants (2) 

• Location - it is not sustainable if homes are remote from access to transportation and 

services/town (e.g. stores, schools, etc.) (3) 

• Building new homes next to existing homes 

29 
• Conservation should exist. The kilowatt measuring device "Kill-a-watt" calculates the 

cost of usage. People don't realize that having appliances plugged in (like a toaster), when 

not in use, still uses power. 

• Educate homeowners about what they can do with what they already have 

• Motion sensor lights 

• Energy audits, especially for larger and community buildings 

• Community outreach: tap into community, schools, etc. For example, there was a 

recycling project at the school. It educated kids about the importance of recycling. The 

kids went home and told their parents. It was an example of the younger generation 

making changes at the family and community level. It also lowered landfill costs. 

• Getting recycling and waste company partnerships with the community 

• Preventive maintenance 

• HUD regulation - want more flexibility - what you can and cannot include. e.g. put in an 

additional fireplace 

• TDC - more flexibility to increase TDC for green building 

• Energy efficient light bulbs, e.g. when tenants move in and out 

• Beneficial use of gray water 

• Rainwater collection systems but some concern about mosquitoes – expensive 

underwater rain catchment 

• Community garden 

• Walking trails 

• Encourage biking; carpool with neighbors 

• Engage community members to educate residents on how to use systems. 

• Upgrades to windows, doors, floors, appliances, low-flow toilets, water efficiency, 

HVAC, roofs (7) 

• Lighting, bulbs, fixtures, use of natural lighting, etc. (2) 

• Attic space 

• Ventilation 

• Site location 

• Get contractors on contracted out rehabilitation work to use energy efficient products 

• Educating tribal members how to maintain new products

 

Question 2: What support and training do you need to develop a sustainable construction 

project? 

Participants identified the following types of needed support and training: 

• How to define a project and write an RFP 

• Top-down education. Getting political will and convincing the board 

• Partner with tribal colleges, use of graduate students (engineers, architects), other local 

and community college partnerships and resources 

• Educate maintenance and warehouse staff 

• Have a green purchasing initiative 

• Local workforce training - either on the job or at a training site 

30 
• Training residents on green practices, cost benefits, maintenance, etc. 

• Pre-development and design funding – Big picture planning 

• Engaging community partners. Need to work on the communication process and getting 

buy-in. Need to improve the mechanisms used for communication 

• Need assistance how to have a community-building process 

• There needs to be a link between language and culture on the issue of sustainability. 

Make sure we are all understanding the same concepts. Focus on "what is the message?" 

• Staff training 

• Technical support for code officials 

• Assistance in developing own standards 

• Charette with all stakeholders 

• Money 

• HUD: Develop a consortium of funding agencies that can partner with HUD dollars 

• Training for NAHASDA on 1) green building technologies, 2) what LEED certification 

means and how that differs from other certification programs 

• TA from HUD or HUD-approved agency on how to develop a master plan 

• Webinar for TA is a potential BUT tribes may need assistance linking to a webinar 

• Liaison at HUD that continues through a whole project - someone who can come out 

monthly 

• On-line video training (YouTube) is a possibility, but there are concerns about tribal 

access 

• Checklist for procuring green construction materials 

• RFP template for contractors for green building; LEED provides a framework for 

ensuring all parties are committed to green building 

• TDC is a limiting factor - need greater flexibility 

• Energy training 

• Decision makers need training 

• Regional housing association training 

• Force account training/certification 

• Hands on training 

• On-site training 

• Train the trainers 

• Financial support 

• Community based education for our tribal members - for them to have buy-in 

• Contact local housing associations to put out information to All tribal housing and 

building contractors 

• HUD - allowing tribes to be empowered by allowing grant funds for develop and green 

builds (NOFA) 

• More incentives for Green Builds/rebates 

Question 3: What are your major impediments to developing sustainable construction 

projects? 

Participants identified the following impediments to developing sustainable construction 

projects: 

31 
• Lack of homeowner education 

• Perception of costs – green is too costly 

• The conflicts that can be involved or perceived in using traditional methods vs. 

incorporating modern technology 

• Perception that pushing back to traditional ways is a step back to poverty 

• Board education and buy-in 

• No more land – lack of space, needing to buy land 

• Need for council buy-in and education 

• Manpower – not enough maintenance workers; sometimes bring in workers from other 

areas, which increases cost 

• Money/funding top to bottom – plan, build, maintain, and rehab 

• Planning design is very important to avoid later problems 

• Education of residents about benefits of energy efficient retrofits/behavior change 

• Existing dispersed housing developments; developing consensus among community in 

developing Master Plan to reduce building footprint 

• There is not always a need for housing where tribal council members want it; i.e., politics 

• Lack of data on housing need; research 

• Need to clearly demonstrate benefits of sustainable housing to decision-makers 

• Multiple environmental review requirements 

• Lack of cooperation with adjacent communities 

• Land status; lack of documentation of real estate transfers 

• Demolition of houses; regulations written for cities, not suitable for tribal communities 

• Federal, State, local housing funding should have tribal set-aside based on formula 

• Transportation 

• Location 

• Building cycle 

• Political 

• Funds/cost 

• Education 

• Myths 

• The cost placed on the homeowner for replacement materials or products for energy 

efficient building 

• Availability of energy efficient products in rural areas 

• Cultural/traditional long-term cost 

• Floor plans –barriers to using new designs – new generation homeowners not accepting 

anything less than grandpa’s house 

• Budget restraints 

• TDC limitations 

4. What can your tribe do to help your community understand the benefits of green 

construction? 

Participants listed the following ways to bring communities on-board: 

32 
• Board and Councils should attend workshops and summits 

• Promote projects you do get done 

• Grant administrators leave to attend workshops 

• Workshops should be free and include food and incentives 

• Follow the money – explain the cost savings 

• Educate community about green building: 

o About conservation methods, e.g., better to insulate home than burn free wood 

o Explain relationship between green homes and health 

o Increase awareness of the younger generation 

o Identify targeted groups –e.g., elders, youth – and target them in appropriate ways 

o Get buy-in from opinion leaders/“squeaky wheels” 

o Use social media to educate the community/twitter about your event, e.g., “free 

light bulbs” 

o Tribal newspapers, radio, television commercials 

o Media blitz everywhere – health clinics, schools, etc. 

o Community events, e.g., booth at sporting events 

o Hand out materials at general Council meetings, election day campaign/polling 

places (2) 

o Fact sheet for community members on green building benefits 

o Community dinner to discuss benefits of green building 

o Community meetings for all tribal members 

o Monthly newsletter and/or Web sites with information about green building 

• Educate/orientation at move-in for new residents on green building features; have staff do 

hands-on tenant training 

• Partner with other agencies so you are not duplicating the number of visits from 

departments (e.g., Health Department brought energy efficient light bulbs when making 

health visits.) 

• Partner with casinos, lodges, hotels, restaurants, and tribal enterprises 

• National Indian Housing Survey – see if they are getting information about green 

issues/practices 

• Tie green building into cultural heritage 

• The RFP for any housing element should include training for operations and maintenance 

staff and require training manual from installer 

• Need tribal champion at decision-making level 

• Tribal councils adopt a policy or include language in the mission statement that 

supports/encourages green building in all projects 

• Have tribal council establish an environment committee that can educate the council as a 

whole on green building; educate employees and tribal leadership 

• EPA should encourage cooperation by the tribal housing and tribal environment 

departments 

• Share information between tribes on green housing successes 

• Tribal lack of or minimal access/use of computers/electronic media is potential barrier 

• One-on-one training 

• Demonstration 

33 
• Utility data collection 

• Testimonies 

• Partnerships/NGO 

• Sensitive to community concerns 

• Urban areas in the tribal areas that may be using home loan funds to purchase homes 

need to be educated for pre-existing structures 

• Provide giveaways with information on the products 

COORDINATION MEETING 

September 28, 2011 

1:00 pm – 4:30 pm

Participants: 

Payton Batliner Department of the Interior, Office of Indian Energy 

and Economic Development 

Mike Blanford HUD PD&R 

Dana Bres HUD Policy Development and Research (PD&R) 

Tedd Buelow US Department of Agriculture, Rural Development 

Melissa Fetters Choctaw Housing Authority 

Brian Gillen HUD, Eastern Woodlands ONAP 

Daniel Glenn Glenn & Glenn Architects 

Rebecca Halloran HUD ONAP Office of Loan Guarantee 

Jed Harrison Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Radiation and Indoor Air 

Lizana Pierce Department of Energy, Tribal Energy Program 

Sabrina Stephens Southern Plains Indian Housing Association Board 

member and Choctaw Nation Housing Authority 

Roger Taylor National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Tribal 

Energy Program 

Trina Thompson Choctaw Housing Authority 

Michelle Tinnin HUD SPONAP 

David Vought HUD, Alaska ONAP 

This meeting began with a summary of the barriers that were identified in the three focus groups 

from the prior day. Most participants in this meeting were present at one of the focus group, but 

not all. 

Discussion during Barrier Summary 

Participants expressed concern that a number of the barriers listed are not specific to green 

building. They think we need to focus on impediments to doing green building including the 

“low hanging fruit” such as weatherization, but omit those barriers that are endemic to doing any 

housing construction in Indian Country. Nonetheless, someone commented that some tribes are 

34 
less sophisticated that others and could benefit from training about the construction process. 

Tribes which are not familiar with the process may need this prior to any green training. 

Another participant suggested that the questions asked in the focus group and the Green Building 

Council definition of sustainable development used in the focus groups favored certain responses 

and topics over others. He suggested both were designed to elicit strong discussion of 

environmental and energy factors, but not about the health side of sustainability or cultural 

issues. [Note that issues of the relationship of sustainability to culture and health were discussed 

as part of the focus groups. See pp 19, 21, 22, 23, 31, and 33.] The participant said that we need 

to broaden people’s understanding of what “green” means to include these elements. 

Participants were told that they could add barriers to the list. They added: 

• Health factors 

• Cultural relevance 

Barrier: IHP and Comprehensive Planning

• Tribes submit the Indian Housing Plan (IHP) annually to HUD to describe their year’s 

housing activities. HUD substantially updated the IHP this year. HUD reviews the IHP to 

ensure compliance and approves IHPs to release IHBG funding. Some tribes have fairly 

comprehensive IHPs and others give less detail. The level of detail is very tribe-specific. 

Some participants felt that tribes could use assistance to help them develop longterm/master plans. 

• Some participants, however, felt that the planning issues faced by tribes were larger than 

the IHP. Tribes need to integrate their housing plan with the larger tribal planning 

process. Within their own governments, tribes need to plan roads, housing, etc. as a 

single entity. To have smart growth planning, need communication across different tribal 

entities. The goal is to integrate housing, roads, health services, zoning, etc. in one 

planning process. Housing should stem from the master plan. 

• Several participants stressed that not all tribes are “reservation tribes,” in particular tribes 

in Oklahoma and Alaska but also in other places. Thus, challenges may be different and 

familiarity with long-term planning may be different. Choctaw Nation, for example, has 

5-, 10-, and 100-year plans so they can be sustainable in all areas for future generations. 

They also work with their counties, cities, and State to do comprehensive planning. 

• Perhaps it would be productive to ask each region to identify barriers to tribes conducting 

comprehensive planning. 

A participant said that some tribes keep doing the same things because that’s what they are 

familiar with. It is easier to do what you’ve always done than to do something new. In contrast, 

another participant stated that there were tribes that were leading the way in commitment to 

sustainability: “The Pokagon Band of Potawatomi showed us what could be done to make a 

tribal community really green, from the planning of the site through the whole process. We have 

example after example in our communities of sustainable building. We just want to promote this 

and share this with other tribes.” 

35 
After the barriers were summarized and discussed, participants were asked to use dot ballot 

voting to prioritize the barriers, which were also posted on the wall. They each were given 10 

dots in each of two colors: 

• Red dot: absolute priority even if not specific to green building 

• Green dot: priorities among the barriers to green building 

Most participants did not use all of their dots! 

The combined impediment list for the coordination meeting was composed of the following: 

• Lack of money and flow of funds 

• Flexible funding – quantity of restrictions, e.g., multi-generational units, etc. 

• Connect private sector innovation to Federal efforts 

• Building codes – capacity building – regulation – permitting- recording 

• Do training, then no jobs for tribal members afterwards 

• Getting the right person/people to attend trainings and meetings 

• Cultural barriers – tribes have adapted to the “HUD house mentality.” 

• Existing units are unsustainable – need to commit to fixing old houses (disposition 

regulations, written for cities not tribes). 

• House design focused geographically, culturally, climatically – commit to specific HUD 

support. Make a new, full commitment that replaces the 1960s, 1970s homes. 

• Lack of local plan –difficult to do relocation. 

• Need master planning. Allocate more funding for tribes to do their IHPs, so they can 

develop comprehensive housing plans rather than just meet requirements for using 

housing funds 

• Transition from one “administration” to another – consistent voice; turnover of personnel 

at key tribal agencies/positions and Federal agencies 

• Short-term versus long-term focus; incentives to tribes to look long term at materials, etc; 

i.e., fewer restrictions on design, mandated materials, “low bid” mentality – want housing 

to have more durable life cycle, educating the public about the short term cost vs. the 

long term savings and health benefit 

• Land issues: ownership and land is available for development (including environmental). 

Politics within communities among Village Corporations, tribes and cities limit the land 

for sale, because they don’t work together to get more housing, no one wants to sell land. 

Funding to consolidate fractional heirship interested on allotted reservations. Also lack of 

space, needing to buy land 

• Letting existing water/sewer/roads/electric limit sustainable development and creativity 

• Need to meet with the community many times to get dialogue going and planning 

developed, and travel to remote communities is very expensive. 

• Institutional resources for research and development, need for data 

• Lack of consensus building 

• Using traditional methods and incorporating modern technology or vice versa 

• Perception that going back to traditional ways is a step back to poverty 

• Council and Board education and buy-in 

36 
• Manpower – not enough maintenance workers; sometimes bring in workers from other 

areas, which increases cost 

• Planning design is very important to avoid later problems 

• Residents not knowing benefits of energy efficient retrofits/behavior change 

• Existing dispersed housing developments 

• There is not always a need for housing where Tribal Council members want it; i.e., 

politics 

• Green building: need to clearly demonstrate benefits of sustainable housing to decisionmakers 

• Multiple environmental review requirements 

• Lack of cooperation with adjacent communities 

• Federal, state, local housing funding should have tribal set-aside based on formula 

• Transportation 

• Location 

• Building cycle 

• Myths 

• The cost placed on the homeowner for replacement materials or products for energy 

efficient building 

• Availability of energy efficient products in rural areas 

• Cultural/traditional long-term cost 

• Floor plans –barriers to using new designs – new generation homeowners not accepting 

anything less than grandpa’s house 

• Budget restraints 

• Resident Investment-ownership: someone else is paying for it so not as invested in 

making changes. There is a cost to investing in housing and energy. Homeowner buy in is 

needed. 

• Green Building is perceived as a luxury or a fad 

• Quality vs. Quantity (better to do more or to do it better?) 

• The initial cost vs. the Life Cycle cost. Big initial investments which will pay off in the 

long run. 

• Getting information to the tribes about industry financing vs. government financing 

• Limited number of native architects/culturally relevant/sensitive green design 

• Leadership priorities - regulation and banking not going well together 

• Appraisal Value - For example, getting an appraiser out to a location can be costly 

• Fragmentation within the tribe (ownership/responsibility) 

• Availability and development of green building codes 

• Standardization of rules and regulations and processes across agencies 

• Tribal empowerment - lack knowledge of exercising their sovereignty; they don't know 

they have the ability to legislate in that area. 

• Agencies don’t always incentivize green building. 

• Remoteness, especially in Alaska. Sometime the infrastructure does not exist 

• The number of tribes and the diversity of tribes 

• The large number of tribes and the limited number of Federal staff 

• Coordination with tribal groups/NGO's is not as good as it could be 

37 
• Cost - such as the impact of Total Development Cost, Dealing with small tribes is not 

cost efficient. COSTS AND FUNDING 

• Quality Assurance 

• Tribal capacity - turn over, knowledge sharing and transfer. Change in leadership, short 

staffed. 

• Dissemination of information during digital age 

• Lack of physical housing inventory 

• Construction time and the availability of contractors. 

• Okay to go “deeper green” - the cutting edge in green building construction 

Results of Dot Ballot Voting

General construction issues (red dots) 

The five impediments that received the most votes included: 

• Lack of money/flow of funds (9 votes) 

• Tribal capacity – turnover, knowledge sharing and transfer. Change in leadership, shortstaffed. (7 votes) 

• Land issues (9 votes) 

• Short-term versus long-term focus (6 votes) 

• Fragmentation within the tribe (ownership/responsibility)(5 votes) 

Green issues (green dots)

The major categories that emerged from voting on specific barriers included: 

• Building codes (21 votes) 

• Costs/funding (16 votes) 

• Capacity building (15 votes) 

• Planning (15 votes) 

• Benefit analysis (8 votes) 

• Infrastructure (6 votes) 

One participant noted that there are some issues the group can impact and others that are harder 

to impact, e.g., staff turnover. She suggested a focus on issues that the group can address. 

Bridging the Gap (Solutions) 

Capacity building 

• Expand the services provided by NGOS that give interim support. 

• Develop the capacity of CDCs because there are not enough groups that have this 

capacity. 

• Develop the number of Native CDCs with capacity to serve Native communities. 

38 
Building codes 

• Develop matrix of funding sources to tribes. 

• Develop new green building standards. Participants think we should talk about standards 

rather than a code. Tribes can develop their own standards/policies that are more stringent 

than state codes. 

• Have one, consistent income limit for all programs (several think this is true for all 

construction). 

• Tribal policy. 

• Adopt incentives that encourage tribes to implement green practices/ meet green 

standards. 

• Adopt International Building Code (IBC) customized by individual tribes. 

• Pick standards that you particularly want to emphasize, e.g., stand up to a particular wind 

speed. But need to be cautious because don’t want to discourage building because of too 

stringent standards. 

Planning

• Provide initial planning for tribes 

• Education – identify funding for planning: 

o Let tribes know that they can use planning under ICDBG 

o Let tribes know that there are regional planning commissions that can help them 

do comprehensive planning 

o Can access EDA public works planning grants 

o Can get other grants to do planning, e.g., new Native American Business 

Development Initiative grant 

o ANA 

o Green PDR – can provide assistance to tribes to identify funding sources 

o NAIHC – training on development/financing 

• Cross-agency training and training at the tribal level to educate groups about the types of 

assistance that are available 

o Native Learning Center 

o NAIHC provides classes and also provides direct TA to tribes 

o Mayor’s Institute on Urban Design – do tribal version 

Benefit Analysis – Resident and Community Education

• Because of turnover, need to do this “over and over and over again.” Have to repeat 

education/training regularly because energy is not at the top of their radar screen. The 

training is more effective when you get a group of people in a given tribe together for a 

several day training because there is critical mass and the knowledge is sustainable. This 

is much more effective than having only one person from a tribe attend a regional 

training. You need a champion to lead the charge, and the champion can be a housing 

authority director. 

Costs/Funding

• Focus on smaller items as a step toward going green. 

• Education on the life-cycle costs; Daniel Glenn – HUD needs to reevaluate TDC to 

incorporate lifecycle costs; educate tribes on ability to get a waiver and go above TDC 

39 
• Education about the benefit to other programs – for example, healthier buildings will 

reduce health care costs 

• Use creative financing – use other sources in addition to HUD funds – do better job of 

leveraging funding 

• Cost-benefit analysis tools – see payoff of putting in different energy efficiency options – 

see return on investment (ROI) of different options 

• Tax benefits, e.g., of solar 

• Health benefits/impact on health 

• Cultural relevance 

• Insurance reduction -- Convince insurance companies that building green homes will 

save them a great amount of money. Fireman’s Fund (offers discount for LEED home), 

Farmer’s Insurance of Los Angeles and Fireman’s Fund (provides eco-rebuild options) 

• Train appraisers -- Get appraisers to recognize additional value to a home that has green 

features 

• Educate local lenders about value of green building 

• Cost-benefit analysis (“What if matrix”) 

Demonstrate benefits of sustainable housing to decision makers

• Assessment of existing stock that identifies shortcomings 

• Comparison of green project to other homes – do as baseline (not ongoing) 

• Look at best practices in tribal housing 

• Lots of these analyses have been done for non-tribal developments – perhaps adapt these 

• Have a tribal version of the DOE’s Solar Decathlon featuring solar (or other renewable 

energy heated) homes built at tribal colleges. 

Quality versus Quantity

• Perception change – show them tribes who have done it well/models 

• Offer incentive/rebates 

Paramount to this effort – need to change how homeowners perceive housing. How can housing 

providers change homeowners’ attitudes and behaviors? 

Coordination/Collaboration/Improvement: How do different agencies improve how they 

work together to accomplish goals? 

• Find right person to provide TA 

• Coordinate/schedule meetings better rather than have multiple meetings with tribes 

• Coordinate among agencies about outreach schedules –align agency visits 

• More local training – get more tribal areas together 

• Do a joint project – agencies work together on, e.g., master plan 

• Clearinghouse of meetings 

• Interagency meetings 

40 
APPENDIX B: ORIGINAL INVITEES 

 Governmental 

Invitees 

Name and title Organization and address 

1 Winter Jojola-Talburt, Electrical 

Engineer 

DOI, Office of Indian 

Energy and Economic 

Development 

2 Rebecca Halloran, Presidential 

Management Fellow 

HUD, Office of Native American 

Programs 

3 Lizana Pierce, Administrator DOE Tribal Energy Program 

4 Tedd Buelow, Native American 

Specialist 

US Department of Agriculture 

 

5 Brian Gillen, Region V Sustainability 

Officer 

Eastern/Woodlands ONAP 

6 Randy Akers, Administrator Northern Plains ONAP 

7 Lisa Stewart, Grants Management 

Specialist, or Tom Carney, GM Director 

Northwest ONAP 

 

8 Michelle Tinnin, Native American 

Program Specialist 

Southern Plains ONAP 

9 Carolyn J O'Neil, Administrator Southwest ONAP 

10 Jed Harrison, Tribal Program Advisor EPA 

11 Carrie Nelson, Low-Income 

Weatherization for Tribes 

Bonneville Power Administration 

12 Cynthia Kitchens, SWT U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

13 Martin Nee, Division Director HUD Healthy Homes 

14 Dana Baer, Assistant Program Director, 

or Gordon Delchamps, General 

Engineer 

Indian Health Service 

15 Evangeline Campbell, Program 

Manager 

Department of Labor Indian and 

Native American Program 

16 David Vought, Native American 

Programs Specialist 

HUD Alaska ONAP 

41 
 NGO 

Invitees 

Name and title Organization and address 

1 Stewart Sarkozy-Banoczy, 

Director 

HUD PD&R IPI (formerly of Oweesta) 

2 Russell D Kaney, Sr. Program 

Director 

Enterprise Community Partners 

3 Charles Anderson, Training & TA 

Specialist 

National American Indian Housing Council 

4 Katherine (Katie) Hoyt, 

Legislative Fellow 

National Congress of American Indians 

5 Judith Grunau, Architectural 

Designer/Program Manager 

Cold Climate Housing Research Center 

6 Tony Monroe, Board Member Green Native Council 

7 Jon Panamaroff, Executive 

Director 

Oweesta 

8 Dr. Holly YoungBear-Tibbetts, 

Dean, External Relations 

College of Menominee Nation 

9 Lacey Gaechter, Assistant 

National Director 

trees, water & people 

10 Holly Tiger Bowers, Executive 

Director 

Native Learning Center 

11 Colleen Steele, Executive 

Director 

Mazaska Owecaso Otipi Financial Inc. 

12 Zoe LeBeau, Sr. Program 

Manager 

Corporation for Supportive Housing, 

American Indian Supportive Housing 

Initiative (AISHI) 

13 Cindy Owings, Executive 

Director 

Red Feather Development Group 

14 Tanya Fiddler, Executive 

Director, also on Native CDFI 

board 

Four Bands Community Fund 

42 
15 Greg Bland, Director Travois Environmental Services 

16 Hazel James, Executive Director 

(works with Navajo Nation) 

Indigenous Communities Enterprises 

17 Billie Spurlin, Executive Director Salt River Financial Services Institution 

18 

Dorothy Stoneman, President, 

and Kim Phinney, Director Rural 

and Tribal Development Youthbuild 

 

43 
Coordination 

Meeting 

Name and title Organization and address 

1 Rick M. Garcia Denver Regional Office 

Regional Administrator HUD 

2 Rebecca Halloran, Presidential 

Management Fellow 

HUD OLG, on rotation with 

the DOE's Tribal Energy 

Program 

3 Lizana Pierce Tribal Energy Program 

Director Department of Energy 

 

4 Tedd Buelow US Department of 

Native American Specialist Agriculture 

5 Charles Anderson, Training & TA 

Specialist 

National American Indian 

Housing Council 

 

6 Phil Bush, Director Nevada-California Indian 

Housing Association 

 7 Russell Kaney, Sr. Program Director Enterprise Community 

Partners 

8 Judy Romann, Construction Projects 

Coordinator, and/or Annette Bryan, 

Executive Director 

Northwest Indian Housing 

Association (NWIHA) 

 9 Evangeline Campbell, Program Manager Department of Labor 

 Indian and Native American 

Program (INAP) TEAM 

10 Jon Panamaroff, Executive Director Oweesta 

9 Sabrina Stephens and another SPIHA 

director 

Southern Plains Indian 

Housing Association 

10 Dan Duame, Board President Association of Alaska 

Housing Authorities and 

Aleutian Housing Authority 

11 Kitcki Carroll, Director United South and Eastern 

Tribes 

12 Jed Harrison, Tribal Program Advisor [or 

Alfreda Mitre, EPA Region 8, Tribal 

Assistance Programs] 

Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) 

44 
45 

13 Winter Jojola-Talburt, Engineer, or 

Payton Batliner, Program Specialist 

DOI/BIA 

 

14 

Michael Chavez, President Southwest Indian Housing 

Assn 

15 

Dana Baer, Assistant Program Director, 

or Gordon Delchamps, General Engineer 

Indian Health Service 

16 Steven Golubic, National Tribal Liaison FEMA 

17 Rodger Boyd, Deputy Assistant Secretary HUD ONAP 

18 Roger Taylor, Tribal Energy Program DOE NREL 

19 Martin Nee, Division Director HUD Healthy Homes 

20 

David Vought, Native American 

Programs Specialist 

Alaska ONAP 

21 

Brian Gillen Eastern/Woodlands ONAP 

 

Native Programs Specialist, Region V 

Sustainability Officer 

 

22 Randy Akers Northern Plains ONAP 

 Administrator 

23 Lisa Stewart, Grants Management 

Specialist, or Tom Carney, GM Director 

Northwest ONAP 

 

24 Michelle Tinnin Southern Plains ONAP 

 

Native American Program Specialist 

25 Carolyn J O'Neil Southwest ONAP 

 Administrator 
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-1

Appendix C-1: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Rehabilitating Housing to Incorporate Lower-Cost 

Sustainability Measures

Cocopah 

Indian Tribe

“Better housing is one of the most basic and important 

improvements we can make in peoples’ lives, and the jobs this 

creates won’t be the only benefit the community sees from this 

project.” 

 - Arizona Congressman Raul M. Grijalva 
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

SOMERTON

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Rehabilitation and Climate 5

Community Involvement 5

Utility Company Opportunities 6

Project Summary 8

Best Practices 9

Next Steps 11

How To Get Started 12

Funding

 Activity Funding Source

Rehabilitation of 

three buildings 

with 24 units 

total

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Housing Preservation Grant

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) Indian Community 

Development Block Grant

HUD Native American Housing Assistance 

and Self Determination Act 

Map

Problem

Increasing the number of tribal members 

living on the reservation by retrofitting 

and renovating existing housing to 

improve housing conditions and decrease 

energy costs.

Solution

Upgrading three existing apartment 

buildings with largely low-cost solutions 

so they become an affordable, energyefficient model project in the community.

Community Snapshot

Location: Lying 13 miles south of Yuma, 

Arizona, the Cocopah Indian 

Tribe reservation takes in 

6,500 acres, is divided into 

three noncontiguous areas, 

and borders Mexico along the 

Colorado River.

Location type: Rural/agricultural

Population: The Cocopah Indian Tribe has 

approximately 816 members.

Climate: Desert climate with extremely 

hot summers and warm winters. 

Extremely sunny, the area 

receives an average of 3 inches 

of rain annually. (Köppen 

classification: BWh)

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

• Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs)

• Double-paned low-emissivity (low-e) 

windows

• Energy-efficient air conditioners

• Sustainable roofs

• Faucet aerators and low-flow 

showerheads

• Upgraded water heaters

• Energy Star appliances
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

The Cocopah Indian Tribe seeks to encourage 

tribal members to stay on-reservation and to 

encourage members living off-reservation to 

return by providing affordable, safe, decent, 

and sanitary housing for all. To assist with this 

goal, Cocopah Indian Housing and Development 

(CIHAD) has been implementing affordable, 

energy-efficient changes to its older housing for 

the past 10 years. CIHAD Chief Executive Officer 

Michael Reed takes a commonsense approach to 

sustainability and cost savings: as old systems 

and appliances wear out, replace them with 

more sustainable products. Under the dry, hot 

desert conditions of the Cocopah reservation, 

they may wear out sooner than a system’s 

normal anticipated life span. 

Currently, CIHAD is rehabilitating three two-story garden apartment buildings that have a total of 24 

apartments. The apartment buildings, built in 2003, share a site with a community building and parking 

area.

CIHAD plans to upgrade these 

buildings as a sustainable, energyefficient, affordable model project 

in the community. It is replacing 

lighting, water fixtures and fittings, 

appliances, air conditioning, and 

windows, and is making other 

changes. To carry out this work, 

CIHAD has added a new partner 

to the mix: its utility provider. The 

Tribe worked with Arizona Power 

Service (APS) to take advantage 

of an incentive program which 

provided free compact fluorescent 

lamps (CFLs), faucet aerators, and 

low-flow showerheads. In addition, 

it worked with building residents 

and APS to receive utility cost data from a 12-month period for one of the buildings. The data were analyzed 

to create a cost and usage baseline that will help guide future energy-efficiency strategy decisions. Reed 

said, “It is too soon now to see if we have cost savings and how much. We have a baseline and in a year we 

will see if electricity use has improved.”

CIHAD corporate office, Somerton, AZ

Multifamily apartment rehabilitation project
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

The following chart describes the technologies and their effect on sustainability. 

Sustainable 

Technologies What Is It? Effect

Compact fluorescent 

lamps (CFLs)

CFLs are made of glass tubes filled with gas and 

a small amount of mercury (100 times less than 

a thermometer). The mercury emits an invisible 

ultraviolet light that becomes visible when it hits 

the white coating inside the CFL.

