U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

34–906 PDF 2007

S. HRG. 110–92

TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

APRIL 12, 2007

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Chairman 

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Vice Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma 

SARA G. GARLAND, Majority Staff Director 

DAVID A. MULLON, JR., Minority Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on April 12, 2007 .............................................................................. 1

Statement of Senator Dorgan ................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Tester ................................................................................... 10

Statement of Senator Thomas ................................................................................ 3

WITNESSES

Artman, Carl J., Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Department of the 

Interior .................................................................................................................. 3

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 5

Gipp, Dr. David M., Past President and Board Member, American Indian 

Higher Education Consortium; President, United Tribes Technical College .. 14

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 17

Guy, Elmer J., President, Navajo Technical College; Board Member, American 

Indian Higher Education Consortium ................................................................ 23

Prepared statemaent ........................................................................................ 25

Keltner, Dr. Bette, Dean, School of Nursing and Health Studies, Georgetown 

University ............................................................................................................. 33

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 35

Merisotis, Jamie P., President, Institute for Higher Education Policy ............... 27

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29

APPENDIX

Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota, prepared statement ...... 45

(1)

TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES 

THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 2007

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room 

485, Senate Russell Office Building, Hon. Byron Dorgan, Chairman 

of the Committee, presiding. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

The CHAIRMAN. We will call the hearing to order. I will be joined 

momentarily by Vice Chairman Thomas. 

Because of impending votes this morning in the U.S. Senate, I 

want to begin on time and I don’t want to have a lengthy recess 

for votes and inconvenience witnesses. 

I want to thank Mr. Artman for being here. This is Carl 

Artman’s first appearance before the committee since being confirmed as assistant secretary for Indian Affairs. We very much appreciate his being here. We appreciate the other witnesses as well. 

Senator Thomas, I just began as the buzzer started for the Senate. I pointed out that we have votes this morning, and I am hoping to get through the witnesses and hear their testimony before 

we have to have a lengthy recess for votes. I know that we also 

have an Energy Committee meeting concurrent with this. So forgive me for banging the gavel on time. 

Senator THOMAS. That is fine. 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to make a brief opening statement to try 

to set the stage for this discussion, which I think is very important. 

The purpose of today’s oversight hearing on tribal colleges and 

universities is to receive testimony that will instruct us in amending the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act of 

1978. The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions is currently drafting a bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act of 1965. The Tribally Controlled College or University 

Assistance Act of 1978 is included under Title III of the Higher 

Education Act. We have been working closely with the HELP Committee to ensure that amendments requested by tribal colleges and 

universities and considered by us are included in this session’s reauthorization bill. 

So today we will hear from the Department of the the Interior 

responsible for providing grants for 26 tribally controlled colleges, 

funding to two post-secondary career and vocational technical institutions, and directly operating two tribal colleges. 

2

We will receive testimony from others, including David Gipp, 

President of the United Tribes Technical College, and Elmer Guy, 

President of the Navajo Technical College in Arizona and New 

Mexico. Jamie Merisotis of the Institute for Higher Education Policy will share with us recent quantitative and qualitative analysis 

and research into Indian higher education. 

I have long been a strong supporter of tribal colleges and universities because I believe they benefit the community and the individual student substantially. In many cases, the only kind of higher education that would be available to some of these students is 

the higher education that is available in their community where so 

many other extended family opportunities are available for child 

care and support for these students, many of whom are non-traditional students. 

I have put up a map that shows there are 34 tribal colleges and 

universities throughout the United States. There are five tribal colleges in my State. They offer a wide range of accredited programs 

from business administration to nursing, and many in between. 

In addition to college level programming, tribal colleges and universities also offer high school completion GED programs, job training and college preparatory courses as well. They are an essential 

part of their communities, often serving as community centers, libraries, tribal archives, career and business centers, and much, 

much more. 

If I might have a photograph put up, a photograph of the Oglala 

Lakota College in Kyle, SD. It has a unique decentralized campus 

system featuring college centers in each of the nine districts of the 

Pine Ridge Reservation. That allows students to stay in touch with 

their communities and still attend college. It is a very unique and 

interesting college that I wanted to bring to your attention. It offers bachelor’s and master’s degrees. It has produced 71 percent of 

the elementary education teachers who teach on the reservation, 

and 76 percent of the nurses. 

About 28,000 American Indian and Alaska Native students are 

served by these tribal colleges. As I have indicated, it is critically 

important to their lives and to their opportunity for higher education. Let me just show a couple of quick photos. This is a photo 

of Joey Awanopei, a student from the College of the Menominee 

Nation in Wisconsin. He is a traditional Menominee family member, remained rooted in their language, culture and beliefs. 

He and his brothers were traditionally raised by their grandparents in a small remote town on the Menominee Reservation. 

Joey has earned an associate’s degree from a tribal college. His 

goal is to be a certified teacher in a tribal school, and a positive 

Indian male role model. He plans to earn a bachelor’s degree. In 

the meantime, he has obtained certification as a traditional Menominee speaker and a middle school language teacher. What a 

wonderful inspiration. 

Here is one additional photograph of Nikki Smoker. In her early 

forties, if we could put that chart up, she has dealt with personal 

tragedies that would crush most people. In the past few years, she 

has lost a 16-year old daughter to heart failure, a 20-year old son 

to a car accident, and her husband of many years to cancer. She 

is a grandmother to many, raising many foster children and chilVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:56 Jul 23, 2007 Jkt 034906 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\34906.TXT JACKF PsN: JACK
3

dren of extended families. At one point, she had 15 people living 

in her four bedroom home. Her home is always open to people of 

need. 

Even as she has cared for others, she has attended tribal college 

and received a certificate in tribal law and justice from Fort Peck 

Community College in Montana. And now she plans on attending 

a 4-year university. Again, she is an inspiring story, and I do that 

only to point out that this is about individuals with interests in improving their lives and getting a better education. Tribal colleges 

allow that opportunity to exist. For those reasons, I strongly support the tribal college system. 

Let me call on my colleague, Senator Thomas. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator THOMAS. Welcome, Mr. Artman. Glad to have you here. 

I think certainly the tribal colleges are an opportunity for tribal 

members to develop skills and gain education that is especially important. These opportunities include the tribal colleges for economic 

development, for energy and entrepreneurial tracks. We are looking 

forward to that in Wyoming, as a matter of fact, and starting to 

establish a startup college there. There are lots of opportunities for 

things that we haven’t yet been able to take advantage of. 

So we just obviously need to be more prepared for competitiveness in this century, and these are the kinds of things that would 

help there. 

So I welcome the witnesses and I am glad we are having this 

hearing, and I certainly support the tribal college program. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Thomas, thank you very much. 

Assistant Secretary Artman, thank you for being here. We will 

include the full statements of all of the witnesses today as a part 

of the permanent record of the Committee. We would ask that you 

summarize. 

Again, welcome on your first occasion back as Assistant Secretary. You may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF CARL J. ARTMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR 

INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. ARTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Vice 

Chairman and Members of the Committee. 

I will just hit a few salient points in these opening comments. 

I am pleased to be here today to speak about post-secondary tribal education, as I served on the President’s Board of Advisors for 

Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU) from 2002 to 2006. This is 

an area of great importance to me. 

The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) is committed to improving 

the overall quality of our education system. The BIE system includes two post-secondary institutions: Haskell Indian Nations University and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute. 

The BIE also administers grants to 25 tribal colleges and universities. In addition, the Department of Education provides funds to 

improve and strengthen the academic quality, institutional management, and fiscal stability of eligible TCU. 

4

Each year, our system serves approximately 46,000 Indian students in grades K–12, and we are striving to support a seamless 

education program from early childhood through adulthood by providing safe, secure and healthy learning environments that promote academic achievement and successful student transition to 

post-secondary education. 

This summer in Denver, CO, on July 24–26, the BIE will hold 

its first National Partnership Conference to promote collaboration 

and cooperation with the various stakeholders of the BIE education 

system. The goal of the conference is to better use available stakeholder resources to support student achievement. The American Indian Higher Education Consortium, AIHEC, will be representing 

the TCU and is a key conference partner focusing on student transition to post-secondary education. 

Just a brief overview. Looking at the TCU operations funding, 

appropriations for TCU have increased approximately 45 percent in 

the past 15 years, with authorized appropriations for tribal colleges 

remaining relatively steady over the past 3 years. TCU student enrollments have increased and the number of tribal colleges funded 

under the Tribally Controlled Community Colleges Assistance Act 

have grown from only a few in the early 1980s to 25 as of Fiscal 

Year 2007. 

Funding is limited to a one school per tribe basis, using a formula that funds each TCU based on the full-time student equivalency rate. Currently, the act is funded at $54 million for operating 

grants. 

With regards to the Endowment Program, included in the act is 

a provision for endowments at TCU. Each year, based on the availability, TCU may receive endowments from the BIE which are, in 

turn, matched by the TCU at one-half of the Government’s contribution and placed in a restricted interest-bearing account. Interest received from that account can be used by the colleges to defray 

the expenses of running the college. The BIE has funded close to 

$8 million in endowments to TCU since 1999. 

Technical assistance is another provision of the act. By election 

and resolution of the tribal colleges, AIHEC currently receives the 

technical assistance funds in the amount of about $600,000 per 

year to provide various technical assistance services to TCU. Since 

1999, just under $2 million has been provided for technical assistance to the TCU. 

In an effort to monitor and promote the success of the program, 

the BIE maintains an ongoing collaboration with AIHEC and the 

White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities. This efforts helps ensure that TCU receive adequate support to carry out 

their mission. As part of its annual plan, AIHEC provides the BIE 

with a progress report each year, as well as a description of the 

continuing efforts made on behalf of TCU. 

The Honors Program. Most recently, we have sought out the help 

of tribal colleges to implement what we are calling our Honors Program, a program designed to hire top Indian students into Indian 

Affairs. This is broken into three levels: High school, junior college, 

community college, and then college, or university. Graduates can 

be appointed directly into the Indian Affairs positions. Our BIE 

and Human Resources Office are working with three tribal colleges 

5

to provide opportunities for students attending these colleges to 

earn class credits, while developing marketing plans to advertise 

the program and its benefits to Indian students. 

In terms of economic development, Indian Affairs supports other 

initiatives such as our recent partnership with Colorado School of 

Mines, United Tribes Technical College, and the Navajo Technical 

College to develop an energy-oriented curriculum for Indian colleges. Our Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development provided a grant to CSM to develop a curriculum in partnership with 

UTTC and NTC. CSM will provide faculty training and will teamteach some of the course. They will be retained as technical support 

in later years. 

Internship opportunities are being established with energy-focused companies, and we hope to create opportunities for high performing students to transfer into a full 4-year program at CSM. 

On related matters, I had the opportunity yesterday to meet with 

Nick Lowery, the acting chair of the National Fund for Excellence 

in American Indian Education. I am happy to report that we made 

progress at this meeting. I expect that we should be able to help 

the Fund achieve its milestones. Some of the issues discussed included supplementation of personnel during the startup phase, a 

commitment to more frequent communications regarding the 

progress and the needs of the Fund, and working with the Fund 

representatives to facilitate the transfer of bequeathed moneys 

from OST to the Fund. 

The National Fund provides an important component to the overall Indian education picture, and I look forward to helping it 

achieve its goals. 

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Members of the Committee, I want to thank you for inviting me to testify here today. 

I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Artman follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CARL J. ARTMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN

AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Members of the Committee. My name is Carl Artman and I am the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior. I am pleased to be here today to speak about 

post-secondary Indian education. This is a topic of great interest to me. From 2002 

to 2006, I served on the President’s Board of Advisors on Tribal Colleges and Universities. 

Background 

The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), formerly the Office of Indian Education 

Programs within the Bureau of Indian Affairs, is committed to improving the overall 

quality of our education system. The BIE is a unique system which includes 184 

elementary and secondary schools located across 23 states—66 of these schools include residential components (dormitories) and two post-secondary colleges: Haskell 

Indian Nations University and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute. The 

BIE also administers grants to 25 Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU). In addition, the Department of Education provides funds to improve and strengthen the 

academic quality, institutional management, and fiscal stability of eligible TCU. 

Each year our system serves approximately 46,000 Indian students in grades K–

12. We are striving to support a seamless education program from early childhood 

through adulthood by providing safe, secure, and healthy learning environments 

that promote academic achievement and successful student transition to post-secondary education. 

We must improve our overall high school graduation rate and we also need to better prepare our students academically so they have the option of continuing their 

6

education at the post-secondary level. In meeting the workforce needs of the 21st 

century, nearly 90 percent of the fastest growing jobs in this country require postsecondary education. TCU provide for many of our students the next step in that 

educational development. However, before students can move on to college course 

work, they must acquire foundational knowledge in math, science, and language 

skills. We want to work more collaboratively with our TCU partners to identify better ways to better prepare our students for college course work. This could include 

‘‘student enhancing’’ efforts of bridging programs and individualized tutoring services. 

This summer in Denver, Colorado (July 24–26, 2007), the BIE will hold its first 

national partnership conference to promote collaboration and cooperation with the 

various stakeholders of the BIE education system. The goal of the conference is to 

better use available stakeholder resources to support student achievement. The 

American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), representing the TCU, is 

a key conference partner focusing on student transition to post-secondary education. 

Overview of TCU Program Functions 

TCU Operations Funding 

Our elementary and secondary education programs use 90 percent of the BIE’s 

total budget. Appropriations for TCU have increased approximately 45 percent in 

the past 15 years with the authorized appropriations for tribal colleges remaining 

relatively steady over the past 3 years. TCU student enrollments have increased 

and the number of tribal colleges funded under the Act has grown from only a few 

in the early 1980s to 25 as of FY 2007. Funding is limited to a one-school-per-tribe 

basis, using a formula that funds each TCU based on a full-time student equivalency. 

The BIE’s primary function in implementing the Act has been historically more 

administrative than service-oriented. These functions include collecting and reviewing applications for eligibility to receive TCU operating grants, ensuring that funds 

reach the tribal colleges, and ensuring tribal colleges receive necessary technical assistance required to fulfill their commitment under the Act. The BIE carries out its 

responsibility to the TCU by administering the appropriated funds intended to defray expenditures for academic, educational and administrative purposes, and for 

the operation and maintenance of the tribal colleges. 

Currently, the Act is funded at $54 million for operating grants. In 2007 the BIE 

is administering operating grants to 25 Tribal Colleges and Universities. In 2006, 

these schools offered over 350 degree programs and 180 vocational programs. During 2006, the TCU served 27,897 Indian students and conferred 1,298 degrees and 

certificates. 

Endowment Program 

Included in the Act is a provision for endowments to TCU. Each year, based on 

availability, TCU may receive endowments from the BIE, which are in turn matched 

by the TCU at the rate of one-half of the government’s contribution, and placed in 

restricted interest-bearing accounts. Interest income received by the colleges is 

available to the college to supplement and further defray the expense of running the 

college. The BIE has funded close to $8 million in endowments to TCU since 1999. 

Technical Assistance 

Technical Assistance (TA) is another provision of the Act. By election and resolution of the tribal colleges, the American Indian Higher Education Consortium 

(AIHEC) currently receives the TA funds in the amount of $600,000 to provide various technical assistance services to TCU. Since 1999, just under $2 million has 

been provided for TA to TCU. 

In an effort to monitor and promote the success of the TA program, the BIE maintains ongoing collaboration with the AIHEC and the White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities (WHITCU). This effort helps to ensure that TCU receive adequate support to carry out their mission. As a part of its annual plan, 

AIHEC provides the BIE with a progress report each year as well as a description 

of the continuing efforts made on behalf of the TCU. 

