U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

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

98–435 PDF 2016

S. HRG. 114–170 

BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION: 

EXAMINING ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES 

IN TRANSFORMING EDUCATIONAL 

OPPORTUNITIES FOR INDIAN CHILDREN 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 13, 2015 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Chairman 

JON TESTER, Montana, Vice Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

T. MICHAEL ANDREWS, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

ANTHONY WALTERS, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on May 13, 2015 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Barrasso ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Daines .................................................................................. 44 

Statement of Senator Franken ............................................................................... 3 

Statement of Senator Heitkamp ............................................................................. 46 

Statement of Senator Hoeven ................................................................................. 41 

Statement of Senator Tester ................................................................................... 2 

Statement of Senator Udall .................................................................................... 42 

WITNESSES

Emrey-Arras, Melissa, Director, Education, Workforce and Income Security 

Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office ................................................. 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11 

Jones, Hon. Carri, Chairwoman, Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe ............................. 32 

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

Lewis, Tommy, Superintendent of Schools, Department of Dine ́ Education, 

Navajo Nation ....................................................................................................... 36 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 37 

Roessel, Charles ‘‘Monty’’, Director, Bureau of Indian Education, Department 

of the Interior ....................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

APPENDIX

Bordeaux, Dr. Roger, Executive Director, Association of Community Tribal 

Schools, Inc., letter ............................................................................................... 65 

National Indian Education Association, prepared statement .............................. 57 

Response to written questions submitted to Charles ‘‘Monty’’ Roessel by: 

Hon. Mike Crapo .............................................................................................. 69 

Hon. Al Franken ............................................................................................... 75 

Hon. Tom Udall ................................................................................................ 71 

Steele, John Yellow Bird, President, Oglala Sioux Tribe, prepared statement .. 55 

Vizenor, Hon. Erma J., Chairwoman, White Earth Band of Ojibwe, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 60 

(1) 

BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION: EXAMINING 

ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES IN 

TRANSFORMING EDUCATIONAL 

OPPORTUNITIES FOR INDIAN CHILDREN 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 13, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room 

628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Barrasso, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

The CHAIRMAN. Good afternoon. I call this hearing to order. 

Today, the Committee will examine the organizational challenges 

that continue to plague the Bureau of Indian Education. 

The Federal Government has an important responsibility in educating Indian children. In the past Congresses, this Committee has 

held several hearings on Indian education. One troubling finding 

throughout these hearings is the lack of consistent successful 

achievements at the Bureau of Indian Education schools. 

Indian children are some of the most at-risk children in the Nation. The school conditions many of them face on a daily basis are 

deplorable. For example, according to the Government Accountability Office, some Bureau of Indian Education schools fail to meet 

basic fire and health standards. 

Nearly two years ago, on May 15, 2013, Secretary Jewell testified 

before this Committee that the state of Indian education was an 

embarrassment. The Government Accountability Office has issued 

numerous reports detailing systemic problems with the organization at the Bureau of Indian Education and the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs. These problems prolong efforts to repair schools and educate Indian children. 

According to the GAO, the recommendations in the reports have 

not been fully implemented. These agencies must work together to 

find ways to help our Indian children. 

I look forward to hearing what progress the Department has 

made in addressing these issues and improving student achievement. 

Before we hear from our witnesses, I would like to turn to Senator Tester for his opening statement. 

2 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator TESTER. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for holding this hearing. 

I also, before starting my prepared statement, I want to recognize Carol Lankford as Vice Chair of the Salish and Kootenai 

Tribes here. Carol, are you here? There she is, right over there. It 

is great to have you here, Carol. Thank you for your interest in 

education in Indian Country. 

I would also say, Mr. Chairman, since your daughter is here, I 

hope you hold with the longstanding tradition of having her come 

up and explain to us what she interprets as the meaning of life. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator TESTER. Look, we all know here that education is the 

foundation for everybody, and it is more important, I believe, as far 

as the future for Indian Country because of the poverty that is in 

Indian Country. I am glad that this Committee continues to privatize this issue of education. It was almost exactly a year ago that 

we held an oversight hearing on the Bureau of Indian Education, 

so I am looking forward to hearing what progress has been made 

by the Department and stakeholders to improve the BIE. 

One of the main themes we continue to hear from Indian country 

is that something needs to be done to improve school facilities. I 

couldn’t agree more. Last week, I and several members of this 

Committee sent a letter to Secretary Jewell requesting that the Department use a fair and transparent process in developing new 

school construction priority lists. In that letter, we also encouraged 

the Department to take a look at what the Defense Department is 

doing to improve its school facilities, since they operate the only 

other Federal school system. 

I am aware that this is comparing apples to oranges, but we simply cannot continue to allow this double standard when it comes 

to providing education for our Native youth. 

By working with the Office of Management and Budget and the 

Congressional Appropriations Committees, the Department can 

make a similar plan to build on the strategic best practices learned 

by the Defense Department’s recent construction improvement efforts. 

At the same time, we need to be having a serious conversation 

about what is reasonable with such an underfunded BIE budget. 

Budgets are a direct demonstration of our priorities, and we can’t 

continue to let our Native students lose out on the current state of 

priorities in this Congress. 

Furthermore, I don’t think we can expect the Department to be 

able to meet the needs of infrastructure in Indian Country if we 

don’t appropriate them adequate monies to get that job done. 

In summary, we should be building a few less Apache helicopters 

and a few more Apache schools. Improving the learning environment is only one part of the solution. We also need to make smart 

targeted investments in other areas directly related to the education of Native children, including increasing our investments in 

per student funding. 

In my home State of Montana, there are two BIE schools, one 

BIE dormitory. One of those BIE schools is the tribally-operated 

3 

Two Eagle River School in Pablo, Montana. The Tribe reported to 

me that public schools on the reservation receive almost 6,000 more 

dollars per Native student than do BIE schools on a reservation. 

That disparity must be rectified. 

In addition to the per student imbalance, I often hear stories 

that schools are having to make tough choices between keeping the 

heat on or buying materials for the students, or, even worse, having to supplement their classroom budgets with money from their 

own pockets. School administrators and teachers shouldn’t have to 

make these kind of tough choices; it is unacceptable and we need 

to do better if we expect a better outcome for our Native children. 