Switching to energy-efficient lighting is one of 

the fastest ways to cut energy bills. CFLs last 

about 10 times longer and use about 75% less 

energy than traditional incandescent bulbs. A 

typical CFL can pay for itself in energy savings 

in less than 9 months and can continue to cut 

energy costs each month. 

Low-e windows

Low-e, or low thermal emissivity, windows have 

a coating on the glazing or glass that absorbs, 

reflects, and emits low levels of radiant thermal 

(heat) energy depending on the weather. 

Low-e windows typically cost about 10% to 

15% more than regular windows according to 

the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), but they 

may reduce energy loss by as much as 50%. The 

greatest savings tend to come from areas with 

hot summers, cold winters, or both.

Energy-efficient air 

conditioning (high 

Seasonal Energy 

Efficiency Ratio 

or SEER)

The efficiency of air conditioners is often rated 

by the SEER defined by the Air Conditioning, 

Heating and Refrigeration Institute. The higher 

the unit’s SEER rating the more energy efficient 

it is. 

High-efficiency air conditioners result in 

lower monthly energy bills and often include 

additional energy-saving features.

Sustainable roofs 

(30-year shingles)

Various factors such as the thickness of 

the shingle, the materials from which it is 

manufactured, and the amount of asphalt used 

determine the length of warranty on the shingle.

These shingle roofs are intended to last for a 

longer time than their 10-15 year predecessors. 

This is both financially and environmentally 

desirable.

Faucet aerators 

and low-flow 

showerheads

Aerators use specialized airflow regulators to 

mix water and air to reduce water flow while 

increasing pressure. Low-flow showerheads also 

significantly reduce water flow.

The aerators use 1.5 gallons per minute, or 31% 

less water than a standard faucet. The lowflow showerheads use 1.5 gallons per minute, 

20% less water than standard showerheads, 

according to the Arizona Power Service (APS). 

By using a lower flow faucet, less energy is used 

for heating hot water for everyday use. APS 

estimates that $246 in utility bills and 8,212 

gallons of water per year will be saved.

Energy Star

appliances

Energy Star appliances are independently 

certified through a program of the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and the DOE.

The products save money and protect the 

environment. For example, replacing a 1980s 

model refrigerator with an Energy Star version 

could save $100 a year in total energy costs. 

Replacing a clothes washer could save as much 

as $110 a year.
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

5

Rehabilitation and Climate

In recent years, CIHAD has been renovating tribal homes with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) grants. Fifty of the “oldest and most 

in need” homes on the reservation received major rehabilitation, including new roof shingles, heat/

air conditioning systems, ductwork, floors, baseboards, exterior and interior doors, security screen 

doors, 200-amp electrical systems, dual-pane windows, and exterior and interior paint, according to an 

article in the Yuma Sun. Kitchen and bathroom upgrades involved installing new appliances, cabinets, 

countertops, vanities, showers, towel bars, medicine cabinets, exhaust fans, toilets, and plumbing. 

Currently, CIHAD is undertaking rehabilitation on three garden-style apartment buildings that were built 

in 2003. Each all-electric building has eight units (four two-bedroom and four three-bedroom units), and 

split-system electric heat pumps (which include cooling systems). Each building is 8,523 square feet, 

with apartments ranging from 855 to 1,107 square feet. On the same lot are a community building with a 

common laundry area and parking. 

Temperatures of up to 124 °F and the hot summer sun can shorten the lifespan of some materials and 

appliances. Some of the first upgrades the CIHAD maintenance team is making to the three buildings—

Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) 14 air conditioners and 30-year shingles on the roof (rather 

than the old 10-15 year shingles)—should help 

with cooling. The region also has hard water, which 

causes deterioration in the water heaters. As these 

water heaters give out, they are being upgraded to 

more energy-efficient models. 

Windows were added into the mix when they 

began to experience problems. CIHAD will replace 

windows in all three buildings with double-paned, 

low-e models, which will come at a cost of $1,480 

per apartment. The Tribe anticipates that replacing 

the lighting, windows, stoves, and refrigerator will 

take 18 months. An additional benefit of the project 

is that CIHAD’s own staff, more than one-half of 

whom are tribal members, will conduct the work. 

Community Involvement

CIHAD held two public meetings at the complex to 

inform tenants about the planned changes to the 

windows and lighting. CIHAD staff are also walking 

tenants through these changes as they install new 

windows, CFLs, and lighting fixtures, and make more 

renovations in the apartments. 

1 2 3 4

Glass Surface

Interior

Neutral color Low-E 

 on glass surface 2

Intercept® Spacer

11/16” O.A.

Double-paned, low-e window diagram
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Utility Company Opportunities

Utility companies are motivated to encourage smart energy use and energy efficiency to provide more 

consistent, efficient, and cost-effective power. Companies such as APS offer free or low-cost energy-efficiency 

services, incentive programs, and rebates to their customers. Tribes sometimes may be hesitant to reach out 

to utility company programs, but as paying customers of a utility, tribes, tribally designated housing entities 

(TDHEs), or tribal housing residents (depending on who pays the utility bills) may have access to a range of 

programs and incentives.

Assessments and Incentives

Many utilities offer energy-efficiency assessment 

services. APS offers a Multifamily Energy Efficiency 

Program that provides eligible building owners 

a free onsite energy assessment to identify quick 

areas of upgrade for energy savings, free energy cost 

reduction measures (ECRMs), and technical and field 

support to assist with installation. In May 2012, the 

Tribe requested an onsite energy assessment of one 

of its buildings. APS conducted an assessment of the 

eight apartments’ lighting and water features. APS 

installed the following ECRMs at no cost: 

• 24 kitchen faucet aerators and 36 bathroom faucet aerators.

• 38 low-flow showerheads.

• 360 CFLs.

Other utility companies may partner with HVAC consultants 

to offer thorough energy assessments. The HVAC consultant 

observes the housing from top to bottom, noting features 

from insulation levels to water heater age and model. These 

assessments likely have an associated fee (although less 

than would be charged without the program) and come with 

recommendations that the utility may assist in funding. 

Most commonly, utilities provide their customers with 

rebates. The occupant or TDHE purchases a qualified heating 

and cooling system or appliance. It then submits paperwork 

including a receipt to receive a cash rebate. 

Low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

7

Benchmarking

Benchmarking is a method that facilitates energy 

accounting, comparing a facility’s energy use with 

that of similar facilities to assess opportunities for 

improvement and quantify energy savings. Because 

CIHAD tenants pay their own APS electric bills with a 

utility allowance provided by the housing department, 

CIHAD initially did not have access to usage data for its 

buildings. Each tenant household provided APS with a 

signed release form, enabling APS to send CIHAD cost 

and kilowatt-usage data for the period of 1 year. 

 A HUD Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

(SCinIC) initiative team including the University of 

Illinois Urbana Champaign Building Research Council 

conducted a comprehensive energy analysis of the eight 

units of Building B, one of the three garden apartment 

buildings, for the 2011 calendar year. The SCinIC team 

plugged those figures into a modeling program to 

calculate a baseline usage for the building and to make 

recommendations for ECRMs. CIHAD can also use this 

initial baseline to measure its success in reducing energy usage and cost in future years.

Renewable Energy and Net Metering

APS also offers renewable energy incentive programs, 

including photovoltaic array and solar domestic hot 

water incentive programs; these are not available to the 

CIHAD, but to individual customers. Program members 

can also participate in APS’ net metering program. In 

this program, if the renewable resource produces more 

power than is needed for the home, the electricity is fed 

back into the power grid and the participant’s utility 

account is credited.

Apartment building electricity meters

Solar domestic hot water

Photovoltaic (PV) array
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Project Summary 

Project Name: Multifamily Buildings 

LOCATION: Somerton, Arizona 

Timeline: 2011 though present 

Project Type: Multifamily apartment rehabilitation

Project Key Features

• Free incentives from the local utility company.

• Individual heat pumps.

• Associated community building.

• Common laundry area.

Key Sustainable Elements

• CFLs.

• Low-e windows.

• High-SEER air conditioning.

• Thirty-year shingles.

• Faucet aerators and low-flow showerheads.

• Upgraded water heaters.

• Energy Star appliances.

• Benchmarking.

8

Thirty-year shingles

Low-e windows

High SEER air conditioning
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Best Practices

CIHAD has focused its initial energyefficiency upgrades on the most affordable 

strategies—but these upgrades can have major 

consequences for a housing authority’s or an 

occupant’s bottom line. 

The SCinIC energy assessment report compared 

cost and kilowatt usage for incandescent 

lighting and CFLs. It estimated that the building 

would save $282 annually through this simple 

upgrade. The cost of interior lighting with 

incandescents in one apartment building was 

estimated at about 21 percent of the building’s 

total costs. The upgrade to CFLs, even when 

factoring in the cost of the CFLs, is estimated to 

pay for itself in less than 18 months and to save the building 2,171 kilowatts annually. (In this case, CIHAD 

did not have to purchase 360 CFLs because of its participation in the APS program.)

CFL Lighting upgrade

Annual Savings per building

Kilowatts Dollars Percent of 

Energy

Cost of 

Installation Simple Payback

2,171 $282 3% $395 1.4 years

CIHAD also had bathroom and kitchen aerators, and low-flow showerheads installed through the APS 

program. These items are not costly. Aerators cost between $5 and$10 each and less expensive lowflow showerheads between $15 and $50, but they can also bring in big savings. According to the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) WaterSense program, the average household spends as much 

as $500 per year on water and sewer bills and can save about $170 per year by installing water-efficient 

fixtures and appliances. 
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

CIHAD is replacing refrigerators, air conditioners, and water heaters as they wear out. Refrigerators consume 

the most energy of all household appliances because they operate 24 hours a day. The units’ original 

refrigerators (1995 models) are estimated to cost $112 annually to run, compared with only $51 annually for an 

equivalent new Energy Star model. This upgrade could save each tenant $61 per year. 

Refrigerator upgrade

Annual Savings per building

Kilowatts Dollars Percent of 

Energy

Cost of 

Installation Simple Payback

3,754 $488 6% $3200 6.56 years

By starting with less expensive changes and replacing systems as they 

wear out, CIHAD and its residents can expect to see some quick return 

on their investment with cost and energy savings.

Energy Star replacement
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Next Steps

The Tribe has been renovating homes on the reservation for the past 10 years. The original focus of the 

current retrofitting project was three apartment buildings, but now the Tribe plans to make the same energyefficient improvements to the remainder of its housing. 

Many of the changes CIHAD is making to the three garden apartment buildings are the most affordable, 

quickest return options, but it is also considering more extensive sustainable upgrades for the future. 

According to Reed, although CIHAD is currently installing a 30-year upgraded shingle roof, it is looking at 

more expensive/durable roofs for the future, although “we’re not there yet.” CIHAD is also looking at solar 

panels for existing projects. Reed noted CIHAD is using the current projects as a pilot “to see if we break even.”

The SCinIC report recommended adding window shading to the exterior of the building, protecting windows 

and apartments from the sun. Although this upgrade was estimated to cost about $2,000 per building, it had 

an anticipated payback time of slightly more than 8 years and an estimated annual utility cost savings of about 

$242. 

CIHAD also is planning to include sustainable features in their new construction. It is submitting plans 

to Indian Community Development Block Grant to add infrastructure for two new homes on the North 

Reservation—and, in the long run, will seek funding for 14 homes on the lots. In the proposed rental housing 

units, Reed said, “We will do everything we can—lighting, higher R-factor walls, high SEER, nice 30-year roofs, 

stucco,” depending on available funding. He also noted that CIHAD may choose totally different options in the 

future. For example, he said, “I like the idea of not having a hot water heater because water is so poor here, so 

we are open to other options.” CIHAD will continue to apply for a variety of federal and state grants as they 

become available to continue financing its sustainable rehabilitation projects.

For more information:

Dr. Michael Reed

Chief Executive Officer

Cocopah Indian Housing and Development 

10488 W. Steamboat Street

Somerton, AZ 85350

ceomr@ontherez.org

928-627-8863
12

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about utility program incentives and energy-efficient lighting, appliances, benchmarking, 

and the energy assessment report, check out these resources.

Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency on utility company and other incentives:

http://www.dsireusa.org/

EPA on energy efficient improvements, including low-e windows:

http://www.epa.gov/greenhomes/ReduceEnergy.htm

EPA on CFLs:

http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/

Energy Star on appliances:

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_find_es_products

Energy Efficiency Evaluation and Recommendations: 14380 S. Farm Road Multifamily Housing 

http://www.huduser.org/portal/SCinIC/EnergyAssessment_Cocopah11_28.pdf 

APS:

http://www.aps.com/

DOE and EPA Energy Star on benchmarking for multifamily housing programs: 

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=multifam_housing.bus_multifam_housing

CIHAD:

http://www.ontherez.org/

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase 

sustainable construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in 

partnership with the Office of Native American Programs. 

Some photos, tables, and renderings courtesy of CIHAD and the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign Building 

Research Council.

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.

Produced May 2013
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-2

Appendix C-2: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Moving Toward Sustainable Design and 

Homeownership Despite Emergency Circumstances

Native Village of 

Kwinhagak

 “We are among the most poverty stricken communities in 

rural Alaska. It is imperative to me that we find energy 

efficient, more durable, and affordable housing that will last. 

I am hopeful and excited to see how these new energy efficient 

designs will hold up over time.”

 - John O. Mark, Native Village of Kwinhagak Tribal President
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Planning 5

Construction Challenges 6

Design Adaptations 6

Project Summary 8

Timeline 8

Best Practices 10

Next Steps 11

How To Get Started 12

Funding

Activities Funding Sources

Demolition and 

disposal of materials

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) Indian Community 

Development Block Grant (ICDBG) 

Imminent Threat Grant

Purchase of 

deteriorated houses 

from homeowners

ICDBG 2011

Construction Title VI loan, donations, Indian Housing 

Block Grant

Mortgage products

U.S. Department of Agriculture Section 

502 Loan Guarantee Program and HUD 

Section 184 Loan Guarantee program

Map

Problem

Providing new, sustainable opportunities 

for homeownership and replacing 55 

units of housing that has emergency-level 

structural damage, overcrowding, and 

extremely high utility costs.

Solution

The Kwinhagak Work Group, established 

at the request of U.S. Senator Mark 

Begich, is pursuing a pilot self-help model 

homeownership program with sustainably 

designed housing.

Community Snapshot

Location: Less than 1 mile from the Bering 

Sea, 70 miles south of Bethel, 

Alaska

Location type: Remote, rural

Population: 800

Household size: 4.05 (compared with the 

Alaska average of 2.65 and 

the Bethel average of 3.09)

Climate: Wet, with 11,700 heating degree 

days in Alaska for 2011; cool 

summers (41  ̊F to 57  ̊F) and cold 

winters (6  ̊F to 24  ̊F) (Köppen 

classification Dfc).

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

• Quinhagak wall

• Vented airspaces

• Mold-resistant materials

• Heat Recovery Ventilator

• Floating-raft foundation

• Spray-foam envelope insulation

• Energy-efficient electrical appliances and 

 lighting

• Octagonal design that addresses cultural 

 and climate requirements

• Integrated “whole-house” truss
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

In 2009, the Native Village of Kwinhagak (NVK), 70 miles 

south of Bethel, Alaska, and less than 1 mile from the Bering 

Sea, was in a difficult situation. Not only were many of its 

young families unable to find homes, but also 55 out of 

NVK’s 160 houses were severely deteriorated because of 

frequent battering by harsh wind, rain, and storms. NVK 

declared a housing emergency.

First priorities involved securing funds for demolition, 

cleanup, site control, and new construction. The community 

determined it needed homes that were more durable and 

energy efficient than the conventional housing style it had been using. NVK invited representatives from the 

Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) to conduct charrettes and develop a culturally appropriate 

prototype. This house, known as the Quinhagak prototype, was completed in 2010.

In the 2012 building season, community leaders 

decided on an ambitious plan: NVK would continue 

to build the multisided Quinhagak house, with 

its proven energy efficiency, but also add a more 

conventional-looking, but still energy-efficient, 

rectangular house. Both designs incorporate critical 

sustainable technologies and strategies. These 

technologies include a monolithic thermal envelope, 

vented airspaces, mold-resistant and lightweight 

materials, Heat Recovery Ventilators (HRVs), and 

energy-efficient electric appliances and lighting.

The designs meet the community’s and designers’ 

goals of lowering annual fuel usage, addressing 

moisture and mold conditions, decreasing shipping 

expenses, and facilitating construction assembly 

without heavy equipment. The Quinhagak design 

also addresses a cultural preference for an open floor 

plan and includes an arctic entrance large enough to 

process wild foods.

To finance the large-scale replacement, NVK leveraged 

existing housing funds with other resources. It is in 

the process of implementing a mortgage program that 

will allow for a self-help program, whereby families 

will contribute labor.

Native Village of Kwinhagak

Quinhagak prototype

Open floor plan
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

The following chart describes the technologies and their effect on sustainability. 

Sustainable 

Technologies What Is It? Effect

Quinhagak wall

A continuous monolithic thermal envelope 

that includes 3-inch thermal breaks in walls 

and 4-inch thermal breaks in the foundation. 

The walls and exterior siding are constructed 

of lightweight materials. The exterior wall 

is covered with foam insulation to create an 

envelope with no gaps. 

Water- and wind-resistant, spray-foam 

thermal envelope eliminates thermal 

conduction; use of lightweight plastic and 

metal aids in shipping and construction. The 

Insulation rating is R-40.

Vented airspaces

Ventilation is created in spaces between trusses 

and roof sheathing. The roof is insulated to a rating of about R-50.

This system creates a necessary drainage 

plane and drying path.

Antimold materials

These materials include AC plywood and metal 

studs and joists. No gypsum wall board is used in 

the assembly.

In this a very damp location, these materials 

avoid mold growth, which can cause 

deterioration and unhealthy living conditions.

Heat Recovery 

Ventilator (HRV)

This mechanical ventilation system uses blowers to pull cold outside air into the house, warm 

it with existing heated inside air through an 

air-to-air heat exchanger, and distribute fresh air 

throughout the house.

HRV provides fresh air, which is critical in 

very tightly sealed housing.

Adjustable raised 

foam-filled mat 

foundation

Rigid frame foundations with spray foam-embedded metal joists are placed on an overbuilt gravel 

pad with adjustable post bases.

Spray foam provides water resistance, a thermal barrier, and greater rigidity for the frame. 

Adjustable post bases allow for changes in 

leveling.

Spray foam

insulation

Spray foam insulation is used in walls, ceilings, 

crawlspaces, and other parts of buildings. It seals 

heat inside during cold weather and does not 

allow water to penetrate inside. Also reduces 

shipping cost, as it is transported in liquid form.

Spray foam insulation stops air and moisture 

infiltration, making homes more comfortable, 

energy efficient, and stable. This is a nontoxic foam.

Octagonal design This design lessens surface area-to-volume ratio. 

An arctic entry was also included.

The lowered ratio means less surface area 

exposed to the cold and wind compared with 

a rectangular model of the same size. The 

special entry improves heating efficiency and 

protects the home from wet winds.

Whole-house or 

integrated truss

A prefabricated structure wherein the walls, 

floor, and roof are designed as a single 

component.

This design can be raised in a day without 

a crane, decreases raw material use, and 

increases recycling.
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Planning

NVK is near the coast of the Bering Sea and is frequently 

battered by wind, rain, and heavy storms. Reports 

found that 55 units—approximately one-third of the 

community’s housing stock—suffered from extensive 

mold and moisture deterioration. To address its shortterm needs, NVK applied for and received an Imminent 

Threat Indian Community Development Block Grant to 

perform emergency health repair and enable residents to 

continue to live in their homes.

The community also faces high energy costs. NVK sought to develop a new housing model that was both more 

durable and more energy efficient. “The old buildings are so bad, it is hard to keep them warm,” said John 

Mark, NVK Tribal President. NVK approached CCHRC 4 years ago. “In year one, the goal was to build a single 

house—to come up with a model that would be energy efficient, stand up well against the elements, and fit 

into the culture,” said Jack Hebert, CCHRC President.

CCHRC conducted charrettes to determine what issues were 

most important, including cultural elements, and to ensure 

complete understanding of energy efficiency. Of about 800 

tribal members, 60 to 100 attended. 

Bill Marks, former U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development staff member and consultant with NVK, recalled 

that CCHRC separated men and women to capture different 

housing wishes. The women more often requested a nice 

kitchen and study areas for the kids, whereas the men wanted 

space to fix the snow machines. John Mark said, “We got great 

input from those in attendance. People were put into small groups to tackle part of the bigger puzzle. Their 

task was to say what they thought and to answer questions about how best to resolve a problem.”

“The charrettes were helpful in getting everyone on board,” Bill Marks added. “Council members participated 

in the charrettes. When talk started about what kind of housing, people reminisced about the kinds of homes 

we used to have—circular in nature for keeping the home pleasantly heated. It was not hard to convince 

anyone because people understood the concept already. It was not a hard sell.”

Although the community was involved in the development process, reaction to the new design was mixed. Bill 

Marks said that some found “the idea was something of ‘Back to the Future’ ...an octagonal house with a hole 

in the center of the roof for ventilation.” Regardless, the housing committee was on board and simply said, 

“Now we have a design; let’s build a house!” The prototype was completed in 2010 and monitored during 

2011 for energy usage.

For the 2012 season, the community discussed whether the prototype would be replicated. After a discussion 

of need, local climate, and energy costs with members of the younger and older generations, members of the 

NVK council (tribe), city of Quinhagak council (municipality), and Qanirtuuq, Inc. board (local corporation) 

decided to move forward with a plan for four octagonal and one rectangular houses.

5

U.S. Senator Mark Begich inspects NVK homes

Charrette with NVK tribal members 
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Construction Challenges

Procurement and transportation can raise significant 

challenges in remote communities, where logistics 

may amount to as much as 30 to 40 percent of the 

building budget. NVK is not accessible by road. It may 

be reached by airplane year round and by two to three 

barges in the summer. Hébert said, “If you forget to 

order a hammer and it doesn’t come on the barge, 

then you have to pay to fly it in, and that is much more 

costly.

When possible, the materials selected for these 

energy-efficient houses are lightweight or may be 

placed without need for a crane. Because procurement also takes time, planning 5 to 6 months in advance 

also helps keep costs down. “If you have to order something that has to be made or fabricated, you have to 

give enough lead time for these things to be built and then delivered to the barge. You have to be cognizant 

of the barge schedule. You can’t just call up a week before and order kitchen cabinets to come up on the June 

barge,” Hébert said.

In fact, in the 2012 building season, the NVK work crew framed and enclosed only three of the five houses it 

had hoped to construct, in part because of significant barge transportation issues. Because the materials for 

the additional houses are already onsite, the work crew will be able to start its 2013 building season early. 

The building season also coincides with the traditional lifestyle calendar. For example, the first barge arrives 

in June, just as the salmon do. Construction in 2012 started at the beginning of moose and caribou hunting.

According to Hébert, “Knowing that the seasons (berry picking, salmon fishing, game hunting, etc.) are very 

important is essential when working with the villages. For us, it might seem very different culturally. We 

want to just push, push, and push all the time. We don’t understand why they are taking longer to complete 

something that in the lower 48 would be done much quicker. We have to look at things differently and respect 

that this is their cultural life and their livelihood."

He added, "This is true all over Indian Country. We have to understand that we cannot use our own filters to 

value one thing over another. For the village, subsistence and traditional life needs to take precedence over 

homebuilding.”

Design Adaptations

To withstand the wet, stormy, and cold climate, CCHRC developed several technologies. These were 

experiments and the interaction of a prototype house with both the climate and with occupants can lead to 

additional adaptations. 

Building materials arrive at Quinhagak Airport
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Foundation

The first winter after construction in 2011, monitors evaluated the 

octagonal prototype to show which elements worked and which 

needed improvement. The only architectural change made to the 

2012 octagonal houses was to the foundation. The prototype was 

built on an insulated raft foundation sitting directly on the gravel pad. 

The unstable soil thawed and heaved more 

than originally anticipated, causing drainage 

issues. The design was later modified to have 

the foundation float just above the ground. This updated foundation uses off-theshelf components to create a foundation assembly that can be adjusted and releveled, 

should doing so become necessary because of shifting of the pad.

Whole House Truss

The rectangular house design is also adapted from a prototype 

home that CCHRC designed in Crooked Creek, Alaska. The design 

shares many energy-efficient features with the octagonal house, 

including spray-foam envelope; metal roofing; and triple-glazed, 

low-e windows. A unique design feature is the “whole-house,” or 

integrated truss construction; the structure of the walls, floor, and 

roof are designed as a single component. The truss was constructed 

offsite (in Alaska) and can be assembled onsite in a day without 

heavy machinery. Use of a prefabricated truss decreases the 

amount of wood used and allows for increased recycling; this approach also decreases construction time and 

generally lowers costs. This house is easier to construct than the octagonal design, but it lacks the cultural tiein to the community.

Monolithic thermal envelope

Both house designs are extremely energy efficient because of a 

thermal envelope. In the Quinhagak house, the walls are constructed 

of 4-inch metal studs, a 3.5-inchplastic spacer in the middle, and a 

light-gauge angle iron that holds the siding 7.5 inches out from the 

inside of the stud. The rectangular house walls are wood. In both, a 

non-toxic soy-based spray foam is applied continuously inside the 

exterior wall to create a wind- and water-resistant envelope that is 

not drafty and requires little energy to heat.

Spray Foam

Because NVK will need to build many additional houses, it decided to 

invest in the specialized equipment and training to enable the work crew to 

spray foam its own units in the future. This investment will add to in-house 

capacity, cost savings, and control over the building schedule. Initially, 

however, it was difficult to maintain the storage temperature needed keep 

the spray foam usable and the equipment required more careful cleaning 

than anticipated leading to some equipment malfunctions.

7

Integrated truss construction

2012 Octagon house (left) & prototype

Thermal envelope construction

Spray foam application
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Project Summary 

PROJECT NAME: Octagon houses

Location: Quinhagak, Alaska

Design/Plan Team: Cold Climate Housing Research Center 

Timeline: August 2012 through spring 2013

Project type: Single-family house

Project Key Features

• Gravel pad site- built-up gravel pad.

• Toyotomi OM-22 Oil Miser Direct Vent Oil Heating System.

• Backup wood stove.

• Half-roof trusses with metal hub connection.

Key Sustainable Elements

• Octagonal aerodynamic design.

• Venmar EKO HRV.

• Cultural open space and arctic opening design.

• Quinhagak wall.

• Floating-raft foundation.

• Triple-glazed low-e windows.

• LED (light-emitting diode) and CFL.

(compact fluorescent lamp) lighting.

• Energy-efficient appliances.

• Vented air spaces.

2009 2010 2011 

Multiple 

reports nd 55 

units “severely 

compromised.” 

Quinhagak 

(octagon) 

prototype 

completed.

NVK asks CCHRC 

to partner to 

develop 

prototype.

Data collected 

on octagon 

prototype 

energy usage.

Completed octagon house
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Project Summary 

PROJECT NAME: Rectangular house

Location: Quinhagak, Alaska

Design/Plan Team: Cold Climate Housing Research Center 

Timeline: August 2012 through spring 2013

Project type: Single-family house

Project Key Features

• Gravel-pad site and elevated wood piling foundation.

• Toyotomi OM-22 Oil Miser Direct Vent Oil Heating System.

• Backup wood stove.

Key Sustainable Elements

• Whole-house truss.

• Venmar EKO HRV.

• Triple-glazed low-e windows.

• LED and CFL lighting.

• Energy-efficient appliances.

2012

CCHRC developed 

its Crooked Creek 

(Rectangle) 

prototype.

NVK demolishes 

one unit and 

secures the site.

NVK decides to 

build more octagon 

and whole house 

truss houses.

NVK completes 

enclosure of 2 

octagon and 1 

rectangle house.

NVK carries out 

health and 

safety repairs 

on 54 units. 

CCHRC visits 

to assist 

NVK.

Interior work 

on houses 

continues over 

the winter.

Rectangular house construction
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Best Practices

Monitoring of the Quinhagak protype has shown it to be 80 percent 

more efficient than previous housing, creating a significant savings 

when fuel oil costs $7 to $8 a gallon. Hébert said, “This is not so much 

a reflection of how intelligent we are but how bad the current housing 

truly is.”

These houses have the potential to give NVK much greater control 

over its budgets, utility costs, and even construction schedules. 

Because the cutting-edge thermal spray-foam envelope used in both 

housing designs is so energy efficient, the community can budget 

better for its heating fuel usage. In 2012, severe weather caused 

additional usage in the community that led to emergency shipments 

of fuel at even higher prices. The spray-foam envelope also lowers 

costs for residents, who can put the extra savings into a mortgage. 

The use of a spray-foam envelope and other mold-resistant materials 

should increase the durability of the housing, enabling it to withstand 

the weather in NVK. Prospective homeowners are more likely to 

accept mortgage payments when they can count on their homes 

outlasting the mortgages.

The lightweight construction means that NVK does not need to bring in cranes and, with careful planning, that 

some transportation costs can be lowered. As NVK develops its internal capacity in skilled areas such as spray 

foaming, it will not need to adjust its construction schedule to accommodate specialists and can save costs. These 

considerations are important, considering the number of units that are needed in the community.

To build capacity of its work crew, NVK 

sent three crew members to specialized 

technology training. For the five houses 

NVK is currently building, it has needed 

to bring in only three outside workers: an 

electrician, a plumber, and a contractor for 

the foam insulation. NVK saves the cost 

of additional specialists, transportation, 

housing, and per diem. This capacity 

building at the village level is an important 

benefit to the community and financial 

stimulus for the local economy. 

Spray foam insulation
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Next Steps

In the coming years, NVK needs to move from prototypes to 100 new homes to meet its housing need, 

addressing not only substandard units but overcrowding and the growing population of young families 

needing homes. With the successful sale of all the units already constructed by NVK, the community has seen 

firsthand that purchasing homes outright is possible. Thus, the number of families hoping to take advantage of 

new construction and the self-help concept has increased.

The self-help program will involve residents assisting with construction under the supervision of the skilled 

workers. To date, this component has not been implemented because many of the construction crews have 

been learning the basics.

The self-help program also involves the introduction of mortgages. Villagers are not accustomed to paying 

more than $150 a month for their homes; thus, challenges will likely be associated with this process. The Tribe 

applied for a rural development grant with a 1.0- to 1.5-percent interest rate, requiring families to make $500 

to $800 monthly mortgage payments. Education and discussions will be required to teach tribal members 

how they might save through energy-efficient homes, freeing up money for these payments.

NVK is exploring the feasibility of constructing its own trusses in a former fish-processing plant or other 

protected location. Work crews could build trusses during the slower winter months, increasing winter 

employment opportunities, decreasing shipping costs (and eliminating damage caused by shipping), and 

ultimately enabling NVK to get a jump on its next building season.

For more information:

John Mark

Tribal President

Native Village of Kwinhagak

P.O. Box 149

Quinhagak, AK 99655

jmark.nvk@gmail.com

907-556-8165 
12

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about the prototype designs, HRVs, Toyotomi systems, and energy-efficient lighting and 

appliances, check out these resources.