Collaboration requires ongoing interaction to be productive and successful. The 

BIE participates in meetings with the WHITCU Advisory Board members, the Tribal Colleges and Universities Annual Presidents’ Planning Session sponsored by 

AIHEC, and the National 2007 Summer Conference. AIHEC is one of the partners 

for this conference. 

7

Honors Program 

Most recently, we have sought out the help of the tribal colleges to implement the 

Honors Program—a program designed to hire top Indian students into Indian Affairs. The Honors Program is designed to provide opportunities at three educational 

levels—High School, Junior/Community College, and College/University. Graduates 

can be appointed directly into available Indian Affairs positions. Our BIE and 

Human Resources Office are working with three tribal colleges to provide opportunities for students attending these colleges to earn class credits while developing marketing plans to advertise the program and its benefits to Indian students and Indian 

Affairs management. 

BIE’s Adult Education (Tribal) 

Indian Affairs is implementing strategies to support our vision of ‘‘life-long learning’’ and to improve the literacy of American Indians residing on reservations. The 

BIE’s Adult Education Program is funded at $2,441,000, and allows tribes to direct 

their Tribal Priority Allocation funds to adult learning situations where adults are 

able to obtain a GED or gain the basic skills they need to transition into a community or tribal college and/or job placement. Oftentimes, students attending tribal colleges and universities require remedial education in basic math and reading skills. 

This program provides educational opportunities for individuals who lack the level 

of literacy skills necessary for a smooth transition into post-secondary education. 

Graduation rates for American Indians are currently lower than the national average; the program supports the advancement of students to higher levels of education. Participation in adult basic education, community education, and developmental courses leads to upgraded skills and abilities to match job placements with 

community members, thus creating opportunities for developing stronger local 

economies in Indian communities. 

Tribal College Teacher’s Aide Training 

Indian Affairs has requested program enhancement funds of over $5 million to 

support initiatives such as the Teacher’s Aide Training program, consistent with the 

provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which provides for the Qualifications for Teachers and Paraprofessionals. The BIE-funded TCU play an important role in developing specialized certification programs for current, new, and potential teacher aides for Indian schools. Programs can develop the training through 

distance learning or classroom instruction, with local or regional concentration and 

emphasis, following the ‘‘grow your own’’ philosophy. Indian schools located in remote and isolated areas often rely on members who have a vested interest in their 

communities and wish to remain in jobs on the reservations. 

Of the 25 TCU, 15 provide at least an Associate’s degree in elementary education, 

two are identified as having teacher’s aide programs, and the remaining TCU have 

classes in early childhood education and/or development. 

Other Tribal College Projects—Partnering With Economic Development 

Indian Affairs supports other initiatives such as our recent partnership with the 

Colorado School of Mines (CSM), the United Tribes Technical College (UTTC), and 

the Navajo Technical College (NTC) (formerly Crown Point Institute of Technology) 

to develop energy, educational, vocational, and technology curriculum for Indian colleges. Our Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED) provided a 

grant to CSM to develop a curriculum in partnership with UTTC and NTC. The 

CSM will provide faculty training and will team-teach some portions of the curriculum; they will also be retained as a future source of technical expertise for the 

colleges. Internship opportunities will be established with energy industries and we 

will create opportunities for high performing students to transfer into a full 4-year 

degree program at the CSM. We are looking at additional opportunities to expand 

on this initiative. 

Conclusion 

With high unemployment rates in Indian Country, solidifying the tribal colleges’ 

infrastructures is critical. Increased collaboration and partnerships between TCU 

and federal, state, regional and local entities must be established in a manner that 

addresses specific needs. Education and workforce development will lead to local 

employment opportunities where tribal members can reinvest in a sustainable local 

economy. Education must provide not only a seamless process of continuing lifelong 

educational opportunities, but the necessary skill sets for our Indian communities 

to offer a vibrant labor pool which will lead to economic growth for all Indian people. 

The challenges as well as benefits are shared by all. In order to promote change, 

vested parties must establish economic development plans that involve potential 

8

business and industry opportunities, tribal college administrators, community-planning officials, and various federal, state, regional, local and tribal governments. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for inviting me to testify today on such an 

important issue for our Indian people. I will be happy to answer any questions you 

may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Secretary Artman, thank you very much for your 

willingness to provide leadership at this important time. 

Let me ask an obvious question, I guess, and that is, with flat 

funding, which is where we are with tribal colleges on the appropriations side, and a circumstance where the tribal colleges are already substantially below the amount of contribution per student 

that goes to, for example, junior colleges, and community colleges, 

and so on, are we not going to lose ground rather than gain ground 

if we only have flat funding and don’t provide at least for inflation 

with respect to the tribal colleges appropriation? What is your 

sense of that? 

Mr. ARTMAN. Right now, the BIE and my office are core-focused 

on K–12 education. We are striving to, as I mentioned in the testimony, to provide a seamless transition. So we are trying to make 

the most of the funds that we do have outside of that K–12 core 

focus, to get that into the TCU hands. There have been fluctuations 

in funding, but we are working with the Department of Education 

and others to make sure funds get there. 

We are looking at partnership opportunities with industries, to 

provide careers and perhaps other additional funds to the schools. 

We are working with schools like the Colorado School of Mines and 

similar opportunities perhaps to that in other areas as well, to provide additional funds, to amortize the costs to these tribal colleges 

and universities. 

As I mentioned, it is a very important program to us, but we do 

have to do with what we have and focus on our core mission. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I understand making do with what we 

have, but if tribal college enrollment is increasing and we have flat 

funding, that, it seems to me, will be a problem, especially if we 

believe that the tribal college system contributes a great deal to the 

lives of these people that now have opportunities to get educated 

in their tribal colleges. 

So we will have to work on that and talk about that, but there 

is an enrollment increase and it reflects the popularity of the opportunity that is available now that was not available many years 

ago. 

With respect to K–12, we have had the GAO do an evaluation of 

the condition of the infrastructure with respect to the BIA schools 

and so on. What the GAO has shown is that there is a significant 

problem with respect to the infrastructure investment that is needed that is not available to bring those schools up to standard. Do 

you have any observations about what your plans are, or what the 

Department of the Interior’s plans are with respect to that? 

Mr. ARTMAN. The GAO report is enlightening. Last week, I was 

down in New Mexico and visited Laguna Pueblo. I had an opportunity to take a look at their elementary school. You can see stark 

examples of where facilities moneys are desperately needed. In 

their case, there were a number of cracks in the foundation that 

9

went up through the walls. They have supported it now. They have 

taken mitigation measures, but that is a good example. 

This is an area of great importance to us. What we have done 

is, with our facilities manager, he has been able to develop priorities and processes. He is expediting the funds that are getting to 

the schools. I think what we have now is not everything will be 

fixed immediately, but we now have a schedule that we can look 

to, and we can point to say that this school will be fixed in this 

particular year if funding stays at the same level. That is what we 

are focused on. 

We have eliminated a lot of bureaucracy and we have given some 

assurance to the schools that are out there that need the funds 

when they will get the funds. 

The CHAIRMAN. As you begin your work in these areas, would 

you work with us to give us an analysis? The GAO didn’t do it institution by institution, but it evaluated the circumstances that existed with respect to the BIA-run schools and the infrastructure 

needs, and the fact that these children are going to schools that are 

in pretty substantial disrepair in some cases. Can you work with 

us to give us an analysis of what are the institutions? Where are 

they? What is the schedule? How long would it take to make the 

investments? 

The reason I ask the question is, you walk into a school that is 

in substantial disrepair, with a student sitting in a classroom with 

30 kids; desks one inch apart. I went into one school that I have 

talked about with 150 kids, two toilets, one water fountain, crowded classrooms. That young kid that walks through that third grade 

classroom isn’t going to get the same education as a kid that is in 

another school where there are 15 students and new facilities, or 

facilities at least not in disrepair. 

So could you give us an analysis as you begin to work on all of 

this? What are the specific schools? What are the needs? What is 

the time line? How do you see us beginning to address them so that 

we can talk about it more in the specifics with the appropriators 

and others, rather than just the abstract? 

Mr. ARTMAN. I would be happy to do that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Would you be willing to do that? 

Mr. ARTMAN. Mr. Chairman, yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Thomas. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You mentioned this matter of the National Fund for Excellence 

in Indian Education. Why hasn’t that money been transferred? 

Mr. ARTMAN. There have been a number of legal issues surrounding that money. Yesterday, we had a good opportunity to 

hash through some of those legal issues and come to some resolution on that. We committed to having an opinion to them on the 

legal implications, the legal liability attached to that money to the 

National Fund within a month. We are going to be working with 

their legal counsel in developing that opinion as well. 

Senator THOMAS. Good, very good. 

Technology obviously is most important for preparing students 

for this century. I have been told that Haskell doesn’t even have 

internet services in the student dorms. Why isn’t there more emphasis on improving those technological services? 

10

Mr. ARTMAN. Technology, especially in today’s educational world, 

is an important part of education. If at home or at school, the more 

opportunity students get to use technology, the more they will be 

able to adapt to the workplace. Specifically with regard to Haskell 

University and Internet access, Internet access is available in the 

common areas of the dorms there. It is available in the individual 

student rooms, but it is very much like cable television. If they 

want it outside of the common areas, they need to subscribe to it 

at this point in time. 

Senator THOMAS. You mentioned the Colorado School of Mines 

affiliation. Isn’t it a good idea to have more of that? Couldn’t there 

be opportunities to be affiliated with other colleges to increase the 

opportunities through these affiliations? 

Mr. ARTMAN. I think so, Mr. Vice Chairman. The Colorado School 

of Mines examples dovetails extremely well with also our goals in 

economic development focusing on the energy aspect of that. I 

think you are going to see more partnerships coming out and created in the area of dovetailing with medical schools that may have 

excellent educational opportunities in the medical profession, or 

teaching in the teaching area. So yes, we are going to be taking 

more advantage of those situations. 

Senator THOMAS. We don’t have many of these facilities in Wyoming. We just have one small college kind of beginning, but they 

are close to a community college. And even in that instance, it 

seems as if they could pick up some additional things. 

Funding, of course, is always an issue. What about tribal colleges 

participating in State and private funding and other kinds of ways 

of helping finances? Is there an opportunity there? 

Mr. ARTMAN. I think there is. I think you are seeing that a lot 

of tribal colleges are taking advantage of those situations and looking for new opportunities. Depending upon which college you are 

talking about, the funds that come from the BIE fund 30 percent 

to 60 percent of the needs of the tribal colleges. So tribal college 

presidents are looking to other resources out there. 

Having had the opportunity to work with some of these presidents before, they are an extremely smart and resourceful group of 

individuals who are doing yeoman’s work in making their colleges 

work. I know that they are looking to other opportunities. To what 

degree that we can help facilitate that, we will put ourselves out 

there. 

Senator THOMAS. That is great. 

I think Indian colleges are important because they focus on what 

we want to have accomplished here, but they can certainly gain 

more quickly by affiliating themselves with some other organizations to help in funding programs. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Tester. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for being here today, Carl. 

11

Over the Easter break, I had a tribal college summit, interestingly enough. It is fair to say that we have our work cut out for 

us to hopefully address some of those needs. 

I just want to start with a comment. One of the individuals that 

came and visited with us talked about the K–12 issue. Potentially, 

maybe we could have him here someday to be on a panel here talking about at-risk kids. He told me that his figures are showing 

pretty much across the United States, but in Montana I can tell 

you that almost every at-risk kid in that State is Native American. 

The lines are so clear that it is scary. 

Interestingly enough, those Native American kids that happen to 

be in school districts that tend to be more affluent are at risk. 

Those kind of things, they are challenges that we have to deal with 

here to try to allow everybody to be the best they can be. 

But one of the things that was talked about at the summit that 

I didn’t hear you speak about a lot in relationship to tribal colleges 

is building funds, funds for buildings. There are tribal colleges, for 

example, that want to set up dorms for their college students. 

What is your assessment of availability of building funds out there 

in regards to tribal colleges? 

Mr. ARTMAN. Senator Tester, with regard to the specific amount 

available for building funds, I would have to look into that and get 

back to you, sir, and I will do that. Through our endowment funds, 

the interest that is received off of those accounts, and that has 

been a varying amount, so I am not saying that that is going to 

be the fund that saves it, but that is available to use for building 

funds. 

As you know, the grants that come from the BIE to tribal colleges under 471 come with some restrictions on it, which may or 

may not allow them to be used for building purposes. But I will be 

happy to look into that and get back to you with the number. 

Senator TESTER. I would like to know. And with the number, 

would you give me, if you have this, Carl, and you may or may not, 

some sort of assessment of the need out there versus what is there. 

Because we happened to be in the facility on the Blackfeet Reservation. They have some great facilities there. I have been just about 

in every tribal school, and there are some building needs there. But 

their overall classrooms, at least in Montana, are fairly impressive 

from my perspective. But there are some needs out there for research facilities, science labs, and dormitories that they don’t have, 

for sure, and there may be others, too. 

That is it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ARTMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Secretary, let me also say that Mr. Lowery on behalf of the 

National Fund for Excellence in American Indian Education met 

with me the day before yesterday to talk about those issues. I am 

pleased that you are working on that because as you know it is a 

federally chartered organization that has not yet been given an opportunity to really get started. I know that the Secretary had indicated that they would provide some space and perhaps some clerical assistance. They are interested in trying to determine when 

that which has been contributed to the Department of the Interior 

12

from estates and so on that could be used in this 501(c)(3) that has 

been federally chartered, when that might be transferred to them. 

So I appreciate the fact that you are working on that. I think 

that, using private sector funds that are donated into this federally 

chartered organization, it can also be an important supplement for 

Indian education. So your work on that is important, and I appreciate that. 

Let me make another point here that is important to emphasize. 

Tribal colleges are different. They are different because in most 

cases they are on Federal trust lands. State governments have 

their own circumstances. They have no obligation to fund tribal colleges and they by and large do not. There are no local property 

taxes or no local property base on which to levy taxes. So you can’t 

support the tribal colleges that way. 

That is why we have this different system to fund tribal colleges. 

They are very important in the lives of Native Americans. I have 

spoken about many of them. I have showed a couple of photographs 

today of them, that are inspiring because they in many cases are 

non-traditional students. I told you, Mr. Artman, about speaking at 

a tribal college, and asking at the graduation ceremony at that 

tribal college, who is the oldest one here. And they said, she is the 

oldest one; and I went and talked to her; 40 some years old, who 

had been cleaning the toilets and the hallways in the college; a single mother of four who decided, I want to do more than clean the 

hallways and clean the bathrooms; I want to graduate. 

And the day I showed up, she was wearing a cap and a gown and 

a big smile because she had graduated from that college. She could 

not have done that except for the tribal college, because she had 

relatives that could provide child care. She could continue to do 

some work, and at her home area go to a tribal college. It is the 

only way this woman got a college degree. 

That is happening all over the country in ways that are very inspiring. It is why I care so much about these tribal colleges. We 

have to have adequate funding. I gently asked you about the funding because I know what you will do. You are brand new to this 

job, but you are so practiced, as have to be all of the witnesses from 

the Administration. If I ask you a lot of drilling questions about 

funding, you come here and have to support the President’s budget. 

If you didn’t, when you get back to your office, they will clean out 

your desk. 