I think it is clear that the educational realities of Native students are finally starting to play a part in our national conversation about schools, and that is why I am glad we are keeping the 

focus on this topic here in this Committee today. 

I am pleased with the Administration’s increased focus on issues 

affecting Native youth and the cross-agency collaboration that is 

happening. As these partnerships and initiatives continue to 

progress, I plan to help in any way I can, and I want to thank everyone on the ground who works so very hard every day to improve 

the lives of Native children throughout Indian country. 

I look forward to hearing each one of the folks here at the panel 

testimony today. Thank you for being here and we look forward to 

your words of wisdom. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Vice Chairman Tester. 

I would point out that also joining us are a number of students 

from Wyoming from St. Stephens School in St. Stephens, Wyoming, 

who are here as part of the Close Up Program. They were here in 

this room earlier this morning to meet with Senator Enzi and me. 

They just got back from across the way, having met with our congressman, Cynthia Lummis, and they are paying very close attention. 

Could I ask you all to stand up and make sure that you feel welcome here in the Committee? Thank you. Thanks so much for joining us today. Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Do any other members have opening statements? 

I know also that, Senator Franken, you have one of the panelists 

at some point you are going to want to introduce as well. You could 

do it now or do it later, depending on your time. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator FRANKEN. I will do it right now, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you. 

I am very pleased to be able to introduce Chairwoman Carri 

Jones, who hails from my State of Minnesota. She brings very valuable experience to this hearing as a witness. Ms. Jones was elected 

Chairwoman of the Leech Lake Band of the Ojibwe in 2012, making her the first woman and the youngest person ever to hold the 

position of tribal chair on the Leech Lake Tribal Council. The Tribal Council is the elected body of government responsible for manVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK
4 

aging the affairs of the Ojibwe at Leech Lake, which is a sovereign 

territory in north central Minnesota, just north of Bemidji. 

Previously, Chairwoman Jones served as a controller of finance 

for the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe for three years. Chairwoman 

Jones is a knowledgeable champion for Native American youth and 

a tireless advocate for the students, educators, and families of the 

Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School, which has been sort of a project of 

mine. 

When Senator Tester, the ranking member, talked about woeful 

levels of funding in Indian Country on education, the Leech Lake 

School, the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School is an example of a school I 

visited a few weeks ago. The principal and teachers and everybody 

there is great, but the physical plant is a disgrace and needs to be 

replaced, and I have been fighting for that since early 2010. 

But I am very pleased that Chairwoman Jones is a witness for 

us today, and we will benefit from her experience and her insight. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Franken. 

Anyone else have an opening statement? 

If not, we will hear from four witnesses today: Dr. Charles 

‘‘Monty’’ Roessel, the Director of the Bureau of Indian Education; 

Ms. Melissa Emrey-Arras, Director of the Government Accountability Office; the Honorable Carri Jones, who was just introduced 

by Senator Franken; and Dr. Tommy Lewis, who is the Superintendent of Navajo Nation Department of Dine ́ Education from Arizona. 

Thank you and welcome. I want to remind the witnesses that 

your full written testimony will be made a part of the official hearing record. Please try to keep your statements to five minutes so 

that we may have adequate time for questions. 

I look forward to hearing the testimony from each of you, beginning with Dr. Roessel. Thank you. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF CHARLES ‘‘MONTY’’ ROESSEL, DIRECTOR, 

BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE 

INTERIOR 

Dr. ROESSEL. Good afternoon, Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman Tester, and members of the Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on the Bureau of Indian Education. 

I have been the director for over a year now. I come here with 

a renewed sense of confidence that we will get the job done. The 

success of BIE is contingent on the continued engagement of 

Tribes, the Administration, Congress, and advocates for American 

Indian Students. 

The blueprint for reform and the realignment needed to implement it is not BIE’s plan or my plan, but is the restructuring that 

embeds the voices of over 400 American Indian stakeholders. Every 

new organizational box is based on the ideas and contributions of 

education and Tribal leaders, parents and teachers, administrators 

and students. These are not just boxes on an org chart, but ideas 

from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw, the Hopi, the Navajo, the 

Yankton-Sioux, the Shoshone-Bannock, and many of the 64 Tribes 

that have BIE schools. 

5 

The blueprint for reform will look different for each Tribe. The 

types of services provides includes those that were requested from 

Tribes, as well as proven strategies in school improvement. Here is 

what it will look like. 

In New Mexico, the Isleta Elementary School, as a newly formed 

tribally-controlled school, they will receive specific tools to safeguard internal controls to ensure clean audits, training for school 

board members in effective governance. They also can apply for the 

new $2 million Tribal Education Department grant to develop an 

educational code. 

In Wyoming, the St. Stephens Indian School, the students who 

are here today, they will receive school improvement support from 

the Rapid City Education Resource Center. Our school solution 

teams will work with their principals and teachers to analyze student academic data to find the strengths and weaknesses and target professional development for teachers to meet their students’ 

specific needs. 

In Minnesota’s Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School, they will receive additional support to continue their immersion program. From a recently developed Native language framework, they will receive support in better utilizing their portion of BIE’s $24 million to teach 

Native languages. In addition, BIE is targeting $3 million to be 

used in Native language program development with an eye towards 

fluency. 

The Department of the Interior understands it has a trust and 

treaty responsibility to educate American Indian students. As 

Tribes continue down the path of self-determination in education, 

the BIE must provide the support needed to Tribes so they can exercise their sovereignty in education. 

One such plan that I feel and believe holds great promise is the 

Sovereignty in Indian Education Initiative. It allows for Tribes 

with three or more BIE-funded schools to examine the functions of 

a successful school and scale best practices. For example, North 

Dakota’s Standing Rock Sioux Tribe established the Exploring 

Tribal Sovereignty in Indian Education Committee to understand 

how to measure student academic achievement from a different 

lens, a tribal lens. Measures that are driven by the Tribe’s own 

valuation system that can be integrated into their three schools. 

When I was the Associate Deputy Director for Navajo Schools, I 

instituted a district model. I realigned functions and clarified roles, 

much like any school district within this Country. I sought to unify 

professional development for teachers. We developed processes and 

protocols for instructional rounds that focused on improvement, not 

punishment. 

What were the results? For our Navajo BIE operated schools, we 

went from 29 percent of the schools making AYP in 2012 to 54.8 

percent now making AYP. These lessons learned are helping to 

drive our reform efforts. 