CCHRC, prototype octagonal Quinhagak house:

http://www.cchrc.org/quinhagak-prototype-home.

CCHRC, Crooked Creek prototype house:

http://cchrc.org/crooked-creek-prototype-home\.

The National Association of Home Builders’ toolbase.org onHRVs:

http://www.toolbase.org/Technology-Inventory/HVAC/energy-recovery-ventilators.

Toyotomi OM-22:

http://www.toyotomiusa.com/products/laserventedheaters/OM-22.php.

U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Star on energy-efficient lighting and appliances:

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=next_generation.ng_ee_light_app.

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase 

sustainable construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in 

partnership with the Office of Native American Programs. 

Some photos courtesy of the Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC). 

Produced May 2013

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-3

Appendix C-3: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Addressing Housing and Financial Need Through 

Sustainable Housing Improvements

Mississippi Band of 

Choctaw Indians

“The goal is to help every family achieve the American dream 

of owning their own home and driving their own destiny.”

 -Eric Willis, Executive Director, Choctaw Housing Authority
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Planning Process 5

Goals 6

Certification	 	 	 	 7

Project Summary 8

Climate Adaptations 9

Resident Education 9

Best Practices 10

Accomplishments/Awards 10

Next Steps 11

How To Get Started 12

Funding

 Number of Homes Funding Sources (2009-2012)

11 single family 

houses (SFHs)

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) Native American 

Housing Assistance and Self Determination 

Act (NAHASDA)

32 SFHs HUD NAHASDA

8 SFHs HUD American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act (ARRA)

1 SFH HUD NAHASDA 

10 SFHs HUD NAHASDA

12 SFHs HUD NAHASDA

8 duplex units HUD ARRA

Map

Problem

A substantial waiting list of tribal 

members reporting housing issues, 

including prohibitively high utility 

costs, which directly affect their ability 

to make housing payments and meet 

other expenses.

Solution

Creating new, energy-efficient 

homes featuring structural insulated 

panels (SIPs) and other sustainable 

components proven to reduce utility costs.

Community Snapshot

Location: Throughout east-central 

Mississippi, 8 communities in 10 

counties

Location type: Rural

Population: Approximately 10,000 tribal 

members

Climate: Warm-to-hot summers (average 

91 °F) with high humidity and 

mild winters (average 41 °F). 

High tornado activity (Köppen 

classification: Cfb)

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

• SIPs for walls and roof.

• Low-emissivity (low-e) windows and

glass in doors.

• Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs).

• Energy Star qualified/EnergyRight

Platinum certified.

• High-efficiency heating, ventilation,

and air-conditioning (HVAC)

• Energy Star appliances.
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

The Choctaw Housing Authority (CHA) 

seeks to provide affordable, accessible, 

and sustainable housing for all of its tribal 

members. Unfortunately, many Mississippi 

Band of Choctaw Indian (MBCI) families 

live in overcrowded, drafty, uncomfortable, 

and sometimes unhealthy houses. The 

CHA waiting list currently has 500 

Choctaw families waiting for new homes. 

The families’ current homes often also 

have inefficient energy systems or aging

windows and doors, resulting in high utility 

costs that some families struggle to pay. 

Some communities place the pressing need 

for more housing in opposition to the need for better quality and durable housing. MBCI was not willing 

to make this tradeoff; they are working to meet both goals. The CHA built 82 new, energy-efficient homes

throughout its eight communities during the course of 3 years. At the same time, to encourage support 

for the new housing and its sustainable materials, the CHA implemented educational events—first, to let

community members know about the benefits of energy-efficient housing and, second, to educate residents

in the appropriate operation and maintenance of their new homes. 

The CHA recently completed its fourth subdivision 

of new housing featuring structural insulated panel 

(SIP) walls and roofs. Although most of the houses 

are single family, these recent new homes include 

eight duplexes, which are designed to meet the 

needs of tribal members who are elderly, disabled, 

or veterans. All the homes are also equipped 

with low-emissivity (low-e) windows and doors; 

compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) lighting; highefficiency heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning

(HVAC); and Energy Star appliances. Tribal 

members report reducing their monthly heating 

costs from approximately $350 or $400 to $120.

Road construction for new subdivision
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

The following chart describes the technologies and their effect on sustainability. 

Energy Efficient 

Solutions What Is It? Effect

Structural 

insulated panels 

(SIPs)

SIPs are a building system for residential 

and light commercial construction. The 

panels are constructed like a sandwich. 

The filling is an insulating core and the

bread is two structural facings, or skins. 

Manufactured in a factory, SIPs can 

be produced to fit nearly any building

design.

A SIP building envelope provides high 

R-value in insulation and is extremely 

airtight. Department of Energy (DOE) 

studies are finding that SIPs can cut

the amount of energy used to heat 

and cool a home by 40% to 50% when 

used in conjunction with other energy 

efficiency strategies.

Low-emissivity 

(low-e) windows 

and doors

Low-e, or low thermal emissivity,

windows and low-e glass in doors have 

a coating on the glazing or glass that 

absorbs, reflects, and emits low levels of

radiant thermal (heat) energy, depending 

on the weather. 

Low-e windows typically cost about

10% to 15% more than regular 

windows, according to DOE, but they 

may reduce energy loss by as much as 

50%. The greatest savings tend to come 

from the areas with hot summers, cold 

winters, or both.

Energy-efficient 

lights

CFL (compact fluorescent lamp) bulbs

are made of glass tubes filled with gas

and a small amount of mercury (100 

times less than a glass thermometer). 

The mercury emits an invisible ultraviolet light that becomes visible when it hits 

the white coating inside the CFL bulb.

Energy Star-qualified fluorescent

lighting uses 75% less energy and lasts

up to 10 times longer than normal 

incandescent lights.

EnergyRight 

Platinum 

certified/Energy 

Star qualified

EnergyRight Platinum-certified new

homes are Energy Star qualified. They

are designed and built to standards 

above most other homes on the market 

today. Certification requires a process of

third-party inspections to meet requirements.

Like Energy Star-certified new homes,

EnergyRight Platinum-certified homes

are certified as 15% more energy

efficient than a minimum standard.

Certified homes receive financial

incentives in addition to utility cost 

savings and increased comfort.
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

5

Planning Process

Each year, the CHA holds a public 

hearing for tribal members to 

voice their opinions about MBCI 

housing needs and related issues. 

Each of MBCI’s eight communities 

has a Development Club, which 

functions similarly to a homeowners’ 

association, participating in local 

events and advocating for community 

residents. When CHA was preparing 

to begin development of these 

new SIP-built houses, it began 

an education campaign to help 

residents understand what this new 

construction material looked like and 

what it could offer. CHA provided the 

clubs with boxes of materials to use 

as visual aids to educate members 

about SIPs and other improvements. Although SIPs can cost more upfront, they can lead to significant

cost savings over time. (The SIP construction costs were under CHA’s HUD-allowed total development 

cost (TDC) requirements.) According to CHA Executive Director Eric Willis, “There was a learning curve 

regarding conservation and sustainable living. They chose SIPs because they thought they were a flexible

option that would increase the integrity of construction and save money in the long run.”

The CHA’s Board of Commissioners also includes representatives from each community. The board 

provides direct input regarding the design and construction of homes. At the end stage of the planning 

process, CHA develops a proposal that requires board approval for the design of each home. After that, 

the procurement and development processes can begin. 

4 bedroom home design

Breaking ground on a new subdivision
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Goals

CHA is seeking to balance the higher upfront costs of sustainability with the extreme need on the reservation. 

This balance has required careful planning and use of cost-effective sustainable materials. Some residents 

have reported utility costs dropping more than 50 percent. 

Housing Design and Location

As executive director, Eric Willis needs to ensure that the most 

tribal members possible can be served with the limited budget 

available under the Indian Housing Block Grant. The communitydesignated lot size, in general, is 1 acre, so raising density is 

not an option. Willis has, at times, reduced extra amenities; 

the houses do not feature carports or garages, allowing for 

more living space. The four-bedroom houses, for example, are 

approximately 1,400 to 1,500 square feet. Residents can select 

from four designs to allow for individual taste. 

To maximize CHA’s budget and resources, the first houses are constructed along the outer edge of a

subdivision to use the existing infrastructure. From year to year, new construction rotates among the eight 

communities. It may, therefore, take a little longer to complete an individual subdivision, but the new 

housing is spread among the communities. 

Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs)

SIPs can be used for outside walls, floors, roofs, and

foundations. The CHA had its houses designed to use SIPs 

for the exterior walls and roofs. (The houses are built on 

a slab foundation.)

SIPs are made of two facings, or surfaces, usually 

created from oriented strand board, on either side 

of an insulating foam core. Different facings include 

metal, fiber cement, plywood, gypsum board, and fiberreinforced concrete. The most common types of foam 

core include expandable polystyrene, polyurethane, or 

polyisocyanurate. SIPs are also very strong, which is a 

plus during severe weather, including hurricanes, and has 

assisted CHA in decreasing rodent infestation problems.

SIPs are assembled in a factory to the specifications of

the developer. Because they are constructed offsite rather 

than in the field, like a stick-built house, they benefit from

economies of scale, greater consistency of fit and performance, and better use

of resources. Because they are prefabricated, houses can be assembled more 

quickly, and potentially with a smaller crew, than a stick-built house after 

the construction team is experienced. They can cost more upfront, especially 

when a crane must be used to install large panels. 
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

7

Certification

The new energy-efficient homes have achieved Energy Star certification each year since 2010. They qualify

under a New Homes Program operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). The TVA, a corporation and 

utility company owned by the U.S. government, provides electricity for 9 million people in parts of seven 

southeastern States. The TVA New Homes 

certification has two program levels;

platinum is the higher level.

The CHA new homes met a variety of 

efficiency standards, which made them

eligible for TVA financial incentives, such

as rebates. They were independently 

verified as 15 percent more efficient than

required by the 2009 International Energy 

Conservation Code. This standard rated 

them as EnergyRight Platinum certified,

which is also Energy Star qualified.

MBCI subdivision plan

Energy Star/EnergyRight Platimun certified home
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Project Summary 

Project Name: MCBI SIPs housing

Location: Developments are in each of MBCI’s eight communities

Design/Plan Team: Has differed on each subdivision Contractors have included Hal Brumfield (architect),

 Pritchard Engineering, and Engineering Service

Timeline: First subdivision homes came online in 2010 and 

 continue coming online through the present

Project Type: Seventy-four single-family houses and eight 

 duplex units

Project Key Features

• Built incrementally as budgeting permitted.

• Slab-on-grade foundations.

• Decreased operation and maintenance costs.

• Four design styles.

• No garages or carports to maximize living space.

• All electric.

Key Sustainable Elements

• SIP walls and roofs.

• Energy Star certified/EnergyRight Platinum certified

• Low-e windows and doors.

• High-efficiency HVAC.

• Energy Star appliances.

• CFL lighting.

8

2 bedroom duplex floor plan

Slab-on-grade foundation
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Climate Adaptations

Because SIPs create a tight air seal, they require 

mechanical ventilation to ensure that indoor 

air quality remains good. High humidity in the 

local climate posed a significant challenge:

The dampers for air return must be adjusted 

specifically to bring in adequate amounts of

fresh air while consistently keeping moisture 

out of the home. CHA had special timers 

installed to monitor humidity levels.

Resident Education

Energy-efficient technologies can need specialized care

and operation to perform up to their efficiency potential.

To ensure tenants could enjoy the full benefits of their new

homes, CHA mandated classes in properly using the new 

technologies and equipment to help residents save money 

and increase comfort and quality of living.

Specifically, CHA taught tribal members how to conduct

preventative maintenance, including cleaning filters in

their air conditioners and heaters. It also included making 

seasonal preparations, such as identifying, wrapping, and covering exposed pipes to increase efficiency.

Residents learned to check that downspouts were not loose, blocked, or allowing water to pool around 

the house. The classes also included budgeting components so residents could most efficiently use the

money saved. 

The mix of a tight house, humid climate, and 

many occupants in a house can lead to specific

education needs. Over time, CHA has added 

education to help tenants understand the 

necessity of keeping all doors and windows 

closed while the air conditioner or heater is 

running, to maximize efficiency. In homes with

many occupants, it can be difficult to find a

temperature that is comfortable for everyone. 

Willis said that some residents would retreat 

into other rooms and open windows, resulting in 

both energy loss and system overcompensation. 

The SIP system creates energy efficiency with

a tight air seal; an open window can undo the 

energy savings.

Mechanical ventilation damper

Energy saving pipe insulation

Energy efficient CFL bulbs
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Best Practices

Despite the difficulty of planning for and addressing the diversity of challenges that can arise in building new

homes, CHA’s sustainable housing construction has come in within budget and on time every year. According to 

Willis, converting to SIPs and adding other energy-efficient components was easier than he had imagined, thanks

to the assistance of skilled outside contractors. He hopes eventually to be able to hire contractors and laborers 

who are tribal members as necessary skill sets develop. 

Lessons learned on one

site were brought to the 

next, and all the panels 

were built at one source, 

General Panels by Perma 

“R” Products, in Grenada, 

Mississippi, less than 100 

miles away. The ability to 

use local materials from a 

single source has allowed 

for increased consistency, 

more cost savings, and a 

smaller carbon footprint. 

Perma also helped train 

the contractors who were 

installing the panels, 

thereby reducing their 

learning curve. 

The SIPs, in conjunction with energy-efficient lighting, windows, doors, HVAC, and appliances, offer the potential

for cost savings for CHA housing residents. The educational component that CHA implemented can help make 

those cost savings a reality. Some residents have already reported that their utility bills dropped from about $350 

or $400 monthly to $120 monthly. 

Accomplishments/Awards

The TVA awarded the CHA with the All Electric Home Award in 2012 and 2013. CHA was recognized for its efforts 

in providing EnergyRight Platinum certified (under TVA’s New Homes Program) and Energy Star-qualified

housing on the reservation. “Providing energy efficient housing allows our Choctaw families to lessen their

financial burden and use those resources to elevate their standard of living,” said Tribal Chief Phyliss J. Anderson

in an MBCI press release. 

SIPs being transported.
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Next Steps

The CHA has developed energy-efficient housing with the potential to house residents cost effectively and

healthily for many years, but many families are still waiting. The CHA’s next steps are to continue to increase 

its housing stock to meet this need while continuing to qualify for Energy Star certification, which is on its

third revision; that is, CHA must consistently educate itself on the new standards and find ways to apply them.

Willis also is continuing to research the most cost-effective, energy-efficient solutions appropriate to the

regional climate. For example, he is now exploring the long-term durability and cost of metal roofing as

compared with shingles in a humid, damp climate. The CHA is also investigating the cost efficiency of sprayfoam insulation and tankless water heaters. Tankless water heaters provide hot water only as needed, thus 

using less energy than traditional storage water heaters, but they do have a higher upfront cost and require 

specialized maintenance.

Improved site planning is another area of interest. If a site can be cleared and landscaped to retain trees, 

protect waterways, and minimize habitat disturbance, residents enjoy increased privacy, water resources are 

conserved, and erosion is decreased.

Willis noted that the existing construction will be used to inform future endeavors. Each time his team 

members build a home, “They learn more and more, thereby streamlining ongoing construction and building 

better and better homes.”

For more information:

Eric Willis

Executive Director, 

Choctaw Housing Authority

Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians

101 Industrial Road

Choctaw, MS 39350

ericwillis@choctawha.com

601–656–6617
12

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about SIPs, and energy-efficient windows and lighting, check out these resources.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) on insulation, including SIPs:

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/types-insulation.

DOE on SIPs:

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/solar-decathlon-technology-spotlight-structural-insulated-panels.

DOE, Oak Ridge National Laboratory research data on SIPs with other energy-efficient technologies:

http://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/Files/Pub10081.pdf and http://www.sips.org/wp-content/

uploads/2011/01/ORNL-2600.pdf.

DOE on energy efficiency in windows:

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/window-types.

DOE on efficient lighting choices:

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/tips-lighting.

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase 

sustainable construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in 

partnership with the Office of Native American Programs. 

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.

Produced May 2013
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-4

Appendix C-4: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Expanding Sustainable Construction with In-House 

SIPS Manufacturing

Muscogee (Creek)

Nation

“The Tribe is at a turning point where we will really start to see 

energy savings. The new administration is ready to jump on 

board with next steps. Then we can put the money we’ve saved 

into other programs to serve our Tribe and keep improving 

housing.” 

 - James Williams, Senior Environmental Specialist, Muscogee (Creek) Nation
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

OKMULGEE

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

The Pilot Program 5

Housing for Elderly Residents 5

Economic Development 6

Project Summary 8

Accomplishments/Awards 9

Best Practices 9

Next Steps 10

How To Get Started 11

Funding

Projects Funding Sources

15 duplex units

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 

and U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD) American 

Recovery ad Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

Purchase of 

geothermal rig DOE ARRA

Map

Problem

Improve quality of life for residents and 

save energy by testing cost effectiveness 

and difficulty of implementing green 

technologies.

Solution

The success of a 2008 demonstration 

project has led to wider incorporation 

of sustainable construction practices 

and enhanced in-house economic 

development capacity. 

Community Snapshot

Location: Approximately 40 miles south of 

Tulsa, in Okmulgee, Oklahoma; 

tribal members live throughout 

11 counties.

Location type: Rural

Population: More than 70,000 enrolled 

members

Climate: Okmulgee County temperatures 

range from an average daytime 

high of 93OF in July and August 

to an average low of 25OF in 

January (Köppen classification: 

Cfb).

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

• Structural insulated panels (SIPs)

• Geothermal systems

• Energy-efficient triple-paned windows

• High-efficiency water heaters

• Light-emitting diode (LED) lighting

• Energy Star appliances
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

In 2007, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation (MCN) 

began planning its entry into the world 

of sustainable construction. The Housing 

Division developed a pilot program home 

in 2008, with “the goal of incorporating as 

many green technologies as possible,” as 

MCN Senior Environmental Specialist James 

Williams stated. The single-family house 

was built with technologies including a 

geothermal heat pump and cooling system, 

a heat recovery ventilator (HRV) to supply 

fresh air, cellulose insulation, a radiant heat 

block, high-efficiency water heater, and 

compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). The Tribe 

compared the energy costs of the pilot program house to those of conventionally built houses. Utility costs 

on the pilot program house were under half of the utility costs of the conventionally built houses: $1,403 

compared to $2,875 per year. Green homes do cost more to build, Williams said, “The extra expenses have 

been recuperated in 3-4 years.” The homeowner, he added, was very happy with his lower utility bills. 

With the positive pilot program experience under its belt, MCN added additional sustainable technologies 

to its tool kit. The Tribe completed Phase II of an existing elderly housing development in 2012. The new 

construction added 15 green duplex units 

to the 24 originally built. The technologies 

used included structural insulated panels 

(SIPs), geothermal heating and cooling 

systems, high-efficiency water heaters, 

triple-pane custom windows, Energy Star 

appliances, and light-emitting diode (LED) 

lighting. The technologies have worked 

well. Brent Coleman, assistant construction 

manager, said, “We think the houses are 

even tighter than we expected.” 

The tribe has also been building alternative 

replacement housing with SIPs because it is 

affordable and quick to construct. 

The installation of SIPs and of geothermal systems are not simply newly acquired construction skills sets 

for MCN work crews. The techologies are also potential economic opportunities because all SIPs used on the 

elderly housing development and the replacement housing were manufactured in a SIP plant operated by 

MCN – a unique situation that offered significant cost savings. MCN has also purchased a geothermal rig of 

its own and is digging geothermal wells. 

Phase II construction of SIPs roof
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

The following chart describes the technologies and their effect on sustainability. 

Sustainable 

Technologies What Is It? Effect

Structural insulated 

panels (SIPs)

SIPs are a high-performance building system for 

residential and light commercial construction. 

The panels consist of an insulating foam core 

sandwiched between two structural facings, such as 

oriented strand board (OSB). SIPs are manufactured 

under factory-controlled conditions and can be 

fabricated to fit nearly any building design.

A SIP building envelope provides high 

levels of insulation and is extremely 

airtight, so that the amount of energy used 

to heat and cool a home can be cut by 

one-half.

High-efficiency 

water heaters

High-efficiency water heater technology includes 

tank water heaters, tankless water heaters, and heat 

pump water heaters, and solar water heaters. The 

water heaters used here are run off the geothermal 

system. 

Energy Star notes that heating water 

accounts for approximately 15% of a 

home’s energy use. High efficiency water 

heaters use 10% to 50% less energy than 

standard models.

Geothermal 

systems

A geothermal or ground source heat pump system 

transfers heat stored in the earth and pumps it into 

the indoor air delivery system in the winter. In the 

summer, the ground acts as a heat sink, and the heat 

is transferred from the interior through the heat 

exchanger back to the ground. The system relies 

on the ground beneath the surface being warmer 

than the air above it in the winter and cooler in the 

summer.

The energy produced by geothermal 

systems is naturally concentrated, 

existing heat that is clean and sustainable. 

Although costly to install, geothermal 

systems have low operating and 

maintenance costs. According to the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE), system life 

is estimated at 25 years for the inside 

components and 50+ years for the ground 

loop.

High-efficiency 

windows

Windows can be a weak spots in a home’s thermal 

envelope. Energy efficiency in windows depends 

on types of glass or glazing, such as low-thermal 

emissivity (low-e) or gas fill; frame material, and, 

once installed, weatherstripping and caulking. 

According to the DOE, leaky windows 

can account for 10% to25% of a home 

heating bill. Installing high-performance 

windows will improve a home’s energy 

performance—but may take a number of 

years to pay off in energy savings.

Energy Star

appliances

Energy Star appliances are independently certified 

through a program of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency and the DOE.

Energy Star products save money and 

protect the environment. For example, 

replacing a 1980s model refrigerator with 

an Energy Star version could save $100 

a year in total energy costs. Replacing 

a clothes washer could save as much as 

$110 a year.
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

5

The Pilot Program

The pilot program, Take Control & Save, was inspired by the Housing 

Director and council members passing green building codes to reduce 

consumption and energy costs. MCN partnered with the East Central 

Electric Cooperative on the program.

MCN constructed a 1,900-square foot single-family house for a family of 

five. It was wood-framed, but included a construction method known as 

California Corners. This advanced framing technique allows for additional 

insulation through caulking and placement of the drywall backer stud. 

The house also used TechShield© roof decking, a radiant barrier that keeps the attic cool. The Tribe also 

added in wet- and loose-blown cellulose insulation, a Marathon water heater, CFLs, a Bosch ground source 

heat pump and cooling system and a HRV to maintain indoor air quality within the tightly built unit. The 

foundation was an insulated concrete slab.

Comparison of 12-months of utility data between the all-electric (except for a propane-fueled stove) pilot 

house and a conventionally built unit of the same size (with propane heat, water heat, and stove, but only 

two occupants) showed average monthly savings of $123 a month. Annually savings were $1,472. After the 

pilot program success, Williams said that the Tribe realized, “We can do this!” 

Housing for Elderly Residents

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD) American Recovery ad Reinvestment 

Act (ARRA) funds provided MCN with an opportunity to expand their 

energy-efficiency activities significantly. An award of $5 million from 

HUD funded infrastructure, roads, and construction of the Phase 2 

Elderly Housing project, while part of $2 million from DOE paid for 

geothermal drilling equipment and training. (The DOE funds also 

funded a geothermal conversion for the College of the Muscogee Nation, 

a recycling center, and tribal building energy audits.) 

SIPs construction required training for the contractors and subcontractors, although Coleman said, “The 

learning curve wasn’t steep. They were already familiar with construction using wood.” The speed of the 

new construction process inspired the construction teams. At approximately 2,800 square feet, the duplex 

buildings have SIP walls and roofs and geothermal heating and cooling systems with two wells per duplex. 

The high-efficiency water heaters operate off the geothermal system. The triple-pane windows were 

specially designed by a factory. The units also feature Energy Star appliances, LED lighting, a pond and 

walking trails. 

The all-electric units have monthly utility bills of approximately $45-55, Williams said, compared with $120 

in the older units. According to Coleman, “I understood it was going to be energy efficient, I just didn’t realize 

how much. The feedback has been better than expected.”

SIPs are also a key component in the no-frills alternative single-family houses that the Housing Division is 

providing elderly residents whose houses are deemed substandard. The new homes, about 1,000 square feet, 

are positioned next to the old home and the old home is demolished. Williams said, “We put sod out front and 

it looks really nice.” 

Workers installing SIP walls
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Economic Development Opportunities

It is too soon to know if the MCN’s investments in the green collar industry will provide economic development 

opportunities that will spread beyond the tribe’s own projects. In the meantime, providing jobs for some tribal 

members in emerging construction and energy industries is an accomplishment worth celebrating. 

In-House SIPs Plant

The idea for the SIPs manufacturing plant grew out 

of the Tribe’s effort to build affordable homes that 

are easy and economical to heat and cool. The elderly 

housing addition was the first project for the plant. The 

13,000-square-foot plant provided all 1,700 wall, roof, 

and ceiling panels for the 15 duplexes during 2011. 

To test the accuracy of their early work, pieces of the 

duplex were cut out, then fit together to make sure 

measurements and cuts were correct. “It was like fitting 

together a puzzle,” Williams remembered.

The plant included a demonstration house built with SIP 

walls, floor, ceiling, and roof for visitors to walk through 

and see the inner workings of a SIP-constructed house. 

The demo house is being brought online for a family. It has been moved to a building site and currently 

under construction.

With six employees, the plant has current capability 

to provide panels for a house a day. The plant made 

panels for the duplex project in approximately a month. 

Williams said, however, that the demand was not yet 

there. A more realistic number at this time might be 

12-15 houses. “It’s a learning process,” he added. 

Current plans are to focus on providing panels for MCN 

Housing Division new construction and rehabilitation, 

and to develop marketing materials to expand into other 

communities. The plant has been supplying the panels 

for the alternative houses. Located in Wetumka, the 

southern region of the MCN, the plant also owns trucks for panel delivery. 

Completed SIPs ready to ship on-site

SIPs manufacturing plant worker finishing panels
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

7

Geothermal Drilling Equipment

The geothermal drilling rig equipment 

was purchased in late 2010. The 

construction team received training in 

2011, but gaining experience with the 

rig has been challenging. Well-drilling 

on the elderly housing development was 

slowed by the team’s lack of experience. 

The construction team was forced to 

contract out some of the work. Ultimately 

everyone worked well together. According 

to Williams, “We have a great team at 

MCN.” He added, “The drillers are getting 

used to the rig now. We are building tribal 

capacity as the guys are getting the hang 

of it.” MCN workers being trained on the geothermal drilling rig

Close-up of drill in progress

Workers using geothermal drilling rig
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Project Summary 

Project Name: Elderly Housing Addition 

LOCATION: Okmulgee, Oklahoma 

Timeline: 2011 through summer 2012 

Project Type: 15 duplex units

Project Key Features

• Affordability. 

• ADA-compliant (one-half of units).

• Brick veneer.

• Tornado safe rooms.

• In-unit laundry.

Key Sustainable Elements

• SIPs.

• Geothermal heating and cooling system.

• Triple-paned windows.

• Energy-efficient water heater run off geothermal.

• LED lighting.

• Energy-efficient appliances.

• Pond and walking trails.

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Demonstration 

house built.

Infrastructure 

and roads 

built. 

Geothermal 

rig equipment 

ordered.

Drilling 

training 

began.

All 

duplexes 

framed and 

roofed.

Well 

drilling in 

duplexes 

began.

Thirty 

geothermal 

wells dug. 

ARRA funds 

from HUD 

awarded.

Panel 

construction 

began.

Duplexes 

completed.

Demonstration 

house 

renovated.

2013

Energy-efficient washing machine

Geothermal system installation

Completed duplex unit
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

9

Accomplishments/Awards

The MCN Housing Division recently received a rebate check 

for $40,000 from the East Central Electric Cooperative 

high-efficiency rebate program for the Tribe’s use of highefficiency energy technology at the newly constructed 

elderly housing addition. 

The project was also nominated for a 

Henry Bellmon sustainability award 

(www.bellmonawards.com).

Best Practices

MCN has developed a housing model that is employing tribal members at the same time it keeps residents 

comfortable and saves on costs. Summer in Oklahoma is hot. Williams noted, “Last summer, I was visiting with 

a lady and a gentleman in one of the SIP homes. They were surprised how hot it was outside because they had 

not needed to turn their air conditioner on yet. The homes naturally keep cool in the summer and warm in 

winter. We have gotten good feedback on the elderly homes.”

MCN Chief Tiger accepts rebate check

Caulk is used to improve the homes air tightness

A crane is used to assist workers install SIPs
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Next Steps

Coleman says, “Tribal administration has great leadership who has been very positive and forward-thinking.” 

The Tribe hopes to use the money saved from its new sustainable units for future projects. It is also exploring 

marketing SIPs panels to other tribes. Because the Tribe already owns trucks and trailers, it is additionally 

equipped for delivering the materials it manufactures. 

A team from the Sustainable Construction in Indian Country (SCinIC) initiative visited MCN in April 2013 to 

conduct blower door testing on five stick-built and SIP-built houses to test air tightness. One of the SIP houses 

tested was under construction; however, the two completed SIPs houses were 36 to 49 percent tighter than 

the stick-built houses.

The report also noted that additional opportunities for air sealing were still available, which would require 

minor additional effort. Unsealed wall penetrations and receptacles that were not caulked left open holes 

in the SIPs where energy was escaping. For example, dryer vent and electrical service penetrations through 

the SIPs are not being sealed before the brick veneer is installed. The report also estimated that additional 

construction cost savings improvement and utility savings would be possible if the thermal boundary between 

the attic or roof and SIPs were clearly defined. When that boundary is not well defined, the SIPs used in the 

roof or attic area are not effective at reducing energy consumption.

The report recognized MCN’s willingness to “try new construction techniques and install high-end geothermal 

heating and cooling systems” and praised it for a “a very motivated staff with a keen desire to provide tribal 

residents with energy-efficient and well ventilated homes.”

For more information:

James Williams

Senior Environmental Specialist

Muscogee (Creek) Nation 

Environmental Services

P.O. Box 580

Okmulgee, OK. 74447

918-549-2580

jquestme2001@yahoo.com
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about the energy-efficiency strategies highlighted above, check out these resources:

EPA Energy Star Program: 

http://www.energystar.gov/

DOE on selecting windows for energy efficiency:

http://windows.lbl.gov/pub/selectingwindows/window.pdf

DOE on SIPs: 

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/solar-decathlon-technology-spotlight-structural-insulated-panels 

DOE on geothermal systems: 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/heatpumps.html

Energy Star on high-efficiency water heaters:

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/new_homes/features/WaterHtrs_062906.pdf 

Muscogee (Creek) Nation Housing Division Web site:

http://creeknationhousing.org/

SCinIC technical assistance report on Muscogee (Creek) Nation:

http://www.huduser.org/portal/scinic/home.html

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase 

sustainable construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in 

partnership with the Office of Native American Programs.