So when I ask you the question: Is level funding adequate? You 

are going to dance around a little bit because that is your job. But 

you and I know, it is not adequate. If they have more people coming into these tribal colleges, and we have flat funding, and by the 

way, were it not for myself and a couple of others, we wouldn’t be 

at $54 million. We would be at $40 million or $42 million. But flat 

funding means that with the ravages of inflation and more students, which is not a ravage, but is a blessing, but we are losing 

ground, not gaining ground. The contribution per student to tribal 

colleges relative to other colleges is at a very low level. 

So my point is this, Mr. Artman. You can’t answer the question 

the way I would hope you would or the way that we might if we 

were having a quiet conversation in a corner, and not in a Senate 

hearing, and I asked the question, are we adequately funding tribal 

13

colleges. You can’t answer it, so I won’t ask it quite that way today. 

But I will say this to you, I hope that you will be a missionary inside the Department of the Interior for these issues of education, 

health care and housing. With respect to education, it is a labyrinth of issues, but today we are talking about tribal colleges. 

That is the one area, and I think Senator Tester put his finger 

on it, where you come away inspired. You go to these places. You 

talk to these students. You find out what they have been confronting in life, and all of a sudden they are in college. They are 

so unbelievably proud of that opportunity to go to college and make 

something of themselves, because they know that is the step up 

and out to opportunity. 

So I really want you to be aggressive on these issues in working 

with us. I can say what you can’t say. We need to fund these in 

a manner that is fair. We need more funding when we have more 

students. We need to support these students the right way because 

these tribal colleges are critically important. 

So you may want to respond to that, Mr. Artman, but don’t get 

yourself in trouble. 

[Laughter.] 

Just tell me that you are interested in working with myself or 

Senator Thomas or Senator Tester and others to accomplish these 

goals. That would be helpful. 

Mr. ARTMAN. I have been to a number of tribal colleges out there. 

In fact, Sitting Bull College in your State, I have been there before 

and know very well the former president of Sitting Bull College, 

Ron His Horse Is Thunder. He and I have had numerous discussions about the issues and needs there. I have been down to the 

Tohono O’odham Community College, and of course spent time at 

Haskell and less time at Sippy, but I want to spend more time 

down there as well, and others. They are doing inspirational work. 

The teachers and the administrators are doing excellent work down 

there. You are right about the students and their faces. You can 

see the pride and the determination in their faces. I look forward 

to working with you and the Committee on this issue. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am hoping at long last that the Administration, 

and with your help probably inside as an agitator, that inside we 

will probably see in the next budget that the United Tribes Technical College, which serves tribes all around this Country and is in 

my judgment, and we will have a witness in the next panel, is just 

an unbelievably good school, and has been left out of the President’s budget. I hope that you will be able to help us change that. 

I talked to the previous Secretary, not the current Secretary. She 

even went there. She understands, but she for some reason through 

the OMB and the thickheadedness of people there, was saying we 

are not going to fund that school. It should be funded. It was always funded previously. 

Anyway, we will talk about that as well. The United Tribes Technical College is a terrific institution and is providing hope to a lot 

of students. 

It has been a long time, 2 years, that the position of assistant 

secretary was vacant. That was shameful, but we now have someone there that is, in my judgment, well qualified. I worked hard to 

try to get your nomination through the Senate. 

14

Mr. ARTMAN. I appreciate that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Tester did the same. Senator Thomas 

did the same. You are now there, and I know you want to be there 

to make a difference. We want to help you make a difference. So 

we appreciate your being here today on this subject. We are going 

to see a lot of each other on these issues because we face some very 

serious challenges, Mr. Secretary. We are glad that you have this 

role to play now and we want to help you be successful. 

Mr. ARTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Tester. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for being with us. 

We will next hear from a panel that includes Dr. David Gipp, 

past President and Board Member of the American Indian Higher 

Education Consortium, and currently President of the United 

Tribes Technical College in Bismarck, ND; Elmer Guy, Board Member of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium and 

President of the Navajo Technical College in Crownpoint, NM; 

Jamie Merisotis, and I hope I have pronounced that correctly, 

Jamie, who is President of the Institute for Higher Education Policy, Washington, DC; and Dr. Bette Keltner, Dean, School of Nursing and Health Studies at Georgetown University. 

Mr. Artman, I did not invite you to, and I should have identified 

I guess it was Dr. Keltner sitting next to Mr. Artman. 

Ms. KELTNER. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. OK. So we are fine. 

Let me thank all four of you for being here. We have Board 

Members who are accompanying Elmer Guy: Caroline Tom, the 

Chairman of the board. Caroline, where are you? Thank you very 

much for being with us. Steve Grey? Steve, thank you for being 

with us. I want to recognize also before I begin with this panel, 

Chairwoman Myra Pearson, the Chair of the United Tribes Board. 

Myra, thank you very much for being with us. We appreciate your 

presence today. 

Why don’t we begin, Dr. Gipp, with you? My understanding is 

that next month will mark 30 years as president of the United 

Tribes Technical College. I don’t want to make you sound like 

Gabby Hayes or something, but 30 years is a long time. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. But more than just the United Tribes Technical 

College, you have been a real leader in education in this Country. 

We appreciate your being here and appreciate your work on Indian 

education. 

Let me ask, as I have indicated before, your entire statements 

will be made part of the record, so if you would please summarize 

for us. We will begin with Dr. Gipp. 

STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID M. GIPP, PAST PRESIDENT AND 

BOARD MEMBER, AMERICAN INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATION 

CONSORTIUM; PRESIDENT, UNITED TRIBES TECHNICAL 

COLLEGE 

Dr. GIPP. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate the parallel to Gabby 

Hayes and I am glad to be here. I don’t know that Gabby is anymore; 30 years goes by fast in many respects. I have been in the 

tribal college business, if you will, for about 35 years, working on 

this whole effort. We have gone from six tribal colleges back in 

15

1972, when I first started out working for that effort. We now have 

over 35 tribal colleges. So we are pleased to see the growth. 

We serve over 30,000 students now, among all of us nationwide. 

I am proud to say that United Tribes Technical College and Navajo 

Technical College, and Dr. Guy will be speaking shortly about that, 

are part of that effort to really change the way of life for Native 

people and for tribal governments. As you know, we have the fastest growing population in the United States when we talk about 51 

percent or better of our population is under the age of 25 now. So 

the real challenge is really to bring quality education and to give 

hope and inspiration, but do it through education so that every one 

of our people have the skills and the ability to move ahead and 

bring their families and their tribes up to a 21st century level of 

participation in society. This is what it boils down to. 

That is how I look at this. That is why I think 30 years for me 

has gone by fast. It has been fun. It has been great. But we have 

had some disparities and some difficulties sometimes with the U.S. 

Government in their obligation to tribal colleges as part of treatybased tribes, and that obligation to provide education for and by 

Native people. That is what this is all about, creating our own determination; creating our own pathway into that future. 

So to me, that is really what underlies and undergirds what we 

do. I have a student from United Tribes who graduated in 1992. 

Everybody gave up on him. He had alcohol problems. He had attempts at suicide. He graduated from United Tribes. He is a Wisconsin Chippewa. Today, he is Vice President of my campus in Student Services. He is working on his doctorate right now. He has a 

family of eight children. He is a tax-producing citizen, if you will, 

on our campus. He lives in Bismarck, ND and is doing outstanding. 

Likewise, he is serving as a role model for other Native people. 

I know that we all have these different kinds of stories within 

our institutions in terms of the origins of what is happening back 

in those tribal communities. 

But let me get to the issue of our testimony. I do ask, of course, 

that it is part of the record, both for ourselves and for all of the 

tribal colleges. Today, I appear for the American Indian Higher 

Education Consortium, the 35 member organization that I referred 

to a bit earlier. We are talking about the issues of higher education 

and how we fit into that as a part of U.S. policy on higher education. 

When I first started out back 35 or 37 years ago in this effort, 

we were not welcome into the higher education community because 

many of the remarks that were being said was that, hey, how can 

you American Indian people do your own thing? You don’t have 

qualified people to do those things. Well, today we do. By doing and 

persevering, I think it is very important that we continue this effort of being a part of higher education. 

To that end, we recommend that the Tribal Colleges and Universities Act of 1978 be continued as an amendment to the overall reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, and that we also see 

that the title III programs under the Higher Education Act are provided for more fully, more completely, and with a formula that will 

allow for equitable distribution of funds for those developing instiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:56 Jul 23, 2007 Jkt 034906 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\34906.TXT JACKF PsN: JACK
16

tutions, because indeed, we are developing institutions that participate and provide those firsthand opportunities to Native people. 

Second, we also urge that there be a hard look at this issue of 

facilities. Senator Tester, you mentioned this issue of facilities. We 

don’t get any kind of maintenance money from the BIA or from 

anyone else. To build a building, whether it is a toilet or whether 

it is a classroom or whether it is a science lab, we have to go out 

and really, really dig in every way we can looking for those resources to put a basic facility in place on our campuses. 

So we need the continued help of title III higher education facilities programs, by the way. They have been very helpful, but more 

is very, very important in the future. Equity is very, very important when we talk about that, equity and access for our populations 

and for the institutions that we administer. 

Second, in terms of our testimony, I also want to point out there 

is a provision that is being put forth that would allow for more 

funds to go to mainstream institutions that perhaps serve Native 

American students. While we think this is good, we are very concerned that we would see a diminishment of dollars that would go 

to the students that we serve on our campuses. 

Third, we urge that the basic operating funds that are provided 

under the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act 

be increased from roughly about the $5,200. Actually, it is authorized at $6,000. We are recommending that that authorization be 

upped to $8,000 per annum per student, is what it boils down to. 

Last, we urge that forward funding be included for tribal colleges 

and universities. This is a major problem, because our institutions 

are poor schools. We don’t have the rich, big endowments. We don’t 

have State funds or even tribal funds to rely on to keep us going 

during the interim years when we go from one fiscal year to the 

next. So forward funding is very critical to the day to day operations of our institutions. 

Last, we urge that the Congress take a hard look at providing 

specific legislative authorization to Navajo Technical College and 

United Tribes Technical College. For 6 years now, the Administration has left us out of the budget. Senators and Mr. Chairman, you 

know full well that we have been a part of the budget, at least in 

the case of United Tribes, since 1969. We have good tribal support. 

We have good community support. We have good results and good 

data. 

Mr. Chairman, I met with the Office of Management and Budget 

about 2 years ago on this subject. I will tell you, the most frank 

answer I have received from this Administration is that until you 

are a favorite of the Secretary of the Interior, you are not going to 

get funded. It is a political question. We know that the BIA and 

the new BIE have the authority to fund us and to authorize it, and 

to ask for these funds, but they do not. So we ask that legislation 

be provided under a new Title V that would be under part of the 

Tribal Colleges and Universities Act as it would be reauthorized 

into the future. 

We do have solid support from our colleague institutions. Just 2 

weeks ago, the presidents of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium passed a resolution supporting legislation that 

will be beneficial to these schools. 

17

I won’t go into the other details because I know we have the 

other witnesses here. But much of this is contained in the details 

of our testimony. I would ask that you and others take a hard look 

at that, and see that this is all moved forward on behalf of the tribally controlled movement. 

Thank you so much. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Gipp follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID M. GIPP, PAST PRESIDENT AND BOARD MEMBER, AMERICAN INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM; PRESIDENT, UNITED TRIBES

TECHNICAL COLLEGE

UNITED TRIBES TECHNICAL COLLEGE (UTTC) 

United Tribes Technical College (UTTC) submits this statement in support of enacting into law a new Title V to the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act (Tribal College Act). We are very appreciative of this Committee’s inclusion 

of us in the drafting and consultation process. 

The new Title would authorize Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) funding for our 

institutions which do not receive funding under the Tribal College Act. It is our 

hope that an explicit authorization of BIE funding for UTTC and Navajo Technical 

College (NTC) will encourage the Administration to reverse its course of the past 

6 years when no Bureau of Indian Affairs funding was requested for us. Having the 

two institutions included in an authorization for a Tribally Controlled Postsecondary 

Career and Technical Institutions program in the BIE will lessen the likelihood that 

our funding will be considered an earmark. 

The Board of Directors of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium approved a resolution on March 23,2007 in support of enacting a new title to the Tribal College Act authorizing funding for UTTC and NTC provided that it would have 

no negative impact on funding the colleges currently receive under the Tribal College Act or other Acts. We are very appreciative of the support of our sister colleges. 

Background. UTTC and NTC do not now receive funding under the Tribal College 

Act, but rather receive funding as separate and unrelated line items in the BIA 

(now BIE) budget. Funding for both schools is uncertain every year. In fact, the Administration has requested zero funds for both schools over the past 6 years. Although our Congressional delegations have persuaded Congress to put our funds 

back into budget, even this action is now coming under scrutiny because of the controversy about ‘‘earmark’’ appropriations. United Tribes Technical College has been 

a part of the Executive branch budget requests since 1969. 

Under Titles I (24 tribal colleges) and II (Dine ́ College) of the Tribal College Act, 

only one college per tribe may receive operating funds under that Act. UTTC is governed by a Board consisting of the Chairs of the five tribes located wholly or in part 

in North Dakota, and each tribe represented on our governing board has a tribal 

college that receives Tribal College Act funds. Thus, UTTC may not receive funds 

under the Tribal College Act. The same is true for NTC, as Dine ́ College is the Navajo Nation recipient under the Act. 

On March 30, 2007 we received a draft bill from the Senate Committee on Indian 

Affairs amending the Tribal College Act, including establishing a new Title V as 

mentioned above. Our comments below will note where we are in agreement with the 

draft and where we recommend changes. 

Eligibility. We support the draft bill’s provision (Section 502) making United 

Tribes Technical College and Navajo Technical College the only eligible institutions 

under Title V of the Tribal College Act and specifying that and that we must continue to meet the definition given the term ‘‘tribally controlled postsecondary career 

and technical institutions’’ in Section 3 ofthe Carl Perkins Act (20 U.S.C. 2302). 

Exempted From one College Per Tribe Provision. We support the draft bill’s provision exempting Title V from the provision that allows funding for only one college 

under the Act. The bill does this by exempting Title V from certain provisions of 

the Tribal College Act. These exemptions are listed in Section 503(a) of the draft 

bill. This section says that the paragraph that contains the definition of ‘‘tribally 

controlled college’’ (Section 2(a)(4) of the TCCUAA), which also contains the statement that only one college per tribe may receive funding, does not apply to Title 

V. 

Indian Self-Determination Act Contracts. We support Section 503(b) which provides that funding is to continue to be made available pursuant to the Indian SelfDetermination and Education Assistance Act. UTTC has been administering funds 

18

from the BIA under an ISDEAA grant since 1978. NTC is also now administering 

its funds under an ISDEAA contract. 

Use the terms ‘‘Funds’’ or ‘‘Funding’’. We ask that the terms ‘‘grant’’ or ‘‘grants’’ 

in the draft bill be changed to ‘‘funds’’ or ‘‘funding’’ throughout Title V. Funds administered under ISDEAA contracts are not ‘‘grants’’, and even though the draft bill 

provides that the funds will be continued to be made available pursuant to the 

ISDEAA, we want it clarified that these funds are not ‘‘grants’’. Grants are far more 

limiting and do not generally bring with them contract support costs funding; 

whereas funds administered under an ISDEAA do bring with them funding for contract support costs. 

Distribution of Funds. We support a distribution of funds that:

• Holds harmless the two schools at the higher of their FY 2006, 2007 or 2008 

BIA funding levels. In other words, contingent upon appropriations, the schools 

could not be funded at an amount less than the amount for their base year (the 

higher of FY 2006, 2007 or 2008). This could mean that each institution uses 

a different base year, which is acceptable. It is likely that each institution’s FY 

2007 funding will be the same as its FY 2006 funding, although final FY 2007 

allocations have not yet been made. The draft bill leaves open the year which 

would be considered the base year.