An organization that has known only failure will always look for 

the perfect plan. The search for such a plan becomes an excuse for 

inaction. The blueprint for reform is a plan worthy of action. It centers on the students and support needed to improve academic outcomes; it focuses on partnerships with Tribes in developing tribal 

education systems that reflect their expectations for academic sucVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK
6 

cess; and it has the support of the Administration, as evidenced by 

the President’s 2016 budget with a request of an additional $145 

million for BIE. It also has the interest of Congress, as evidenced 

by the many congressional visits to our BIE schools and seeing 

firsthand the challenges facing our teachers, our principals, our 

Tribes, and, most importantly, our students. 

We know what the problems are. We have analyzed the data and 

we have read the reports. We cannot be paralyzed with inaction. 

Our Indian Nations deserve better. Our Indian students deserve 

better. 

I am happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Roessel follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHARLES ‘‘MONTY’’ ROESSEL, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF

INDIAN EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

Committee. Thank you for the invitation to appear today. My name is Charles 

‘‘Monty’’ Roessel, and I am the Director of the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) 

at the Department of the Interior (Department). I appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the Department before this Committee on the topic of the ‘‘Bureau 

of Indian Education: ‘‘Examining Organizational Challenges in Transforming Educational Opportunities for Indian Children.’’ 

I am here to provide the BIE’s vision for American Indian education in BIE-funded schools. The BIE has recently initiated several actions to improve student outcomes, including building the capacity of tribal nations to operate their own schools, 

improving the quality of instruction in BIE-funded schools and restructuring Indian 

Affairs in the Department to streamline the BIE bureaucracy and improve day-today operations. 

The Bureau of Indian Education 

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

dormitories. The BIE serves approximately eight percent of Native youth, with the 

majority of Native youth attending public schools. Currently, the BIE directly operates 57 schools and dormitories and 64 tribes operate the remaining 126 schools and 

dormitories through grants or contracts with BIE. During the 2013–2014 school 

year, BIE-funded schools served approximately 48,000 individual K–12 American Indian students and residential boarders. Approximately 3,800 teachers, professional 

staff, principals, and school administrators work within the 57 BIE-operated schools. 

In addition, approximately twice that number work within the 126 tribally-operated 

schools. 

The BIE has the responsibilities of a state educational agency for purposes of administering Federal grant programs for education. BIE responsibilities include providing instruction that is aligned to the academic standards set forth in regulations; 

working with the U.S. Department of Education (ED) to administer the formula 

grant funds ED provides to BIE under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

of 1965 (ESEA) and under Title VII, subtitle B, of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 

Assistance Act for the schools operated and funded by BIE; and providing oversight 

and accountability for school and student success. BIE is also responsible for ensuring compliance with ESEA, currently referred to as the No Child Left Behind Act, 

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and other Federal civil rights laws 

for the schools operated and funded by BIE. 

The BIE faces unique and urgent challenges in providing a high-quality education 

to Indian students attending the schools it funds. These challenges include difficulty 

in attracting effective teachers to BIE schools (which are most often in areas of concentrated poverty and located in remote locations where there is often insufficient 

housing and services); difficulty in adopting research-based reforms at all BIE 

schools; lack of access for BIE and BIE schools to certain programs that are designed to build SEA and LEA capacity; the need for organizational and budgetary 

restructuring to meet the needs of the current school system; and a lack of consistent leadership—having had 33 directors since 1979. 

7 

A New Vision for the BIE 

The Administration is fully committed to providing a high-quality education to Indian students attending the schools BIE operates and funds to ensure that all BIE 

students are ready for college and careers. The Administration undertook a rigorous 

assessment of BIE and thereafter conducted extensive tribal consultations, consistent with the Department’s tribal consultation policy, to develop the BIE Blueprint for Reform, which was released in 2014. The Blueprint focuses on the following five pillars of reform: 

• Self-Determination for Tribal Nations—Building the capacity of tribes to operate high-performing schools and shape what students are learning about their 

tribes, language, and culture in schools. 

• Highly Effective Teachers and Principals—Identifying, recruiting, retaining and 

empowering diverse, highly effective teachers and principals to maximize the 

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

• Agile Organizational Environment—Developing a responsive organization that 

provides the resources, direction and services to tribes so tribes can help their 

students attain high-levels of student achievement. 

• Budget that Supports Capacity Building Mission—Developing a budget that is 

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

scaling up best practices. 

• Comprehensive Supports through Partnerships—Fostering parental, community, and organizational partnerships to provide the emotional and social supports that BIE students need in order to be ready to learn. 

The Blueprint sets out a vision for a 21st century education system for BIE operated and funded schools, grounded in both high academic standards and tribal values and traditions. 

Implementation of BIE Blueprint for Reform Recommendations 

The Department, BIE, and Congress have taken action on several of the Blueprint’s key recommendations, including: 

• Secretarial Order 3334. The order promotes tribal control of BIE-funded schools 

and ensures that tribally-controlled schools receive the resources and support 

they need in order to be successful. The goals of the Secretarial Order are to: 

—Reduce reporting burdens on schools and make the reporting structure 

more efficient and effective; 

—Improve accountability of BIE; 

—Provide services more effectively to BIE-funded schools; 

—Address concerns raised by tribal leaders and other BIE stakeholders; and 

—Facilitate the transfer of best practices amongst schools. 

• Sovereignty in Indian Education (SIE) Awards. These awards to tribes create 

tribally-managed school systems. 

—Six tribes with three or more BIE-funded schools each received awards of 

$200,000 to research, assess and develop an implementation plan to establish 

a tribally-managed school system. 

—Tribes receiving an SIE award will conduct a comprehensive analysis in 

four functional areas: Finance, Academics, Governance, and Human Resources. 

—Tribes receiving SIE awards will work together and share best practices 

and challenges. 

• Tribal Education Department (TED) grants. As authorized by section 1140 of 

the Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 2020), the BIE will award a total 

of $2 million to support tribes in building capacity to plan and coordinate all 

educational programs of the tribe. These projects will cover areas such as the 

development of tribal educational codes or tribal administrative support. This 

funding will be used to help tribes to create tribally-managed school systems. 