Produced June 2013

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-5

Appendix C-5: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Providing Affordable, Accessible, and 

Sustainable Housing

Nez Perce Tribe

“The Housing Authority is going very green, beyond LEED in a 

lot of ways. The Nez Perce are pursuing a green expansion of 

a community, not a green subdivision, but a sustainable and 

culturally appropriate village expansion.” 

 - Nathaniel Corum, architect and straw-bale construction specialist 
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

LAPWAI

OROFINO

MONTANA

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Design Process 5

Community Involvement 5

Goals 6

(Pre)Construction Challenges 8

Certification	 	 	 8

Project Summary 9

Best Practices 10

Next Steps 11

How To Get Started 12

Funding

 Activity Funding Sources

Infrastructure Nez Perce Tribe

Duplex construction

U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development Native American 

Housing and Self Determination Act, 

Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and 

volunteer labor

Map

Problem

Providing affordable, accessible, and 

healthy housing for low-income families.

Solution

Constructing low-income duplexes with 

lower maintenance and utility costs; and 

making units accessible so residents can 

remain in their units as they age.

Community Snapshot

Location: Tribal lands in parts of four 

northern Idaho counties 

(part of the Lewiston, ID-WA 

Metropolitan Statistical Area), 

which includes the largest 

community—the city of Orofino,

near the northeast corner of the

reservation.

Location type: rural/agricultural

Population: 17,959 reservation residents, 

as of the 2000 Census. 

Climate: Orofino’s low elevation and

northwestern location give it one 

of warmest climates in Idaho 

in the summer (average high of 

86 oF) and one of the mildest in 

winters (average high of 43 oF) 

(Köppen classification Cfb).

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

•	 Straw-bale construction. 

•	 Structural insulated panels (SIPs). 

•	 Low-impact site management and 

landscaping.

•	 Double-pane low-emissivity (low-e) 

windows.

•	 Ductless heat pumps.

•	 Heat-pump water heaters.

•	 Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs).

•	 Energy Star appliances.

•	 Use of nontoxic materials.

•	 Shed-style roof maximizes potential 

for solar panels.
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

The Nez Perce Tribe is developing 

healthy, sustainable housing. Its 

current project, nine duplexes with 

17 two-bedroom units and 1 threebedroom unit, is designed for lowincome families. This project, however, 

is also bringing the Nez Perce Tribal 

Housing Authority (NPTHA) new 

experiences in terms of sustainability, 

construction materials and techniques, 

incorporation of cultural features, and 

funding sources.

The primary sustainable technology is a nonload-bearing straw-bale construction in conjunction with 

structural insulated panels (SIPs). Each unit will also include a ductless heat pump system and heat pump 

water heaters. Laurie Ann Cloud, Executive Director of the NPTHA, said the design would “most definitely”

reduce utility costs. “It is a high priority to reduce the operating cost of units. The heat pump is designed 

to do this. It sounds almost too good to be true.” Units will have Energy Star appliances, energy-efficient

lighting, and low-flow plumbing fixtures.

Although the duplexes are family units, 

they will be handicapped accessible. This 

will allow for more options for families 

with a disabled family member or make 

it so that residents will not have to move 

out of their housing because their physical 

abilities change over time.

Cultural design features that are 

interwoven into the design include housing 

clusters, a common area, and an eastern 

entry orientation consistent with Nez 

Perce culture. The housing is modern, but 

the carport roof and shed-style roofs are 

designed to call to mind the Nez Perce 

traditional teepees’ extended shade structure. The carport has multiple purposes: it serves as an outside

room and a protective parking space. 

The shed-style roofs, with south-facing orientation, are designed to be solar ready, allowing for the houses at 

some point to become even more energy efficient.

The site includes a planned community garden, playground, and a walking path leading along the creek to 

the sweat lodge. The site is designed to allow the community to grow and meet housing needs while also 

preserving the agricultural and rural setting. NPTHA has worked with the adjacent farmers to ensure that 

their alfalfa crop and subsequent grazing and the housing can co-exist. 
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

The following chart describes the technologies and their effect on sustainability. 

Sustainable 

Technologies What Is It? Effect

Straw-bale 

construction

A building method that uses bales of straw as 

structural elements, building insulation, or 

both. This method is commonly used in natural 

building or “brown” construction projects.

Advantages of straw-bale construction 

over conventional building systems include 

renewability, cost, availability, natural fireretardant qualities, and high insulation value.

Structured insulated 

panels (SIPs)

SIPs are a building system for residential and 

light commercial construction. The panels are 

constructed like a sandwich. The filling is an

insulating core and the bread is two structural 

facings, or skins. Manufactured in a factory, SIPs 

can be produced to fit nearly any building design.

A SIPs building envelope provides high R-value 

in insulation and an extremely airtight space. 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) studies are 

finding that SIPs can cut the amount of energy

used to heat and cool a home by 40% to 50% 

when used in conjunction with other energyefficiency strategies.

Double pane 

low-e windows

Low-e, or low thermal emissivity, windows 

and low-e glass in doors have a coating on the 

glazing or glass that absorbs, reflects, and emits

low levels of radiant thermal (heat) energy, 

depending on the weather.

Low-e windows typically cost about 10% to 

15% more than regular windows, according 

to DOE, but they may reduce energy loss by as 

much as 50%. The greatest savings tend to come 

from areas with hot summers, cold winters, or 

both.

Ductless heat 

pump system

Ductless heat pumps are also called “mini-split”

heat pumps. They operate on the same principle 

as traditional heat pumps, using electricity to 

move heat between outdoor and indoor air 

by compressing and expanding a refrigerant, 

although without a duct system.

Because they deliver heated or cooled air 

directly to the room, ductless heat pumps 

avoid efficiency loss associated with ductwork.

According to the DOE, duct loss can account 

for more than 30% of energy consumption for 

space conditioning.

Energy-efficient 

lighting

CFL (compact fluorescent lamp) bulbs are

made of glass tubes filled with gas and a small

amount of mercury (100 times less than a glass 

thermometer). The mercury emits an invisible 

ultraviolet light that becomes visible when it hits 

the white coating inside the CFL bulb.

Energy Star-qualified fluorescent lighting uses

75% less energy and lasts up to 10 times longer 

than normal incandescent lights.

Energy Star

appliances

Energy Star appliances are independently 

certified through a program of the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency and the DOE. 

It identifies high quality energy efficient

products.

The products save money and protect the 

environment. For example, replacing a 1980s 

model refrigerator with an Energy Star version 

could save $100 a year in total energy costs. 

Replacing a clothes washer could save as much 

as $110 a year.
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

5

Design Process

Although NPTHA had previously built with SIPs, the 

Housing Authority was interested in exploring other 

green technologies and materials. At the same time, it was 

apprehensive about the cost of adding more sustainable 

technologies. When several NPTHA Board members visited 

the Coeur d’Alene Housing Authority’s new multifamily

straw-bale project, they became excited to explore this 

technology for their own tribe. Would it be too difficult

to build without previous experience? How much energy 

might it save? A Sustainable Construction in Indian Country 

(SCinIC) team developed an energy modeling report, which compared different technologies for construction 

and heating/cooling, including straw bale. “Having access to modeling data and being able to compare 

options for cost-effectiveness and utility savings played a big role in the decision to go with straw bale,”

SCinIC team member architect Daniel Glenn said. 

NPTHA had already engaged a local architect, Jerry Brotnov, for a stick-frame, SIPs design, but then NPTHA 

decided to move ahead on a duplex housing straw-bale project. The SCinIC initiative was able to provide the 

local architect with technical assistance support from Nathaniel Corum, an architect with straw-bale and 

sustainable design and construction experience in collaboration with Native American communities. The 

new technology, however, also interested Brotnov, who pursued further education in straw-bale construction. 

NPTHA originally planned on building on uninsulated crawl spaces, but these were not very compatible 

with straw-bale construction and the SCinIC energy modeling study indicated that the homes would lose 

significant energy through the floor. Plans now include an insulated slab on grade, which is easier to build

and less expensive than crawl spaces in straw-bale construction. To address elders’ concerns about walking

on concrete, the insulated slab will include subflooring to provide “give” so the floor is softer.

To lower water consumption and increase drought resistance, the project will include a drip system, with 

drip irrigation for the rain gardens. NPTHA has brought on-board a landscape architect to realize a number 

of plans for additional low-impact site management and sustainability.

Community Involvement

Getting input from community members is a common challenge for housing authorities. Executive Director 

Cloud capitalized on planned events. She said, “What was nice is that we got some elders to come in... this 

year the Tribe and the city of Lapwai had a community review. I participated in it and it opened my ears to 

community observations and I brought that into my own planning process.”

Cloud further said that the project “meets the needs of the community. Most tribal members will agree.” One

important issue was that the units fit with other housing in the community: “It is a set-alone project but it

still will be comparable to local styles so it won’t stand out in a bad way,” she said. It is “right size” housing,

Cloud added, in which the size and number of bedrooms meet local need. The units are affordable, and in a 

good location.

Corum noted that NPTHA has a waiting list and two- and three-bedroom units for low-income families are a 

great need. The new project “will take a huge chunk out of their waiting list.”

Coeur d’Alene straw-bale project 
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Goals

NPTHA incorporated technologies and materials that will allow them to achieve tribal community goals:

create affordable, accessible, sustainable, and culturally relevant housing. 

Straw bale

Corum said, “Straw can be harvested 

several times a year. Local straw wheat 

bales are a non-toxic renewable resource 

that provides amazing insulation value. 

If built well, straw-bale construction 

is superior to wood construction in 

several ways.” NPTHA is procuring straw

from local farmers, increasing project 

affordability.

Straw-bale construction in this project 

is nonload bearing. The load bearing 

structure is timber framed, with SIPs 

above 8 feet. The straw bales, which 

function as insulation, fit into the

supporting structure. The 24-inchwide walls are estimated to have a high 

(thermal resistance) R-value of 40.

In addition to their insulating value, straw-bale buildings are fire and mold resistant after they are coated

with plaster. Mice are not likely to nest in straw bale houses, and the houses are not prone to insect 

infestation. 

Example of straw-bale construction (not at Nez Perce Tribe). 
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

7

Accessibility

The units are singlelevel and compliant with 

Americans with Disabilities 

Act requirements so 

residents can remain in their 

units as they age. Cloud described the units 

as having “visitability” with their wider

doorways and halls, as well as graduating 

sidewalks that allow for wheelchair 

entry. One unit may be fully handicapped 

accessible with lowered countertops and 

higher toilets. 

Cultural elements

The design plan consists of nine buildings in three circular encampments. The units are laid out in cul-desacs that emulate villages with a center common area. The doorways are oriented to face east, which is 

an important expression of Nez Perce culture. Secondary vestibules on the houses allow all doorways to 

appear to face east in this circular design. They serve a sustainable function as well, keeping wind and other 

elements out of the house. The duplexes have a cathedral ceiling and slanted roof shed, as does the carport, 

a design that echoes a teepee’s shade structure. Some say the straw-bale could even be said to recall tule

mats used to construct another of the Nez Perce tribe’s traditional houses, and basket patterns are being

cut into a panel above the straw-bale wall.

Single-level ADA compliant floor plan.

Architect’s rendition of the project showing the nine duplex units in three circular encampments
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

(Pre)Construction Challenges

Although construction has not yet 

begun on the project, construction 

challenges begin in the planning 

stages. From the beginning, NPTHA 

has been concerned about who 

would construct the development 

because NPTHA does not have 

that skill set readily available. But 

inspired by experiences of other 

tribes, including the Puyallup 

Nation Housing Authority, at 

building tribal capacity in new 

technologies, NPTHA is planning to 

use force account labor. This means 

a construction manager, either inhouse or with straw-bale experience, 

will hire and manage a construction team composed of tribal members with support of experts in straw-bale 

construction. 

Several challenges have delayed construction. Initial discussions of the project site did not indicate that 

the site had cultural significance, but the environmental review revealed cultural concerns. NPTHA tabled

infrastructure and water construction plans, and bid solicitations while the Tribe considered conducting a 

full archeological survey. Testing cleared the immediate housing site, but culturally sensitive areas along the 

perimeter will cause some changes to infrastructure placement and may require additional testing. 

Glenn said, “Funding was certainly a challenge.” The construction method, design elements, and other

sustainable additions added to the budget that NPTHA had set aside. Obtaining additional funds was more 

difficult and time intensive than anticipated, which delayed construction. NPTHA worked with a consultant to

apply for low-income housing tax credits, which were awarded in December 2012. Ironing out the budget is a 

struggle since NPTHA and their team are estimating costs for a construction process with which they are not 

familiar. Cloud, however, pointed out an upside to the delay: “The good thing is it bought us time to investigate

the green and sustainable activities that we are going to use.”

Certification

NPTHA plans to follow Enterprise Green Communities certification, which has base standards and

opportunities for additional points for exceeding those standards. The Nez Perce project needs at least 35 

points to become certified as a Green Community. NPTHA added certification into its plans to gain additional

points on its LIHTC application. It selected Enterprise Green Communities standards because these were more 

affordable than some other certification processes. As one part of meeting Enterprise Green Communities

standards, NPTHA plans to develop a green maintenance/operations manual that includes a training 

component. 

Pre-construction image of the development site
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Project Summary 

Project: Straw-bale Duplexes 

Location: Lapwai, Idaho 

DESIGN/PLAN TEAM: Jerry Brotnov (architect of record), Daniel Glenn (consulting design architect/green 

building consultant), Nathaniel Corum (consulting design and straw-bale architect), 

Ecotope (consulting design engineer) Brian McCormack (landscape architect), and Ken 

McCown (consulting landscape architect)

Timeline: 2011 through fall 2014 

Project Type: Nine duplex units

Project Key Features

• Affordability.

• Accessibility.

• Healthy, non-toxic home.

• Orientation and design incorporates cultural traditions.

• Cathedral ceiling maximizes light.

• Insulated slab on grade foundations.

Key Sustainable Elements

• Straw-bale construction.

• Super-insulated envelope with local materials and SIPs.

• Double-glazed low-e windows.

• Ductless heat pumps.

• Heat-pump water heaters.

• CFL lighting.

• Energy-efficient appliances.

• Low-flow water fixtures.

• Walking trail and community garden.

• Low-impact site management.

• Conservation subdivision.

9

2011 2012 2013

Duplex 

planning 

begins.

Straw bale 

technology 

selected.

LIHTC 

application 

made.

Cultural 

resources 

survey 

conducted.

Preliminary 

award of 

LIHTC made.

Cultural resources 

cleared housing 

area for 

construction.

Infrastructure 

construction 

anticipated. 

Visit to 

Coeur d’ Alene 

straw bale 

project.

Community 

green charrette 

held.

Duplex 

construction 

to begin.

Ductless heat pump
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Best Practices

The NPTHA duplex project combines best 

practices in land management; sustainable 

and appropriate technologies and materials, 

and culturally relevant features. Superinsulated duplexes built with straw-bales 

and SIPs are both energy efficient and

durable. These construction techniques will 

save on utility and operational costs. 

NPTHA is using local materials including 

straw and building healthy, toxin-free 

homes to last for future generations. Corum 

said using natural, nontoxic materials “is the 

modern version of the Tribe’s responsibility

to their future generations. It fits the Tribe’s

definition of sustainability. It also meets

community imperatives: residents can walk

to facilities, and it is respectful of a nearby 

spring and adjacent ceremonial area.”

The Tribe seeks to integrate the site with nature and agriculture. This conservation subdivision will retain 

existing landscape and respect adjacent wetlands while the neighboring farm will continue operation. The 

project includes native plants, a trail leading down to the stream near the site and to the community sweat lodge, 

a playground, and a community garden. Culturally relevant design features emphasize the continuity of the Nez 

Perce people on this land.

NPTHA is refining its sustainable choices

based on experience and empirical modeling 

data to be more resilient and efficient

relative to the local climate. A comparison of 

double-pane and triple-pane low-e windows 

showed that, for the Nez Perce, the triplepane windows would be more expensive 

without offering a sufficient payoff in heat

savings. Although, in the past the Tribe has 

used heat pumps with ducts, the ducts can 

contribute to energy loss. Since the planned 

units are small enough to go ductless, each 

unit will have one ductless heat pump, with 

baseboard heat in the bedrooms as backup. 

A crane lowers the SIPs roof into place (not at Nez Perce Tribe).
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Next Steps

NPTHA is fully involved in the process of getting this project off the ground. Glenn sees this project as an 

inspiring beginning: “The Nez Perce Tribal Housing Authority has demonstrated a keen interest in bringing

sustainability and cultural responsiveness to its new housing developments and an openness to exploring new 

approaches and ideas to achieve the goal of creating excellent affordable housing for tribal members.”

Solar is another technology that the Housing Authority want to try, but the current budget does not allow at 

this time. The Ecotope engineers explored passive solar heating, but determined it was not a viable option 

because there are too few solar heating days in winter. They also modeled solar water heaters for NPTHA. The 

energy modeling report showed that heat pump water heaters were less expensive and almost as efficient as

solar water heaters in this region. 

To accommodate budget limits, the duplexes are solarready. Roofs are sloped and oriented to maximize the 

potential area for solar panels. The electrical system 

and layout of the building can accommodate either 

photovoltaic or solar hot water panels at a later date.

For more information:

Laurie Ann Cloud

Executive Director

Nez Perce Tribal Housing Authority

P.O. Box 305

Lapwai, ID 83540

208-843-2229

lauriew@nezperce.org 

NPTHA project team members (left to right): Matthew Horwitz, Paul Nye, Laurie Ann Cloud, Daniel Glenn, 

Jerry Brotnov and Nathaniel Corum
12

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about Energy Star, energy-efficient windows, SIPs, CFLs, straw-bale construction, and

ductless heat pumps, check out these resources:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Energy Star program: 

http://www.energystar.gov/

EPA on energy efficient improvements, including low-e windows:

http://www.epa.gov/greenhomes/ReduceEnergy.htm

U.S. Department of Energy on SIPs: 

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/solar-decathlon-technology-spotlight-structuralinsulated-panels

EPA on CFLs:

http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/

National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) Toolbase on straw-bale construction:

http://www.toolbase.org/Techinventory/TechDetails.aspx?ContentDetailID=971&BucketID=6&Ca

tegoryID=13

NAHB Toolbase on ductless heat pumps:

http://www.toolbase.org/Techinventory/TechDetails.aspx?ContentDetailID=4016&BucketID=2&

CategoryID=42

NPTHA:

http://www.nezperce.org/official/tribalhousingauthority.htm

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase 

sustainable construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in 

partnership with the Office of Native American Programs. 

Some drawings, photos, and floor plans courtesy of Daniel Glenn, Jerry Brotnov, Nathaniel Corum, and Skip Baumhower 

Photography. Graph courtesy of Ecotope.

Produced June 2013

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-6

Appendix C-6: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Incorporating Sustainable Land and Water 

Strategies Into a Master Plan

Pokagon Band of 

Potawatomi Indians

The mission of the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians 

is “to respectfully promote and protect the culture, dignity, 

education, health, welfare and self-sufficiency of our elders, 

our youth, our families, and our future generations while 

preserving Mother Earth.” 
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Visioning 3

Master Plan Resources 4

Watershed Goals 5

Phases of Development 7

Best Practices 10

Next Steps 11

How to Get Started 12

Funding

Projects Funding Sources

Master Plan

U.S. Department of Housing & 

Urban Development (HUD) Native 

American Housing Assistance and Self 

Determination Act funds 

Édawat Phase I

HUD Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG), 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Indian 

Reservation Roads (IRR)

Édawat Phase II HUD IHBG, BIA IRR

Édawat Phase III

(community center)

HUD American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act, BIA IRR, HUD Indian 

Community Development Block Grant

Map

Problem

Developing a long-term plan that includes 

water management and conservation as 

an integral part of the overall land use and 

community planning strategy.

Solution

The Pokégnek Bodéwadmik Master Plan 

has guided the development of sustainable 

water management and conservation, 

housing, and a LEED (Leadership in Energy 

and Environmental Design) Gold certified 

community center.

Community Snapshot

Location: Communities in Dowagiac and 

Hartford, Michigan, and South 

Bend, Indiana

Location type: Rural

Climate: hot summer/cold winters 

with heavy snow (K�ppen 

classification Dfa)

Population: 4,325 enrolled tribal members

Median age: 22

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

• Community master plan based on tribal 

 mission statement

• Watershed protection including 

• Bioswales

• Cluster housing design

• Permeable pavement

• Replacement of invasive plant 

species with prairie grasses and 

indigenous vegetation
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

The largest community of the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi 

Indians is in Dowagiac, Michigan. The name “Dowagiac” comes 

from the Potawatomi description for a “place to hunt, fish, 

and forage.” Care and restoration of earth and water are at the 

center of the Band’s master plan. 

The Pokégnek Bodéwadmik Master Plan blends deeply rooted 

cultural beliefs with state-of-the-art best management practices 

(BMPs) to achieve high-performance infrastructure. (The term 

“BMP” refers to environmental management strategies that 

prevent or reduce stormwater pollution.) The infrastructure includes stormwater management and water 

conservation, roadway and walking-path surfaces, and landscaping. Part of the water management includes 

planning the location of the housing units on the site.

Here are some of the BMPs and their effect on sustainability. 

Best Management 

Practices What Is It? Effect

Bioswale

An alternative to storm sewers that uses 

natural landscaping and native plants to 

drain and move stormwater

Effective stormwater management, reduced 

landscaping maintenance, improved water 

quality, elimination of chemical and 

fertilizer use

Permeable roadway and 

walking path

Smooth surface for transportation that 

allows water to reach soil, not become 

run-off

Effective stormwater management, improved water quality, reduced pavement 

maintenance

Planting and restoration of 

native trees, wildflowers, and 

grasses

Use of plants that are native to a 

particular ecosystem to improve the 

environment

Effective stormwater management, reduced 

landscaping maintenance, increased plant 

survival, improved water quality, 

elimination of chemicals and fertilizer

Clustered housing plan

Building houses in a clustered 

pattern to follow the topographical 

contours of a building site

Minimized excavation and maximized 

open space

The Band is moving toward greater integration of sustainable technologies and renewable energy in future 

housing developments and the community as a whole. 

Visioning

In 2002 the Pokagon Band began to develop its master plan. A question guided the visioning process: What 

would a plan look like if it embodied the Pokagon mission statement:

To respectfully promote and protect the culture, dignity, education, health, welfare and self-sufficiency of our 

elders, our youth, our families, and our future generations while preserving Mother Earth. We will strive to give 

our people a better quality of life. The Band will also strive to be economically independent from federal and 

local government allowing the Band to fully exercise its sovereignty.

Dowagiac, Michigan
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

To make sure that the plan created sustainable development, the Band allowed time to gather input and 

comments from community leaders and residents, conduct assessments and reviews, and make careful decisions 

about the selection of the development firm and contractors. Objectives in the master plan and the Band’s 

development strategy are: 

• Protection and restoration of Mother Earth.

• Housing development as an investment.

• Quality, long-lasting housing and infrastructure.

• Deep green standards for future housing investments.

• Deference to and respect for tribal elders.

• Healthy lifestyles and outdoor recreation.

As a result, the master plan balances strong development 

principles with environmental sustainability. This can be 

seen most clearly from the plan’s water conservation and 

management strategies. “Édawat has been held as a national 

example of good resource planning. This resource planning 

started with a master plan that evolved from discussion of traditional tribal villages,” David Yocca, landscape 

architect for Conservation Design Forum, said.

Build support for sustainable development through:

• Ongoing education of Tribal Council members.

• Meetings and dialogue among tribal departments.

• Design charrettes to educate and hear from residents.

• Workshops and event invitations to engage Tribal Council.

• “Planning to Plan”–Former Housing Director Troy Clay.

• Keeping contractors informed.

• Training for maintenance staff on environmental systems.

• Opportunity for residents to experience first-hand how 

homes and community buildings save energy and use 

resources wisely.

Master Plan Resources

Every master plan will be different based on the community that creates it and will change over time. One 

important emphasis in this plan is the protection of water quality. Mark Parrish, Pokagon Band Director of Natural 

Resources, stated, “Land use has the greatest influence on water quality. There are certain ways to build while 

protecting our natural resources...and expanding our envelope to become more sustainable.” Planning documents 

used to help develop the Pokégnek Bodéwadmik Master Plan include:

• Dowagiac River Watershed Management Plan. 

• Southwest Michigan Planning Commission’s Green.

 Infrastructure Project. 

• St. Joseph River Watershed Management Plan.

• Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan.

• Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Design Charrette

The Band engaged in various design charrettes 

during the design and development phases. A design 

charrette is a design and planning workshop (or series 

of workshops) where project stakeholders come 

together to learn, brainstorm, discuss, and develop 

recommendations that will lead to a feasible plan. “It 

is a very exciting time to be a tribal planner,” said Jason 

Auvil, Pokagon Band Tribal Planner. “The data gathered 

during the charrettes as well as from the tribal census, 

staff will analyze the data and take it to tribal council...

By no means is this the end of this process...staff will try 

to get the best information that we can to make these 

developments reflect what tribal citizens want.”

Watershed Goals

The Pokagon Band master plan includes goals for protecting its watershed. These goals were met by using 

low impact development (LID) BMPs in their infrastructure design. According the the Environmental 

Protection Agency, “LID is an approach to land development (or re-development) that works with nature to 

manage stormwater as close to its source as possible.” LID BMPs include cluster development, minimization 

of total disturbed area, protection of natural flow pathways and of sensitive areas, and reduction of 

impervious surfaces.

Goal 1: Protect watershed hydrology and water quality 

Protecting the watershed begins with protecting the landscape’s existing natural features. The housing 

development is clustered within the existing geography. This planning strategy preserved glacial depressions 

that formed natural drainage patterns as well as sensitive areas. Bioswales are a natural alternative to 

storm sewers; they also 

infiltrate and filter water. 

Infiltration means that 

the water seeps into the 

ground.

5

Bioswale Rain garden Restored vegetation
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Streets narrowed to 18 feet wide

Interlocking permeable pavers

Clustered housing design also reduces costs because roadways are shorter and utility infrastructure is 

less. In addition, fewer trees need to be removed and less land excavated. The area kept more rural, open 

space. Constructing homes on smaller lots, with smaller footprints, also keeps more of the land’s natural 

features. Smaller lots reduce the distance to the roadway and the amount of lawn maintenance. 

Goal 2: Reduce sediment, chemicals, and thermal inputs to surface water

To protect the quality of the surface water, the 

Pokagon Band used infiltration techniques to ensure 

that this new development would not increase 

the amount of run-off. One technique is to limit 

impervious surfaces. Concrete driveways, walkways, 

and roads, and most asphalt cannot absorb water. 

Rainwater entering the soil directly is less likely to 

gather with it harmful chemicals, extra nutrients, or 

heat that may change the quality of surface water. 

Streets were designed slightly narrower using 

interlocking permeable pavers. David Yocca 

said, “Permeable pavers are not only a great 

way to provide roadway and parking, but to 

allow rainwater infiltration.” In addition to their 

environmental benefits, the street width and layout 

were designed to naturally slow traffic, which 

is important in a residential community. “The 

permeable pavers were more expensive up front...

but require no maintenance and, therefore, save on 

long-term costs,”said Troy Clay. Many of the walking 

paths in the community are also permeable, using 

aggregate and mulch.

Goal 3: Protect the public water supplies by reducing nutrients and chemicals

Public water quality is directly linked to ground 

water quality. Restoring the vegetation native to 

the area is one way to protect the water supply. 

The Pokagon Band restored portions of their 

wooded areas by removing invasive species and 

opening up the tree canopy. They enhanced the 

bioswales with prairie grasses and native plants. 

Wildflower and rain gardens limit the amount of 

turf. The native vegetation develops deep root 

structures and generates soil’s organic carbon. 

The ground can better filter the water, which 

protects water quality. These plants do not 

require irrigation systems, fertilizers, or lawn chemicals—making them less 

expensive to maintain and better for the environment.

 Native plants

Prairie grasses

6
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Phases of Development 

Energy efficiency, sustainable water use, 

landscape-sensitive planning, and the 

selection of appropriate material and 

methods of construction are current 

practices of the Pokagon Band of the 

Potawatomi Indians. The addition of 

new key and sustainable features in the 

projects demonstrates the Band’s growing 

vision of sustainable development. 

Phase 1 Phase 2

Phase 3
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Phase 1: Project Summary

Location: Pokagonek Édawat Housing Development (Dowagiac, Michigan)

Design/Plan Team: Conservation Design Forum (Master Plan/

neighborhood design), Wightman & Associates, 

Inc. (home design)

Timeline: Visioning began in 2004. Units were occupied in late 2005.

Project Type: High performance infrastructure with 20 

single-family elder units

Project Key Features

• Culture-based development.

• Integrated design--streets, sidewalks, stormwater management and 

 landscaping.

• Financial benefits.

 • Decreased operation and maintenance costs.

 • Decreased energy costs.

 • Increased real estate values.

Key Sustainable Elements

• Dense deep-rooted vegetation—aids in pollutant removal and 

 infiltration.

• Permeable pavement.

• Clustering and placement of houses in development preserves 

 topography and existing vegetation.

• Rain gardens and bioswales.

• Energy Star appliances.

PHASE 1

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Visioning 

and 

planning

began.

Requests for 

proposal 

drafted and 

distributed.

Conservation 

Design Forum 

and Wightman & Assoc. 

hired.

UIUC architecture 

students completed 

community center 

concept.

Phase 2

planning

began.

Phase 3

planning

began.

Proposals 

recieved and

review process 

began.

Plan presented 

to HUD and 

School of 

Architecture,

UIUC.
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Phase 2: Project Summary 

Location: Pokagonek Édawat Housing Development 

(Dowagiac, Michigan)

Design/Plan Team: Wightman & Associates, Inc.

Timeline: Visioning began in January 2006. Units were occupied in 

2006.

Project type: Fourteen single-family units. (High-performance 

infrastructure was already in place.)

Additional Key Sustainable Elements

• Energy-Star Certified houses

PHASE 2

2009 2010 2011 2012

Charrettes 

conducted for 

elders for

 Phase 4.

Construction 

began on 

community 

center.

Community 

center 

opened. 

Community 

Center awarded 

LEED Gold 

certication.

Phase 4 

infrastructure 

planning

began.

Charrettes 

conducted for 

additional 

villages.

Construction 

began on 34 

units planned 

for Phase 4.
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Phase 3: Project Summary 

Location: Pokagonek Édawat Housing Development 

(Dowagiac, Michigan)

Design/Plan Team: University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign 

School of Architecture, Wightman & 

Associates, Inc.

Timeline: Visioning began in 2006. Construction began in 2010. 

Building opened in 2011.

Project type: Community Center

Additional Project Key Features

• Built to LEED Gold standards.

• Decreased dependence on fossil fuels.

Additional Key Sustainable Elements

• Dedicated open space, native vegetation and landscaping, 

 preserved tree line.