• Distributes appropriations above the ‘‘hold harmless’’ level of the two institutions combined according to the Indian Student Count formula used to distribute Section 117 Perkins Act grants. This formula was just enacted into law 

in 2006. For instance, if the hold harmless amount for both schools combined 

is $6 million, but the total appropriation is $7 million, then the $1 million above 

the hold harmless amount would be distributed according to the Indian Student 

Count formula. The draft bill would have the Secretary of Interior establish a 

new formula for distribution of funds that are in excess of the base amount—

we do not favor the Secretary having this responsibility.

Justification for ‘‘hold harmless’’ language. Each institution has established a 

budget for its operations according to current and expected funding levels for the 

coming year. BIA funds are critical for core functions such as curricula development 

and hiring of instructors. Neither institution can afford to take a significant reduction in funding. Further, it is not unusual for Congress to enact ‘‘hold harmless’’ provisions when a funding methodology is changed—one current example is the hold 

harmless provision under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

Justification for formula distribution of those funds in excess of the ‘‘hold harmless’’ amount. United Tribes Technical College and Navajo Technical College agreed 

to the Indian Student Count provision included in the 2006 reauthorization of the 

Carl Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. Under that formula every 12 

credits taken by an Indian student is valued as one Indian Student Count. Each 

school is provided funds based upon a division of the total ISC for both institutions 

into the amount appropriated for the program. 

A major reason why we reached an agreement on the formula for the ISC contained in the newly reauthorized Carl Perkins Act is that it is almost the same formula as set out in the Tribal College Act. Since we are now proposing to be authorized under a new title V of the Tribal College Act, it makes sense to utilize the Carl 

Perkins ISC formula, so similar to the Tribal College Act’s ISC formula, for funds 

in excess of the ‘‘hold harmless’’ amount. 

Justification for eliminating the discretion of the Secretary of Interior. The draft 

bill would require the Secretary of Interior to develop a formula for the distribution 

of the ‘‘excess’’ funds. As this Committee knows, the Secretary of Interior is the one 

who has regularly left NTC and UTTC out of the President’s annual budget six 

times in a row. We have no reason to trust the Secretary’s discretion. Further, the 

process of developing a formula for distribution could take a very long time and 

delay distribution of funds. It would further create great uncertainty about funding 

for the two institutions. 

Since we already have a formula for fund distribution that works, and both parties understand how it works, we see no reason why the Secretary should have discretion to create a new formula or a new process for distribution of funds. The formula we have proposed is fair to both institutions and recognizes the needs of both 

institutions, to the extent Congress provides adequate funding. 

A formula also has the advantage that it avoids the issue of ‘‘earmarks’’. Funding 

that is competitive or formula driven is not generally considered an ‘‘earmark’’, even 

by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 

We also do not support the idea of the Secretary distributing funds utilizing information provided by the Government Accountability Office as has also been suggested (but it not in the draft bill). A GAO study of the ‘‘needs’’ (a subjective and 

19

undefined term) of the two institutions could take years to complete—the request 

would go to the bottom of the long list of requests for reports. Even requests from 

Committee Chairs on reports of national significance do not happen quickly. In 2003 

Finance Committee Chairman Grassley asked the GAO to study Indian participation in Medicare and Medicaid programs, a study that 4 years later is just now getting underway. Therefore, a GAO study is not a practical or efficient way to distribute core funding that is so vitally needed now by both institutions. 

A study of tribal needs nationally regarding human resource capital relative to career and technical education. We feel strongly that there should be a study that focuses on the present human resource development needs of all Indian tribes in relation to career and technical education. Tribal governments, Federal agencies, and 

private entities are making plans to develop Indian Country, but not enough 

thought has gone into assessing the present tribal human resource capital—economic/business, social, political, cultural, nor what needs to be done to involve the 

Indian/Alaska Native population in guiding and benefiting from such development. 

Broad questions that could be assessed could include: (1) the status of the workforce 

infrastructure available to tribes; (2) workforce and infrastructure needs of tribes; 

(3) economic development opportunities that would expand tribal economies; (4) tribal education and job training needs. A study of this kind could go a long way toward 

helping tribal colleges meet the needs of the tribes they serve, point the way for 

new tribal colleges to be developed, and assist Congress to more effectively help 

meet the needs of tribes as they continue to develop their economies. 

Thank you. We look forward to continuing with work with the Senate Committee 

on Indian Affairs. 

AMERICAN INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM (AIHEC) 

Chairman Dorgan, Vice Chairman Thomas, and distinguished Members of the 

Committee, on behalf of this Nation’s 34 Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU), 

which comprise the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), I 

thank you for extending us the opportunity to testify. I am honored to be here. 

My name is David Gipp, I am a Member of the Hunkpapa Lakota tribe and for 

the past 30 years I have served as the President at United Tribes Technical College, 

which is located near Bismarck, North Dakota and serves Indian students from over 

75 federally recognized tribes across the Nation. 

United Tribes began as a residential employment training program and was called 

United Tribes Employment Training Center. Today, UTTC offers over 30 Associate 

degree and certificate programs, with five degrees being offered through online delivery. The college employs over 330 faculty, staff and administrators and serves 

over 1,400 full- and part-time students. 

The idea of tribally controlled institutions of higher education has spread rapidly 

throughout Indian Country, over the past 30 years. Today, despite decades of severe 

funding inequities and Federal budget cuts, there are 35 Tribal Colleges and Universities located in 14 states educating many thousands of full- and part-time students from over 250 federally recognized Indian tribes. 

This morning, I would like to give you some background on the tribal college 

movement and to detail some specific issues and how they might be addressed during the 11Oth Congress reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA) and the 

Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act—or Tribal College Act. 

I. Background: The Tribal College Movement 

Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU) are young, geographically isolated, and 

poor. Forty years ago there were no Tribal Colleges or Universities. Most TCU are 

located in areas of Indian Country that the Federal Government defines as extremely remote. We serve our communities in ways far beyond college level programming, and are often called beacons of hope for our people. We provide much 

needed high school completion (GED), basic remediation, job training, college preparatory courses, and adult education programs. We function as community centers, 

libraries, tribal archives, career and business centers, economic development centers, public meeting places, and elder and child care centers. In fact, an underlying 

goal of all TCU is to improve the lives of students through higher education and 

to move American Indians toward self-sufficiency. This goal is important to us because of the extreme poverty in which most American Indians live. In fact, three 

of the five poorest counties in America are home to TCU, where unemployment 

rates range from 50 to 75 percent. 

We are the most poorly funded institutions of higher education in the country. 

And apart from the U.S. Military Academies and Howard and Gallaudet UniverVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:56 Jul 23, 2007 Jkt 034906 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\34906.TXT JACKF PsN: JACK
20

sities, we are the only institutions of higher education whose basic operating budgets are funded—by legislative mandate—by the Federal Government. 

Most of our institutions are located on Federal trust land. Therefore, states have 

no obligation to fund tribal colleges. Most states do not even provide funds for the 

non-Indian state-resident students who account for 20 percent of our enrollments. 

Yet, if these same students attended any other public institution in the state, the 

state would provide that institution with basic operating funds. Ironically, TCU are 

accredited by the same regional agencies that accredit state institutions. 

Despite their strong support, our tribal governments are able to provide us with 

only modest financial support. Our tribes are not the handful of small and wealthy 

gaming tribes located near major urban areas; rather, they are some of the poorest 

governments in the Nation. Only a handful of tribal colleges currently receive any 

revenue from tribal gaming. Gaming is not a stable or viable funding source for 

TCU, nor should it be a factor when considering the funding of tribal colleges. And 

as you know, it is a very few casinos that are located in or near major urban areas 

that are realizing the vast majority of the highly publicized profits from Indian gaming. 

Revenues from state run gaming operations far exceed revenues from Indian gaming. Although some form of gaming is legalized in almost every state, the Federal 

Government has not used the revenue generated from state run gaming to justify 

decreasing Federal funding to state operated colleges or universities. The standards 

that apply to states and state operated higher education institutions should apply 

to tribes and tribal colleges. Unfortunately, it appears that this is not the case. 

II. 110th Congress Reauthorization of the Tribally Controlled College or 

University Assistance Act and Higher Education Act 

(A) Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act—Key Issues 

Institutional Operations and Forward Funding: Despite trust responsibilities and 

treaty obligations resulting from the exchange of millions of acres of land, the Federal Government has not, over the years, considered funding of American Indian 

higher education a priority. 

Since 1981, when the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act, or 

‘‘Tribal College Act’’ was first funded the number of tribally chartered institutions 

funded under Title I of said Act has quadrupled and it is expected that three to five 

additional institutions will be eligible for Tribal College Act funding in the near future. In addition to the increasing number of tribal colleges, enrollments of full-time 

Indian students have grown over 300 percent. 

Despite the much appreciated increases that Congress has appropriated over the 

last several years, Tribal Colleges and Universities are chronically under-funded. 

Today, 26 years after the Act was first funded, the TCU are receiving $5001 per 

Indian student, just 80 percent of their authorized level. And if you factor in inflation, the buying power of this appropriation is $1,337 LESS per Indian student than 

it was in the initial FY 1981 appropriation, which was $2,831 per Indian student. 

Clearly, an increase in the per Indian student authorized level is warranted and 

necessary and adjusting the new level to annual inflation is a way to keep the authority level from becoming a false measure of adequate funding. 

On the face of it, the holdups due to impasses and the resulting continuing resolutions or even delays in the Department’s distribution of operating funds after Congress makes them available, might seem easily remedied. However, the consequences have a cumulative effect that create even greater financial difficulties 

that grow exponentially, the longer the payments are left undistributed. 

The stop gap measures, such as short term loans, that must be employed to keep 

tribal colleges operating only serve to further exacerbate the tenuous financial circumstances under which these institutions are continually forced to operate. The situations created by budget impasses or Department delays lead to strained relations 

with banking institutions and a lack of credibility with businesses in the colleges’ 

respective communities. It creates a need to identify emergency lines of credit to secure daily operational cash-flow. These lines of credit come with burdensome interest rates that immediately reduce the appropriated level of funding included in the 

final enacted bill. 

Over the past several years, funding has not been available until well after October 1 of the relevant fiscal year. In FY06, although the Interior appropriations bill 

was signed into law in August, TCU did not receive their operating funds until late 

November and December, several months into the academic year. This year, due to 

the protracted FY07 appropriations process, TCU did not receive operating funds 

until February or March—4 to 5 months into the fiscal year and 6 months after our 

academic year begins. Delayed appropriations and less than timely distribution of 

funds, which are becoming the regular order, make it difficult to properly plan and 

21

project operation funding needs, hamstring long-range strategic planning, and force 

heavier reliance on grants and soft-money funding, which is a recurring concern of 

the accrediting agencies. In short, TCU are forced into a credibility crisis with their 

faculty, staff, communities, and students. Forward funding of our institutional operations would go a long way to breaking this unfortunate cycle. 

Recommendation: 

• Increase the Authorized Institutional Operations Funding Level: Tribal Colleges 

and Universities request that the Committee include an increase to the per Indian student authorized level for operations to ‘‘$8,000 adjusted annually for inflation,’’ in its bill regarding the reauthorization of the Tribal College Act.

• Forward Funding: No additional language is needed as the authority already 

exists in the Tribal College Act to forward fund the institutional operations of 

eligible TCU. Tribal Colleges and Universities request that the Committee recommend that the Appropriations Committee and the Administration work to secure the one time appropriation needed to achieve forward funding in Fiscal 

Year 2009.

Authorizing BIE funding for Tribally Controlled Post-secondary Career and Technical Institutions: Navajo Technical College and United Tribes Technical College: 

United Tribes Technical College (UTTC) and Navajo Technical College (NTC) very 

much appreciate this Committee’s including a Title V to the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act during the reauthorization of said Act. The new 

Title would authorize Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) funding for our institutions. 

By establishing this authorization for the Tribally Controlled Post-secondary Career 

and Technical Institutions in the BIE it will lessen the likelihood that their funding 

will be considered an earmark, and may reverse the trend of the past 6 years of 

eliminating funding for our institutions in the President’s annual budget. 

The Board of Directors of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium approved a resolution on March 23, 2007 supporting the inclusion of a new title to 

the Tribal College Act to authorize institutional operating funds for UTTC and NTC 

provided that it would have no negative impact on funding of any tribal colleges currently receiving institutional operating funds from the Department of the Interior. 

Under Titles I (24 tribal colleges) and II (Dine ́ College) of the Tribal College Act 

each tribe may charter only one college to receive operating funds under the Act. 

UTTC is governed by a Board consisting of the Chairs of the five tribes located 

wholly or in part in North Dakota and each tribe represented on our governing 

board has a tribal college that receives funds under Title I of the Tribal College Act. 

It is for this reason that UTTC may not receive funds under the Tribal College Act. 

The same is true for NTC, as Dine ́ College, which is chartered by the Navajo Nation, receives funds under Title II of the Act. 

Recommendation: 

• Authorization for Tribally Controlled Post-secondary Career and Technical Institutions: The Board of Directors of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium approved a resolution on March 23, 2007 supporting the inclusion of 

a new title to the Tribal College Act to authorize institutional operating funds 

for UTTC and NTC provided that it would have no negative impact on funding 

the tribal colleges currently receiving institutional operating funds from the Department of the Interior. Tribal Colleges and Universities urge the Committee 

to work with the presidents of our two affected institutions in determining the 

details of language and implementation of the proposed new title. 

(B) Higher Education Act—Key Issues 

Department of Education—HEA Title III–A section 316: Title III–A of the Higher 

Education Act supports minority and other institutions that enroll large proportions 

of financially disadvantaged students and have low per-student expenditures. Tribal 

colleges clearly fit this definition. TCU fulfill a vital role by providing access to quality higher education programs to some of the most impoverished areas of the country. Their programs are specifically designed to focus on the critical, unmet needs 

of their American Indian students and communities, in order to effectively prepare 

their students for the workforce of the 21st Century. A clear goal of the Title III 

program is to improve the academic quality, institutional management, and fiscal 

stability of eligible institutions, in order to increase their self-sufficiency and 

strengthen their capacity to make a substantial contribution to the higher education 

resources of the Nation. 

TCU are the youngest and least developed institutions of higher education in the 

Nation. As such, they are the most in need of these funds yet, our funding level 

increases lag behind other programs, and we must struggle to submit competitive 

22

applications under the arduous requirements and volume of Title III Part A grants 

for the funds that are available. Many higher education institutions spend thousands of dollars on grant application preparation and submission. This is simply not 

an option for TCU. In addition, the pool of eligible applicants for the TCU program 

is small and although new TCU are emerging, the pool is expected to remain below 

45 institutions for the foreseeable future. Creating a formula funded program would 

result in a win-win situation. Current applications submitted for Title III Part A 

competitive grants must have each of the required areas individually judged by application reviewers, by converting the TCU program to formula funding considerable 

administrative time and cost savings could be realized by the Federal Government. 

For these reasons, the Department of Education supports formula funding for the 

Tribal College Title III development grants program. 

Recommendation: 

• Expand and increase authority for the Tribal Colleges and Universities’ Title 

III–A Developing Institutions Program—The Tribal Colleges and Universities request that the Committee include the language contained in Sec. 303 of S. 1614, 

reported from the Senate HELP Committee in the 109th Congress to formula 

fund the Tribal Colleges’ 5-year developing institutions grants and also retain 

the critically needed construction grants that are competitively awarded on an 

annual basis, in its bill or any recommendations sent to the Senate HELP Committee regarding the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.