• FY 2015 Enacted Budget. Congress has supported the recommendations of the 

Blueprint by providing additional funding: 

—Includes an additional $19.2 million over FY 2014 funding levels to complete the school replacement construction project started in FY 2014 and cover 

design costs for the final two schools on the 2004 School Replacement Priority 

list. 

—Includes an increase of $14.1 million for Tribal Grant Support Costs for 

tribally-controlled schools which increased the percentage administrative cost 

8 

grants paid from 68 percent to 87 percent, and an increase of $1.7 million for 

Science Post-Graduate Scholarships. 

• FY 2016 President’s Budget Request. The President’s budget proposes a $1.0 billion investment in Indian education at BIE-funded schools grounded in high 

academic standards and tribal values and traditions, with increases totaling 

nearly $140 million for BIE educational programs, operations, and facilities construction. 

—Includes increases of $80 million for programs that improve opportunities 

and outcomes in the classroom: 

• $10 million to promote tribal control of BIE-funded school curriculum including 

native language and cultural programs; 

• $20 million for school facilities operations and maintenance; 

• $12 million to fund 100 percent of administrative costs for BIE-funded schools 

operated by tribes; 

• $3 million to strengthen delivery of services to schools and enrich instructional 

services and teacher quality; and 

• $34 million to bring broadband and digital access to all schools in the BIE system over three years. 

—Includes increases totaling $59 million to repair and rebuild BIE-funded 

schools to improve the educational environment: 

• $37 million for school replacement construction projects and planning; 

• $4 million to repair and upgrade education employee housing; 

• $12 million to replace individual buildings where the entire campus does not 

need to be replaced; and 

• $18 million to fund major and minor facilities improvement and repair projects. 

—Includes an additional $50 million dollars for the Native Youth Community 

Projects, an ED program that encourages community partnerships between 

tribes and either a BIE school or a local school district to improve college-andcareer readiness for Native youth. 

—The Department is working collaboratively with tribes and other Federal 

agencies including the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, and Justice 

to implement education reforms and address issues facing Native American 

youth and families. 

• College Readiness for BIE Students. BIE identified 20 tribal colleges and universities (TCUs) to create or expand bridge programs for BIE students. Each TCU 

will receive $50K to help increase the number of low-income students who are 

prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education. 

• Native Language Policy Framework. BIE will provide guidance on the development of Native language curriculum to all BIE-funded schools. 

• Department of Education Preschool Development Grants Competition. The President’s FY 2016 Budget proposes $750 million for Preschool Development 

Grants, including expanding eligibility to the BIE if sufficient additional funds 

are appropriated for another competition. 

Proposed BIE Reorganization 

To implement meaningful reform in the BIE that will lead to improved student 

outcomes, the bureau is proposing to restructure its organization and expand direct 

line responsibilities. The proposed restructuring is in line with recommendations of 

the Blueprint and addresses concerns raised by recent Government Accountability 

Office reports. The proposed changes have two primary objectives: (1) strengthened 

BIE capability to address school operating needs; and (2) improved oversight of BIEoperated and tribally-controlled schools. 

An example of how the restructuring responds to Blueprint recommendations is 

the proposal to re-designate Education Line Offices as Education Resources Centers 

(ERC) and relocate several to more effectively serve schools in its jurisdiction. The 

ERCs will be staffed with mobile School Solutions Teams to provide customized 

technical assistance to meet the unique needs of each school. 

An example of how the restructuring responds to GAO recommendations is the 

proposal to stand up the School Operations Division (SOD) within the BIE with additional administrative services functions with line authority through the Deputy 

Director—Operations. This action will strengthen financial stewardship of BIE 

schools and provide direct line expertise in teacher and principal recruitment, acquiVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK
9 

sition and grants for schools, school facilities management, educational technology, 

and communications. 

Conclusion 

This forward looking vision for BIE—a vision rooted in the belief that all children 

can learn and that all tribes can operate high-achieving schools—allows the BIE to 

achieve improved results in the form of higher student scores, improved school operations, and increased tribal control over schools. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I’m happy to answer any questions 

the Committee may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you so very much for your thoughtful comments. 

If I could move next to Ms. Melissa Emrey-Arras. 

STATEMENT OF MELISSA EMREY–ARRAS, DIRECTOR, 

EDUCATION, WORKFORCE AND INCOME SECURITY ISSUES, 

U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman Tester, 

and members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me here 

today to discuss GAO’s work regarding Indian Affairs’ oversight of 

and support for Indian education. 

Over the past 10 years, Indian Affairs has undergone several reorganizations, resulting in multiple offices across different units 

being responsible for Indian education. Within Indian Affairs, the 

Bureau of Indian Education oversees 185 elementary and secondary schools that serve approximately 41,000 students on or near 

reservations in 23 States. Student performance at these schools has 

been consistently below that of Indian students in public schools, 

raising questions about whether students at these schools are receiving a quality education. 

My remarks will cover findings from our prior work at GAO. Specifically, I will focus on three key management challenges at Indian 

Affairs: one, its administration of schools; two, the capacity of its 

staff to address school needs; and, three, accountability for managing school construction and monitoring school spending. 

In terms of the Administration, we have found that organizational fragmentation and poor communication undermine administration of these schools. In addition to the Bureau of Indian Education, multiple offices have responsibility for educational and administrative functions at these schools. For example, Indian Affairs 

provided us with a chart, and you can see it over there, on offices 

that support just school facilities, which shows numerous offices 

across three organizational divisions. 

Fragmentation and poor communication among Indian Affairs offices has led to confusion among schools about whom to contact 

about problems and has also resulted in delays of key educational 

services and supplies like text books for students. 

In 2013, we recommended that Indian Affairs develop a strategic 

plan for the Bureau of Indian Education and a strategy for communicating with schools. Although Indian Affairs agreed with the recommendations, it has not yet fully implemented them. 

Limited staff capacity within Indian Affairs poses another challenge to addressing school needs. Indian Affairs data indicate that 

about 40 percent of regional facility positions, such as architects 

and engineers, are vacant. We also found that staff do not always 

10 

have the skills and training they need to oversee school spending. 

We recommended that Indian Affairs revise its workforce plan so 

that employees are placed in the right offices and have the right 

skills to support schools. Although Indian Affairs agreed with this 

recommendation, it has not implemented it. 