• Vegetated roof and LED site lighting.

• Photovoltaic system and geothermal heat.

• Bike rack and minimized parking.

• Earth berm.

• Local, natural, and durable building materials. 

• Passive solar heat sink with roof overhang and tinted insulated glazing.

PHASE 3

Best Practices

The Band is planning a phase IV in its housing development. This will include 20 additional housing units at 

the Édawat development (half elder and half single-family units) and also housing with high performance 

infrastructure in its Hartford, Michigan, and South Bend, Indiana, locations. Planning for these new houses 

begins with best practices taken from the earlier phases of development. Troy Clay, who took part in the planning 

process from the start, says, “The community is just now realizing the community center as a resource and 

wanting more amenities.” The best practices include:

• Culture of the Pokagon people embedded in each housing development.

• Sensitivity to the landscape in the development of the built environment.

• Successful performance of the high-performance infrastructure. 

• Community center’s sustainable features, such as passive solar heat sink, insulated glazing, vegetated roof, 

 minimized parking, and earth berm.

• Walkability features within the Édawat Development.

• Good stormwater management and water quality through infiltration and filtration strategies.

• Limited housing footprint and lot size to maximize existing rural landscape.
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Next Steps

With the eventual goal of becoming a net-zero energy community which produces as much energy as it uses, 

the Band sees opportunities for continued improvement. Development of the first three projects has begun 

to expand the Band’s idea of what sustainable housing can be. In addition to housing with a small footprint 

and Energy Star certification, for example, the Pokagon Band wants to explore renewable energy, alternative 

sustainable building materials, and multifamily housing. Although already adapted to its topography, future 

housing can accomplish greater energy savings if it also can be oriented to benefit from passive solar heating 

and ventilation practices based on prevailing wind patterns. 

The original master plan called for on-site residential wastewater treatment. In the long term, this option 

may be possible if the Band takes the properties into trust. The shorter term plan, which supports Pokagon’s 

cultural emphasis on reducing and reusing, is to explore additional water reclamation and treatment 

opportunities.

Increased community building is another area of interest. Clustering housing is one strategy. The Band also 

plans to develop additional housing types to build a supportive community in which tribal members can live, 

work, and play without traveling long distances. 

For more information:

Mark Parrish

Director, Department of Natural Resources

Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians

P.O. Box 180

32142 Edwards Street

Dowagiac, MI 49047

mark.parrish@pokagonband-nsn.gov

269-782-9602

• American Institute of Architects (AIA) 

Michigan Chapter 

Design Merit Award

 • LEED Gold certification for 

 community center

• Best Practices and Innovation Award, 2005 HUD National Indian Housing Summit

• 2011 HUD Greener Homes National Summit awardee 

• Featured on Southwest Michigan Planning Commission Web site: 

http://www.swmpc.org/pokagon_band.asp

• Featured on Southeast Michigan Council on Governments, Low Impact Development Case Studies:

http://www.semcog.org/Data/lid.report.cfm?lid=132

Accomplishments/Awards
12

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about creating a master plan, implementing a water management and conservation strategy, 

or conducting a charrette, check out these resources.

Search for local State, county, or city at the Council of Governments Web site on planning organizations: 

http://narc.org/regional-councils-mpos/listing-of-cogs-and-mpos-2.html

Intergovernmental Partnership for Sustainable Communities Web site for community planning. (Also, see 

sections on Energy Efficiency and Rural Communities): 

http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov/toolsKeyResources.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for LID: 

http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/green/index.cfm

Toolbase.org low impact development BMPs:

http://www.toolbase.org/Techinventory/TechDetails.aspx?ContentDetailID=909&BucketID=6&Category

ID=11 

Landscaping with native plants: 

http://www.epa.gov/greenacres/

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service fact sheets: 

http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/news/brochures/urbanfactsheets.html

Handbook from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory on planning and charrettes: 

http://www.nrel.gov/applying_technologies/pdfs/charrettes_handbook.pdf

National Charrette Institute:

http://www.charretteinstitute.org/

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase 

sustainable construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in 

partnership with the Office of Native American Programs. 

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.

Produced October 2012
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix C-7

Appendix C-7: 

Case Study
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Incorporating Sustainability and Renewable 

Energy Into Housing for Elders

St. Regis Mohawk

Tribe

“The community is very impressed with this project. It is 

located in a relatively isolated area, so community members 

didn’t know this was going on and had never realized it was 

here. Then they went to the grand opening and were blown 

away by the neighborhood we created.”

 -Retha Herne, Executive Director of the Akwesasne Housing Authority
2

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

2

Critical Sustainable 

Technologies and Strategies

• Geothermal system for heating (and cooling 

in the training center), with in-floor radiant 

heat

• Solar domestic hot water 

• Active solar photovoltaic power generation

• Active daylighting via skylight tubes

• Insulating concrete form (ICF) construction

• Recyclable metal roofing

• Stormwater management/pollution control

• Energy Star appliances

• Light-emitting diode (LED) and compact 

fluorescent lamp (CFL) lighting

• Dual flush toilets and water 

saving plumbing fixtures

• Sustainable community

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Design Process 4

Community Involvement 5

Certification 6

Construction Challenges 6

Renewable Energy Systems 7

Insulating Concrete Forms 8

Project Summary 9

Best Practices 10

Next Steps 11

How To Get Started 12

Funding

Costs for the Sunrise Acres Phase 2 project including a 

community building, parking lot, rental office building, and 

20 units of residential housing, came in at about $5.6 million. 

Renewable energy systems and energy-efficient upgrades 

cost an additional $1.4 million. 

Source Amount

U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD)

American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

$4 million

HUD Native American 

Housing Assistance and Self 

Determination Act (NAHASDA)

$3 million

Map

Problem

Adding sustainability features and 

renewable energy into design plans for an 

affordable housing project for elderly tribal 

members when those designs are already 

partly developed.

Solution

Adopting a flexible approach to design and 

development, with attention to selecting the 

most reasonable and relevant sustainability 

elements. 

Community Snapshot

Location: In northern New York State, the 

territory of Akwesasne is divided 

internationally between Canada 

and the United States (U.S.). The 

U.S. (southern portion) of the 

reservation includes the village 

of Hogansburg and the Canadian 

(northern portion) is further 

divided by the provinces of 

Ontario and Quebec along the St. 

Lawrence River.

Location type: Rural

Population: 3,288 in the 2010 census

Climate: Cold winters (14–31 oF) and 

moderate summers (60–82 oF) 

(Köppen classification Dfb).
3

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Summary

When the Akwesasne Housing Authority (AHA) 

began Phase 2 of its Sunrise Acres expansion project, 

an additional 20 units of housing southwest of 

an existing 20-unit complex, it was interested in 

sustainability and renewable energy sources, but 

did not initially have funding to incorporate such 

features. After AHA was fully immersed in the design 

phase, new funding allowed for the additional 

components but presented a new challenge: 

modifying existing plans to integrate sustainability. 

Phase 2 was completed in the summer of 2011. 

It provides safe, affordable units for elderly tribal 

members with much lower utility costs than the Phase 1 housing. Phase 2 includes five quadplexes, a 

community and training center, a parking area, and a public pavilion on 28 acres of tribal land. Each onestory, multifamily building has its own mechanical room and is divided into four apartments. Each buildings 

is approximately 4,050 square feet. 

Utility cost data for a period of 12 months showed dramatic utility savings: approximate 50% annual cost 

savings between the Phase 1 buildings and the Phase 2 buildings—more than $4,000 per building a year. 

This is in large part due to the change from kerosene to geothermal heat.

A geothermal system provides the primary heating source (and cooling in the training center only), with 

in-floor radiant heat connected to the system by heat exchangers. The major benefit of this system is that 

it allows the AHA to move away from costly kerosene that was the primary heating fuel. The geothermal 

system uses no fuel other than electricity to run the pumps that circulate the water. The project also 

incorporates six solar photovoltaic arrays of 24 panels each, which partially supplement electricity use. 

Solar domestic hot water (DHW) systems are installed on the roofs of each quad building. 

The walls include a 6-inch insulating concrete form 

(ICF) wall system. Although the walls have standard 

insulation (an R20 value for heat transfer), the 

thermal mass of the concrete combined with in-floor 

heat maintains very stable and even heating levels. 

With well-sealed windows, this type of construction 

produces an extremely tight building without air 

infiltration. In addition to saving energy, ICF systems 

keep units more comfortably cool in the summer and 

warm in the winter.

The project not only provides safe, affordable, and attractive housing for the elderly, but it also is helping the 

Tribe move away from fossil-fuel dependence. This move is critical because green measures that reduce the 

carbon footprint—including renewable energy systems—are consistent with cultural values. 

Sunrise Acres
4

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Here are some of the technologies and their effect on sustainability. 

Sustainable 

Technologies What Is It? Effect

Geothermal

 energy system

A geothermal or ground-source heat pump 

system transfers heat stored in the earth and 

pumps it into the indoor air-delivery system 

in the winter. In the summer, the ground acts 

as a heat sink, and the heat is transferred 

from the interior through the heat exchanger 

back to the ground. The system relies on the 

ground beneath the surface being warmer in 

the winter and cooler in the summer than the 

air above it. 

The energy produced by geothermal systems 

is naturally concentrated, existing heat that 

is clean and sustainable. Although costly 

to install, geothermal systems have low 

operating and maintenance costs. According 

to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 

system life is estimated at 25 years for the 

inside components and 50+ years for the 

ground loop.

Photovoltaic (PV) array

A PV array generates power when exposed 

to the sun. It is composed of PV panels and 

modules. Energy is converted to watts and 

stored, used, or, if tied to the grid, sent back to 

the utility grid.

The Florida Solar Energy Center (University 

of Central Florida) estimates PV modules can 

last 20-30 years.

Solar domestic hot water 

(DHW)

In a passive system, the sun heats water 

in a solar tube system. Solar-heated water 

flows into a tank in the mechanical room. An 

electric tank also provides backup.

Passive DHW systems require little 

maintenance and can reduce energy costs. 

Insulating concrete form 

(ICF)

ICF is a system of formwork for concrete that 

stays in place as permanent building insulation for energy-efficient, reinforced concrete walls, floors, and roofs. The forms lock 

together similar to LEGO bricks and serve to 

create a form for the structural walls or floors 

of a building. 

ICFs provide superior insulation, high 

thermal mass, and low infiltration. They 

may raise construction costs approximately 

2 to 5 percent (according to the National 

Association of Home Builders’ Toolbase) but 

can significantly lower utility costs compared 

with wood or steel construction.

Sustainable community

The definition varies by community. A 

sustainable community is one that is 

economically, environmentally, and socially 

healthy and resilient, according to the 

Institute for Sustainable Communities.

This community is more walkable, has easily 

accessible diabetes services, and provides 

more opportunities for social interaction.

Design Process

The AHA designed the project in collaboration with architect Barry Halperin of Beardsley Design Associates. From 

the beginning, the AHA was interested in incorporating green concepts and sustainability as guiding principles, 

although it did not have funding to include these elements. AHA’s later successful American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act (ARRA) application received points for sustainable technologies, allowing for changes to the 

design plan. Specifically, the AHA was interested in high-efficiency mechanical systems. The architect suggested a 

geothermal system. The challenge of using a geothermal system is that it costs considerably more money up front 

than a traditional mechanical system. However, the Tribe was willing to invest in this sustainable feature because 

of its commitment to green building, lower utility costs, and decreased environmental impact. 
5

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

The Tribe’s commitment to sustainable construction is also 

evident in its decision to use solar photovoltaic arrays and a solar 

DHW system to provide supplemental energy sources.

The design phase included a great deal of discussion about 

incorporating culturally relevant features. Some, such as adding 

artwork that would highlight the welcoming prayer on the outside 

of each building, were not implemented. The design, however, 

does address the cultural significance of kitchens in the St. Regis 

Mohawk Tribe. Typically, kitchens in senior housing are small 

because seniors tend not to cook extensively. In Sunrise Acres, the kitchens were more generously designed to 

allow tribal members to continue to use them as family gathering places. 

Retha Herne, Executive Director of the AHA, described the housing authority’s approach to incorporating 

culturally relevant features in the design: “It can be hard to do culturally relevant features in design because 

they are expensive. Green products are another kind of cultural relevancy because we want to lessen our 

footprint on the environment.”

Community Involvement

Before Phase 2 of Sunrise Acres could be constructed, the AHA 

needed to identify the properties it would purchase for this 

project. As part of that process, AHA presented an elderly housing 

plan to the community and invited comments. 

Herne noted: “Typically we don’t get comments. But we knew 

there was a need for elderly housing because of the wait list and 

trends we had been seeing in the elderly selling larger homes and 

downsizing.”

She also noted the Tribe has received the completed project very 

positively: “The community is very impressed with this project. 

It is located in a relatively isolated area, so community members 

didn’t know this was going on and had never realized it was here. 

Then they went to the grand opening and were blown away by the neighborhood we created.” 

AHA intentionally created a neighborhood that values quiet and independence, while also encouraging 

healthy living and intergenerational activities. The “healthy” distance between quads enables residents to be 

close to their neighbors while maintaining some privacy, and the ICF construction reduces noise so that units 

are quiet. In support of the Diabetes Center for Excellence Program, housed in the training center, exterior 

LED lighting and extensive landscaping, including plants adjacent to the patios, encourage seniors to walk 

around. The project also provides space for the residents to put in a vegetable garden. As further incentive, 

Phase 2 includes a small, covered pavilion and picnic tables on the south side of the project where seniors 

can meet with their extended families. The Tribe is also planning to develop a wetlands wild bird sanctuary 

sighting area on the remaining property.

5
6

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Certification

Although the AHA consulted the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED (Leadership in Energy and 

Environmental Design) rating system checklist and used some of these concepts to guide construction, AHA 

decided ultimately not to seek LEED certification. This decision was made, in part, because of the potential 

added costs, time, and the knowledge that it would have taken to coordinate all of the necessary pieces to 

bring LEED certification into the picture.

Herne further noted that the benefits of the ARRA funding and its tight deadlines played a significant role. 

They “didn’t go the LEED route because when the funding became available, we were starting to work on 

the Sunrise expansion. We had planned to build a few units at a time, but this funding gave us the ability to 

construct the whole project at once.”

Construction Challenges

For more than 10 years, AHA has built its 

own dwellings utilizing a force account 

construction crew. This gives AHA greater 

control over quality assurance than 

contracting out to other sources. The size 

of the new Sunrise Acres project, however, 

was larger than what AHA would normally 

undertake in a year. That, combined with 

ARRA’s rigorous grant timelines, reporting, 

and rules, made contracting out a “grim 

reality,” according to Herne. AHA bid the 

job out and, with a limited number of the 

Native contractors, the AHA had to increase 

due diligence in responsibly carrying out its 

procurement policy.

Tracking the progress of the general contractor and the subcontractors was also a challenge. Some design 

features and specifications were missed and/or had to be put in place later “because we weren’t on top of 

it,” said Herne. Based on these issues, the AHA learned to pay better attention. In the future, said Herne, “We 

would have more inspectors out there on our end to ensure that all specifications are met.” 

Some tasks were difficult to coordinate on this large project. For example, one firm installed the fiber optics 

for the mechanical system, which uses a central computer to control and monitor the system across all the 

buildings, but another firm was asked to prepare the building for fiber optic Internet service. 

Overall construction was a positive experience. The general contractor did an “excellent job” and the project 

benefited from “a brainiac” inspector on staff who was also an electrician by trade, said Herne. “He knows the 

systems, knows how to troubleshoot,” she added. Given contracting challenges, design challenges, and the 

fact that the project schedule was stressed by 75 to 80 days lost to rain, it is noteworthy that AHA needed to 

extend the project by only 1 month.
7

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

PV array

Renewable Energy Systems 

The AHA hopes that installing renewable energy systems will mark a major step toward energy 

independence. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), renewable energy includes 

“resources that rely on fuel sources that restore themselves over short periods of time and do not 

diminish.” The AHA uses sun and the earth’s heat, but other renewable fuel sources include the wind, 

moving water, and organic plant and waste material (for biomass). Because renewable energy systems are 

expensive, it is important to include them early in the long-term budgeting and planning process. The AHA 

is monitoring costs and savings to determine the cost-effectiveness of their renewable fuel sources, while 

also incorporating inexpensive energy efficiency measures. 

Geothermal System

Phase 2 of the Sunrise Acres development has a closedloop geothermal system with seven wells per building 

and nine wells for the training center. The cost for 

the wells and piping was approximately $320,000. 

The cost for the control system and the radiant floor 

heating system was about $820,000. Each building has 

a mechanical room that houses a mechanical system. 

The training center has a central office for system 

operation, monitoring, maintenance, and temperature 

control. These controls are also connected to the main 

administration building, thanks to the fiber optic 

network.

Solar PV Array

The solar PV array is intended as a supplemental energy 

source to further reduce the amount of electricity that 

must be purchased from National Grid, the electric 

utility company. The project has a six-panel solar array—

one to provide supplemental energy for each building—

that can generate 5.04 kilowatts each. According to PV 

Watts Calculator, a 5.0 watt array local to the St. Regis 

Mohawk reservation (Massena, NY) is estimated 

to produce 5,814 kilowatt/hour annually, which 

could save the AHA an estimated $813.96 per 

year per building on utility bills. Over the course 

of the project’s first 14 months, the PV array 

produced approximately 20 percent of the energy 

that a new Sunrise Acres building consumes.

7

National Grid meter

Geothermal piping system
8

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Solar Domestic Hot Water

DHW is provided through a solar tube system. Each building’s mechanical room contains two tanks with 

a holding capacity of 80 gallons: one tank contains water heated by the solar system and one tank is a 

conventional electric hot water tank. Water from the solar holding tank flows into the electric tank as needed. 

This type of system can require significant space with multiple tanks, including possibly a storage tank for the 

hot water loop. Together the panels and DHW systems cost approximately $260,000.

Solar DHW on roof Solar and electric water tanks

Insulating Concrete Forms

The walls of the new Sunrise Acres quadplexes 

are built with ICFs. Instead of being poured 

into wood or metal forms, concrete for the 

walls is poured into interlocking modular 

foam forms. The forms are stacked without 

mortar and filled with concrete. The foam 

is not removed, providing a layer of thermal 

insulation that raises R-value and also 

decreases air infiltration. ICFs do require 

some specialized knowledge to install, but the 

National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) 

indicates that the learning curve is slight. 

The ICFs cost about $240,000. These upfront 

costs are also slightly higher than with woodframed walls, but increased energy efficiency 

decreases the cost differential. 

ICFs with reinforcing steel
9

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Design Charrette

The Band engaged in various design charrettes during the 

design and development phases. A design charrette is a 

design and planning workshop (or series of workshops) 

where project stakeholders come together to learn, 

brainstorm, discuss, and develop recommendations that will 

lead to a feasible plan. “It is a very exciting time to be a tribal 

planner,” said Jason Auvil, Pokagon Band Tribal Planner. 

“The data gathered during the charrettes as well as from the 

tribal census, staff will analyze the data and take it to tribal 

council...By no means is this the end of this process...staff 

will try to get the best information that we can to make these 

developments reflect what tribal citizens want.”

Watershed Goals

The Pokagon Band master plan includes goals for protecting 

its watershed. These goals were met by using low impact 

development (LID) BMPs in their infrastructure design. 

According the the Environmental Protection Agency, “LID is an 

approach to land development (or re-development) that works with nature to manage stormwater as 

close to its source as possible.” LID BMPs include cluster development, minimization of total disturbed 

area, protection of natural flow pathways and of sensitive areas, and reduction of impervious surfaces.

Goal 1: Protect watershed hydrology and water quality 

Project Summary 

Location: Hogansburg, NY

Design/Plan Team: Beardsley Design Associates

Timeline: Design began in 2009. Residents occupied units in 

2011.

Project type: Five single-story quadplex buildings (20 

apartments) for seniors, one training center, 

and a rental office building.

Project Key Features

• Mechanical room in each building.

• Slab-on-grade foundations.

• Heat recovery ventilators. 

• Increased kitchen size.

• Decreased operational costs.

• Elimination of kerosene fuel use.

• Landscaping emphasis to encourage walking.

Key Sustainable Elements

• Geothermal heating and cooling system.

• Solar panels. 

• Solar DHW.

• ICFs.

• Community development to encourage healthy habits.

• Metal roof system.

• Energy-efficient windows.

• Solar daylighting tubes.

1998 2009 2010 2011 2012

Phase 1 of 

Sunrise 

Acres 

built.

Design for 

Phase 2 of 

Sunrise 

Acres began.

Phase 2 of 

Sunrise Acres 

groundbreaking 

held.

Phase 2 of 

Sunrise Acres 

completed.

Ribbon 

cutting 

held.

Residents 

moved in.

One year of 

utility data 

available for 

comparison.

ARRA funds 

from HUD 

awarded.

Phase 2 

design

revised for

sustainability.

• Energy Star appliances.

• Energy-efficient lighting.

• Low-flow dual-flush toilets, faucet aerators, 

and low-flow showerheads. 

• Stormwater and pollution control.

• Net-metering.

Training center
10

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Best Practices

With a year of monthly utility costs in hand, AHA was eager to discover more about the costs and savings 

associated with their commitment to renewable energy in the new units. A Sustainable Construction in Indian 

Country initiative team conducted a comprehensive energy analysis comparing Phase 1 and Phase 2 of Sunrise 

Acres. The data show the newly constructed units in Phase 2 of Sunrise Acres are much more energy efficient 

and substantially less expensive to operate: the annual energy cost for Phase 2 is $4,110 per building, which is 

one-half the cost per building for Phase 1 ($8,176). When actual energy savings are calculated by converting 

all energy measurements to Btus (British thermal units), 58 percent in utility costs were saved, despite the fact 

that electricity use is much higher in Phase 2 because of geothermal pumps. Utility bills show wide variation in 

energy use from building to building, however, suggesting that resident education may help decrease usage even 

more. 

The picture is complex and not entirely to be answered by model calculations; the usual calculations of payback 

do not evaluate the benefit to the environment of carbon reduction, a benefit of importance to the St. Regis 

Mohawk. A simple payback calculation suggests that the geothermal system will pay for itself by the end of 

its estimated lifetime. Halperin suggests a more optimistic view that weighs two sets of costs: the geothermal 

system may take 7 to 10 years to realize overall cost reductions as compared with a conventional mechanical 

system.

The solar panels allow the Tribe to exercise greater energy 

independence. As mentioned, the panels have provided 

approximately 20 percent of the energy used by the Phase 

2 buildings. This is energy that the AHA does not need to 

purchase. The AHA participates in the National Grid’s (the 

local utility company) net-metering program, which can 

further decrease electricity costs. The utility company’s 

net-metering policy allows customers to connect their 

renewable energy sources to the electric grid. Customers 

save money by offsetting electrical costs with their own 

renewable energy or by contributing excess production to 

the grid. 

Herne indicated that the usage meets the hot water needs of the unit with electric hot water backup. The unit size 

and number of occupants play a role in this success. “This has been successful, partly because there are only one 

or two occupants in each unit so they do not use a lot of utilities.”

With solar technologies, upfront cost is also significant. Calculations of cost recovery on the DHW are promising, 

with simple payback within an estimated 4 years and positive returns on more complicated calculations as well. 

The solar arrays fare less well in payback models. With the Tribe taking advantage of federal tax credits, simple 

payback shows the solar arrays pay for themselves only within the lifetime of the system. 

The units are popular with the community, according to Herne: “Some people were concerned that we wouldn’t 

fill the units. But we finished the project in July and it was filled by August.” As of January 2013, the AHA had a 

15-unit waiting list for these units, partially because of positive reports from residents. At just over 1,000 square 

feet, units are smaller than many residents’ former houses, but she added, “the tradeoff is that they don’t have 

to mow the grass or shovel snow. It’s a worry-free environment close enough to neighbors but far enough apart 

that it is comfortable. The ICF construction means they don’t hear each other. So residents are happy with these 

apartments.”
11

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

Another positive outcome is that the AHA has more confidence in its ability to design projects that meet 

community needs and expectations. Herne noted, “The grand opening made us realize that the housing 

authority can do a good job of creating a neighborhood. There is more community trust in what we do.”

Herne also emphasized, “This time around we really wanted to do responsible housing development. We 

introduced some green development and sustainable construction.” Barry Halperin, the project manager for 

the design firm and the chief architect, confirmed this assertion: “I think it was a success because the Tribe 

was committed to the sustainable elements.”

Herne’s advice to other tribes: “Just do it! It’s not going to get done unless you jump in there and do it and see 

where you end up!”

Next Steps

In the long term, renewable energy strategies are part of the AHA plan. Herne said, “Now that we touched on 

green building practice, we want to continue it.” But, she has some qualifiers. First she wants to monitor the 

continued cost efficiency and system performance of the Phase 2 units. 

Although the AHA has rehabbed 10 of the Phase 1 apartments by upgrading the kitchens and lighting, it 

did not yet make any of the energy-efficient improvements featured in Phase 2. Herne said the Tribe’s first 

priority is multifamily tax-credit projects. If Phase 2 is successful, AHA would like to make more extensive 

energy-efficient changes to Phase 1. The proposed work would not take place within the units themselves, 

rather in the boiler rooms and mechanical rooms.

Another area of research for the AHA, according to Herne: “We want to find affordable ways to bring 

renewable energy efficiency to single family housing. We would like to tap into programs to bring in funding to 

do hot water heat with solar panels on single family homes.” 

In future projects, she added, the AHA would also like to incorporate wind energy, “but for now we have done 

a lot, we know what we can do, it came out positive, we have more capacity and experience in green building. 

I’m happy with what we’ve done so far.”

For more information:

Retha Herne

Executive Director

Akwesasne Housing Authority

378 State Route 37, Suite A 

P O Box 540

Hogansburg, NY 13655

rherne@akwehsg.org

518–358–9020
12

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country

How To Get Started

To learn more about geothermal systems, solar panels, DHW, sustainable construction efficiency 

determinations, and the Sunrise Acres Energy Assessment, check out these resources.

EPA on geothermal energy: 

http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/energy/re_geothermal.html

DOE, Energy Saver on solar water heaters:

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/solar-water-heaters

DOE EERE on solar systems: 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/topics/solar.html

DOE, National Renewable Energy Laboratory photovoltaic array calculator:

http://www.nrel.gov/rredc/pvwatts/

U.S. Department of the Interior, simple payback worksheet: 

http://www.doi.gov/greening/energy/efficiency.cfm

Federal Energy Management Program’s energy and cost savings calculators for energy-efficient products:

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/technologies/eep_eccalculators.html

NAHB Toolbase.org on ICFs:

http://toolbase.org/Techinventory/TechDetails.aspx?ContentDetailID=602&BucketID=6&CategoryID=54

HUD, Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities: 

http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/sustainable_housing_communities

Institute for Sustainable Communities: 

http://www.iscvt.org/what_we_do/sustainable_community/

Energy Efficiency Evaluation and Recommendations: Elder Housing Sunrise Acres:

http://www.huduser.org/portal/SCinIC/resources.html

Akwesasne Housing Authority:

http://www.akwehsg.org/

This best practice case study is one in a series that examines how Native American and Alaska Native 

communities have incorporated sustainable technologies and strategies into their housing development.

The Sustainable Construction in Indian Country initiative was created to support and increase sustainable 

construction practices in Native American communities. It is administered through the U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research in partnership with the Office 

of Native American Programs.