Proposed Native American Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions Program: In the 109th 

Congress, the Senate bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act included a new 

Title III program for ‘‘Native American-Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions’’. Tribal colleges have serious concerns regarding this proposal—but the underlying issue is one 

of equity. 

Tribal Colleges and Universities have a special relationship with the Federal Government, which is based on our status as extensions of the federally recognized Indian tribes that charter us. Our tribes have binding treaties with the U.S. Government that include certain responsibilities, including education, in exchange for millions of acres of land. The reason the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act exists—and resources are allocated to tribally controlled colleges and 

universities—is because of these treaties and the Federal trust responsibility. In 

short, this is solely a political, and not race-based, distinction. Funding of tribal colleges and universities raises no affirmative action issues. This Native American 

Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions proposal, however, does. 

Additionally, the vast majority of tribal colleges has open enrollment policies. Approximately 20 percent of our enrollments are non-Indian students and these students receive the same education opportunities as enrolled tribal members. However, the tribal colleges and universities cannot include anyone who is not an enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe in their student count that is used to 

determine their institution’s operating budget. There are no parameters for determining Native American students under the proposed American Indian Serving Institutions. Native American students would simply be determined by self-reporting, 

there is no definition of parameters to determine what constitutes a ‘‘Native American’’. 

Tribal colleges receive little, or as in many cases no, institutional operating funds 

from the state for either the Indian or non-Indian state residents who attend a tribal college or university. State supported institutions that would be eligible to receive 

funding under this proposed Native American Serving Institution Title III program 

already count their American Indian students, as well as non-Indian state residents, 

when tallying their institution’s student count for determining their allocation of 

funds from the state. 

Further, there is no practical way of separating out funds going to improve education opportunities for Native Americans within these state institutions. As noted 

earlier, these institutions already receive funding for the education of their Native 

American students. This program would just result in creating a source of additional 

funds for state supported institutions to increase their basic operating and program 

budgets—without any means for measuring its effect on Native American students. 

Recommendation: 

• Proposed Title III–A Native American Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions Program:

As a matter of equity and for the reasons noted earlier in this statement, the 

Tribal Colleges and Universities respectfully request that the Committee on 

Senate Indian Affairs oppose the establishment of a new Title III–A program 

for so-called Native American Serving, non-Tribal Institutions. 

23

III. Conclusion 

Tribal Colleges and Universities bring high quality, culturally relevant higher 

education opportunities to thousands of American Indians. The modest Federal investment in the TCU has paid great dividends in terms of employment, education, 

and economic development. Continuation of this investment makes sound moral and 

fiscal sense. Tribal colleges need stable funding sources and competent agency administration of our various programs to sustain and grow those programs and 

achieve our missions. 

We greatly appreciate the long standing support of this distinguished Committee. 

Thank you for this opportunity to present our views and recommendations to help 

achieve equality in higher education and economic opportunities in Indian Country 

through the Nation’s Tribal Colleges and Universities.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Gipp, thank you very much. 

I should just mention that the question of funding the United 

Tribes, for example, is not solely within the discretion of the Department of the Interior or the Secretary of the Interior. The Congress has weighed in on that each year that this President has left 

it out of the budget. 

But you are quite correct that you were always a part of the 

budget until this Administration. Congress has, as you know, decided this Administration is wrong and has continued that funding. 

But I think the authorization request is a reasonable request that 

we should proceed on. 

Dr. GIPP. I deeply appreciate the bipartisan effort by the Congress, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Elmer Guy is a board member of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, and president of the 

Navajo Technical College in Crownpoint, NM. Mr. Guy, thank you 

for being with us. 

STATEMENT OF ELMER J. GUY, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO

TECHNICAL COLLEGE; BOARD MEMBER, AMERICAN INDIAN

HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM 

Mr. GUY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. 

I am here today in partnership with Dr. Gipp from United Tribes 

Technical College, in order to ask for support for the new title V 

section of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Act of 

1978. This new title will authorize funds to tribally controlled postsecondary career and technical institutions. 

Navajo Tech was founded in the largest American Indian Nation, 

the great Navajo Nation, to help turn a tragedy into educational 

success. Navajo Tech has had a distinguished history in Indian 

education. Part of the challenge is the realization of the depth of 

the tragedy of Indian education in 1968. Back in 1969, we began 

to discover how to use education and training as a tool to address 

the immediate needs of unemployed populations. 

In 1979, the Navajo Skills Center was founded to meet that critical need. Unemployed Navajo citizens not only mastered vocational and technical skills, but they found jobs. In 1985, I response 

to the limited offerings by the Navajo Skills Center, this school became Crownpoint Institute of Technology. The Institute began to 

expand its program in order to offer associate degrees at that time, 

and responded to the national trends as they relate to career technical education. 

24

While Navajo Tech responded positively to the call for the Nation’s colleges and universities to begin working toward programs 

that would bolster science, technology, engineering, math and competitive needs of the 21st century by developing impressive associate programs, it continued to build programs like culinary arts, 

nursing assistants, automotive and so forth, to keep with the 

knowledge revolution and career fields and insure that job certificate degree priorities are aligned to achieve high placement rates. 

In 2005, Navajo Technical College was accredited by the Higher 

Learning Commission as a higher education institute. Navajo Tech 

has maintained retention rates over time that exceed 60 percent of 

the student population using cohort analysis, besting the national 

community retention rate below 50 percent. This does not mean 

that Navajo Tech comes close to meeting the Navajo people’s higher 

education needs. The 2000 census acknowledges a Navajo population at 225,298. On trust land alone, we have 106,432 citizens 

that are over age 18 and needing higher education. 

In spite of the success by Navajo Tech, the BIA in 2000 began 

to zero out the budget for critically needed operational funds. This 

is part of the operational funding that receives the Indian Self-Determination Act contracts. Both colleges also receive funding from 

Department of Education funding under the Carl D. Perkins Act. 

But through the wisdom of Congress and the deeply appreciated 

help of this Committee, and Senators and Representatives from our 

home States, the BIA decision has been reversed every year since 

then, thus keeping both Navajo Tech and United Tribes Technical 

College alive and providing services to students. 

The truth is that, Members of the Committee, Navajo Tech needs 

to stabilize its funding base. Without BIA and Carl Perkins funding, in spite of the discretionary target funding the college is eligible to apply for, Navajo Tech and UTTC cannot provide even the 

modest services that it now provides to students of the United 

States. 

We especially want to support the formula for funding between 

Navajo Tech and UTTC that will hold harmless that two schools 

at the higher of their 2006, 2007, or 2008 funding levels. We want 

to ensure that the two schools will not be funded at an amount less 

than the amount of their base year based on congressional appropriations, and to distribute appropriations above the hold harmless 

level of the two institutions combined, according to the Indian student formula used to distribute Section 117 Carl Perkins Act 

grants. 

Ensure that the legislation passed includes a provision which 

provides that funding is continued to be made available pursuant 

to the Indian Self-Determination Education Assistance Act. Ensure 

that the two colleges will continue to receive the base funding that 

they need through sources from BIE and Perkins Act funding. 

Recognize that the Navajo Nation is the largest American Indian 

Nation in the Country, with by far the largest population base, and 

should not be therefore limited to only one institution of higher 

learning to serve its people. In comparison, Members of the Committee, the Navajo Nation is larger than West Virginia and other 

smaller States like Connecticut and Rhode Island, and they are not 

limited to one college. 

25

Ensure that there is authorization for forward funding, as well 

as to allow both colleges to use non-Federal match, and to use their 

funds as the non-Federal match. 

Therefore, the greatest respect for the Members of this Committee, which number among Navajo Tech’s friends, we ask that 

you support the new title V language before you so that we can end 

the uncertainty and provide stability to our colleges. We are hoping 

that you will, on a bipartisan basis, help us to live up to our educational responsibility to current Navajo students, future students, 

and even unborn students of the future. 

The job identified in 1969 is still with us today. We need to 

change the tragedy of Indian education into a success of Indian 

education. The United States needs us to succeed since our human 

resources are always our greatest asset. If we succeed, all of us 

serve the American people well. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Guy follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ELMER J. GUY, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO TECHNICAL COLLEGE; 

BOARD MEMBER, AMERICAN INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM

Honorable Members of the Committee on Indian Affairs. My name is Elmer J. 

Guy, President of Navajo Technical College (Navajo Tech) that has two campuses 

on the Navajo Nation in Crownpoint, New Mexico and Chinle, Arizona. I am here 

today in partnership with Dr. David Gipp, the President of United Tribes Technical 

College (UTTC) located in Bismarck, North Dakota, in order to ask for support for 

a new Title V section to the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Act of 

1978 (25 USC 1801, et seq.). This new title will authorize funds to tribally controlled 

postsecondary career and technical institutions. 

Navajo Tech, like UTTC, has had a distinguished history in Indian higher education. In the famous 1969 report by the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 

of the U.S. Senate, made by its Special Subcommittee on Indian Education, Indian 

education throughout the United States was found to be ‘‘a National Tragedy—a National Challenge.’’ The stark reality painted by the statistical and policy analysis in 

that report shocked the Nation at that time. U.S. education policy toward American 

Indian people had not improved their lives and prospects for a better future. It had, 

instead, taken resources from the national treasury in a way that perpetuated a historical tragedy of major proportions. 

I will let the able Dr. Gipp speak for his institution, of course. He is one of the 

most distinguished American Indian educators in the Nation and has been so for 

a long period of time. But Navajo Tech was founded on the largest American Indian 

Nation, the great Navajo Nation, in the U.S. to help turn a tragedy into educational 

success. 

Part of the challenge in the wake of the realization of the depth of the tragedy 

of Indian education in 1969 was to begin to discover how to use education and training as a tool to address the immediate needs of an unemployed population. In 1979 

the Navajo Skill Center was founded to meet that critical need. Through the dedicated work of Navajo education leaders at that time, the Skill Center was a success. 

Unemployed Navajo citizens not only mastered vocational and technical skills, but 

they found jobs. 

With a Navajo population of the time at over 150,000 people, this success was limited, however. There were a lot of reasons for this. Funding was limited; too few 

training and educational programs were available; student and trainee interests 

were broader than the curriculum; jobs in the Nation were limited and highly competitive; job requirements became more demanding as the national economy demanded higher levels of education, and dreams among students and Navajo educators were larger than the Navajo Skills Center structure could contain. 

In 1985, in response to these new challenges, the Skills Center became the 

Crownpoint Institute of Technology. A new era was begun. The Institute began to 

expand its programming in order to offer associate degrees. It began to pay close 

attention to national trends as they related to careers and technical education. And, 

was previously true, it began to succeed as it developed programs to meet the challenges present during the late 1980s and 1990s. 

26

I am telling this history to make two points: (1) That Navajo Technical College 

has played a vital role in the effort by the U.S. Senate and government of the 

United States to address problems in Indian education that stretch back into U.S. 

history and (2) that, although it has not managed to meet even one half percent 

of the technical and career needs on the Navajo people living in New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah, it has been making slow progress on national education goals as 

they relate to American Indian people. 

While Navajo Tech was the Crownpoint Institute of Technology it managed a 

number of significant achievements. It responded positively to the call for the Nation’s colleges and universities to begin working toward programs that would bolster 

the science, technology, engineering, and math competitive needs of the 21st century 

by developing impressive associate degree programs. It continued building its 

strengths in programs like culinary arts and automotive technology, sometimes 

keeping up with the knowledge revolution in career fields and sometimes ensuring 

that jobs, certificate, and degree priorities were aligned to achieve high job placement rates. 

In 2005 Crownpoint Institute of Technology became Navajo Technical College, in 

part because of the expansion of services into the Arizona side of the Nation. Navajo 

Tech has maintained retention rates over time that exceed 60 percent of the student 

population using cohort analysis, besting a national community college retention 

rate of a little over 50 percent. It became a land grant institution in partnership 

with other tribal colleges in 1994. In 2005 it became fully accredited by the Higher 

Learning Commission of the North Central Association. 

This does not mean that Dine College, the other tribal college on the Navajo Nation and Navajo Tech are coming close to meeting the Navajo people’s higher education needs—although both institutions of higher learning provide absolutely vital 

eduacational services to the Navajo people. U.S. Census acknowledges a total of 

Navajo population of 225,298. On trust land alone, 106,432 Navajo citizens are age 

18 and over. This population is spread throughout a 17,500,000 acre reservation 

(26,897 square miles) extending into three states. The Navajo reservation is 2,810 

square miles larger than the State of West Virginia. The median Native American 

population age is 27.4 years, 8 years younger than the median age for mainstream 

America. Approximately 10,000 Navajo students graduate from area high schools 

each year. Dropout rates from high school are as high as they are in the most challenging urban schools. Large percentages of those Navajo students who graduate 

lack basic reading, writing, and math skills. Navajo Tech alone only serves a little 

over 500 full-time equivalency students where it should be serving thousands if persistent poverty on the Navajo Nation is going to be ended before the 21st century 

ends. 

In spite of the success realized by Navajo Tech, and the needs that I just brushed 

over with the lightest of touches—I will be glad to provide the Committee or staffers 

with more extensive statistics if that will be useful to your deliberations, the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs (BIA) in 2002 began to zero out the budget for critically needed 

operational funds, the authorization for appropriations that enables Navajo tech is 

Pub.L. 84–959, ‘‘Vocational Training for Adult Indians.’’ This is part of the operational funding that Navajo Tech receives under the Indian Self-Determination Act 

Contract. Both colleges also receive U.S. Department of Education Funding under 

Section 117 of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act as part of its operational funding. 

Through the wisdom of Congress and the deeply appreciated help of this Committee and the Senators and Representatives from our home states, the BIA decision has been reversed every year since then, thus keeping both Navajo Tech and 

UTTC alive and providing services to their students. But the uncertainty and stress 

on communities, which read about the yearly drama in area newspapers and hear 

about it on area media, students, faculty, and staff damages Navajo Tech every single year. ‘‘Will Navajo Tech survive another year or not? ’’ People say. ‘‘What’s wrong 

with the college if the Bureau of Indian Affairs wants to shut it down? ’’ They say. 

Education is about the future, and when the future is clouded and troubles seem 

to always verge on creating disaster, then planning efforts go awry, key professionals look for other jobs, students question if they should make a decision that 

is in their best interest, and keeping everyday tasks going gets harder. 

The truth is that Navajo Tech needs to stabilize its funding base. Without BIA 

and Carl Perkins funding, in spite of the discretionary and targeted funding the college is eligible to apply for, Navajo Tech cannot provided even the modest services 

that it now provides to the Navajo Nation and the people of the United States. We 

especially want to support the formula for funding between Navajo Tech and UTTC 

that will:

27

• Hold harmless the two schools at the higher of their 2006 or 2007 funding levels. We want to ensure that the two schools will not be funded at an amount 

less than the amount for their base year based upon Congressional appropriations.

• Distribute appropriations above the ‘‘hold harmless’’ level of the two institutions 

combined according to the Indian Student Count Formula used to distribute 

Section 117 Perkins Act grants.

• Ensure that the legislation passed includes a provision which provides that 

funding is continued to be made available pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistant Act.

• Ensure that the two colleges will continue to receive the base funding they need 

from their sources of BIA and Perkins Act funding.

• Recognize that the Navajo Nation is largest American Indian nation in the 

country with by far the largest population base and should not therefore be limited to only one institution of higher learning to serve its people.