Inconsistent accountability also hampers management of school 

construction and monitoring of school spending. We have found 

that Indian Affairs did not consistently oversee some construction 

projects. For example, at one school we visited, Indian Affairs spent 

$3.5 million to replace multiple roofs in 2010. The new roofs have 

leaked since they were installed, causing mold and ceiling damage. 

You can see a picture of the ceiling in one of the classrooms. Indian 

Affairs has not addressed the problems, resulting in continued 

leaks and damage to the structure. 

At another school we visited, $1.5 million in Federal funds were 

used to build a bus maintenance building that is too small to fit 

all the school’s buses. And you can see that there on the side. Specifically, the building is not long enough to allow a large bus on the 

lift with the outside door closed. As a result, they now need to keep 

the outside door open when working on a large bus, which is just 

not practical in the cold South Dakota winters. 

In 2014, we found that the Bureau of Indian Education does not 

adequately monitor school expenditures using written procedures 

or a risk-based monitoring approach. As a result, the Bureau failed 

to provide effective oversight of schools when they misspent millions. We recommended that the Agency develop written procedures 

and a risk-based approach to improve its monitoring. Indian Affairs 

agreed, but has yet to implement these recommendations. 

Unless these issues are addressed, it will be difficult for Indian 

Affairs to ensure the long-term success of a generation of students. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Emrey-Arras follows:] 

11 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MELISSA EMREY-ARRAS, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, WORKFORCE AND INCOME SECURITY ISSUES, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE


513a1.eps
12 


513a2.eps
13 


513a3.eps
14 


513a4.eps
15 


513a5.eps
16 


513a6.eps
17 


513a7.eps
18 


513a8.eps
19 


513a9.eps
20 


513a10.eps
21 


513a11.eps
22 


513a12.eps
23 


513a13.eps
24 


513a14.eps
25 


513a15.eps
26 


513a16.eps
27 


513a17.eps
28 


513a18.eps
29 


513a19.eps
30 


513a20.eps
31 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you so much for your testimony. We appreciate it. 

Now the Honorable Carri Jones. 


513a21.eps
32 

STATEMENT OF HON. CARRI JONES, CHAIRWOMAN, LEECH 

LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE 

Ms. JONES. Good afternoon. The Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe is 

located in north central Minnesota, where we share overlapping 

boundaries with the Chippewa National Forest. I would like to 

thank Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman Tester, and other distinguished members of the Committee for holding this hearing and for 

the opportunity to testify. 

I firmly believe that taking the time to examine organizational 

challenges at the Bureau of Indian Education is extremely important. Further, it is vital that action be taken to address the deficiencies as we are working together to ensure that children 

throughout Indian Country are well served and have excellent educational opportunities. 

On a personal note, and on behalf of the Leech Lake Band of 

Ojibwe, I would like to take a moment to thank Minnesota Committee Member Senator Al Franken for his steadfast work for support the youth of our nation. Further, I would like to thank Senator 

Amy Klobuchar and the Minnesota Congressional Delegation for 

the continued efforts to improve the health and well-being of tribal 

members throughout the country. 

As it relates to organizational challenges at BIE, I can speak to 

a topic of great concern to the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe and 

Tribes throughout the Country: the condition of schools in Indian 

Country. At Leech Lake, the dire need to replace the Bug-O-NayGe-Shig School is a symbol of one of the major challenges facing 

the Bureau of Indian Education. 

We have spent a lot of time talking about the important issues 

in Washington. Over the years and recently, one of our high school 

students was able to join us and provide his unique perspective. 

During a meeting with members of Congress, he was asked why he 

came to D.C. to discuss the conditions of the school. He said, I am 

here for my siblings. I know I won’t see a new school while I am 

there, but I am trying to do this for the best interest to make it 

a better place for my siblings. This is a very sad statement. Instead 

of fully focusing on learning, he worries about future generations 

of students. 

As you may know, the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School, which is administered and funded by the Bureau of Indian Education, has received significant attention from our community, the local and regional media, national media, this Committee and its members, 

and the current Administration. It has put a spotlight on very real 

organizational challenges. Sadly, we have not been able to focus 

time on many awards the school has received for its academic 

achievement and its Native language programs that helped our 

students learn and grow. 

Because our attention has been focused on the challenging conditions of the school, I would like to take a moment to describe them 

for you. 

The current facility is in a metal-clad pole barn originally built 

to house an auto mechanic and bus garage, not a high school. This 

facility has severe structural and mechanical deficiencies and lacks 

proper insulation. It does not meet safety, fire, and security standards. Students cannot use computers at the same time for fear of 

33 

electrical overload. We have exposed wiring, lack of proper communication systems, telecom technology, and safe zones, which puts 

everyone at great risk during emergencies. 

The structure also jeopardizes the health of the students and faculty due to poor indoor air quality from mold, fungus, and a faulty 

HVAC system. Metal plates cover the floor of our science room and 

it is unable to be used to its full capacity because desks cannot 

properly affix to the ground. The facility suffers from roof leaks, rodents, uneven floors, poor lighting, sewer problems, lack of handicap access, and lack of classroom and other space. Due to the unsafe surroundings, many students have withdrawn from the school 

to attend other schools. 

The high school is among 63 schools funded by the BIE and recognized as being in poor condition and in need of replacement. The 

BIE construction backlog is at least $1.3 billion. There needs to be 

sustained funding to address this backlog. 

The Administration has not focused enough attention in addressing serious issues in BIE schools throughout Indian Country. No 

amount of band-aid improvements or repairs will address the serious deficiencies in our high school, and many BIE schools face 

similar situations. 

How can we expect our children to learn in these conditions? Our 

kids deserve better. We appreciate the difficulty decisions facing 

the BIE, but our kids should not be the ones forced to shoulder this 

burden. 

It is clear to me, and I believe this Committee agrees, that this 

is simply unacceptable. Significant changes need to be made to address these problems. Our students deserve to attend schools where 

they can focus on learning, and not their health and safety. 

I would like to end with a quote from Sitting Bull: Let us put 

our minds together and see what life we can make for our children. 