Produced April 2013
Sustainable Construction In Indian Country

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Final Report | Appendix D

Appendix D: 

Training Materials
Sustainable Construction 

in Indian Country

Assessing Conventional-Built and 

Sustainable Buildings

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Policy Development and Research

February 14, 2013

Albuquerque, NM
Defining Sustainable Construction 

and Sustainable Communities 

in Indian Country
1/29/13&

1&

Albuquerque,&NM&

February&14,&2013&

Sustainable&Construc>on&in&Indian&

Country&(SCinIC)Ini>a>ve&&

• Created&to&support&and&increase&sustainable&&construc>on&

prac>ces&in&Na>ve&communi>es.&

• Administered&through&HUD’s&Office&of&Policy&Development&

and&Research&(PD&R)&in&partnership&with&HUD’s&Office&of&

Na>ve&American&Programs&(ONAP).&

• Congressionally&mandated&ini>a>ve.&

• Ini>a>ve&runs&to&May&2013.&

Sustainable&Construc>on&Building&Prac>ces

• Supports&housing&that&is&"healthier,&more&comfortable,&

more&durable,&and&more&energy&efficient&and&[has]&a&

much&smaller&environmental&footprint&than&conven>onal&

homes."&(U.S.&Green&Building&Council)&

• Broad&areas&of&sustainable&construc>on&prac>ces&

include:&

- Master&planning&

- Si>ng&and&design&

- Water&management&

- Energy&efficiency&

- Environmental&sustainability&

- Local&cultural&relevance&and&>es&to&tradi>onal&sustainability&
1/29/13&

2&

Ac>vi>es&under&SCinIC

• Na>onal&focus&group&–&held&during&

Greener&Homes&Na>onal&Summit,&

September&2011.&

• Technical&assistance&for&the&

demonstra>on&sites.&

• Training&

• Best&prac>ce&case&studies&

Keep&Up&on&SCinIC&Ac>vi>es?&

• Visit&PD&R’s&HUD&User&Web&site:&

hbp://www.huduser.org/portal/

na>ve_american/

sustainable_construc>on.html&&

• Sign&up&there&for&edlist&updates.&

Defining&Sustainability&in&Construc>on&

LEED&&Gold&Cer>fied&mul>family&developed&by&Lible&Traverse&Bay&Bands&of&

Odawa&Indians,&MI&
1/29/13&

3&

Defining&Sustainability&in&Construc>on&

How$is$sustainable$construc0on$

defined? • Ofen&called&“green&construc>on”&or&"green&building."&&&

• The&U.S.&Environmental&Protec>on&Agency&defines&green&building&as&"the&

prac>ce&of&crea>ng&structures&and&using&processes&that&are&

environmentally&responsible&and&resourcedefficient&throughout&a&

building's&lifedcycle&from&si>ng&to&design,&construc>on,&opera>on,&

maintenance,&renova>on&and&deconstruc>on.&This&prac>ce&expands&and&

complements&building&design&concerns&of&economy,&u>lity,&durability,&and&

comfort.&A&green&building&is&also&known&as&a&sustainable&or&high&

performance&building.”&&&

• The&U.S.&Green&Building&Council&believes&that&green&homes&are&generally&

"healthier,&more&comfortable,&more&durable,&and&more&energy&efficient&

and&have&a&much&smaller&environmental&footprint&than&conven>onal&

homes."&&&

• The&Sustainable&Na>ve&Communi>es&Collabora>ve&defines&sustainable&

housing&as:&“culturally&appropriate,&green,&and&affordable.”&

Sustainability&Defini>ons&for&SCinIC

• Uses&the&U.S.&Green&Building&Council&

defini>on.&

• Focuses&on&&sustainable&technologies.&

• Includes&durability&of&housing,&affordability,&

life&cycle&costs.&
1/29/13&

4&

Sustainability&in&housing&can&include:&

• Improvement&to&health&

• Care&for&the&environment&

• Aben>on&to&lifedcycle&of&materials&or&building&

• Durability&

• Financially&&feasible&

• Increased&comfort&for&residents&

• Provides&longdterm&support&for&residents&

What$are$the$benefits$of$sustainable$

construc0on? • It&is&generally&accepted&that&there&are&environmental,&economical,&and&

social&benefits&to&building&more&sustainably:&

• Environmental,benefits—Sustainable&construc>on&enhances&and&protects&

biodiversity&and&ecosystems,&improves&air&and&water&quality,&reduces&

waste&streams,&and&helps&conserve&and&restore&natural&resources.&

&&

• Economic,benefits—Green&building&prac>ces&help&to&reduce&opera>ng&

costs&(such&as&fuel&costs);&create,&expand,&and&shape&markets&for&green&

products&and&services;&and&op>mize&lifedcycle&economic&performance&of&

buildings.&

• Social,benefits—Sustainable&design&prac>ces&enhance&occupant&comfort& and&health,,minimize&strain&on&local&infrastructure,&and&improve&overall&

quality&of&life.& hbp://www.epa.gov/greenbuilding/pubs/whybuild.htm

Examples&Of&Sustainable&

Construc>on&Prac>ces&in&Different&

Categories&

Examples&range&from&simple,&

inexpensive&and&doditdyourself&or&

complex&and&costly&
1/29/13&

5&

Energy&Efficiency&

• Blown&cellulose,&foam,&or&other&insula>on&(not&fiberglass&babs)&mee>ng&

2012&Interna>onal&Energy&conserva>on&Codes&for&Residen>al&Energy&

Efficiency&(Rdvalue)&standards

• Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPS)

• Façade&differen>a>on&designed&for&passive&solar&hea>ng/cooling&

• Aerated&Concrete&&&

• Advanced&Wood&Framing&&

• Insulated&Concrete&Forms&(ICF)&

• Straw&bale&technology&&

• Adobe&&

• Modular&construc>on&&

• LowdE&windows&(low&emissivity&windows)&&

• Heat&and&Energy&Recovery&Ven>lators&(HRVs&and&ERVs)&

• High&efficiency&hea>ng&and&cooling&systems&(heat&pumps)&&

• Radiant&floor&hea>ng&&&

• Thorough&caulking&and&weatherdstripping&

Renewable&Energy&

• Geothermal&hea>ng/cooling&&

• Photovoltaic&panels&(solar&panels)&

• Domes>c&solar&water&hea>ng&(DSWH)&

• Bio&Fuels&

Materials&

• Longdterm,&durable&materials&such&as&metal&

roofs,&cemen>>ous&siding,&masonry,&etc.&

• Recycled/waste&products&incorporated&into&

construc>on&materials&and&interiors&

• Low&vola>le&organic&compound&(VOC)&

products&and&paints&&

• Use&of®ional&or&local&materials&and&labor&
1/29/13&

6&

Water&Efficiency&

• Green&roofs&&

• Landscaping&to&reduce&water&usage/plants&that&

thrive&in®ional&condi>ons&

• Gray&water&systems/wastewater&systems&

• Rainwater&harves>ng&and&storage&

• Xeriscaping

• Rain&barrels/cisterns&

• Permeable&pavement&

• Bioswales

• &Lowdflow&plumbing&fixtures&

Site/Community&Planning&

• Project&on&a&brownfield&site&

• Building&orienta>on&

• Project&near&public&transporta>on&or&car&sharing&implemented&to&

minimize&car&trips&to&and&from&the&site&for&everyday&needs&

• Project&part&of&larger&master&plan&that&includes&other&nond

residen>al&uses&

• Lowdimpact&development&

• Soil&erosion&control&

• Plan&for&future&expansion&

• Green&maintenance&plan&

Increasing&Energy&Efficiency&in&the&

Built&Environment&

Exis>ng&

buildings&

represent&the&

most&cost&

effec>ve&

opportunity&

to&reduce&

CO2&

emissions.&
1/29/13&

7&

Untapped&Energy&Efficiency&

Opportuni>es&

Mul>family&Retrofit&Opportuni>es&

• Cost&costdeffec>ve&upgrades&in&mul>family&

buildings&can&achieve&savings&of&15–30%&in&

buildings&with&five&or&more&residen>al&units.&&

• If&these&upgrades&were&made&in&mul>family&

buildings&na>onally,&it&“would&translate&into&

annual&u>lity&bill&cost&savings&of&almost&$3.4&

billion.”&

Source:&American&Council&for&an&Energy&Efficient&Economy,&

report,&January&2012&

Impacts&of&Energy&&&Buildings&

• Residen>al&&&Commercial&Buildings&in&the&

United&States&are&responsible&for:&

o 74.5%&of&electricity&produc>on.&

o 50.1%&of&total&energy&flows.&&

o 49.1%&of&CO2&emissions.&

• Overall&energy&consump>on&by&the&building&

sector&con>nues&to&increase.&
1/29/13&

8&

Crea>ng&the&Green&Sustainable&

Community&in&Indian&Country&

Planning&Healthy&Communi>es&

Physical$and$Social$Considera0ons$

University&of&Illinois&at&UrbanadChampaign&

What&Does&a&Green&Sustainable&

Community&in&Indian&Country&Look&

Like?&

• Varies&enormously&because&tribal&communi>es&

vary&enormously&

• Shaped&by&needs&and&desires&of&each&community&

• Integrates&housing,&transporta>on,&economic&

development,&healthy&lifestyle,&environmental&

concerns&

• Grows&and&changes&over&>me&

• Requires&inten>onal&planning&
1/29/13&

9&

Social&Considera>ons&in&Planning&

Healthy&Communi>es&

• Offer&mul>ple&residen>al&choices&

– Unit&types&

– Tenure&op>ons&

• Integrate&residen>al&choices&that&support&exis>ng&social&

structures&

– Support&broad&age&range&

– Support&range&of&incomes&

– Support&variety&of&lifestyles&

• Provide&details&that&allow&posi>ve&interac>on&between&

neighbors&&

• Augment&available&social&supports&

Examples&of&Sustainable&Community&

Features&in&Na>ve&American&

Communi>es& • St.&Regis&Mohawk&–&landscaping&and&paths&that&

promote&exercise,&Diabetes&Center&for&

Excellence,&and&training¢er&within&a&

seniors&housing&development.&

$$$

Examples&of&Sustainable&Community&

Features&(2)&

Pokagon&Band&of&Potawatomi&–&master&plan&

that&includes&housing,&rain&gardens,&walking&

paths,&community¢er.&
1/29/13&

10&

Examples&of&Sustainable&Community&

Features&(3)&

Oglala&Sioux&Tribe&–recently&adopted&the&

Oyate Omniciye&|&Oglala&Lakota&Plan&as&the&

official&Regional&Plan&for&Sustainable&

Development&

• What&communi>es&do&you&know&that&are&

exploring&sustainability&at&a&community&level?&

Exploring&Elements&of&Sustainable&

Communi>es&

• What&is&our&community?&Is&it&a&reserva>on?&What&

if&we&are&a&“checkerboard”&community?&&

• What&are&the&physical&loca>ons&that&are&

considered&our&community?&How&can&we&define&

those&beber&for&our&residents&(and&perhaps&for&

people&outside&our&community)?&How&can&we&

create&our&own&boundaries&if&we&want&these?&

• How&can&we&show&a&physical&sense&of&pride&in&our&

community?&&

Cultural&Requirements&

• Use&of&domes>c&or&exterior&space:&where&do&

we&live&and&how&do&we&use&our&space?&

• Maintaining&space&or&crea>ng&new&space&for&

old&tradi>ons&

• Cultural¢er&for&celebra>ng&and&educa>ng&&

• Subsistence&rights&

• Keeping&family&or&families&together&
1/29/13&

11&

Housing&

• How&do&we&build&our&housing&to&be&durable,&energy&

efficient,&and&use&materials&that&are&kinder&to&the&

environment?&

• Type.&Is&it&all&single&family?&Is&it&mul>family?&How&do&we&

support&different&types&of&families&with&different&

needs?&

• Does&it&provide&suppor>ve&services?&How&do&residents&

get&to&community&services&and&ameni>es?&

• How&close&are&the&units?&If&each&sits&on&an&acre,&what&

does&community&look&like?&If&closer&together,&what&do&

communal&spaces&look&like?&

Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPs)&

Roof: R44 

Sidewalls: R24 

Basement Walls: R10 

Air Leakage: 360 CFM50 

(equivalent to a 4” x 9” hole) 

Annual Space Heating Cost: $250 to $300 

Construction Cost: $95/ft2

Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPs)&
1/29/13&

12&

Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPs)&

Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPs)&

Electrical&

Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPs)&

Basement&Wall& Window&roughdopening&
1/29/13&

13&

Structural&Insulated&Panels&(SIPs)&

• Benefits&

– Easy&to&work&

– Assembles&quickly&

– Aird>ghtness&

– High&Rdvalues&

– Reduc>on&in&lumber&

– Structural&strength&

• Poten>al&Drawbacks&

– May&cost&more&than&

standard&frame&

construc>on&

– Availability&

Insulated&Concrete&Forms&(ICF’s)&

R20&insula>on&

Insulated&Concrete&Forms&(ICFs)&

• Benefits&

– High&Rdvalues&above&

and&below&grade&

– Aird>ghtness&

– Durable&

– Reduc>on&in&lumber&

• Poten>al&Drawbacks&

– Higher&cost&for&above&

grade&walls&

– Addi>onal&engineering&

may&be&required&

– Availability&
1/29/13&

14&

Strawbale&Construc>on&

From&Red&Feather&Development&Group&

www.redfeather.org&

Strawbale&Construc>on&

• Benefits&

– Excep>onal&Rdvalues&

– Aird>ghtness&

– Durable&

– Turns&waste&product&

into&a&building&product&

• Poten>al&Drawbacks&

– Restric>ve&wall&finishes&

– Availability&

Transporta>on&&

• How&do&people&get&to&ameni>es&and&services?&&

• What&do&people&without&cars&do?&How&can&we&

make&them&safe?&

• Do&people&want&other&op>ons?&

• Where&are&cars&parked?&&
1/29/13&

15&

Landscaping&and&Space&

• How&do&people&use&the&outdoors?&

• How&is&private&and&public&outdoor&space&

related?&&

• What&does&a&rural&community&look&like?&

• Who&cares&for&space?&

• How&do&people&more&through&the&outdoors?&&

Economic&Development&&

• Where&do&people&go&to&work?&

• Do&we&need&more&places&to&work?&

• Can&these&be&woven&into&our&residen>al&

communi>es?&Do&we&want&them&to&be?&

• Do&our&communi>es&support&work&for&family&

members&with&responsibility&for&children&or&

elders?&

• Are&there&places&in&our&communi>es&that&can&be&

developed&into&work&places&to&fill&community&

needs?&

Health&

• Where&do&residents&get&their&health&care?&Is&

this&easy&to&get&to?&

• Where&do&they&get&educa>on&on&healthy&

lifestyle?&

• Does&our&community&make&it&easy&to&live&a&

healthy&lifestyle?&Are&there&physical&changes&

we&could&make&to&support&this?&&

• Are&there&safe&places&for&children&to&play?&
1/29/13&

16&

Services&&

What&other&services&would&we&like&inside&our&

community?&Do&we&have&enough&people&to&use&

that&service?&&

• Grocery&store&

• Bank&

• Library&

• Entertainment&

• Restaurant&

• Gas&Sta>on&

• Religious/Spiritual&Ins>tu>ons&

Keys&to&Success&

• One&godto&person&

• BuydIn&from&tribal&leadership&

• A&team&made&of&different&cri>cal&departments,&

leaders,&and&organiza>ons&&

• Local&measures&of&sustainability,&unique&to&your&

community&

• Thorough&research&into&op>ons,&costs,&and&

consequences&

• Ondgoing&communica>on&at&all&levels&of&tribal&life&

• Many&voices&

 

Key&to&Success&

• Build&to&your&climate&

–Builder&Field&Guide&(www.eeba.org)&

–www.buildingscience.com

• Review&alterna>ve&building&systems&

–Less&expensive&

–Energy&efficient&

–Resource&efficient&

–Good&indoor&air&quality&
Leveraging Utility Resources to 

Fund ECRMs and Renewable 

Energy Sources 
1/29/13 

1 

!"#$#"%&'()*+,-()&.*,&/+01#02&

30(,2%&3.4#-#(0"&567,*8(6(0")&

901&'(0(:9;$(&30(,2%&<,*=(-")&

>%7#-9$&50-(0"#8()&?..(,(1&;%&

!"#$#"%&<,*8#1(,)&

• !"#$"%&$'()(*+,%+--.(/,(01--.(1"2$,3,45$"(,$21#%/"'(4"(

$"$,6.(#/"'$,&+%/"(7$+'1,$'(

• 8$9+:$'()(;+'<(+=$,(*1,#<+'$(/0($"$,6.($>#4$":(7$+'1,$(

'1#<(+'(?@?8AB(CDE8(8$0,46$,+:/,(

• @$:(7$:$,4"6()(;,$24:(/"(94--(0/,($F#$''($"$,6.(6$"$,+:$2(

9.(,$"$3+9-$(,$'/1,#$'G(

• D+F(#,$24:'()(0/,(4"':+--+%/"($"$,6.($>#4$":('.':$7'(+"2(

,$"$3+9-$($"$,6.('/1,#$'G(

@A*&9,(&"A()(�-(0"#8()&.*,B&

• ;1':/7$,'(/0(:<$(1%-4:.(*,/&42$,(

o 8$'42$"%+-(

o ;/77$,#4+-(

o D,49+-(H/1'4"6(?"%%$'(

• B/1,(,$'42$":'(7+.(9$($-4649-$(4"('/7$(4"#$"%&$'I(:<$(

</1'4"6(+1:</,4:.(7+.(9$($-4649-$(4"(/:<$,(4"#$"%&$'G((
1/29/13 

2 

C*:&-90&5&4#01&*+"&9;*+"�-(0"#8()&

*..(,(1&;%&6%&+"#$#"%&7,*8#1(,B&&

• C$+,#<(0/,(./1,(':+:$J(

o <5*JKK333G2'4,$1'+G/,6K((

• !"0/,7+%/"(34--(4"#-12$(#/77$,#4+-(+"2(,$'42$"%+-(

4"#$"%&$'L(M$2$,+-(4"#$"%&$'L(C:+:$(4"#$"%&$'L(

,$61-+%/"'(+"2(*/-4#4$'L(+'(3$--(+'(1%-4:.(*,/&42$,(

4"#$"%&$'G(

• ;-/'$-.(#<$#N(0/,($-46494-4:.(+"2(6$:(7/,$(4"0/,7+%/"(40(

./1(+,$("/:('1,$O(

D9"9;9)(&*.&E"9"(&50-(0"#8()&.*,&'(0(:9;$()&

F&3.4#-#(0-%&GDE5'3H&

• PC!8?(4'(+(#/7*,$<$"'4&$('/1,#$(/0(4"0/,7+%/"(/"(':+:$L(-/#+-L(

1%-4:.L(+"2(0$2$,+-(4"#$"%&$'(+"2(*/-4#4$'(:<+:(*,/7/:$(,$"$3+9-$(

$"$,6.(+"2($"$,6.($>#4$"#.G((

• ?':+9-4'<$2(4"(QRRSG(

• M1"2$2(9.(:<$(TGCG(P$*+,:7$":(/0(?"$,6.L(PC!8?(4'(+"(/"6/4"6(

*,/U$#:(/0(:<$(@G;G(C/-+,(;$":$,(+"2(:<$(!":$,':+:$(8$"$3+9-$(

?"$,6.(;/1"#4-G(

3I967$(&*.&E*$9,&E%)"(6&<,*=(-"&&

!"#$%&#'$()*+,"()-./'0( 12./,++,3*2(*4(56()-./'0(
1/29/13 

3 

E"(7)&"*&E#J(&901&50)"9$$&E*$9,&30(,2%&

E%)"(6&

•Size the solar system based on anticipated load 

•Recommend version 1 of !PV Watts" from NREL 

•Receive utility approval for system design (should be 

simple for systems less than 10kW.....residential 

systems in Illinois should be less than 10kW for all 

energy needs) 

•Install! 

<K&@9"")&?+"7+"&.*,&3L+#0*I&C*+)(&

We need 8000kWh for 100% of Equinox House 

requirements and 2000kWh for 8000 miles of driving 

Nominal system !size"

Annual output 

!"#$#"%&<,*-())&GM6(,(0H&

Three Steps: 

•Fill out form to become a 

!distributed" generator 

(small power plant less 

than 10kW) 

•Fill out application for a 

!bi-directional" meter 

•Inspection by utility 

before permission to 

come on line 

•$25 application fee 

•Most utilities require 

accessible disconnect 

near meter box 
1/29/13 

4 

N("&O("(,&P,(1#"&

•In Illinois, no checks are written for excess electricity (some states have 

!feed-in" rates, 3 or 4 times their sell rate to encourage growth) 

•!Excess" solar energy generated is credited to your account 

•Summer is time to !grow" energy credit 

•Good synergism with Utility demand 

•At end of !solar year" (April), credit is zeroed....this is time when house load 

should be very low, so new credit will begin growing 

•Can convert to !time-of-day" pricing in Ameren region through !Power Smart 

Pricing" program ... this gives #$" credit, which benefits solar because excess 

in sunny afternoons when energy is $$$, and house needs can be shifted to 

time when energy is $ (eg, AC and hot water at night)...should be able to pay 

!fees" with $ credits 

>*"9$&E*$9,&30(,2%&<,*1+-"#*0&

PV Watts prediction ~10,300kWh 

2010-2011 actual ~11,000 to 12,000kWh 

3L+#0*I&C*+)(&QRST@&E%)"(6&

•40 panel packaged system 28,000 

•Labor (100 hrs @ $35/hr) 3,500 

•Steel, wire, post holes, concrete 3,500 

•Total System Cost $35,000 

•Federal Rebate (30%, no limit) - 10,500 

•Net System Cost $24,500 

~Twice the system in 2009 as in 2008 for the same price! 

-Cost over 20 years is ~12.5 cents per kWh 

-no escalation of price over lifetime 

-Solar powered Electric Vehicle cost less than $2 per 

gallon gas 
1/29/13 

5 

E*$9,&E%)"(6&50)"9$$9"#*0&

8.2kW nominal system size 

~4 days to install rack and panels 

~600 to 750 sqft 

~10,000kWh per year 

8000kWh for house 

2000kWh for electric car 

House panel area 

Car panel area (8000 

miles per year) 

•!Good" electric vehicles 

(Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf, Tesla 

Roadster) obtain 3-5 miles 

(5-7km) per kWh 

•Solar electric cost $0.125/kWh 

•~$0.03-0.04 per mile 

•~$0.02-0.03 per km 

•Gas car cost ($3/gal=$0.8/liter) 

•~50mpg=22km/liter 

•~$0.045-0.06 per mile 

•~$0.027-0.036 per km 

Solar Powered Electric Vehicles 

25% less than Gas 

And, EVs will be less $$$ than Gas Vehicles 

!)#02&!"#$#"%&50-(0"#8()U&P9)(&E"+1%&

• ;/#/*+<(!"24+"(H/1'4"6(+"2(P$&$-/*7$":(V;!HEPW(4"(E,4X/"+G(

• C$$N4"6(#/':Y$Z$#%&$(3+.'(:/(,$<+94-4:+:$(71-%0+74-.(914-24"6(

0/,($"$,6.($>#4$"#.G(

• ;/":+#:$2(1%-4:.(*,/&42$,(E,4X/"+([19-4#(C$,&4#$(VE[CW(

• \1-%0+74-.(?"$,6.(?>#4$"#.([,/6,+7J(*,/&42$'(+''$''7$":(

+"2(M8??(*,/21#:'G(
1/29/13 

6 

O33<�)"9$$(1U&

• D<,$$(<1"2,$2('4F:.(;M]'(

• D3$":.Y0/1,(N4:#<$"(+$,+:/,'(

• D<4,:.Y'4F(9+:<,//7(+$,+:/,'(

• D<4,:.Y$46<:(-/3(^/3('</3$,<$+2'(

E[C(+-'/(/Z$,'(4"#$"%&$'(0/,('/-+,(:<$,7+-(2/7$'%#(</:(

3+:$,L(+"2(*</:/&/-:+4#(+,,+.(4"':+--+%/"G(D<$'$(+,$(

,$'42$"%+-(4"#$"%&$'(+"2(3/1-2(,$_14,$(,$'42$":'(:/(:+N$(-$+2(

4"(47*-$7$"%"6G(

E"9"(&30(,2%&3.4#-#(0-%&'90T#02&

http://aceee.org/sector/state-policy/scorecard 

DE5'3&19"9;9)(&)A*:)U&

• ;/,*/,+:$(D+F(;,$24:(!"21':,.(8$#,14:7$":KC1**/,:(

• ]/#+-(]/+"([,/6,+7(

• [E;?(M4"+"#4"6([$,'/"+-(D+F(;,$24:(

• [,/*$,:.(D+F(!"#$"%&$(

• C:+:$(]/+"([,/6,+7(

• T%-4:.(]/+"(

• T%-4:.(8$9+:$([,/6,+7(

• 81-$'L(8$61-+%/"'L(+"2([/-4#4$'(
1/29/13 

7 

3I967$(&?.&&N(:&O(I#-*&&3$(-",#-#"%V&'()#1(0"#9$&3.4#-#(0-%&

'(;9"()&

• C:+:$J(@$3(\$F4#/((

• !"#$"%&$(D.*$J(T%-4:.(8$9+:$([,/6,+7(?-4649-$(?>#4$"#.(D$#<"/-/64$'J(

8$0,46$,+:/,'L(]46<%"6L(;$":,+-(E4,(#/"24%/"$,'((

• E**-4#+9-$(C$#:/,'J(8$'42$"%+-L(\1-%YM+74-.(8$'42$"%+-((

• E7/1":J`8$0,46$,+:/,KM,$$X$,(8$#.#-4"6J(aSbK1"4:(

;/7*+#:(M-1/,$'#$":(]46<:(c1-9'(V;M]'WJ(*/4":Y/0Y*1,#<+'$(24'#/1":'(

E;(;.#-4"6J(adS('46"Y1*(+"2(adSK.$+,(

• \+F4717(!"#$"%&$J(8$0,46$,+:/,KM,$$X$,(8$#.#-4"6J(d(1"4:'(*$,(</1'$</-2((

• ?_14*7$":(8$_14,$7$":'J(8$0,46$,+:/,KM,$$X$,(8$#.#-4"6J(71':(9$(Qb(:/(de(

#194#(0$$:(4"('4X$(+"2(4"(3/,N4"6(#/"24%/"((

• f$9(C4:$J(<5*JKK333G*"7G#/7K,$9+:$'K,$9+:$'G<:7

3I967$(U&-*0"#0+(1&

C177+,.J(([@\(/Z$,'(4"#$"%&$'(0/,(,$'42$"%+-(#1':/7$,'(:/(

47*,/&$(:<$($>#4$"#.(/0($-4649-$(</7$'G([@\(34--(*,/&42$(+(aSb(

,$9+:$(0/,(:<$(*,/*$,(,$#.#-4"6(/0(/-2(,$0,46$,+:/,'(/,(0,$$X$,'G(

;1':/7$,'(3</(+6,$$(:/(#.#-$(:<$(/*$,+%/"(/0(,$'42$"%+-(+4,(

#/"24%/"4"6('.':$7'(+,$(+-'/($-4649-$(0/,(+(adS(#<$#N(+""1+--.G(

E224%/"+--.L([@\('*/"'/,'(24'#/1":'(/"(':+"2+,2(+"2('*$#4+-:.(

;M]'(+:(+(&+,4$:.(/0(,$:+4-$,'G(M/,(+(#/7*-$:$(-4':(/0(*+,%#4*+%"6(

':/,$'L(+'(3$--(+'(+224%/"+-(*,/6,+7(2$:+4-'(+"2(,$_14,$7$":'L(

&4'4:(:<$(*,/6,+7(3$9('4:$G(

7*2/,8/9(((;1':/7$,(C$,&4#$L([@\ ((?77+(&+"(\//,'$-(

E-&+,+2/(C_1+,$(\C(QQQb ([@\((

E-91_1$,_1$L(@\(geQSgYbbbQ ([</"$J(VSbSW(dhQYhhdS(

[</"$J(VgggW(ihdYSejj( ([</"$(dJ(VgggW(ihdYSejj((

[</"$(dJ(VSbSW(dhQYdebb f$9('4:$J(

((((f$9(C4:$J(<5*JKK333G*"7G#/7( <5*JKK[@\G#/7K,$9+:$'(

(((((

N(:&O(I#-*&901&N("&O("(,#02&

• @$:(7$:$,4"6(4'(+&+4-+9-$(:/(!k1+-40.4"6(M+#4-4%$'"(/,(kM'(34:<(

'.':$7'(1*(:/(gb(7$6+3+5'G(((

• E**-4#+9-$(1%-4%$'(4"#-12$(4"&$':/,(/3"$2(1%-4%$'(+"2($-$#:,4#(

#//*$,+%&$'G(

• E--(1%-4%$'('19U$#:(:/(@$3(\$F4#/([19-4#(8$61-+%/"(

;/774''4/"(V[8;W(U1,4'24#%/"(71':(/Z$,("$:(7$:$,4"6G
1/29/13 

8 

N(:&O(I#-*&E"9"(&&

30(,2%&<*$#-%&<,*4#$(& • :;(<3+#/-(5*+#8#'.

• :;(=>>+#,28'()/,2$,"$.

• :;(?@#+$#2A(7*$'.

• :;(7+',2(B#./"#C@/'$(!'2'",3*2

• :;(6'D#8+'(5*+#8#'.

• :;(&",2.>*"/()-./'0(EF8#'28-

• :;(G',$(C-(EH,0>+'(12#3,3I'.

• :;(J#2,28#,+(128'23I'.

• :;(7+#0,/'(7D,2A'(5*+#8#'.

• )/,/'()>'2$#2A(,2$(),I#2A.(&,C+'.

E"9"(&30(,2%&?.4#-(&

• @$3(\$F4#/(?"$,6.(;/"'$,&+%/"(+"2(\+"+6$7$":(P4&4'4/"(

o <5*JKK333G$7",2G':+:$G"7G1'K?;\PK((

• l$""$:<(H16<$'L(;-$+"(?"$,6.(C*$#4+-4':(

• !"#$%#&'()&*+',()-.#*&.,(/0.122$3452.6$(7289((

• :$*6&()&*+',(;*8*&"*(!2&%(<+2'+6=((

• )-.#*&>(?3*(2@()&*+',(A(?B$#>,(<+2'+6=3((

• 0"3>6#&6C$*(!"#$%#&'(D6E(:+*%#>((

• VSbSW(hejYiidb(

• N$"G<16<$'m':+:$G"7G1'
Case Study 1: 

Cold Climate Energy Evaluation 

of Existing and Newly 

Constructed Units 
ST. REGIS SUNRISE 

ACRES ELDER 

DEVELOPMENT 

 A Cold Climate Case Study of Energy 

Efficiency and Sustainable Developments 

St. Regis Mohawk Tribe 

•Location: St. Regis 

Mohawk Indian 

Reservation, 

Hogansburg, NY 

A Case Study of Energy Evaluation and 

Recommendations for Affordable Housing 

Sunrise Acres Elder Housing 

•The Akwesasne Housing 

Authority manages the 

Sunrise Acres elderly 

housing development. 

The development was 

constructed in two 

phases. 

Phase I and II Development 
Tribal Philosophy 

• Tribal and housing authority 

leadership believes: a quality 

home is the foundation of 

society and that provides a 

pathway to achieving a quality 

lifestyle. 

• Sunrise Acres Phase Two 

illustrates the tribe and the 

housing authority’s leadership 

role in the successful design 

and development of a 

sustainable neighborhood, 

Sunrise acres. Work completed 

in Phase One illustrates the 

tribe’s commitment to updating 

an existing neighborhood to a 

green, sustainable 

neighborhood. 

Phase One Site Description 

•Built in 1998 

•6 apartment buildings with 

20 units 

•Administration building and 

warehouse 

•Each unit is two bedrooms, 

3,497 sq ft. 

•Stick Built with 2 X 6 wood 

frame construction 

•Kerosene is the primary 

heating source.

Building Envelope 

• Walls: Each unit is separated by a 1-hour fire rated wall. The 

typical wall construction: 1/2” gypsum board over 2” x 6” wood 

frame, Tyvek over OSB, and exerior siding. Estimated thermal 

resistance rating (R-value) of R-20. 

• Roof: The roof is hipped with an 3.5:12 slope. It is constructed 

with wood trusses, dark brown asphalt shingles, metal roof 

system. R38 insulation fiberglass Batt insulation above the 

ceiling. 

• Floor: The ground floor is a 4” reinforced concrete slab on 

grade with 1” polystyrene rigid insulation under the slab. The 

main living areas of the apartments have carpet. The kitchen, 

bath, and laundry room have sheet vinyl. 

• Windows: Andersen double pane glass with vinyl frame 

windows 
 HVAC 

Heating 

• The primary heating source for 

each apartment unit: radiant floor 

slab system powered by a castiron boiler in each building. 

• Most of the boilers are a Weil 

McLain Gold Oil Model P-WTGO-3 

with an Annual Fuel Utilization 

Efficiency (AFUE) of 85% 

• Provides roughly 100,000 BTU. 

• Fuel tank outside of each building 

connects to the cast-iron boiler 

• Holds approximately 250 gallons of 

kerosene. 

• Additional heating is supplied by 

space heaters. 

 HVAC 

Cooling 

• The primary cooling source: 

window air conditioning units. 

• Each apartment has roughly 

one AC unit with an estimated 

cooling efficiency, or Energy 

Efficiency Ratio (EER) of 8.5 

• Ceiling insulation: R-38 

Ventilation 

•Ventilation air: building 

infiltration and the residents 

opening windows. 

•Each bathroom exhaust fan 

is estimated to be 

performing at 35-50 CFM. 

•Building plans for Phase 1 

Sunrise Acres shows 

bathroom exhaust fans and 

the dryer vents are located 

in the attic. 

Domestic Hot Water 

•Each apartment has a 

Reliance 40-gallon electric 

domestic water heater with 

model number 

5-40-2DRT4-Z 

•Each estimated to have 53-

gallon first hour rating 

•Uses approximately 4,773 

kWh per year. 
Lighting in Units 

•Lighting: a 2’x4’ florescent 

light in the kitchen and 

light fixtures throughout 

the apartment. 

•Currently retrofitting the 

60W incandescent lamps 

with CFLs and the T12s 

with T8s. 

•Each of the Phase 1 

apartments are the same 

size: it was assumed that 

each unit uses the lighting 

as in the Table. 