Therefore, with the greatest of respect for the Members of this Committee, which 

number among Navajo Tech’s greatest friends, we ask that you support the new 

Title V language before you so that we can end the uncertainty and provide stability 

to our college. We are hoping that you will, on a bi-partisan basis, help us to live 

up to our educational responsibility to current Navajo students, future students, and 

even unborn students of the future. The job identified in 1969 is still with us. We 

need to change the tragedy of Indian education into the success of Indian education. 

The United States needs us to succeed since our human resources are always our 

greatest asset. If we succeed all of us serve the American people well. 

A further truth is that both Navajo Tech and UTTC are making strides in spite 

of the institutional stress and challenges we face because of the zeroing out of BIA 

funding every year. Again, I will let Dr. Gipp speak for his institution, but at Navajo Tech our enrollment is increasing. Our technology education program has become a world class program. It is currently in the process of developing an initiative 

called Internet to the Hogan that is using science and technology research in areas 

like high speed wireless connectivity and supercomputing and using those technologies to end the digital divide on the Navajo Nation. The Congress of the United 

States provided the funds through the National Science Foundation and other Federal agencies to make the work we are doing possible. Navajo students are learning 

world class skills as a result of this project, and some of our graduates, both working at the college and elsewhere, are becoming leaders in research, education, and 

the entrepreneurial use of technology. 

We are currently working hard with the Superintendent of Navajo Education, Dr. 

Tommy Lewis, to improve K–20 student performance in pre-college science, technology, engineering, and math skills, working on an answer to the problem of underperforming high school students. We are extending our service area, strengthening 

curriculum and increasing academic rigor in fields as diverse as nursing, automotive 

repair, electrical trades, and alternative energy. Title V will not provide solutions 

to all of the challenges that still must be overcome to end the national tragedy in 

Indian education that we have fought to overcome since 1969. More resources, fresh 

ideas, an entrepreneurial drive for excellence, and the kind of determination present 

in the students, staff, faculty, and administrators at Navajo Tech will all be needed. 

But the passage of this legislation will be an important step toward Navajo Tech’s 

long-term future.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Guy, thank you very much for being with us 

today. 

Next, we will hear from Jamie Merisotis, President of the Institute for Higher Education Policy in Washington, DC. Mr. Merisotis, 

thank you for being with us. 

STATEMENT OF JAMIE P. MERISOTIS, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE 

FOR HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY 

Mr. MERISOTIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Improving access to higher education continues to be one of the 

most important contributions that the Federal Government can 

make to our national well being. For many American Indians, the 

path of educational attainment is one of many journeys reflecting 

28

the complex challenges that face people who have been underserved by America’s educational system for more than two centuries. 

A combination of historical, economic, social and demographic 

forces have shaped the educational challenges and constraints that 

American Indians face. Today, almost 28 percent of American Indians aged 25 and over have not graduated from high school, compared with the national average of 15 percent. And only 42 percent 

of American Indians pursue any form of higher education; 13 percent of whom attain a bachelor’s degree or higher, half the national 

average. More than one-third of all American Indian students are 

30 years or older, which puts them at risk for dropping out prior 

to earning a degree. At tribal colleges, entering students have family incomes that average less than $14,000, 27 percent below the 

Federal poverty threshold. 

Despite these significant obstacles, we know that investing in 

higher education results in widespread dramatic benefits for both 

individuals and the Nation as a whole. For example, American Indians with a bachelor’s degree or higher earn almost four times as 

much as those who did not graduate from high school, and more 

than twice as much as those who hold a high school diploma. Participation in Federal welfare programs is there times less for those 

with a college education than for those who graduated from high 

school. Only about one-third of American Indian students who did 

not graduate from high school voted in the November 2004 election, 

compared to over half of those with a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

Tribal colleges play an important role in workforce development 

and skills, and they emphasize areas that are of particular importance to the development of reservation communities, such as 

health services, primary and secondary education, and rural farm 

and business development. They offer a variety of social services 

for students and community members, such as family life and parenting courses, and domestic and community violence prevention 

programs. 

The very presence of tribal colleges on reservations encourages 

even further pursuit of post-secondary education, as evidenced by 

the fact that one-half of tribal college graduates continue their education. 

So investment in higher education through tribal colleges isn’t 

just a nice thing to do for American Indians. It is a necessary step 

that is required to allow these colleges to serve the growing numbers of students who will contribute in significant ways to their 

communities and to our Nation. 

I urge the Committee, therefore, to focus on the following key 

Federal policy priorities. First, increase funding for the operating 

expenses of tribal colleges and increase the level authorized under 

the Tribal College Act. The current act allocates funding through 

a formula based on the number of Indian students enrolled. No 

funds are distributed for non-Indian students, who make up 20 percent of total enrollment at these schools. In 2006, as prior witnesses pointed out, total funding per American Indian student was 

$5,001. Appropriations have never reached the authorized level of 

$6,000, and in fact have decreased by almost 30 percent after inflaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:56 Jul 23, 2007 Jkt 034906 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\34906.TXT JACKF PsN: JACK
29

* The Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) is an independent, nonprofit organization 

that is dedicated to access and success in postsecondary education around the world. Established 

in 1993, IHEP uses unique research and innovative programs to inform key decision makers 

who shape public policy and support economic and social development. The Institute’s work addresses an array of issues in higher education, ranging from higher education financing to technology-based learning to quality assurance to minority-serving institutions. 

tion. Future funding increases should be tied to inflation to ensure 

that student support does not decline. 

Second, improve the capacity of tribal colleges to serve students 

by increasing support for facilities and critical infrastructure needs. 

While many mainstream colleges and universities have benefited 

enormously from infrastructure support from the Federal Government, most that have received such support were created prior to 

the establishment of the first tribal college. Congress can correct 

this inequity by establishing a facilities and infrastructure equity 

plan to tribal colleges that provides a level of support that is comparable on a per-student basis to the sums available to other land 

grant institutions. 

Third, enhance the development of tribal colleges through increasing support under Title III of the Higher Education Act. 

Inexplicably, the President’s 2008 budget proposed slashing funds 

for tribal colleges under title III by more than 20 percent, an unprecedented cut. Given the enormous educational needs served by 

the tribal colleges, this must not stand. I urge the Committee to 

make title III funding for tribal colleges formula-based so that institutions do not have to go through the complex and time consuming task of developing detailed competitive proposals. I also 

recommend that the authorized level be increased to at least $40 

million, and that the Committee work with appropriators to fund 

this section at its authorized level. 

These and other strategies targeted at tribal colleges and universities must be combined with broader Federal policies to assist low 

income educationally disadvantaged students. Increasing support 

for Pell Grants, the Federal TRIO Programs, and programs that 

are aimed at building the high order workforce skills of our Nation 

are essential to combat the challenges of limited college access and 

success for our Nation’s growing emerging majority populations. 

As one of the main drivers of economic and social development 

for all American Indian communities, tribal colleges and universities are critical to the future success of these communities. I hope 

that you will continue the Committee’s bipartisan history of support for tribal colleges, and act without delay to make these investments that are so critical to the future prosperity and security of 

American Indian communities. In so doing, our Nation will be 

strengthened and sustained for many generations to come. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Merisotis follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMIE P. MERISOTIS, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR HIGHER

EDUCATION POLICY * 

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before the Committee regarding the important topic of Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU). 

The 110th Congress faces the ongoing challenge of promoting access to higher 

education for all Americans who have the interest and ability to attend college. Improving access to higher education continues to be one of the most important contributions that the Federal Government can make to our national well-being. For 

30

many American Indians, the path of educational attainment is one of many journeys, reflecting the complex challenges that face people who have been underserved 

by America’s educational system for more than two centuries. That path may take 

students on an array of journeys through the postsecondary educational system: 

Tribal Colleges and Universities; mainstream institutions of higher education; adult 

education programs; associate’s, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees; outreach and support programs; financial aid programs; and many others. Yet for many Native people, those journeys represent the best and most important opportunities available 

for cultural preservation and growth, social mobility, and economic prosperity. 

Today I will discuss some of the evidence that has been amassed about why investment in Native people matters to us as a society, and why the specific investment in Tribal Colleges and Universities brings enormous benefits both individually 

and collectively to Native people and communities. I also will discuss some of the 

most important strategies that you can pursue at the Federal level to make this investment pay off in economic, social, and cultural terms. 

The Institute for Higher Education Policy’s acclaimed recent national report The 

Path of Many Journeys: The Benefits of Higher Education for Native People and 

Communities (made possible through the generous support of USA Funds, in collaboration with the American Indian Higher Education Consortium and the American Indian College Fund) has been provided in advance to the Committee. The report points out that a combination of historical, economic, social, demographic, and 

educational forces have shaped the challenges and constraints that American Indians face. 

Historical forces: For decades U.S. Federal policy toward Indian tribes was made 

without knowledge or consideration of the values of Native people themselves. In 

addition, educational curricula and teaching came from a Eurocentric-White perspective and completely neglected any mention of tribal ways of life. 

Economic and social forces: American Indians, especially those who live on reservations, are among the poorest groups in the country. Approximately 26 percent 

of the American Indian/Alaska Native population lives below the official poverty 

level, compared with 12 percent of the total population. Factors such as geographic 

isolation, limited opportunities for upward mobility in rural areas and on reservations, and low labor force participation rates contribute to a continuous poverty cycle 

among American Indians. This poverty is often accompanied by a range of social 

problems—injuries and violence, depression, substance abuse, inadequate health 

care and prenatal health care, unhealthy or insufficient diets, and high rates of diabetes—that can greatly affect the ability and desire to pursue education. 

Demographic forces: The American Indian population has experienced tremendous 

growth, from 237,000 in 1900 to 4.3 million in 2000. An estimated 33 percent of this 

population is under the age of 18, compared with 26 percent of the total U.S. population. American Indians reside primarily in the Western part of the United States: 

48 percent, compared with 22 percent of the total U.S. population. Currently, more 

than a third of American Indians live on reservations or in other American Indian 

Areas, with the remainder living in other communities. American Indians tend to 

be more rural, geographically isolated, and younger than the U.S. population as a 

whole. 

Educational forces: American Indian college enrollment more than doubled, from 

76,100 in 1976 to 165,900 in 2002. An important reason for that growth was the 

advent of the Tribal College and University movement, which began in the late 

1960s and has grown at an impressive rate over a nearly 40 year period. However, 

American Indians continue to have much lower educational attainment rates than 

persons from other racial/ethnic backgrounds. Almost 28 percent of American Indians age 25 and over in 2004 had not graduated from high school, compared with 

the national average of 15 percent. Further, only 42 percent of American Indians 

pursued any form of higher education and 13 percent attained a bachelor’s degree 

or higher, compared with 53 percent and 28 percent nationally. 

In addition, more than a third of all American Indian students are 30 years or 

older, which puts them at risk for dropping out prior to earning a degree. Most (65 

percent) are financially independent, compared to a national average of 50 percent. 

At TCU, entering students have family incomes that average $13,998, or 27 percent 

below the poverty threshold. 

Despite the significant obstacles that confront American Indians, we know that 

investing in higher education results in widespread, dramatic benefits to both individuals and the Nation as a whole, including higher rates of employment, less reliance on public assistance, increased levels of health, and a greater sense of civic responsibility. Figure 1 details some of the many benefits that result from such investments. For example, American Indians with a bachelor’s degree or higher earn almost four times as much as those who did not graduate from high school, and more 

31

than twice as much as those who hold a high school diploma. Further, the more education that is attained, the less likely it is for individuals to rely on public assistance programs. Participation in Federal welfare programs is three times higher for 

those with a high school degree compared to individuals with a bachelor’s degree 

or higher. 

A number of social benefits also correlate with postsecondary education attainment. For example, 88 percent of American Indians with a bachelor’s degree or 

higher said they were in ‘‘excellent, very good, or good’’ health, compared with 73 

percent of those without a high school diploma. Only about a third of American Indians who did not graduate from high school voted in the November 2004 Presidential 

election, compared with over half of those with a bachelor’s degree or higher.

Figure 1: Benefits resulting from higher education in general and from TCU on 

reservations 

Private Public Particular to Reservations 

Economic Higher Salaries and Benefits Increased Tax Revenues Workforce and Skills Development 

Employment Greater Productivity Greater Opportunities 

for Leadership and 

Small Businesses 

Higher Savings Levels Increased Consumption Economic Growth and 

Development 

Improved Working Conditions Increased Workforce 

Flexibility 

Employment for Graduates on Reservations 

Personal/Professional Mobility Decreased Reliance on 

Government Financial 

Support 

Agriculture and Land 

Development

Social Improved Health/Life Expectancy Reduced Crime Rates Mitigation of Social 

Problems 

Improved Quality of life for 

Offspring 

lncreased Charitable 

Giving/Community 

Service 

Centers for Preservation 

of Culture, Language 

and Traditions 

Better Consumer Decision 

Making 

Increased Quality of 

Civic Life 

Provision of Further 

Educational Opportunities 

Increased Personal Status Social Cohesion/Appreciation of Diversity Technology Transfer 

More Hobbies and Leisure 

Activities 

Improved Ability to 

Adapt and Use Technology 

Community Programs 

TCU and other nearby colleges contribute to the economic development of reservations. Despite persistent unemployment in reservation communities, graduates from 

TCU are employed at encouraging levels—for example, in one survey, 60 percent of 

alumni were employed outside the home, in the military, or self-employed. TCU also 

play an important role in workforce and skills development, and they emphasize 

areas that are of particular importance to the development of reservation communities, such as health services, primary and secondary education, and rural farm 

and business development. 

Students at TCU, as well as the colleges themselves, contribute to the social 

health of reservation communities. The goals and activities of the colleges and their 

students translate into direct benefits to communities, such as the provision of social 

services, the preservation of language and tradition, and the encouragement of educational opportunities. TCU offer a variety of social services for students and community members, such as family life and parenting courses and domestic and community violence prevention programs. In addition, the very presence of TCU and college graduates on reservations encourages postsecondary educational attainment in 

these communities. About one-half of TCU graduates continue their education, and 

of those, over 86 percent pursue a bachelor’s degree. 

Thus, investment in Native American higher education through TCU and other 

postsecondary institutions is not just a nice thing to do for American Indians. It is 

a necessary step that is required to allow TCU to serve the growing numbers of students who will contribute in significant ways to their communities and to our Nation. 

32

I therefore urge the Committee to focus on the following key Federal policy priorities that will greatly improve the postsecondary educational prospects of American 

Indians. 

Recommendations 

Increase funding for the operating expenses of Tribal Colleges and Universities and 

increase the level authorized under the Tribally Controlled College or University 

Assistance Act of 1978 (TCCUAA). 

TCU are in a unique funding situation. States have no obligation to provide funding for TCU because of their location on Federal trust territory. At the same time, 

the Federal trust territory status prevents the levying of local property taxes, which 

are often used to support community colleges elsewhere in the United States. Thus, 

the main source of funding for the TCU is the U.S. Government. This puts TCU 

in a unique category of institutions that includes only the U.S. military academies, 

Howard University, and Gallaudet University. According to treaty obligations and 

the trust responsibility between the sovereign Indian tribes and nations and the 

United States, the Federal Government is bound to provide funding for American 

Indian tribes for a variety of programs, including higher education. 

The TCCUAA currently allocates funding to 24 of the TCU through a formula 

based on the number of Indian students enrolled (called the Indian Student Count 

or ISC). No funds are distributed for non-Indian students, who make up 20 percent 

of total enrollments at these schools. In 2006, the total funding per American Indian 

student provided under TCCUAA was $5,001. Appropriations have never reached 

the authorized level of $6,000 per student. Despite increases in total appropriations, 

funding per Indian student has increased only slightly since 1981 (by only $1,616 

over a 26 year period) and, in fact, has decreased by almost 30 percent when inflation is considered. Future funding increases should be tied to inflation to ensure 

that support for students at TCU does not decline and therefore negatively impact 

the ability of the colleges to effectively serve American Indian students. 