Megwich. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jones follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CARRI JONES, CHAIRWOMAN, LEECH LAKE BAND OF

OJIBWE

My name is Carri Jones, and I am the Chairwoman of the Leech Lake Band of 

Ojibwe (Band). Our Band is located on the Leech Lake Reservation in northern Minnesota. I want to thank Chairman Barasso, Vice Chairman Tester, and Members 

of the Subcommittee for holding this oversight hearing entitled ‘‘Bureau of Indian 

Education: Examining Organizational Challenges in Transforming Educational Opportunities for Indian Children.’’ My testimony is focused on the Band’s long struggle to replace the Bug O Nay Ge Shig High School (High School) facility, which is 

administered and funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA) Bureau of Indian 

Education (BIE). We believe this to be emblematic of the significant challenges related to school facilities throughout Indian Country. 

I would like to specifically thank Senator Franken for his tireless efforts to assist 

the Band in addressing our priorities. The School not only serves a critical role providing a quality, culturally relevant education to the Band’s children, but also serves 

as an economic engine for the entire community. We are deeply grateful for their 

support. 

Replacement of the High School has been a top priority of the Leech Lake Government and the entire Leech Lake community for many years. The Band has many 

critical needs on the Reservation on which it could testify; however, given the serious safety and health risks posed at the sub-standard High School facility, the Band 

has steadfastly focused its testimony solely on the need to replace the High School. 

Our hope is that this is the year that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), which 

34 

handles construction of BIE facilities, begins the process to replace High School facility. 

History of Indian Education 

After the formation of the United States, Indian tribes ceded hundreds of millions 

of acres of our homelands to the Federal Government to help build this nation. In 

return, the U.S. made promises to make the resulting reservations permanent livable homes, including providing for the education, health, and general welfare of 

reservation residents. These treaty promises were made in perpetuity, remain the 

supreme law of the land, and do not have an expiration date. However, as you know 

and as tribal leaders are stating in these hearings today, these promises have not 

been kept, and our children suffer because of it. 

Dire Need to Replace High School Facility at Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School 

The Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School is located in Bena, Minnesota, operated by the 

Band and governed by its School Board. It is named in honor of Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig 

(Hole in the Day), an Ojibwe man who lived in the area at the turn of the century. 

He is revered for his commitment to fight for our land, our people, and for our children. Some of the kids ride school buses for 2 hours each way every day to attend 

school. Founded in 1975, the School started modestly with 35 Ojibwe students from 

the Reservation in response to parental concerns that public schools were not meeting the academic and cultural needs of our students. Since that time, the School has 

transformed itself into a magnet school, teaching state-approved curricula with 

Ojibwe cultural components. Existing enrollment is a testament to the passion of 

the students, parents and teachers who are committed to strong academic achievement despite the significant deficiencies and health and safety hazards present at 

our High School. 

The High School is in dire need of replacement. Unlike other schools in the BIE 

inventory, the High School facility was not originally built for use as an academic 

space. It is a metal-clad pole barn originally built to house an auto mechanic school 

and bus garage. When the building was transformed into the High School, the intention was that it would only be a temporary space. However, generations of students 

have attended school in this makeshift building. The facility has serious structural 

and mechanical deficiencies and lacks proper insulation. The facility does not meet 

basic safety, fire, and security standards due to the flimsiness of the construction 

materials, electrical problems, and lack of alarm systems. Further, the building 

lacks a communication intercom system, telecommunication technology, and safe 

zones, which puts students, teachers, and staff at great risk in emergency situations. The police and emergency responders have dubbed the high school building 

as ‘‘Killer Hall’’ because an emergency would likely have tragic results. In addition, 

in high wind situations over 40 M.P.H., the students must evacuate outside into the 

winds because of the structural flaws with the flat metal building. 

The High School facility presents a continuing threat to the health and safety of 

our students and faculty due to poor indoor air quality that contains mold, fungus, 

and a faulty HVAC system. The facility also suffers from rodent and bat infestation, 

roof leaks and sagging roofs, holes in the roofs from ice, uneven floors, exposed wiring, poor lighting, sewer problems, lack of handicap access, and lack of classrooms 

and other space. These are just a few of the facility’s numerous deficiencies. Due 

to the unsafe surroundings, many students have withdrawn from our High School 

and have transferred to public high school. Students report being embarrassed 

about the condition of the High School, which results in a negative image of the 

School and a lower matriculation rate. Despite these challenging conditions, the students perform well. For example, the School has won many awards for its language 

immersion program and our students are successful compared to their performance 

at other area schools. 

U.S. Responsibility to Provide for the Education of American Indian 

Students 

Several federal laws, treaties, and policies acknowledge the Federal Government’s 

obligation to provide for the education of American Indian children. The Band’s Reservation was established through a series of treaties with the U.S. and presidential 

executive orders. See Treaties of February 22, 1855 (10 Stat. 1165) and March 19, 

1867 (Article I, 16 Stat. 719); Executive Orders of October 29, 1873; November 4, 

1873; and May 26, 1874. 

Through these treaties and executive orders, our ancestors ceded to the United 

States significant tracts of our homelands. In return, the U.S. promised to provide 

for school buildings, teachers, and the education of our youth. Hundreds of thousands of additional acres of our homelands were taken from us pursuant to the land 

allotment mandates of the federal Nelson Act in 1889, which is the Minnesota 

35 

version of the General Allotment Act. As with the various treaty promises made to 

our people, one focus of the Nelson Act was to dedicate funds generated from these 

lands for ‘‘the establishment and maintenance of a system of free schools among 

said Indians, in their midst and for their benefit.’’ These treaty promises have no 

expiration dates and remain the law of the land. Sadly, these promises have not 

been kept. 

High School Rated in ‘‘Poor Condition’’ in Need of Replacement by BIA 

The BIA categorizes this facility in ‘‘poor’’ condition. In 2007, the BIA Midwest 

Regional Office for the Office of Indian Education Programs issued a report expressing strong concerns about electrical problems, potential fire issues, and student safety. The BIA Office of Facilities, Environmental Safety, and Cultural Management 

had documented the numerous and serious deficiencies of the High School. 

In a February 28, 2011, in a letter responding to Ranking Member Moran’s inquiry about the High School, former Interior Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs 

Larry EchoHawk stated: 

The Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig High School shows evidence of continuing 

deterioration... Due to the type of construction of the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig 

High School, improvements to the school such as expansion or construction of 

one building for classrooms or administrative space is not an optimum solution. 