Location Fixture Type Watts Operating 

Hours

kWh 

Usage

2 Bedrooms 2-lamp 60W 

Inc. 240 1,460 350 

Kitchen 2-lamp 34W 4' 

T12 72 2,190 158 

Kitchen sink 2-lamp 20W 2' 

T12 50 730 37 

Living room 3-lamp 60W 

Inc. 180 2,920 526 

Bathroom 1-lamp 60W 

Inc. 60 365 22 

Bathroom 

sink

2-lamp 60W 

Inc. 120 365 44 

Laundry 1-lamp 60W 

Inc. 60 365 22 

Hallway/ stair 1-lamp 60W 

Inc. 60 365 22 

Exterior 1-lamp 60W 

Inc. 60 1,095 66 

Total Watts 

per Unit 902 9,855 1,245 

1,245 kWh * 16 cents = 

$199.20

$199.20 - $74.76 = $124.44 

over Phase 2 costs 

Additional Plug Loads 

•Additional plug loads in the 

building include typical 

residential appliances: 

TVs, washer/dryer, 

refrigerators, stoves, 

microwaves, and task 

lighting. 

•AHA is currently replacing 

refrigerators, microwaves, 

and washers with 

ENERGY STAR 

appliances 

•Project base model 

assumes no ENERGY 

STAR appliances. 

Phase Two Site Description 

• Built in 2011. 

• Total project cost $7 million: $4 

million in Recovery Act Funds 

and $3 million NAHASDA funds. 

• Total of five one-story apartment 

buildings each approximately 

4,050 ft2 with an identical floor plan as the Phase 1 buildings 

• Includes four apartments for a 

total of 20 units. 

• The expansion project also 

included a training center, 

parking area, outdoor pavilion 

and outdoor LED lighting. 
Building Envelope 

• Walls: Each unit is separated by a 2-hour fire rated wall. The 

typical wall construction:5/8” gypsum board over a Buildblock 

6” ICF wall system, over 1/2” OSB sheathing with exterior 

siding. Estimated thermal resistance rating (R-value) of R-20. 

• Roof: The roof is hipped with an 8:12 slope. It is constructed 

with wood trusses, is covered in a standing seam metal roof 

system, and has 6” of blown in cellulose insulation over 6” R-21 

fiberglass Batt insulation above the ceiling. Total R-value:46 

• Floor: The ground floor is a 4” reinforced concrete slab on 

grade with 2” polystyrene rigid insulation under the slab. The 

main living areas of the apartments have carpet while the 

kitchen, bath, and laundry room have sheet vinyl. 

• Windows: Architectural drawings show Andersen tilt-wash 

double hung 400 series windows with low-e glazing. Vertical 

blinds on all windows. 

HVAC 

Heating/Cooling • The primary heating and 

cooling source: a radiant floor 

heating from the geothermal 

system. 

• A total of 44 wells were dug: 

each apartment building has 7 

wells, the training center has 9 

wells. 

Ventilation • Ventilation air: building 

infiltration and the residents 

opening windows. 

• Each bathroom is also 

assumed to have an exhaust 

fan originally rated at 70 CFM. 

Solar Domestic Hot Water 

•Each apartment building is 

provided domestic hot water 

from a solar tube system 

•System in mechanical room 

includes two tanks with a 

holding capacity of 80 

gallons: one holding tank for 

the water heated by the solar 

system, and one electric hot 

water tank. Water from the 

solar holding tank goes into 

the electric tank. 

•Provides a 50% savings 

compared to the Phase 1 

buildings 
Interior Lighting 

•Natural lighting: windows 

and solar tube lighting in 

each apartment. 

•Additional lighting: a 

2’x4’ florescent light in 

the kitchen and light 

fixtures with CFL bulbs 

throughout the 

apartment. 

•Lighting assumption the 

same for each apartment 

(see table). 

Interior Unit Lighting Consumption 

Location Fixture Type Watts Operating 

Hours kWh Usage

Living room (5) 1-lamp 13W CFL 65 1,460 95 

Kitchen 2-4', 1-42", and 2-12" 

T8 130 2,190 285 

Hallway (2) 2-lamp 13W CFL 52 730 38 

Laundry 1-2' T8 fixture 13 2,920 38 

Bathroom 1-lamp & 3-lamp 13W 

CFL 52 365 19 

3 Closets 1-lamp 34W 2' T8 34 365 12 

Bedroom 1 2-lamp 13W CFL 26 365 9 

Bedroom 2 2-lamp 13W CFL 26 365 9 

2 Exterior 1-lamp 13W CFL 26 1,095 28 

Total Watts per Unit 424 9,855 534 

534 kWh * 14 cents = $74.76 $199.20 - $74.76 = $124.44 savings over 

Phase 1

Additional Plug Loads 

•Include typical 

residential appliances: 

TVs, washer/dryer, 

 refrigerators, stoves, 

 microwaves, and task 

lighting. 

•All appliances installed 

were ENERGY STAR 

rated. 
Energy Analysis and Evaluation 

A comprehensive energy analysis was conducted 

on the two sites. The approach involved several 

steps. 

• Initial information collected from AHA about each 

building’s design, occupancy data, energy consumption, 

and energy costs. Included: 

• Building plans 

• Utility consumption data for the last 12 months 

• Geographical location and climate data 

• Details about unit occupancy, mechanical equipment, HVAC 

systems, and lighting fixtures from interviews with AHA staff and 

during a site visit 

Electricity Consumption Profiles 

Phase 1 units: 

The kWh usage 

above the modeled 

usage in the winter 

months may be 

caused by the 

building being drafty 

and occupants using 

supplementary 

space heaters. 

Electricity Consumption Profiles 

Phase 2 units: 

• Use more kWh than 

Phase 1 because 

geothermal systems 

are electric. 

•Low use in February is 

due to a billing error. 
Kerosene Consumption Profiles 

phsf MM

phsMMM

pf MM

M

f MM

hsMMM

hsf MM

M

f sMMM

hMsMMM

hf sMMM

i MsMMM

i f sMMM

kMsMMM

kf sMMM


 n4 


 n%A

n n,,

  6, 2   8

  ,5  8

 5e 2   8

    2   8


 4 n8 A

   8n8 A


 8  1

680%


 A 

  
             
 e 

               

3 ,n 5    85, 4  
 5  %    

Computer Energy Modeling: eQUEST Version 

3.64 

•Modeled data was calibrated to match the actual 

building energy usage from the utility bills. 

•This baseline then used for evaluating the energy 

cost reduction measures (ECRMs). 

•The program uses these measures to calculate 

the energy consumption and energy costs the 

building is expected to use over an entire typical 

weather year. 

Assumptions For The eQUEST Model 

•Because these units are for elders, it is estimated 

that the tenants will be in the units 80% of the time 

(approximately 134 hours/week). 

•Winter temperature setting of 72 degrees (F); 

summer, 75 degrees (F). 

•0.5 air changes per hour (ACH). 

•Base model assumes that the Phase 1 units had 

non-ENERGY STAR appliances. 

•Lighting power density of approximately 0.90 W/ft2

for each unit 
Energy Analysis Findings: Phase 1 Buildings 

Average Annual Consumption Annual Costs Average Unit 

Cost

Electricity 18,520 kWh $ 2,948 36% $ 

0.16 $/kWh 

Kerosene 1,340 gallons 

delivered $ 5,229 64% $ 3.90 

$/gal 

delivered 

Total: $ 8,176 x 4 buildings = $32,705 

total 

Total Facilities Area 3,497 ft2 

Electricity Use 

Intensity 5 kWh/ft2/yr Kerosene Use 

Intensity 0.38 Gallons/ft2/

yr 

Energy Use 

Intensity 70 kBtu/ft2/yr Energy Cost 

Intensity 

$ 

2.34 ft2/yr 

Electricity is provided by National Grid and kerosene is supplied by #9 Fuels

Energy Analysis Findings: Phase 2 Buildings 

Average Annual Consumption Annual Costs Average Unit 

Cost

Electricity 30,181 kWh $ 4,110 100% $ 

0.14 $/kWh 

Kerosene 0 gallons 

delivered $ 0 0% $ 0.00 

$/gal 

delivered 

Total: $ 4,110 x 5 buildings = $20,552 total 

Total Facilities 

Area 4,050 ft2

Electricity Use 

Intensity 7 kWh/ft2/yr Kerosene Use 

Intensity 0 Gallons/ft2/ yr 

Energy Use 

Intensity 25 kBtu/ft2/yr Energy Cost 

Intensity 

$ 

1.01 ft2/yr 

Electricity is provided by National Grid and kerosene is supplied by #9 Fuels

Fans and 

Pumps 

2% 

Plug 

loads 

9% DHW 

7% 

Lighting 

8% 

 Space 

Heating 

74% 

Energy Consumption for Phase 1 Buildings 

•From eQUEST modeled 

energy data. 

•Energy consumption 

breakdown for a typical 

4-unit apartment 

building. 

•The largest category of 

energy usage is space 

heating (74%), the 

second largest is plug 

loads (9%), and the third 

largest is lighting (8%). 
Energy Costs for Phase 1 Buildings 

•When energy 

consumption is 

converted to cost, the 

most costly operational 

categories are: 

• space heating ($6,668) 

• plug loads ($979) 

• lighting ($869). 

•Areas to target first for 

energy savings 

Fans and 

Pumps, 

$156, 2% 

Plug 

loads, 

$979, 

10% 

DHW, 

$731, 8% 

Lighting, 

Space $869, 9% 

Heating, 

$6,668, 

71% 

Energy Consumption for Phase 2 Buildings 

•From eQUEST modeled 

energy data 

•Energy consumption 

breakdown for a typical 

4-unit apartment 

building. 

•The largest category of 

energy usage is space 

heating (25%), the 

second largest is lighting 

(22%), and the third 

largest is plug loads 

(19%). 

Fans and 

Pumps 

13% 

Plug loads 

19% 

 Space 

Cooling 

3% 

DHW 

18% 

Lighting 

22% 

 Space 

Heating 

25% 

Energy Costs for Phase 2 Buildings 

•The energy cost 

breakdown. 

• When energy 

consumption is 

converted to cost, the 

most costly operational 

categories are: 

• space heating ($1,058) 

•lighting ($926) 

• plug loads ($805) 

•First areas to target for 

energy savings. 

Fans and 

Pumps, 

$550, 13% Plug 

loads, 

$805, 19% 

 Space 

Cooling, 

$129, 3% 

DHW, 

$782, 18% 

Lighting, 

$926, 22% 

Space 

Heating, 

$1,058, 

25% 
Energy Cost Reduction Measures 

Energy conservation is best achieved through a 

multifaceted approach that involves: 

 1. Load reduction, whether no cost or low cost

 2. Energy efficiency improvements 

 3. Energy generation. 

ECRM: Lighting Upgrade    
      H     
 e   
       
                
  

i     8552 , i p% 2 6 KM  	 4 t i BM hsBKM kf M

 0, 1 4 i p% 2 6 kB  Bc  hi di i sh9M hf H

 0, 1 4 ,043 i p% 2 6 i M  i c  hi f M dkM kd

 0e04  8552 kp% 2 6 KM  	 4 t hHM i s9i M f i K

  ,18552 hp% 2 6 KM  	 4 t KM kKf i i

  ,18552  ,043 i p% 2 6 KM  	 4 t hi M kKf BB

 n 4 8A hp% 2 6 KM  	 4 t KM kKf i i

 % %l A S,,0 8 hp% 2 6 KM  	 4 t KM kKf i i

 y, 8058 hp% 2 6 KM  	 4 t KM hsM9f KK


   
    
             or s o$ut t y$sBt

hsi Bf  3 1 O hK   4, , '  Dh99ti M Dh99ti M p DdBtdK ' ' ysBnBB      	  
    s

    

   
      H     
 e   
       
                
  

 0e04  8552 bf r hp%2 6 hk      Kf hsBKM 9f

 0, 1 4 i pBcs hpBi os 4   i phi o  H hkM i sh9M i Hf

 % %l A bi r i p%2 6 hk     f i dkM kH

 n 4 8A hpi c  H  y,n8 hk i s9i M kH

  ,18552 hp% 2 6 N kp%2 6 hk      f i kKf h9

k  %5, , , hp%2 6 kB  i c  H kB kKf hi

   8552  h i p%2 6 hk     i K kKf 9

   8552  i i p%2 6 hk     i K kKf 9

i   y, 8058 hp%2 6 hk      i K hsM9f i H


   
    
            BsB o$ut t t kB

f kB 3 1 O hB   4, , '  DdBtdK Dh99ti M p DdBtdK ' ' ysBnBB  
         

	  
    y

Phase 1 

Older 

Units: 

$199.20 

Phase 2 

New 

Units: 

$74.76 

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 

• The&Annual&Yield&on&an&equivalent&investment.&

• Project&is&rated&a&good&investment&if&the&IRR&is&greater&than&

could&be&earned&through&a&different&investment&such&as&

other&projects,&bonds,&bank&accounts.&

• Currently&5%&is&the&assumed&rate&of&return.&
ECRM 1: Lighting Upgrade 

ECRM 1: CFL Lighting 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Gallons of 

Kerosene Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

3,696 -30 $591 4% $69 860% $4,283 

• The electrical plans for Phase 1 indicated that there are a total of 68 lamps in 

the building. 

• Lighting provided by a 2 lamp 4’ 34W T12 florescent fixture and a 2 lamp 2’ 

20W T12 (over the sink) in the kitchen and from the ceiling fixtures in the 

living room and bedrooms. 

• Baseline model assumes that each light fixture would have a 60W 

incandescent lamp providing a total average of 1.03 W/sq. ft. for the whole 

building. 

ECRM 2: ENERGY STAR Refrigerator 

Replacement 

• The refrigerator currently in use in each of the four units of the 

building is a 1989 Westinghouse RT143GCDA 

• Costs $206 annually to run 

• An equivalent new ENERGY STAR model would only cost $39 

annually to run. 

ECRM 2: ENERGY STAR Refrigerator Replacement 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

2,992 $479 4% $1,600 27% $1,997 

Net&Present&Value&(NPV)&

• Uses&a&discount&rate&to&the&find&the&present&value&of&savings&

occurring&at&a&future&date.&

• The&discount&rate&is&the&minimum&acceptable&rate&of&return&–

also&5%&is&the&assumed&rate&of&return.&

• Investments&with&a&posikve&NPV&are&considered&good&

investments.&
Install Low-Flow Fixtures 

•Research shows that access to fresh, clean water is also 

becoming a dwindling resource. Shortages in certain 

areas of the United States are already causing water to be 

the next leading concern. 

•Reducing water consumption will save water and reduce 

energy to heat hot water. 

•Low-flow showerheads and aerators are inexpensive, 

simple to install, and save hot water heating costs. 

•Recommended: low flow showerheads (1.6 GPM or less), 

faucet aerators (1.0 GPM or less) and kitchen sink 

aerators (1.8 GPM or less). Some faucet aerators will 

reduce flow to 0.5 GPM. 

ECRM 3: Low-Flow Showerheads 

• The 4 units of each building have standard showerheads. 

• Figuring $0.16 per kWh, in addition to the $195 saved on annual water 

heating costs (in table), it should also save $41 on water usage costs 

(at $3.70/1000 gallons) totaling $236 in savings. 

ECRM 3: Low-Flow Showerheads 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Gallons of 

Water Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

1,219 10,950 $236 2% $200 118% $2,605 

ECRM 4: Low-Flow Aerators 

• All of the units’ sinks have standard aerators. 

• Switching to 8 low flow units will save approximately 697 kWh and 

8,760 gallons of water annually. 

• Figuring $0.16 per kWh, this will save $112 on annual water heating 

costs and $32 on water usage costs (at $3.70/1000 gallons) totaling 

$144 in savings. 

ECRM 4: Low-Flow Aerators

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Gallons of 

Water Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

697 8,760 $144 1% $160 90% $1,556 
ECRM 5: Water-Saver Toilets 

• Toilets should be replaced with high efficiency units using ≤ 1.28 

gallons per flush. 

• Switching to 4 low flow units will save approximately 13,105 

gallons of water annually. 

• Figuring $3.70 per 1,000 gallons, this will save $48 on annual 

water usage costs. 

ECRM 5: Water-Saver Toilets

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

Gallons of 

Water

Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

13,105 $48 <1% $1,200 78% $11,344 

ECRM 6: Boiler Upgrade 

• The current boiler system in each of the four units of the building is 

a Weil Mclain Gold Oil Model P-WTGO-3 with an AFUE of 85. 

• An ENERGY STAR rated system with a 3.6 Coefficient of 

Performance (COP) may save 140 gallons of kerosene annually 

resulting in an annual cost savings of $547. 

• The lifespan of boiler is calculated at 20 years. This upgrade will 

pay back within its lifespan (15 years), therefore implementation of 

this measure is recommended. 

ECRM 6: Boiler Upgrade 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

Gallons of 

Kerosene Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

140 $547 8% $8,000 3% -$1,128 

Renewable Energy Sources 

•May be use to either supplement or create 

complete energy independence. 

•Three renewable energy sources were modeled 

and recommended: 

•Geothermal 

•Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water 

•Photovoltaic Array 
ECRM 7: Geothermal 

• Replacing the current kerosene boiler system with a geothermal heat 

pump system with a 14.5 Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) 

for cooling and a 3.6 COP for heating, may save 1.262 gallons of 

kerosene annually. Annual cost savings of $2,346. 

• The lifespan of the geothermal system is calculated at 20 years. This 

upgrade will pay back in just under its lifespan (19 years); therefore, 

implementation of this measure is recommended. 

ECRM 7: Geothermal Upgrade 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh 

Gallons 

of 

Kerosene 

Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

-16,090 1,262 $2,346 50% $45,000 0% -$15,014 

With 30% Tax Credit: $31,500 4% -$2,156 

ECRM 8: Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water 

• Current use: around 4,600 kWh to heat water per year. 

• Evacuated-tube solar collectors could offset most of the electricity used for 

heating hot water. 

• Panels are available capable of producing 14,700 Btus/day in the Northern 

New York region. The panel size is around 41ft2 (varies by manufacturer) and 

the building would need two to produce all of the building’s hot water needs. 

• Panel first cost estimated at nearly $2,000. 

• The economics of this are favorable with a 4-year payback before incentives. 

If the 30% federal tax credit is taken advantage of, the cost would be reduced 

to $1,400 and would pay back in 3 years. 

ECRM 8: Solar Thermal DHW Upgrade 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

3,214 $514 5% $2,000 25% $4,199 

With 30% Tax Credit: $1,400 37% $4,770 

ECRM 9: Photovoltaic Array 

• The purpose of a photovoltaic array is to reduce the use of traditional energy 

sources and create renewable energy. 

• Captures solar energy and converts it to electricity for home use. This cuts 

down on the amount of energy that must be purchased from the utility 

company. 

• The PV Watts calculator indicated that a 5.0 kW array in the Massena, NY, 

area will produce 5,814 kWh annually. 

• The investment cost is calculated with the $9,000 federal/state tax credit. This 

array would pay back within the photovoltaic 25 year lifespan (23 years). 

Therefore, the measure is recommended for implementation. 

ECRM 9: Photovoltaic Array 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV 

5,814 $930 9% $30,000 -2% -$16,085 

With 30% Tax Credit: $21,000 1% -$7,514 
ECRM Recommendation Summary 

ECRM

Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Gallons of 

Kerosene

Gallons 

of 

Water

Cost % 

Energy Investment IRR NPV SP

ECRM 1 CFL upgrades 3,696 $591 5% $69 860% $4,283 0 

ECRM 2 ENERGY STAR 

Refrigerators 2,992 $479 4% $1,600 27% $1,997 3 

ECRM 3 Low-Flow 

Showerheads 1,219 10,950 $236 2% $200 118% $2,605 1 

ECRM 4 Low-Flow 

Aerators 697 8,760 $144 1% $160 90% $1,556 1 

ECRM 5 Low-Flow Toilets 13,105 $48 <1% $1,200 78% $11,344 25 

ECRM 6 Boiler Upgrade 140 $547 8% $8,000 3% -$1,128 15 

ECRM 7 Geothermal -16,090 1,262 $2,346 50% $45,000 0% -$15,014 19 

With Incentives $31,500 4% -$2,156 13 

ECRM 8 Solar Thermal 

DHW 3,214 $514 5% $2,000 25% $4,199 4 

With Incentives $1,400 37% $4,770 3 

ECRM 9 Photovoltaic Array 5,814 $930 9% $30,000 -2% -$16,085 32 

With Incentives $21,000 1% -$7,514 23 

Package 1 

 

All Recommend 

ECRMs - Boiler 

Upgrade 

17,632 140 $3,489 34% $43,229 5% $245 12 

With Incentives $22,400 15% $20,082 6 

Package 2 

 

All Recommend 

ECRMs - 

Geothermal 

1,542 1,262 $5,288 77% $80,229 3% -$13,640 15 

With Incentives $53,900 8% $11,435 10 

Note 

• With any ECRM, be sure to do your research. 

• How much will it cost you? 

• How much energy do you need? 

• What is the lifespan of the unit or building in question? 

• Especially when considering the renewable energy ECRMs, 

seek expert advice to ensure that you know all of the 

considerations, pitfalls, and available incentives! 

Getting the Most Out of ECRMs 

• Follow maintenance instructions to keep equipment 

functioning at its peak. 

• Ensure that your housing staff is educated in 

maintenance of new systems. 

• Bring in experts to maintain systems or train your 

staff. 

• Provide residents with education on how use or care 

for equipment, what to expect, and how to get 

assistance. 
Case Study 2: 

Warm Climate Energy Efficiency 

Upgrades in Existing Multifamily 

Building

 
1/29/13&

1&

COCOPAH EXISTING 

MULTIFAMILY BUILDING 

 A Warm Climate Case Study of Energy 

Efficiency and Sustainable Developments 

Cocopah Tribe 

•The Cocopah 

Reservation is 

located in 

southwestern 

Arizona, near the 

town of Somerton, 13 

miles south of Yuma. 

A Case Study of Energy Evaluation and 

Recommendations for Affordable Housing 

•Cocopah Indian Housing 

and Development 

(CIHAD) manages the 

units. 

•The three eight-unit 

garden-style buildings and 

a community building 

were constructed in 2003 

•Building B was evaluated. 

Cocopah Site Image 
1/29/13&

2&

Tribal Philosophy 

• The Cocopah Indian Tribe’s 

commitment to providing its 

members with safe, 

affordable, healthy and 

energy efficient housing 

encourages members living 

on the Reservation to remain 

and encourages members 

now living off-Reservation to 

return. 

•As part of this vision, the 

CIHAD decided to explore 

options to retrofit this 

development with more 

energy efficient sustainable 

features. 

Traditional Cocopah Home 

Site Description 

•Constructed in 2003 

•Three apartment buildings 

with 24 units, and 

community building 

•Each building has four twobedroom (855 SF each) 

and four three-bedroom 

(1,107 SF each) units 

totaling 8,532 SF. 

•Stick Built with 2 X 6 wood 

frame construction 

•The buildings are all 

electric.

Building Envelope 

• Walls: The typical wall construction is 5/8” gypsum board, 2x6 

wood stud construction at 16” on center with R-19 fiberglass 

batt insulation, 60 MIL building paper, and 7/16” oriented strand 

board sheathing with stucco and mesh. Estimated thermal 

resistance rating (R-value) of R-22. 

• Roof: The roof is gabled with a 4:12 slope. It is constructed 

with 2x6 pre-engineered wood trusses at 24” on center, 

covered in 7/16” oriented strand board, #15 felt, and 240# 

fiberglass shingles. There is R-32 blown insulation above the 

ceiling. 

• Floor: The main floor is a 5” reinforced concrete slab on 2” of 

clean sand. The second floor is 2x10 wood floor joists at 16” 

on center with 3⁄4” gypsum concrete subfloor and 3⁄4” tongue and 

groove CDX plywood. The bedrooms, hall, dining room, and 

living room are carpeted. The kitchen, storage, and bathrooms 

are vinyl composite tile. 

• Windows: clear double pane glazing 
1/29/13&

3&

 HVAC 

Heating/Cooling 

• Amana split system heat pumps 

that are 3 to 3.5 ton (1000 to 1200 

cubic feet per minute or CFM) 

depending on unit size. 

• Ambient temperature 115 °F 

cooling, 40 °F heating, and 

minimum SEER of 12.0. 

• Ventilation air is provided by 

infiltration and operable windows. 

• Each bathroom also has an 

exhaust fan rated at 100 CFM. 

Ventilation 

Domestic Hot Water 

•The units have 40 gallon 

electric water heaters 

(Whirlpool E1F40RD045V) 

•Energy factor (EF) of 0.92. 

Lighting in Units 

•Lighting: 

incandescent light 

fixtures 

throughout each 

unit. 

•Assumption of 60 

watt incandescent 

lamps 

Location Fixture 

Type Watts Operating Hours

kWh 

Usage

(4) 2 Bedrooms 2-lamp 60W 960 365 350

(4) 3 Bedrooms 2-lamp 60W 1,440 365 526

(8) Kitchen 1-lamp 60W 480 365 175

(8) Living room 1-lamp 60W 480 365 175

(4) 1 Bathroom 3-lamp 60W 720 730 526

(4) 2 Bathrooms 3-lamp 60W 1,440 730 1,051

(8) Hall 1-lamp 60W 480 2,190 1,051

Totals per 

Building: 6,000 5,110 3,854

3,854 kWh * 13 cents = $501.02
1/29/13&

4&

Additional Plug Loads 

•Additional plug loads in 

the building include 

typical residential 

appliances: TVs, 

refrigerators, stoves, 

microwaves, and task 

lighting. 

Energy Analysis and Evaluation 

A comprehensive energy analysis was conducted 

on Building B. The approach involved several 

steps. 

• Initial information was collected from the tribal housing 

authority about each building’s design, occupancy data, 

energy consumption, and energy costs. This included 

the following: 

• Building plans 

• Utility consumption data for the last 12 months 

• Geographical location and climate data 

• Details about unit occupancy, mechanical equipment, HVAC 

systems, and lighting fixtures from interviews with Tribal Housing 

Authority staff and during a site visit 

Computer Energy Modeling: eQUEST Version 3.64 

•Modeled data was calibrated to match the actual building 

energy usage from the utility bills. 

•This baseline was then used for evaluating the energy 

cost reduction measures (ECRMs). 

•The program uses these measures to calculate the 

energy consumption and energy costs the building is 

expected to use over an entire typical weather year. 
1/29/13&

5&

Assumptions of the eQUEST Model 

: 

•It is assumed that 40 people will be living in each building 

(two people per bedroom). While occupancy is highly 

dependent on the individual lifestyles of the families, it is 

assumed that half of the household will spend most of their 

time at home. Therefore it is assumed that the families will 

primarily be in the units 75 percent of the time 

(approximately 126 hours/week). 

•Air changes per hour (ACH) of 0.5. 

•Non-ENERGY STAR appliances. 

•Lighting power density of approximately 0.76 W/ft2 for the 

building. 

Energy Analysis Findings: Building B 

(before CFL upgrade) 

Average Annual Consumption Annual Costs Average Unit Cost

Electricity 70,50

9

kWh $9,295 100% 0.13 $/kWh

Natural Gas therms $/therm

Total: $9,295

Total Conditioned 

Area

5,574 ft2

Electricity Use 

Intensity

13 kWh/ft2/yr Natural Gas Use 

Intensity

Therms/ft2/

yr

 

Energy Use Intensity

 

43

 

kBtu/ft2/yr

 

Energy Cost Intensity

 

$1.67

 

$/ft2/yr

Electricity is provided by APS Electric

Energy Analysis Findings: Building B 

(after CFL upgrade) 

Average Annual Consumption Annual Costs Average Unit Cost

Electricity 67,60

4

kWh $8,789 100% 0.13 $/kWh

Natural Gas therms $/therm

Total: $8,789

Total Conditioned 

Area

5,574 ft2

Electricity Use 

Intensity

12 kWh/ft2/yr Natural Gas Use 

Intensity

Therms/ft2/

yr

 

Energy Use Intensity

 

41

 

kBtu/ft2/yr

 

Energy Cost Intensity

 

$1.58

 

$/ft2/yr
1/29/13&

6&

Energy Consumption and Cost for Building B 

•Uses eQUEST modeled 

energy data to create 

energy consumption 

profile for Building B. 

•The largest category of 

energy usage is space 

cooling (32%), the 

second largest is interior 

lighting (21%), and the 

third largest is plug loads 

(19%). 

•Areas to target for 

energy savings. 

Energy Cost Reduction Measures 

Energy conservation is best achieved through a 

multifaceted approach that involves: 

1. Load reduction, whether no cost or low cost

2. Energy efficiency improvements 

3. Energy generation. 

ECRM: Lighting Upgrade 

Building B 

with 

incandescent 

lamps: 

$501.02 

Building B 

with 

CFLs: 

$123.37 

Location Fixture Type Watts

Operati

ng 

Hours

kWh Usage

(4) 2 Bedrooms 2-lamp 60W 960 365 350

(4) 3 Bedrooms 2-lamp 60W 1,440 365 526

(8) Kitchen 1-lamp 60W 480 365 175

(8) Living room 1-lamp 60W 480 365 175

(4) 1 Bathroom 3-lamp 60W 720 730 526

(4) 2 Bathrooms 3-lamp 60W 1,440 730 1,051

(8) Hall 1-lamp 60W 480 2,190 1,051

Totals per 

Building: 6,000 5,110 3,854

3,854 kWh * 13 cents = $501.02

Location Fixture Type Watts Operatin

g Hours kWh Usage

(4) 2 Bedrooms 2-lamp 13W 224 365 82

(4) 3 Bedrooms 2-lamp 13W 336 365 123

(8) Kitchen 1-lamp 13W 120 365 44

(8) Living room 1-lamp 13W 120 365 44

(4) 1 Bathroom 3-lamp 13W 180 730 131

(4) 2 Bathrooms 3-lamp 13W 360 730 263

(8) Hall 1-lamp 13W 120 2,190 263

Totals per 

Building: 1,460 5,110 949

949 kWh * 13 cents = $123.37 $377.65 savings over 60W 

incandescent
1/29/13&

7&

ECRM 1: Lighting Upgrade 

• Lighting is currently provided by incandescent light fixtures. 

• A 60W incandescent lamp in each fixture calculates to a lighting power 

density of 0.76 W/ft2. 

• 13W CFLs may save 2,171 kWh annually. Cost savings of $282. 

• The lifespan of lighting: 5 years. The replacement of the incandescent lamps 

with CFLs will pay back in just over a year. 

ECRM 1: CFL Lighting Upgrade

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

2,171 $282 3% $395 66% $788 1.40

ECRM 2: ENERGY STAR Refrigerator 

Replacement 

• The refrigerator currently in use is a 1995 GE CTX18CAX. 

• Costs $112 annually to run. 

• An equivalent new ENERGY STAR model would only cost $51 annually to 

run. 