Improve the capacity of TCU to serve students by increasing support for facilities and 

critical infrastructure needs. 

In 1994, 29 TCU were awarded land-grant status in Federal legislation. As landgrant institutions, these TCU have the right to receive resources that can be invested in additional faculty or equipment to conduct agricultural research, either 

independently or in collaboration with 4-year institutions. The 1996 White House 

Executive Order on Tribal Colleges and Universities aims to more fully integrate 

the colleges into Federal programs and reaffirms their important role in reservation 

development by directing all Federal departments and agencies to increase their financial support to the colleges. However, only modest sums that have been invested 

in TCU have been allocated for facilities construction and improvement. While many 

mainstream colleges and universities have benefited enormously from infrastructure 

support from the Federal Government, most that have received such support were 

created prior to the establishment of the first TCU. Congress can correct this inequity by establishing a facilities and infrastructure equity plan for TCU that provides a level of support that is comparable on a per-student basis to the sums available to the other land-grant institutions. 

Enhance the development of TCU to better serve students through increased support 

under Title III of the Higher Education Act. 

Part A, Section 316 of the Higher Education Act provides vital services to the 

growing number of TCU and the students they serve. These funds are used to support basic enhancements to curriculum, faculty development, and some infrastructure costs. Inexplicably, the President’s 2008 Budget proposed slashing funds for 

TCU under Title III by more than 20 percent—an unprecedented cut. Title III represents an important opportunity for TCU to assist in their academic development. 

This funding is similar in scope to funds made available to other institutions with 

low average revenues, including many mainstream two- and 4-year colleges as well 

as Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions. 

Only funding for TCU was cut under Title III in the President’s Budget (funding 

for other developing institutions was level funded and also disappointing). I urge the 

Committee to focus on two key issues to aid in institutional development at TCU 

under Title III. First, make funding for TCU under Section 316 formula-based so 

that institutions do not have to go through the complex and time-consuming task 

of developing detailed competitive proposals. All TCU have major development 

needs and should be recognized with support based on their FTE enrollments. Second, increase the authorization level for Section 316 funds to at least $40 million 

33

and use the Committee’s leverage with appropriators to fund this section at its authorized level. 

These and other strategies targeted at the unique circumstances of Tribal Colleges 

and Universities must be combined with broader Federal policies to assist low income, educationally disadvantaged students. Increasing support for Pell Grants, the 

Federal TRIO programs, and programs that are aimed at building the high-order 

workforce skills of our Nation (such as the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program) is essential to combat the challenges of limited college access 

and success for our Nation’s growing emerging majority populations. 

Low college access and degree achievement rates have been a persistent problem 

for American Indians, the result of decades of neglect, marginalization, and discrimination. As one of the main drivers of economic and social development for all 

American Indian communities, Tribal Colleges and Universities are critical to the 

future success of these communities. I urge you to continue the Committee’s bipartisan history of support for TCU and act without delay to make these investments 

that are so critical to the future prosperity and security of American Indian communities. In so doing, our Nation will be strengthened and sustained for many generations to come. 

Thank you again for this opportunity to appear before the Committee on this important issue.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Merisotis, thank you very much. Those were 

some very interesting statistics you have compiled and offered this 

Committee. 

Dr. Bette Keltner is the Dean of the School of Nursing and 

Health Studies at Georgetown University. Dr. Keltner, thank you 

very much for being with us. You may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF DR. BETTE KELTNER, DEAN, SCHOOL OF 

NURSING AND HEALTH STUDIES, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 

Ms. KELTNER. Thank you so much. 

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. 

Thank you for this opportunity to address the Committee concerning tribal colleges and universities. 

I am Bette Keltner, not from a tribal college, but on behalf of 

Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, to 

support this community. We at Georgetown NHS do offer bachelor 

of science and master’s degrees across a variety of programs, nursing of course, human science, health systems, and international 

health. 

Our school also is co-founding with Georgetown Law Center the 

O’Neill Health Law Institute. I am a member of the Cherokee Nation and have decades of experience supporting American Indians 

and Alaska Natives. I served two terms as President of the National Alaska Native American Indian Nurses Association, and I 

am an active member of the Society for the Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans Into Science. 

My interest and involvement in science spans a variety of industries. I have also been on the production side of the economy as a 

corporate officer for Honda of America Manufacturing before coming to Georgetown in 1999. I would echo Elmer Guy’s support for 

the importance of investment in human assets. As one of the auto 

manufacturers’ success stories in a material business, the competitive edge is given to those who can manage the human assets. It 

is true that we have evidence from today that tribal colleges and 

universities have experience in developing and supporting the 

human assets for American Indians. 

34

Today, I would like to focus my comments on the importance of 

science and technology at TCU, and the need to further collaboration between TCU and major research universities to advance these 

fields of study as a means of promoting health and well being. 

Certainly, we are familiar with the fact that the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics’ projections for the year 2014 are that professional and 

science-related occupations will be the fastest growing segment of 

the labor market, forecasted with over a 20-percent increase in the 

coming years. We are all familiar with the fact that the fields of 

science, technology and health care are experiencing explosive 

growth. 

It is also clear that the economy and individual and community 

well being are dependent upon the new world that we live in, and 

science and technology open these doors. 

It is certainly tragic that the American Indian culture so rooted 

in traditions associated with nature, that has given us the great 

first steps in pharmacotherapy with the introduction of aspirin, 

have fallen behind in participation with their natural affinity for 

sciences, and particularly life sciences. In talking to several presidents of TCU, it has become clear that the lack of science faculty 

and their preparation is one of the things that contributes to this 

gap. This fact creates a barrier for Indian students who would wish 

to participate in the most rapidly growing segment of the economy. 

There are some bright spots. Certainly, we have heard that 

today, for example, with the energy initiative. We have also become 

familiar with the Navajo Technical College and the good work they 

have done. I would point to their Hogan Project that ensures that 

technology and computer skills are brought to bear and can afford 

students, as well as faculty and the community, important growth 

in education and economy. 

TCU are challenged because students often come needing remediation. This is even more important that we have science faculty 

and education. 

I would propose that as we examine the ways to do this efficiently, that we take a look at what Mr. Thomas has said earlier, 

about leveraging partnerships. As a former resident of Wyoming, I 

was particularly pleased that he made my point in starting this. 

I would suggest that we do envision those opportunities, and we 

have heard some examples, for partnerships between TCU and 

major universities, but particular major research universities, as 

having leveraging benefits. These benefits include research collaboration, student services, educational pipeline programs, and a 

unique perspective that would enhance cultural competence in a 

range of fields that include informatics, life sciences, public health, 

nursing, social work, medicine, and linguistics. 

To point to an example, I would say that two summers ago, Stacy 

Phelps, the science educator at Oglala Lakota College, and we have 

seen pictures demonstrating their great vitality, visited my office 

at Georgetown University. One of his roles is to get more students 

interested in pursuing science. Their capacity has some limitations, 

and they have been innovative in deploying what they can do 

through a partnership with South Dakota School of Mines and 

Technology to address some of those limitations. That collaboration 

is a good thing, but could be further advanced with partnerships 

35

with research-intensive universities, especially those with life 

sciences. 

We had at that time 16 students from Pine Ridge who have come 

over the summers as high school enrichment programs, students 

who are primed to have their appetites whetted for science. Stacy 

Phelps and I sat in a room with great enthusiasm and ideas about 

the desirable goal, and just the limitation of those opportunities to 

get together and move an idea forward. 

As we know, science learning is a long continuum. We have 

heard the importance of students being prepared from early education through elementary school, high school, and of course college. This continuum is even more important in science. We cannot 

expect students to drop in on page 85 and understand the content. 

They must learn it from page one or they are lost. 

At Georgetown School of Nursing Health Studies we have had 

Pathways to Success, which leverages another dimension that 

major research universities can bring to a partnership with TCU. 

This project bringing high school students to the Georgetown campus for life science study began with startup money from Goldman 

Sachs Foundation, QUALCOMM and FedEx. Pathways is an initiative to enhance interest in academic preparation for high school 

students who are prepared to attend college and to instill in them 

both the skills and the interest in life sciences. 

At research universities, we can also introduce students to destinations and to opportunities. One of the things that connects the 

activities is that the Imaging Science and Information Center at 

Georgetown University, with the help of Senator Conrad, has been 

implementing an internet-based diabetes management program focused specifically on American Indian populations. I have served on 

the board of this group since its inception. The success in managing 

diabetes at these remote locations has been remarkable. We can 

also do testing at a distance of (B)(1)(c) and get a real sense of the 

progress. 

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Keltner. I am going to have to ask you to 

summarize the remainder of your testimony if you would. 

Ms. KELTNER. The remainder of my testimony is that I would 

support the continued support for TCU, and that as we look forward to the vitality of this capacity, that we encourage investment 

in science education and look to potential collaborations for TCU in 

research-intensive universities. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Keltner follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. BETTE KELTNER, DEAN, SCHOOL OF NURSING AND

HEALTH STUDIES, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, and thank you for 

this opportunity to address the Committee concerning tribal colleges and universities (TCU). 

I am Bette Keltner, dean of Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health 

Studies (NHS). We offer bachelors and masters degrees of science in Health Systems, Human Science, International Health and Nursing. Our school also operates, 

in partnership with Georgetown University Law Center, the Linda and Timothy 

O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law. 

I am a member of the Cherokee Nation and have decades of experience supporting 

American Indian and Alaska Natives. I served two terms as president of the NaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:56 Jul 23, 2007 Jkt 034906 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\34906.TXT JACKF PsN: JACK
36

tional Alaska Native American Indian Nurses Association and am an active member 

ofthe Society for Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in Science. 

My interest and involvement in science spans a variety of industries. I have also 

been on the production side of the economy as a corporate officer for Honda Mfg 

before coming to Georgetown University in 1999. 

Role of Tribal Colleges and Universities 

The important role of TCU in education and their contributions to their communities has been well documented and discussed. 

Today, I would like to focus my comments on: (1) the importance of science and 

technology at TCU and (2) the need for further collaboration between TCU and 

major research universities to advance these fields of study as a means of promoting 

the public’s health and well-being. 

According to 2005 Bureau of Labor Statistics projections for the year 2014, professional and related occupations will be the fastest growing segment of the Labor 

Market by 21.2 percent over the coming years. 

I am sure we all understand that fields in science, technology, and health care 

are experiencing disproportionate growth. 

It is clear that the economy and individual and community well-being are dependent upon the new world that we live in where science and technology open doors. 

Investment in the sciences has worked in various cultures, including in countries 

like Ireland that currently has a low unemployment rate and high standard of living. 

It is certainly tragic that the American Indian culture—which is so close to nature—has never adequately translated that love to life sciences, science, and technology. 

In talking to several presidents of TCU, it became clear they lack science faculty 

and preparation. This fact creates a barrier for Indian students who wish to participate in most things that science allows us to do. 

There are some bright spots, however. 

A review of recent issues of the Tribal College Journal of American Indian Higher 

Education highlights some examples where TCU programs in science and technology are serving the greater interests of American Indians and their communities.

• The Native Grass Project at Haskell Indian Nations University in Kansas focuses its research on switch grass—a warm season, perennial grass found 

throughout the United States with biofuel potential. The program will help 

identify the attributes desirable for the revitalization and expansion of the grass 

for future use by Native people and for the restoration of Army installation 

lands.

• In New Mexico, the Navajo Technical College has partnered with Navajo Nation 

on the Internet to implement the Hogan Project. The project will ensure technology is an integral part of the Navajo community development in education, 

health care, public safety, and economics. The project will bring supercomputing 

capabilities to research and education projects at the college and allow integration with other research and computing facilities such as the University of New 

Mexico. E-Learning programs will bring advanced collaborative education models to remote communities.

This sampling highlights a fertile ground in the area of science and technology 

at TCU. As American Indian communities seek to address their educational, economic, and health needs, the importance of science and technology and collaboration 

grows. 

Yet, TCU are challenged because students are not well-prepared. Their ability is 

limited to offer strong education in life science, science, and technology because of 

faculty who lack depth in these fields and a remote location. 

I propose that we look to unite resources from major universities to address this 

problem. 

University Collaboration with TCU 

Partnership between TCU and major universities with strong research programs 

can have wide-reaching benefits. 

Those benefits include research collaboration, student service opportunities, educational pipeline programs, and a unique perspective that would enhance cultural 

competence in a range of fields, including informatics, life sciences, public health, 

nursing, social work, anthropology, medicine, and linguistics. 

Today, I want to talk about start-up opportunities at Georgetown University. 

37

Two summers ago, Stacy Phelps, the science educator at Oglala Lakota College, 

visited my office at Georgetown University. One of his roles there is to get more students interested in pursuing science. 

The college’s capacity is limited. Faculty members at this TCU lack a depth in 

the sciences. The college has begun a partnership with South Dakota School of 

Mines and Technology to begin addressing this shortcoming. 

That collaboration is a good thing. However, it will not provide the strong base 

in science that these students would encounter at a research intensive university. 

So Stacy Phelps and I sat in my office with a well-known problem, a desirable 

goal, and a great deal of enthusiasm. 

With seed money, we could have launched a substantive program that would leverage the strengths of OLC and South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, as 

well as the major scientific and research capacities of Georgetown University. 

But none existed. 

As we know, science learning is a long continuum, from early education through 

college and beyond. Students cannot drop in on page 85 of a science textbook and 

be expected to understand the content. They have to learn it from page one. Or else 

they are lost. 

One project we launched at the School of Nursing and Health Studies is ‘‘Pathways to Success.’’ We have begun this effort with start-up funding from the Goldman Sachs Foundation, QUALCOMM, and FedEx. 

Pathways is an initiative designed to enhance the interest and academic preparation of underserved high school students. A goal is for students to attend college and 

pursue careers in biomedical science, life science, health care, and technology. 

Between 2003 and 2006, 16 high school students from the Oglala Lakota tribe of 

the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota participated. 

Such a program whets the appetite of these students for science and technology. 

With seed money, we could capitalize on these initial investments and develop a 

stronger partnership with TCU to offer students even greater exposure to a top-tier 

research institution. 

At research intensive universities, students can be exposed to state-of-the-art 

science, such as the Imaging Science and Information Systems Center at Georgetown University Medical Center. 

Over the last several years, the Center—with the help of Senator Conrad—has 

been implementing an Internet-based diabetes management program focused specifically on American Indian populations. It also holds potential for expansion 

through partnerships with Tribal Colleges. 

In the area of education, the School of Nursing and Health Studies participates 

in the Association of American Indian Physicians’ National Native American Youth 

Initiative. 

This is an academic enrichment and reinforcement program designed to prepare 

American Indian and Alaska Native high school students for admission to college 

and professional school and to encourage them to pursue a career in the areas of 

health science and biomedical research. 

These students are hosted at Georgetown for a half-day where they hear a faculty 

lecture and view the Georgetown University Simulator (GUS)—a full-body, robotic 

mannequin that can realistically replicate a human patient in a clinical setting. In 

addition, our Admissions and Outreach staff at NHS conducts a 2-hour seminar 

with the students that focuses on the college admissions process. 

Bettering, Building The Relationship 

For various reasons—including health, education, and workforce—it is clear that 

a solid grounding in science and technology is a missed opportunity for American 

Indians. I have discussed the potential that TCU themselves hold. 