Preliminary evaluations indicate that the building should be replaced (emphasis 

added). The estimated date of replacement will depend on the priority ranking 

of the high school and amount of funds available to correct school facility deficiencies through education construction appropriations. 

Working collaboratively with our community and with architects, we have developed construction and design plans for a new High School that will serve as a local 

anchor for cultural, environmental and economic sustainability. To meet these objectives, we must first provide our children with a learning environment conducive to 

academic achievement. We are ready to move forward, but we need the Subcommittee’s help. 

Lack of Funding for BIE Facilities Replacement Construction 

The U.S. spends billions of dollars on the construction of buildings for federal uses 

but somehow can’t seem to budget sufficient funding to ensure that American Indian children go to school in buildings that are not only safe, but also conducive to 

learning. The President’s FY13, FY14, and FY 2015 budget requests violated their 

treaty and trust responsibilities, as they sought to essentially impose a moratorium 

on replacement school facilities construction by requesting funding only for repairs 

and improvements and the construction of one school. We are extremely appreciative of this Committee’s work to increase funding for construction of BIE schools 

over the past couple of years and believe the Administration is starting to take note 

of the extreme need throughout Indian Country. Although we believe some progress 

has been made, there is much more to be done. 

For the President’s FY16 budget request, the BIA requests a ‘‘$58.7 million increase is requested for Education Construction to support the education transformation. This includes a $25.3 million increase for replacement school construction 

to complete construction of the final two schools on the 2004 replacement school construction priority list: Little Singer Community School and Cove Day School, both 

in Arizona. A $17.7 million increase for facilities improvement and repair is requested for repairs to building structures and components that are necessary to sustain and prolong the useful life of education buildings. Additionally, $11.9 million 

is requested to address major facility repair needs at schools like the Bug-O-Nay-GeShig school on the Leech Lake Band of the Ojibwe reservation’’ 

We are pleased that the President recognizes the significant needs at the BugO-Nay-Ge-Shig High School in his budget and that the Administration is making 

efforts to identify additional funding to address some of the backlog. With this said, 

the FY16 budget request does not offer enough funding to clear out the current 

backlog and admits that there are many schools, such as our High School, that are 

rated in ‘‘poor condition’’ with the potential for life, safety, and health hazards. Our 

High School is among the more than 63 schools funded by the BIE that are in poor 

condition. At this time, the BIE construction backlog is more than $1.3 billion and 

this number keeps growing. 

Instead, the Administration should be requesting at least $200 million for FY16 

for school and facilities replacement with a plan to request at least $200 million 

each year until the BIE school construction backlog is addressed. The Bush Administration had requested over $200 million each year in FY05–FY07 for BIE school 

and facilities construction and was able to make progress in reducing the BIE conVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK
36 

struction backlog. Only through consistent and sustained funding will the BIA be 

able to make a dent in its BIE school facilities backlog. Our hope is that the Subcommittee could consider addressing the BIE construction backlog by developing a 

plan to significantly reduce it over a period of time. 

Conclusion 

The Leech Lake students and students throughout Indian Country deserve the opportunity to attend school in a safe environment that provides them with educational opportunities afforded to other students. The United States owes them this. 

Instead, our students attend high school in a sub-standard, dangerous environment 

that is not conducive to learning. This impacts their self-worth, creates feelings of 

inferiority, and sends a message to them that their education and even their lives 

are unimportant. 

Congress and the Administration must develop a comprehensive plan to fully fund 

the construction needs at the Leech Lake High School and fix organizational barriers which are preventing this. In addition, Congress and the Administration must 

work in consultation with tribal leaders, educators, and others to develop innovative 

ways of funding and building Indian reservation schools. 

We appreciate all the work that this Committee, its Members, and our Representatives have done to raise awareness and advance the replacement of the school to 

date and we look forward to continuing to work with you. Thank you for the time 

to testify and discuss this important topic. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Jones. I appreciate. 

Now Dr. Tommy Lewis. 

STATEMENT OF TOMMY LEWIS, SUPERINTENDENT OF 

SCHOOLS, DEPARTMENT OF DINE ́ EDUCATION, NAVAJO 

NATION 

Dr. LEWIS. Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman Tester, members 

of the Committee, my name is Tommy Lewis, Jr., Superintendent 

of Schools for the Navajo Nation Department of Dine ́ Education at 

Window Rock, Arizona. Thank you for inviting me to testify today. 

We have 17 school districts on our Navajo Nation, with a total 

of 244 schools and approximately 89,000 students in kindergarten 

through 12th grade. Sixty-six of these schools are BIE funded, 32 

are BIE operated, and 33 are tribally-controlled grant schools, and 

we have one 638 contract school. 

For over 140 years, Federal and State public schools have dominated education on our Navajo Nation. The Navajo Nation best understands the needs of its children, but lacks the tools to effectively 

regulate the education of Navajo children. 

The reorganization of the BIE has set the stage for a discussion 

on how we can improve the education of our children and build a 

high-quality Navajo education system. We have conducted a feasibility study on assuming control of the 32 BIE operated schools on 

the Navajo Nation. The 34 tribally- controlled schools will be 

merged into this new system later on. We are developing a plan to 

improve our education system in using the Sovereignty in Education Grant. 

The BIE is trying to improve, despite all the challenges that they 

face as an organization. The BIE is working on systemic and organizational challenges to improve educational opportunities for the 

Navajo. 

One area of concern involves school facilities and construction. 

Navajo schools have to deal with the BIE on many issues, and then 

the BIA for maintenance and construction. This causes confusion 

and inefficiency. The school construction program generally has 

37 

been tedious and should be restructured. Authority over the school 

facilities and construction should be merged into the BIE. 

The inability of the BIE and the BIA to properly maintain school 

facilities has influenced the Navajo Nation’s discussions on whether it can exercise great sovereignty in education by assuming control of the remaining 32 BIE operated schools. The poor conditions 

at existing facilities could be improved. The Federal Government 

needs to prioritize upgrading, fixing, and replacing schools just as 

they do for Department of Defense schools. 

Another common complaint is that decisions regarding personnel 

procurement, accounting, and school operations take a long time. 

Procedures need to be streamlined. Operational and back-office decisions should not necessarily impede the best functioning of the 

school. 