ECRM 2: Refrigerator Upgrade

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

3,754 $488 6% $3,200 9% $541 6.56

Window Shades 

•Adding shading devices to the exterior on the south of the 

building can best prevent sun from heating a space. 

•Interior window shades help, but allow the heat to enter 

through the window. 

•Exterior shades prevent some of the solar radiation from 

reaching the window and therefore entering the building. 
1/29/13&

8&

Window Shades 

The windows on the south side of the building currently 

have no exterior shading device other than the 2’ 

overhang for the windows on the second floor. 

ECRM 3: Exterior Window Shade 

Upgrade 

• Option 1: Adding 4’ louvered shades above the windows on the south side of 

the building may save 1,860 kWh annually. Annual cost savings: $242. 

• Option 2: If 8’ decks were added for the second floor that shaded the 1st floor 

windows, 2,240 kWh could be saved annually. Annual cost savings: $291. 

• The lifespan of the shading: 20 years. The additional 4’ shading will pay back 

in far less time than the 6’ decks. 

ECRM 3: Exterior Window Shade Upgrade

Options

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investme

nt IRR NPV

Simple 

Paybac

k 

(years)

4’ Window 

Shades 1,860 $242 3% $2,000 10% $965 8.27

Decks/Window 

Shades 2,240 $291 3% $6,000 0% -$2,258 20.60

ECRM 4: Triple Pane Low-E Window 

Upgrade 

• The current windows of the building are typical double pane windows with 

clear glazing. 

• New triple pane window that have low emissivity may save 2,100 kWh 

annually. Annual cost savings: $273. 

• The lifespan of windows: 20 years. The window replacement with triple pane 

windows will pay back in just over the 20 year lifespan. 

ECRM 4: Triple Pane Low-E Window Upgrade

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

2,100 $273 3% $6,000 -1% -$2,474 21.98
1/29/13&

9&

ECRM 5: HVAC Upgrade 

• The current HVAC system: a split system single zone with an air source heat 

pump. It has a cooling efficiency of 12 SEER, and a heating efficiency of 3 

coefficient of performance (COP). 

• An ENERGY STAR rated system with a 14.5 SEER and a 3.6 COP, may save 

4,720 kWh annually. Annual cost savings of $614. 

• The lifespan of HVAC is calculated at 20 years. 

ECRM 5: HVAC Upgrade

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

4,720 $614 7% $16,000 -2% -$7,955 26.08

ECRM 6: Radiant Barrier Upgrade 

• The existing attic insulation is blown-in R-32. 

• By adding a radiant barrier with additional attic insulation of R-11 (a combined 

total of R-43), heating and cooling losses may be minimized. 

• The calculations below use $1.20/ sq. ft. for insulation and labor. If this cost 

could be reduced to under $0.40/sq. ft. the additional insulation would pay for 

itself within its 25-year lifespan. 

ECRM 6: Radiant Barrier Upgrade

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

450 $59 1% $4,608 -7% -$3,603 78.77

Renewable Energy Sources 

•Renewable energy sources may be use to either 

supplement or create complete energy 

independence. 

•Three renewable energy sources were modeled: 

•Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water 

•Photovoltaic Array 

•Geothermal 
1/29/13&

10&

ECRM 7: Solar Thermal Domestic Hot 

Water 

• Building B currently uses around 9,200 kWh to heat water per year. 

• Evacuated-tube solar collectors could offset most of the electricity used for heating hot 

water. Panels are available capable of producing 28,000 British thermal units (BTUs)/

day in the southern Arizona region. The panel size is around 55ft2 (varies by 

manufacturer). 

• The building needs two panels to meet hot water needs. The panels would have a first 

cost of nearly $3,000. The economics of this are favorable with a 4-year payback before 

incentives. 

• If the 30 percent federal tax credit and the $0.50/kWh saved APS incentive (up to half of 

the project cost) can be used, the cost would be reduced to $600 and would pay back in 

less than a year. 

ECRM 7: Solar Thermal

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

6,465 $840 10% $3,000 28% $8,424 3.57

With tax credit and 

incentive: $600 140% $10,710 0.71

ECRM 8: Photovoltaic Array 

A photovoltaic array (PVs) can reduce the use of traditional energy sources. 

This system captures solar energy and converts it to electricity for use in the 

home. It cuts down on the amount of energy that must be purchased from the 

utility company. 

PV Watts calculator analysis indicates that a 4.0 kW array in the Somerton, 

AZ, area will produce 6,221 kWh annually. 

The investment cost is calculated with the $8,400 federal/state tax credit and 

the $800 state utility rebate. With the tax credit, the calculator shows that this 

array would pay back within the photovoltaic 25-year lifespan. 

ECRM 8: Photovoltaic Array Upgrade

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV

Simple 

Payback 

(years)

6,221 $809 9% $17,800 1% -$6,097 22.01

ECRM 9: Geothermal 

• The purpose of a geothermal system is to reduce the use of traditional energy sources. 

This system uses the temperature of the earth to heat and cool buildings. 

• There is a federal tax credit (30 percent of measure cost) available for implementing a 

geothermal system. 

• The e-Quest model indicates that this measure should not be implemented as the 

measure will not pay off in its lifetime (20 years). 

ECRM 9: Geothermal System Upgrade

Annual Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV Simple Payback 

(years)

-940 -$122 -1% $48,000 -$47,165 -392.8

with 30% Federal Tax Credit: $33,600 -$33,478 -269.8
1/29/13&

11&

ECRM Recommendation Summary 

Energy Cost 

Reduction Measure 

(ECRM)

 Number 

of 

ECRMs 

Annual Energy Savings Economic Analysis

kWh Cost % Energy Investment IRR NPV

Simple 

Payback 

(years)

CFLs 79 2,171 $282 3% $395 66% $788 1.40

Refrigerators 8 3,754 $488 6% $3,200 9% $541 6.56

Window Shades 20 1,860 $242 3% $2,000 10% $965 8.27

Window Shades 2 4 2,240 $291 3% $6,000 0% -$2,258 20.60

Triple low-e 

windows 20 2,100 $273 3% $6,000 -1% -$2,474 21.98

HVAC Upgrade 8 4,720 $614 7% $16,000 -2% -$7,955 26.08

Radiant Barrier 3,840 ft2 450 $59 1% $4,608 -7% -$3,603 78.77

Solar Thermal 2 6,465 $840 10% $600 140% $10,710 0.71

Photovoltaic Array 4 KW 6,221 $809 9% $17,800 1% -$6,097 22.01

Geothermal 32 wells -940 -$122 -1% $48,000 0% -$47,165 -392.80

All Recommend 

ECRMs 20,471 $2,661 30% $23,995 9% $8,733 9.02

Package of Recommended ECRMs 

• The purpose of this package is to combine the ECRMs recommended for 

implementation, and calculate the combined energy savings for these measures. This 

package includes CFL, refrigerator, and exterior window shades. It also includes the 

renewable energy sources: photovoltaic array and solar thermal. When analyzed in 

the e-Quest model, the package of ECRMs will pay off well within the lifetime of the 

photovoltaic array and solar thermal (25 years). 

• After implementing the ECRM package, the utility consumption analysis would be 

estimated as: 

Utility Consumption Analysis of Building B after Upgrade

Average Annual Consumption Annual Costs Average Unit Cost

Electricity 50,038 kWh $6,505 100% 0.13 $/kWh

Natural Gas therms $/therm

Total: $6,505

Total Conditioned Area 5,574 ft2

Electricity Use Intensity 9 kWh/ft2/yr Natural Gas Use Intensity Therms/ft2/yr

Energy Use Intensity 31 kBtu/ft2/yr Energy Cost Intensity $1.17 $/ft2/yr

Leveraging ECRMs with Utility Resources 

Local utility companies may offer energy efficiency incentives and on-site 

energy assessments of buildings to eligible customers. The Database of State 

Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency: http://www.dsireusa.org/ provides a 

summary of available and eligible state and utility resources. 

• APS provides a Multifamily Energy Efficiency Program (MEEP). The program 

provides a free on-site energy assessment to identify areas of upgrade for 

energy savings, free energy cost reduction measures (ECRMs), and technical 

and field support to assist with installation to eligible building owners. In May 

2012, the Tribe requested an on-site energy assessment of Building B to 

determine eligible ECRMs. In June, MEEP installed, at no cost the following 

ECRMs: 

• 24 Kitchen Faucet Aerators and 36 Bathroom Faucet Aerators 

• 38 Low-Flow Showerheads 

• 360 Compact Fluorescent Lamps 

• Incentives are offered for solar thermal domestic hot water, and photovoltaic 

array installation. 

Energy Cost Reduction Measures 

and Benchmarking in Existing 

(with exercise in energy use)
ENERGY&COST&REDUCTION&MEASURES&IN&EXISTING&

HOMES&AND&BENCHMARKING&

Energy'Cost'Reduc0on'Measures'(ECRMS)'

There'are'three'types'of'ECRMs.'

• Load'reduc0ons'

• Energy'efficiency'improvements'

• Renewable'energy'improvements'

Load'Reduc0on'

• First'step'

• LowD'or'noDcost'strategies'

• Turn'it'off!'

• Resident'educa0on'

• Example:'thermostat'setDbacks,'turning'off'lights'
Energy'Efficiency'Improvements'

• Includes'some'cost'

• Replacing'old'or'failing'systems'with'newer'or'more'

effec0ve'systems'that'will'save'in'u0lity'costs'and'

usage'

• May'result'in'load'reduc0on'as'well'

• Examples'include:'replacing'refrigerators,'hea0ng'

systems,'ligh0ng'fixtures'

Renewable'Energy'Improvements'

• Most'expensive'strategy'

• Offsets'some'of'remaining'energy'consump0on'with'

energy'genera0on'

• Step'toward'energy'independence,'but'requires'

careful'planning'

• Done'aPer'the'first'two'strategies'

• Examples'include'geothermal'systems,'solar'

domes0c'hot'water,'photovoltaic'arrays''

Renewable'Energy'Improvements'

• Part'of'longDterm'tribal'community'energy'

strategy'

• Consider'aPer'other'ECRMs'

• Seek'expert'advice'

• Carefully'research'incen0ves''
Primary'Barriers'to'ECRM'

Lack'of'informa0on'on:'

• Reliability''

• Costs'

• Savings'and'paybacks'

Tools'for'Determining'Useful'

ECRMs'

Simple'Payback'

• Determines'when'the'savings'from'an'investment'

will'cover'the'(extra)'cost'of'the'investment.'

• Simple'payback'does'not'consider'compounded'

savings,'discount'rates,'or'infla0on'rates'–which'

play'a'role'in'calcula0ng'the'precise'payback'over'

many'years'or'decades.'

• Simple'Payback'='Cost'of'Energy'Efficient'Product'/'

Annual'Electricity'Savings'
Internal'Rate'of'Return'(IRR)'

• The'Annual'Yield'on'an'equivalent'investment.'

• Project'is'rated'a'good'investment'if'the'IRR'is'

greater'than'could'be'earned'through'a'different'

investment'such'as'other'projects,'bonds,'bank'

accounts.'

• Currently'5%'is'the'assumed'rate'of'return.'

Net'Present'Value'(NPV)'

• Uses'a'discount'rate'to'the'find'the'present'value'

of'savings'occurring'at'a'future'date.'

• The'discount'rate'is'the'minimum'acceptable'rate'

of'return'–also'5%'is'the'assumed'rate'of'return.'

• Investments'with'a'posi0ve'NPV'are'considered'

good'investments.'

Energy'Use'Intensity''(EUI)'

• A'unit'of'measurement'that'describes'a'

building’s'energy'use.'The'calcula0on'is:'total'

energy'consumed'for'12'months/total'flour'

space'of'the'building.'
Example'of'EUI'per'kBtu/sq'P'

Energy&Costs& Sq&FT& EUI&& K>12&School&

$7,500,000' 50,000' 150' 169'

$'9,000,000' 50,000' 180' 169'

Cold'Climate'–'Conven0onal'Built'

 

Roof: R33&

Sidewalls: R11&&

Basement&Walls: R10&

Window&U>value: 0.65&

Air&Leakage: 11.48&ACH50&

Furnace: 80%&AFUE&(propane)&

Water&Heater: 56%&EF&(propane)&

Refrigerator: 1100&kWh/yr&

Ligh\ng:&Incandescent&

Dishwasher: Old&

HERS&Index: 114&

Ranch:&Built&1987&&&&&1,176&sqa&

Basement &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&Windows:&SG&with&storms&

Wood&frame&construc\on&

Cold'Climate'–'Energy'Efficient

 

Roof: R43&

Sidewalls: R11&

Basement&Walls: R10&

Window&U>value: 0.65&

Air&Leakage: 7.01&ACH50&

Furnace: 92%&AFUE&(propane)&

Water&Heater: 62%&EF&(propane)&

Refrigerator: 420&kWh/yr&

Ligh\ng:&50%&CFLs&

Dishwasher: Energy'Star'

HERS&Index: 87&

Annual&Savings:&$613&

Ranch:&Built&1987&&&&&1,176&sqa&

Basement &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&Windows:&SG&with&storms&

Wood&frame&construc\on&
Find'Out'More?'

• Hire'an'expert.'

• Find'simple'payback'calcula0on'worksheet'at'the'

Department'of'the'Interior'

o hjp://www.doi.gov/greening/energy/efficiency.cfm''

• Federal'Energy'Management'Programʼs'Energy'and'Cost'

Savings'Calculators'for'EnergyDEfficient'Products'

o hjp://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/technologies/

eep_eccalculators.html'''

o These'are'for'government'agencies'and'may'calculate'based'on'

bulk'purchases.'Some'are'web'applica0ons'and'some'are'

downloadable'Excel'files.'

Summary: Put Your Home on Energy Diet 

• Mix'and'match'choices'with'

energy'saving'habits'and'

technology'

• Conduct'a'Power$mart'

assessment'of'your'home'

at:'

– Energy'Star'Home'Energy'

Yards0ck'

– hjps://www.energystar.gov/

index.cfm?

fuseac0on=HOME_ENERGY_Y

ARDSTICK.showGetStarted''

– Home'Energy'Saver'

– hjp://

homeenergysaver.lbl.gov/

consumer/''

Caulk around wall, 

ceiling, and floor 

penetrations.

The biggest culprits are furnace exhaust vents 

penetrating the ceiling, water pipes going through walls 

and floors, and around kitchen and bathroom exhaust 

fans.

Install foam gaskets 

behind faceplates of 

electricial outlets and 

light switches.

Air leaks around outlets and lightswitches is common in 

exterior walls, but interior wall outlets can also let air 

escape up the walls and into the attic.

Weatherstrip around 

windows, doors, and 

attic hatches.

Weatherstripping should be compressed when the door or 

window is shut. Also make sure door sweeps and 

threshholds are in good condition.

Seal duct joints with 

duct mastic, mastic 

tape, or butylaluminum tape.

All supply and return duct joints should be sealed to 

ensure proper air distribution. Ducts in unconditioned 

spaces (attics, garages, crawlspaces) should be insulated 

to a minimum of R6 after air sealing.

Replace incandescent 

bulbs with compact 

fluorescent lamps.

Compact fluorescents save significantly on electricity 

costs and usually last six or seven years. T8 tubular 

fluorscents are another efficient way of lighting the home.

Install and use 

programmable 

thermostats.

These automatically reduce/increase temperatures in the 

heating/cooling season during the night and while people 

are away in the day time. Occupants can also temporarily 

override the settings when desired

Lower the temperature 

of water heaters to 120 

degrees.

Most households don't need water any hotter than 120 

degrees. For each 10oF reduction in water temperature, 

you can save between 3%–5% in energy costs.

Insulate hot water 

pipes.

Domestic hot water lines should be insulated to prevent 

heat loss, and cold water lines should be insulated to 

reduce surface condensation problems. 

Put an insulating 

jacket on your water 

heater.

A water heater tank that's warm to the touch needs 

additional insulation. Doing so can reduce standby heat 

losses by 25%–45%. This will save you around 4%–9% in 

water heating costs.

Install low-flow highpressure 

showerheads.

If it takes less than 20 seconds for your shower flow to fill 

a one gallon bucket, a low-flow shower head could help 

save on water heating costs.

Buy ENERGY STAR® 

appliances

Changing to ENERGY STAR labeled appliances can save 

the average home $80 a year in energy costs.

Replace Older 

Furnaces with HighEfficiency Units 

Switching to a 90+ AFUE furnace from an 80 AFUE 

furnace will save at least 10% on annual heating costs. It 

is recommended that furnaces that are more than 15 

years old be replaced with high-efficiency units.

Change Lifestyle 

Habits 

Provide education and training on energy conservation 

measure in Tribal homes.

Recommendations for Reducing Home Energy Usage

Understanding'U0lity'Data,'

Developing'Baselines'and'

Benchmarking'
Home'Energy'Fundamentals'

• How'much'do'you'spend'''''on'

hea0ng'each'year?'

• How'much'do'you'spend'on'

electricity'each'year?'

• What'is'your'total'annual''''u0lity'

cost?'

Reminder:'Energy'use'within'the'

Home'

'The'annual'energy'bill'for'a'typical'single'family'home'is'approximately'

$2,200'

What'Does'Data'Tell'TDHE?'
How'to'Collect'Benchmarking'Data'

• TDHE'pays'bills.'

• Collect'bills'for'each'unit'for'

12'months'

• Occupants'pay'bills.'

• Each'occupant'signed'form'

from'u0lity'and'u0lity'sent'

12Dmonths'of'data'to'

CIHAD.'

• Data'iden0fied'unit'but'not'

name.'

St.&Regis&example& Cocopah&example&

Annual&Electricity&Use&By&Apartment

Phase&1 Phase'2

Bldg&# Unit'#

#'of'

Occupants

Kerosene'Use'

(Gallons)

Electricity'Use'

(kWh)

Total'Use'

in'kBtu Bldg'# Unit'#

#'of'

Occupants

Electricity'Use'

(kWh)

Total'Use'

in'kBtu

1

1 1

1419

2,924

238,224 9

21 1 9,431

128,714

2 1 2,136 22 1 9,431

3 1 4,049 23 1 9,431

4 1 4,560 24 1 9,431

2

5 1

1150

3,049

179,977

10

25 1 8,770

119,693

6 1 4,216 26 1 8,770

3

7 1

1213

4,001

238,024

27 1 8,770

8 1 6,798 28 1 8,770

9 2 4,098

11

29 1 8,870

121,058

10 1 6,872 30 1 8,870

5

15 1

1226

7,116

227,391

31 1 8,870

16 1 4,291 32 1 8,870

17 1 3,520

12

33 1 8,510

116,144

18 1 3,227 34 1 8,510

6

19 2

945

3,289

146,272

35 1 8,510

20 1 2,175 36 1 8,510

7

11 1

1501

5,498

272,584 13

37 1 10,555

144,058

12 1 3,853 38 1 10,555

13 1 6,776 39 1 10,555

14 1 4,362 40 1 10,555

U\lity& Cost& Annual&Cost& YR&1:&10%&

Savings&

YR&2:&20%&

Savings&

Total&

Savings&

Kerosene' $'3.90' $1,419/4'='

$354.75'per'

unit'average'

$141.90/4'='

$35.48'per'

unit'

$283.80/4'='

$70.95'per'

unit'

$425.70/4'='

$106.43'per'

unit'

Electric' .16'cents' $2,187/4'='

$546.76'per'

unit'average'

$218.70/4'='

$54.68'per'

unit'

$437.40/4'='

$109.35'per'

unit'

$656.10/4'='

$164.03'per'

unit'

Total:' $3,606/4'='

$901.50'per'

unit'average'

$360.60/4'='

$90.15'per'

unit'

$721.20/4'='

$180.30'per'

unit'

$1,081.80/4'

='$270.45'

per'unit'

Building'1:''Phase'1'
Benchmarking'Energy'

kBtu/sq a/yr Ranking&

$'1/sq P'per'year' good'

$1'to'$2/'sq P'per'year' fair'to'slightly'poor'(typical)'

$'2'to'$'3/'sq P'per'year' probably'room'for'improvement'

$'3/'sq P'per'year'and'above' Leaky'dog'

Average&Annual&Consump\on Annual&Costs Average&Unit&Cost

Electricity 18,520 kWh $''2,948 36% $'0.16 $/kWh

Kerosene 1,340

gallons'

delivered $''5,229 64%

$'3.90 $/gal'delivered

Total: $''8,176

x'4'buildings'='$32,705'total'

Total&Facili\es&Area 3,497 P2

Electricity&Use&Intensity 5

kWh/P2/yr

Kerosene'Use'Intens0y

0.38 Gallons/P2/yr

Energy&Use&Intensity 70 kBtu/P2/yr Energy'Cost'Intensity $'2.34 P2/yr

Electricity&is&provided&by&Na\onal&Grid&and&kerosene&is&supplied&by	&Fuels

Benchmarking'example'

Btu/P'Energy'Use'Intensity'

Average&Annual&Consump\on Annual&Costs Average&Unit&

Cost

Electricity 18,5

20

kWh $''

2,948 36%

$'

0.1

6

$/kWh

Kerosene 1,34

0

gallons'

delivered $''

5,229 64%

$'

3.9

0

$/gal'

delivere

d

Total:

$''

8,176

x'4'buildings'='$32,705'

total'

Total&Facili\es&

Area

3,49

7

P2

Electricity&Use&

Intensity 5

kWh/P2/yr Kerosene'Use'

Intens0y

0.3

8

Gallons/

P2/yr

Energy&Use&

Intensity 70

kBtu/P2/yr Energy'Cost'

Intensity

$'

2.3

4

P2/yr

Electricity&is&provided&by&Na\onal&Grid&and&kerosene&is&supplied&by&

#9&Fuels

Average&Annual&Consump\on Annual&Costs Average&Unit&

Cost

Electricity 30,1

81

kWh $''

4,110 100%

$'

0.1

4

$/kWh

Kerosene 0

gallons'

delivered $''0 0%

$'

0.0

0

$/gal'

delivered

Total: $''

4,110

x'5'buildings'='$20,552'

total

Total&Facili\es&

Area

4,05

0

P2

Electricity&Use&

Intensity 7

kWh/P2/yr Kerosene'Use'

Intensity

0 Gallons/

P2/yr

Energy&Use&

Intensity 25

kBtu/P2/yr Energy'Cost'

Intensity

$'

1.0

1

P2/yr
Breakdown'Of'Es0mated'Average'Annual''Energy'

Consump0on'In'Green'Sustainable'Unit:'Cold'Climate'

Breakdown'Of'Es0mated'Average'Annual'Energy'Consump0on'

In'1937'Act'Unit:'Cold'Climate'

Exercise'1:'online'benchmarking'

• Walk&through&the&Energy&Star&Home&

Energy&Yards\ck&

• What&you&need&to&know&to&get&started:&

• Your&energy&use&and&costs&for&the&last&year:&

You'll'need'your'last'12'months'of'u0lity'bills'

OR'a'12Dmonth'summary'statement'from'

your'u0lity'company.'

• Energy&sources&for&your&home:'natural'gas,'

electricity,'fuel'oil,'propane,'coal,'wood'and/

or'kerosene?'

• The&square&footage&of&your&home.
Exercise'1a:'Online'Home'Energy'Calcula0on'

• Walk'through'Home'Energy'Saver,'quick'

input'

SCinIC 

Demonstration Projects 

 
1/29/13&

1&

SCinIC&Demonstra4on&Projects&and&

Their&Sustainable&Technologies&

Eight&Demonstra4on&Projects&

• At&different&stages&of&comple4on&

• Some&in&planning&stage,&some&under&

construc4on,&some&completed.&

• Covers&different&ONAP®ions&and&also&

different&climates&

• Some&differen4a4on&in&housing&type&

• Variety&of&sustainable&technologies&

Mississippi&Band&of&Choctaw&Indians&

• Climate:&warm&temperate&humid&with&hot&

summers.&

• Has&completed&86&single&family&and&duplex&units&in&

the&last&2&years&using&structural&insulated&panels&

(SIPs)&for&envelope&including&roof.&

• Also&Energy&Star&cer4fied.&

• Currently&construc4ng&13&more&units.&

• Exploring&issues&of&site&planning&to&control&erosion,&

maintain&wetlands&and&habitat.&
1/29/13&

2&

SIPs&Features& • Typically&foam&or&straw&insula4on&

between&oriented&stand&board&

(OSB).&

• Increased&efficiency&over&standard&

framing&techniques.&

• Reduced&air&infiltra4on&and&heat&

loss.&

• Saves&energy,&reduces&wood&use,&

increases&comfort.&&

Source:&Daniel&D.&Chiras,&The$New$Ecological$ Home$

• High&wind&resistance&

• Life[cycle&analysis&reports&

available&at&Structural&Insulated&

Panel&Associa4on&(

h\p://www.sips.org/green[building/

life[cycle[analysis/)&

Cross&sec4on&detail&of&a&typical&SIP&and&the&wall&to&

founda4on&connec4on.&(Source:(www.sips.org)

Na4ve&Village&of&Kwinhagak

Design(1:(Quinhagak(Prototype,(

“octagon(house”(

Design(2:(Adapted(Crooked(Creek(

Prototype,(“rectangle”(house”(

h\p://www.cchrc.org/quinhagak[prototype[

home&& h\p://cchrc.org/crooked[creek[prototype[

home&&

Climate:&wet,&snowy&&(43&in&a&year)&with&cool&summers.&

Precipita4on&averages&22&inches&a&year.&

Shared(features(

• Steel&walls&set&off&with&plas4c&

bracing&and&filled&with&soy[

based&spray&foam&insula4on[

prevents&heat&conduc4on.&

R[40&&

• Venmar&air&exchanger&

• Lightweight&materials&for&

transporta4on&ease.&

• Steel&frame&founda4on&filled&

with&foam&and&thermally&

isolated&from&the&ground.&

• Triple&glazed&windows,&low[e,&

argon&gas.&

Octagon(features(

• Tradi4onal&arc4c&entry&

• Rounded&shape&echoes&

tradi4on&and&prevent&

dribing&

• Used&160&gallons&of&hea4ng&

oil&compared&with&norm&of&

600[800.&

Rectangle(features(

• Integrated&truss&includes&

floor,&walls,&and&roof.&

• Frame&erected&in&1&day&
1/29/13&

3&

Navajo&Housing&Authority&

• In&the&process&of&building&153&new&residen4al&

units.&A&number&of&these&will&be&built&using&

Navajo&Flexcrete.&

• They&may&conduct&a&pilot&program&tes4ng&

ductless&electricity[based&heat&pumps&due&to&high&

cost&of&using&propane.&

• Addi4onally,&we&are&working&with&NHA&as&they&

start&a&master&planning&process&and&assis4ng&with&

development&to&green&standards&to&guide&their&

design&and&construc4on&in&the&future.&

Climate:&hot&summers&and&cold&winters,&lots&of&sun,&drought&condi4ons&due&to&

lower&winter&precipita4on&last&11&of&15&years.&

Ductless(MiniDSplit(Electric(

Heat(Pumps(

• Hea4ng&and&cooling.&

• Uses&refrigera4on&

technology.&

• Very&efficient.&

• Easy&to&retrofit.&

• h\p://energy.gov/

energysaver/ar4cles/

ductless[mini[split[heat[

pumps&&

Navajo(Flexcrete(Blocks(

• Solid&fiber&reinforced&aerated&

concrete&

• Reduces&construc4on&4me&and&

work&site&waste.&

• Good&insula4on&and&heat&

storage.&

• Fire,&pest,&and&mold/&mildew&

resistant.&

• Largely&made&of&recycled&

material&(fly&ash)&

• h\p://

www.navajoflexcrete.biz/&&

Housing&Authority&of&the&Pawnee&Tribe&

of&Oklahoma&

• Climate:&warm,&humid&with&hot&summers.&Averages&

55&tornados&a&year&(Na4onal&Oceanic&and&

Atmospheric&Administra4on).&

• Planning&to&build&two&duplexes&or&a&quadplex

• Exploring&Insula4ng&Concrete&Forms&(ICFs)&
1/29/13&

4&

ICF&Features&

• Plas4c&foam&forms&that&are&filled&with&concrete&

(can&mix&in&fly&ash)&

• Increased&insula4on&and&decreased&air&infiltra4on&

• For&hurricane&safety,&ICFs&harden&the&en4re&

structure&so&that&an&extra&safe&room&would¬&

be&needed.&Also&earthquake&and&fire&resistant&

• Mold/moisture&and&pest&resistant&

&&&&&&&&Source:&

h\p://www.toolbase.org/ToolbaseResources/level4DG.aspx?

ContentDetailID=3893&BucketID=4&CategoryID=61&&

Cocopah&Indian&Housing&and&

Development&

• Climate:&arid,&dry&winter,&hot&

• Rehabilita4ng&three&mul4family&buildings&with&

eight&units&each&

• Seeking&ways&to&lower&u4lity&costs&

Energy&Assessment&Recommenda4ons&

• Add&exterior&window&shade&

to&decrease&heat&entering&

window.&

• Add&other&features&
1/29/13&

5&

Nez&Perce&Tribal&Housing&Authority&

• Climate:&Cool&summers&with&snowy,&cold&

winters&

• Planning&a&development&with&18[20&duplex&

units&

• Selected&hybrid&straw&bale&construc4on&

Straw&Bale&Wall&Assembly&Features&

• Light[framed&straw&bale&(non[

load&bearing)[quicker&

• Natural&material&minimizes&

wood&use.&

• Can&be&local&

• Good&insula4on&value:&R[34&to&

R[45&

• Straw&bale&can&also&be&load[

bearing&&

• Fire&resistant&&

Source:&Chiras,&The$New$Ecological$Home$

Addi4onal&features&

• Cultural&eastern&orienta4on,&wood&

carports&echoing&Nez&Perce&shade&

structures,&duplex&shape&to&echo&

extended&teepee.&

• Low&impact&site&design&

• Frost&protected&shallow&

founda4on&

Pokagon&Band&of&Potawatomi&Indians&

• Climate:&hot&summers&and&cold&winters&with&

heavy&snow&

• Already&developed&master&plan&and&implemented&

low&impact&site&development.&

• Currently&construc4ng&four&four[unit&buildings&

• Two&buildings&will&serve&as&a&geothermal&system&

pilot&program.&

• Part&of&sustainable&neighborhood:&LEED[Gold&

community¢er&
1/29/13&

6&

Low&Impact&Site&Development&Features&

• Bioswales

• Rain&gardens&

• Na4ve&plant&

and&tree&

restora4on&

• Permeable&

pavement&

• Cluster&design&

housing&

Pokagon&Band&(con4nued)&

• Beginning&construc4on&

on&four&mul4family&

buildings&to&contain&four&

units&each.&&

• Two&will&pilot&a&

geothermal&system&

hea4ng&and&two&will&use&

forced&air&furnaces,&

fueled&by&natural&gas.&&

Exterior&proposed&by&NDG&

To&Find&Out&More:&

Contact&Lynda&Lantz&

202[393[6400&

llantz@firstpic.org&