But clearly this is just a beginning. In terms of a well-trained workforce, sustainable jobs, and addressing tribal needs, American Indian Nations require more Indians and Indian youth, in particular, to pursue education in the sciences and technology. TCU hold a key to achieving that goal, particularly through collaboration 

with research intensive universities. 

These collaborations require dedication at the ground level, as well as external 

funding and a smart sustainable framework that allow programs to flourish. 

Congress could catalyze such collaboration by brokering partnerships between 

TCU and research intensive universities—through Federal funding of pilot projects 

and national centers of excellence. Adding competitive advantages for collaboration 

between TCU and universities to the proposal process for existing grant programs 

would also encourage increased collaboration to build scientific and technological 

bridges. 

38

I thank you again for giving me the time to address this issue of consequence, 

as well as for your work on behalf of American Indian and Alaska Native communities. I am happy to respond to any questions that Members of the Committee 

might have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Dr. Keltner, for your perspective on these issues. This is an interesting panel, and there are 

some very interesting perspectives on this very important issue. 

It seems to me, hearing from the four of you, that there is a consensus that there needs to be a better funding source for tribal colleges. Senator Tester made the point, and I think it is an accurate 

point as well, that just an adequate funding source for the students 

that are coming in, the increase in students, is not in itself sufficient either because you have to have an infrastructure program to 

build the buildings and complete the campuses and so on, and to 

deal with those issues that are present at every college. 

Dr. Gipp, for example, at your college, you have inherited some 

very old buildings in a very nice campus setting, but very old buildings that I assume require a substantial amount of repair. Tell us 

just a bit about the infrastructure problems. 

Dr. GIPP. Well, as you know, we occupy an old military fort. It 

is a good case of the Indians taking over the fort in this case for 

peaceful and educational purposes. But our core buildings are 

about 105 years old. Fort Abraham Lincoln is what it was called. 

We have added other buildings, classrooms and some labs, but we 

have a major, major need for new classroom space as well as new 

housing, because we are campus-based. We have gone from roughly 

375 students several years ago to close to 1,100 or 1,200 students 

this year. That will continue to grow, as I talked about earlier, as 

is the case with Navajo Technical College and the other schools. 

So that issue of both maintaining as well as building new, and 

addressing the new problems, but maintaining what you have, is 

very, very critical. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Guy, with respect to your request for the authorization language, was your college also funded in previous 

Presidential budget requests prior to the year 2000? 

Mr. GUY. Yes, Mr. Chairman; we have been in the funding before. 

The CHAIRMAN. And were you told any reason that the funding 

was dropped, beginning with the current Administration? 

Mr. GUY. Yes; the explanation that we received is that we were 

not authorized as one of the colleges under the legislation, the 

American Higher Education Act. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Merisotis, your data that you presented is 

especially gripping with respect to this shortfall on funding, the 

dramatic increase in the number of students that have come into 

the system, which describes the popularity of the tribal college system offering something that had not been previously an opportunity for many of these students, many of whom, you say, are nontraditional students. You indicated that one-third of the students 

are over years of age? 

Mr. MERISOTIS. Correct. Yes; the tribal colleges are one of the 

great untold success stories in American higher education. We tend 

to look at the funding challenges of the tribal colleges, which are 

severe. We at times may view them in a sort of deficit mentality. 

39

In fact, what tribal colleges have been able to do with such limited 

resources is really extraordinary. An example of that is the way 

that they are serving these nontraditional students. But I think a 

broader example is the way that the tribal colleges have become 

community resources, community centers in terms of tribal languages, economic development, and social services. They really play 

an enormous role in these communities, well beyond what you see 

in an awful lot of other mainstream institutions of higher learning. 

I think one of the most important things from the perspective of 

the tribal colleges is that the tribal colleges are absolutely dependent on the Federal Government for operating support. We do have 

the important issue of infrastructure, which is outside of the operating expenses that we need to concentrate on. But remember that 

the operating support of the tribal colleges cannot come from the 

States for the reasons that you pointed out in your prior comments 

and cannot come from the levying of local property taxes. It must 

come from the Federal Government in terms of the Federal trust 

responsibility. 

I think that in that sense when I try to describe to individuals 

in mainstream higher education about the role of the tribal colleges, I say the Federal Government plays the same role to tribal 

colleges that the State plays to public institutions of higher education. The difference is that in no State in the Country would a 

public higher education institution stand for the level of uncertainty that exists in terms of basic operating expenses. Their existence is literally annually threatened because of the uncertainties of 

the funding process. I think that is something that really needs to 

change and be stabilized over time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, you have described the dilemma that most 

tribal college presidents would tell you is a very serious problem 

their offices address all year long, trying to determine what kind 

of student support will I get; what kind of funding will I get that 

provides the opportunity for me to continue to run this college. 

One of the things that I am hoping we can do in the Committee 

on Indian Affairs is to begin to describe the success of this system, 

even with those challenges. We should not apologize for holding up 

a student to say, as Dr. Gipp did, he described a student that everybody had given up on, who was now a very significant success. 

We should never shy away from that. These success stories are 

very important for people to understand the conditions under 

which those who otherwise could not get a college education have 

not only gotten a college education, but been able to use that to do 

that something very significant in their communities. 

So I am hoping that we can begin to gather more and more anecdotal information from these colleges about these success stories. I 

think that is a story, the untold story, as you describe it, Mr. 

Merisotis. 

I am going to turn the questions to Senator Tester and ask him 

to complete the hearing. I have to be on the floor and then we have 

votes that will begin momentarily, but I have to be on the floor at 

10:45. So I will call on Senator Tester. Let me, as I do, thank all 

four of you for being here today. We consider the health, education 

and housing issues to be very significant issues that represent a 

priority for this Committee in the Indian nations. So this is one 

40

part of that today, the issue of tribal colleges, something that I 

have very significant and strong interest in. This Committee will 

play a significant role in the reauthorizations. We also will play, 

as I will play on the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, a significant role on the funding side as well. I thank all four of you. 

Senator Tester. 

Senator TESTER [presiding]. Yes; thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I guess I will ask you, Dr. Guy or Dr. Gipp, and I will just make 

the assumption that both UTTC and Navajo Tech, the reason they 

were able to survive is because Congress stepped in and put money 

toward them. Is your funding level the same at the $5,000 figure? 

What did they use for funding level for you? 

Dr. GIPP. We don’t operate under a current formula right now. 

It has been basically what Congress has been able to provide to us, 

as opposed to really no policy by the BIA in regard to the two institutions you just mentioned. So we are left to the whim and the 

will, if you will, of what the Administration has said, which is zero 

request at this point in time. You are correct that the Congress has 

intervened and restored those funds. The operating funds under 

the Interior Appropriations for United Tribes are a little less than 

$3.5 million and I believe about $1.7 million for Navajo Technical 

College annually from the Interior-BIA side of the operating dollars. 

Senator TESTER. Did you guys do something to tick off the Administration? 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. GIPP. We don’t know. At least I don’t know, and maybe President Guy has another story on this. But as I say, the OMB fellow 

said hey, until you are somebody’s favorite, you are not going to get 

financed. 

Senator TESTER. It is a situation we will have to deal with, it appears, again. 

Mr. Merisotis, you talked about enhancing title III support and 

making it formula based. Are you talking so much per student? 

What kind of formula did you have in mind? 

Mr. MERISOTIS. Well, formula meaning that each college would 

not have to go through a complicated competitive annual process 

each year, much like is done, for example, in funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, also under title III, part B, 

where there is a formula based on the students that are enrolled 

and then resources are allocated based on the student enrollments. 

It seems like this sort of annual competitive process that the colleges have to go through is not very productive. 

Senator TESTER. I understand. 

Mr. MERISOTIS. They have limited staff to do this kind of work, 

and I would much rather see them focusing those staff on academic 

issues, rather than on these competitive grant processes. They have 

significant need for all of them. 

Senator TESTER. Right. Then you talked about a facility improvement line item, if that is the proper term. If you were in a position 

of power, how would you structure that? 

Mr. MERISOTIS. I would look at the funding that is already allocated to the other land grant institutions of higher education that 

have been around for many years, the tribal colleges gained land 

41

grant status in 1994, and provide support that is comparable on a 

per-student basis to the land grant support. I don’t know what that 

exact number is right now, but it seems like the support that the 

tribal colleges should get as land grant institutions should be comparable to the support that other institutions receive. 

Senator TESTER. OK. And then in the last question, and I will 

start out with Dr. Keltner, but you can all answer this. I don’t 

mean to be negative toward the tribal colleges at all, by the way. 

I think they do a great job and they are a great hope for economic 

development in Indian country. Make no mistake about it. But the 

dropout rate is something that concerns me. 

I have a couple of questions. Does it concern you? Is it something 

we need to be concerned about? And number two, if you are concerned about it, what do you attribute it to? And what do you think 

we can do to help reduce it? 

We will start with Dr. Keltner, and any of the rest of you can 

respond to that if you would like. It is your choice. The reason I 

direct it at you is because of the collaborative efforts of you. I assume that you work with a number of schools. So go ahead. 

Ms. KELTNER. That is correct, Mr. Tester. The graduation rate 

certainly is a concern, and the preparation for a competitive market is generally very good. I speak to one partnership that we have 

initiated in working with Sisseton-Wahpeton College, where the 

pass rate for nurses was a total failure, 100 percent failure. The 

things that can be done at a distance can be leveraged with certain 

types of collaborations. 

We must beef up the faculty in those particular areas. I know recruitment, hiring and retention is on the minds of college presidents always, and we have people who can speak to that. To the 

extent that we use our entire social capacity of having collaborations, I think we can enhance the achievements of students who do 

make it to tribal colleges and universities. 

Mr. MERISOTIS. I would push back a little bit on your question 

about dropouts, simply because the complex life circumstances of so 

many students in the tribal colleges means that they are going to 

be involved in what the economic researchers called ‘‘swirl,’’ which 

is they come in, they go out, they come in, they go back, they have 

child care, they have family responsibilities, they have work, et 

cetera. 

So when we say ‘‘dropout,’’ I am not sure what measure we are 

really talking about. In terms of mainstream colleges, the typical 

time that it takes to get a degree, certainly that is true. But the 

tribal colleges, as I pointed out, are enormous community-based resources. A lot of the individuals stay connected to their communities through the tribal college. Tribal colleges are providing GED 

training. They are providing health care services, diabetes education, et cetera. 

So there are a variety of things where the tribal colleges are 

serving as community resources, and these students come in and 

out. An awful lot of the tribal college students we have learned 

through a project that AIHEC has called the American Indian 

Measures of Success, are actually successful in many other ways 

beyond that narrow definition of a dropout rate. 

42

Senator TESTER. You bring up a good point. I think we need to 

keep in mind that you don’t necessarily need to have a degree to 

have a good job or be successful, family wise or otherwise. So that 

is a good point. 

Dr. GIPP. Senator, you mentioned the dropout rate. I think about 

80 percent to 90 percent of our population from pre-K through 12 

are in public school systems, by the way. That is where the severe 

dropout rate is occurring, when we talk about that. What happens, 

though, is that we take those young adults that are coming out of 

those systems, sometimes dropping out, and many of our tribal colleges are providing the adult education programs so they can get 

the GED, so they can get into the post-secondary system. That is 

where I think we come in, at the points that Mr. Merisotis has 

pointed out, in terms of providing those community services to support them so that they can be successful. 

The evidence shows that really when our students go through a 

tribal college system, they are going to be far more successful, not 

only graduating from our system, but also it increases their ability 

to be successful in the mainstream institutions that they graduate 

to in terms of other universities or colleges that we referred to in 

terms of those partnerships. So there is really the crux of what we 

do in terms of turning that around. Unfortunately, it comes at the 

later stage of life than those who initially drop out. 

Senator TESTER. Dr. Guy, did you want to respond? 

Mr. GUY. Yes, Senator; I guess back home we call the dropout 

rate sometimes ‘‘step out.’’ Sometimes they step out and then they 

step back into the school. What we are doing is we are looking at 

dual credit programs, to where we want to enroll them while they 

are still in high school, and then we give them credit when they 

come to our school, and then they have already earned some college 

credits. Everything that we are doing is we are training high school 

teachers in math and science to use technology in their curriculum, 

and more effectively use technology. 

Senator TESTER. That is good. I want to do whatever we can do 

to help facilitate your success. I need to make that clear. I think 

that when you look at the at-risk thing that I brought up with Carl 

Artman, with Native American students, I don’t want to put too 

much pressure on you, but I think you are really the key to stop 

that and to turn that around, and to really help those students in 

K–12. I really firmly believe that. I don’t think a solution will come 

out of conventional colleges, or it would have already. 

The other issue that I don’t want to saddle you with, but it is 

the truth, and I think there is a tremendous opportunity for tribal 

schools in reducing the unemployment rate. Education, as we all 

know, is the key to economic development. We just need to make 

sure that you folks have the ability to be successful, to help turn 

that around. That would save us all just a whole lot of heartache. 

So yes, did you want to respond? 

Dr. GIPP. I was just going to point out, too, along the line that 

you are talking about, the issue of economic development and infrastructure development in our tribal communities. I really think 

that one of the major oversights by the BIA in the past 25 years 

has been not looking at our human resources and what our needs 

are. We really need to have a major assessment, if you will, study 

43

where our human resources are and what we can then do. That 

means some additional research that needs to be invested in this 

area to do successful things like economic development. There is no 

question that the tribal colleges can and do play a very important 

part where they are located on the issue of business and economic 

development, and answering that question of unemployment. 

Because you look at Standing Rock where I am from, and you 

have unemployment that ranges from a low of 50 percent or 55 percent, to a high of 97 percent unemployment. We need to do something about that. I think that tribal colleges are a wonderful example of that, Senator. 

Senator TESTER. Yes; absolutely. 

With that, I want to thank the panel for being here today. I 

think it was a very, very good hearing and very enlightening. I appreciate your time. 

With that, this Committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:55 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(45)

APPENDIX

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. KENT CONRAD, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA

Thank you, Chairman Dorgan for holding this important hearing. I want to also 

welcome Dr. David Gipp, President of United Tribes Technical College here today. 

I am a strong believer in the tribal colleges. The tribal colleges bring hope and 

opportunity to thousands of Native Americans across the country. Tribal colleges 

serve young people preparing to enter the job market, dislocated workers learning 

new skills, and people seeking to move off welfare. 

I am particularly proud to serve as Co-Chair, along with Senator Domenici, of the 

Senate Bipartisan Task Force on Tribal Colleges and Universities. The task force 

works to raise awareness of the important role the colleges play in their respective 

communities and advance initiatives to help improve and expand the quality education they provide. 

Over the years, I have met with many tribal college students, and I am always 

impressed by their commitment to their education, their families and communities. 

I am a fighter for the tribal colleges because I know how critical they are to progress 

and growth in Indian country. 

This year, the President proposed a budget that cuts funding for tribal colleges. 

It also eliminates all funding for United Tribes Technical College and Navajo Technical College. Tough budget choices must be made, but I can think of no worse 

choice than cutting funding for the tribal colleges. 

While annual appropriations for tribal colleges have increased in recent years, 

core operational funding levels are still only 75 percent of the $6,000 authorized per 

Indian student count. Funding is not even keeping pace with rising student enrollments. Since 1981, enrollments have increased by more than 330 percent. 

It is also not keeping pace with inflation. It would require $6,304 per Indian student, $300 more per student than the current authorized level, for the tribal colleges 

to have the same buying power as they had in 1981. 

It is important for Congress to do all it can to support their incredible work and 

look for opportunities to help them expand and grow. Tribal colleges make a difference and deserve our support. 

Again, thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing. I look forward to the 

testimony of the witnesses.

Æ