The BIE needs to improve how it monitors finances and audits. 

One school on Navajo was cited in a GAO report as having had 

$1.2 million in Federal funds sent to an offshore bank account. 

This school has also missed three Federal audits and was accused 

of misusing school funds. This school has been taken over by Department of Dine ́ Education and the school is now in compliance 

with Federal law. 

During the last several years, the BIE has been better at communicating and providing information regarding school finance and 

audits. We have been working with the BIE to ensure greater oversight over tribally-controlled schools regarding the late audits and 

misuse or mismanagement of school funds, as demonstrated by the 

example I just gave. 

Another systemic change involves accountability. There is no uniformity across the Navajo Nation on such things as accountability 

or measuring the effectiveness of the education program. Within 

the 17 public school districts and 3 States, it is difficult to get a 

complete picture of the academic performance of Navajo students 

or inadequately evaluate the effectiveness of our academic programs. 

Members of the Committee, the Navajo Nation is embarking on 

a monumental task in assuming authority of 32 BIE-operated 

schools. I ask for your support because this is something that has 

never been done by an Indian Tribe throughout the country. Navajo, if successful, will be the first Tribe to assume control of its education, and we are determined to do that. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lewis follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TOMMY LEWIS, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, 

DEPARTMENT OF DINE ́ EDUCATION, NAVAJO NATION

Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman Tester, and Members of the Committee, my 

name is Dr. Tommy Lewis, and I am the Superintendent of Schools of the Navajo 

Nation Department of Dine ́ Education. Thank you for this opportunity to present 

testimony on the organizational challenges that we face in transforming educational 

opportunities for our children. My testimony will focus on challenges that the Navajo Nation has encountered as a result of the fragmented bureaucracy governing Indian education at the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), the BIE’s reorganization, and will offer recommendations for improving 

the system to enhance educational opportunities for Native children. 

The Navajo Nation has a tremendous stake in improving the education of our children. We must prepare them for active and equal participation on the national and 

38 

global marketplace. We must prepare them to be productive citizens in the 21st century and to be positive, involved members of our communities. Most importantly, 

we must prepare them to be the future leaders of our Nation. There is no more vital 

resource to the continued existence and integrity of our Nation than our children. 

A Profile of Education and Schools on the Navajo Nation 

The Navajo Nation is situated within 3 states: Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. 

17 school districts are operating schools on the Navajo Nation, with a total of 244 

schools. There are a combined total of 38,109 Navajo students in all schools on the 

Navajo Nation. Approximately 60.5 percent or 23,056 of these Navajo students attend public schools on the Navajo Nation. Another 48,172 Navajo students attend 

public schools off of the Navajo Nation. 66 out of the 183 BIE-funded schools and 

residential halls are located on the Navajo Nation, of which 32 are BIE-operated 

schools (out of 57), 1 is a Public Law 93–638 contract school, and 33 are Public Law 

100–297 tribally-controlled grant schools. BIE operated and tribally controlled 

grant/contract schools collectively educate 39.5 percent of all Navajo students, with 

21.2 percent attending BIE-operated schools, and 18.3 percent attending grant/contract schools. 

At this moment, the Navajo Nation does not have a uniform educational system 

that allows for consistent regulatory oversight of the educational opportunities offered to Navajo students. The system is highly fragmented. The BIE is in charge 

of the schools that they control directly. The P.L. 100–297 and P.L. 93–638 grant/ 

contract schools operate as their own individual school districts (local education 

agencies), where they have their own school boards, superintendents, personnel, finances, and transportation departments, as well as individual curriculums (or lack 

thereof), and individual teacher/principal evaluations (or lack thereof). 

The reorganization of the BIE sets the stage for a discussion on how we can improve the quality of education for our students within our schools and to build a 

high quality Navajo Nation education system. The Navajo Nation must be more involved in and in control of the education of our children. We have taken the reorganization of the BIE as an opportunity to study our existing education system, and 

have conducted a Feasibility Study on assuming control of all BIE-funded schools 

on the Navajo Nation. We are developing a plan of action to improve our education 

system in part through a Sovereignty in Indian Education Grant (SIEG). We’ve received valuable input and feedback from numerous Navajo Nation schools and leaders from various public hearings that we’ve held on this matter. 

The BIE is trying to improve, despite all the challenges that they face as an organization. The changes made to the BIE should be measured and the BIE held accountable for outcomes. Over the past three (3) years, the BIE’s reorganization and 

attempt to build a Navajo ‘‘school district’’ model appears to be producing results. 

Aggregate test scores provided by the BIE and Department of Dine ́ Education Office 

of Education Research and Statistics show modest improvements in test scores 

among BIE-operated schools, in contrast to tribally controlled grant/contract schools. 

The ‘‘district model’’ that the Navajo BIE-operated schools are using for their 

schools appears to be working because they have been able to develop and implement a more uniform system, instead of each school going in different directions 

and/or left without support. The BIE ‘‘Navajo district’’ has been able to develop and 

implement a uniform and rigorous curriculum aligned to common core standards, 

rather than each school developing their own curriculum that may or may not be 

aligned to standards. Professional development, interventions, instructional strategies, data analysis, etc., seem to be more effective when used in a ‘‘district system’’ 

because the BIE is able to control and influence those factors, rather than each 

school operating as their own Local Education Agency (LEA). In contrast, tribally 

controlled grant/contract schools on the Navajo Nation operate independently as 

their own LEAs with 34 different systems. The BIE legally cannot mandate or hold 

tribally controlled grant/contract schools accountable to improve, aside from releasing federal funds to those schools. 

Attached below are data charts using state assessments (AIMS, NMSBA, UPASS) 

over the past three (3) years showing significant differences in academic achievement between BIE-operated schools and tribally controlled grant/contract schools 

from SY 2010–11, SY 2011–12, and SY 2012–13. 

39 

Systemic and Organizational Challenges Experienced by the Navajo Nation 

The GAO has reported several times on ‘‘systemic management challenges’’ that 

hinder efforts to improve Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) schools, and recently reported that steps to implement recommendations made by GAO to address these 

problems had not been fully implemented. The GAO’s previous studies noted that 

several organizational realignments have resulted in a fragmented bureaucracy with 

several units being responsible for academic and administrative functions. They 

have reported that this fragmented system has led to confusion on such basic matters as whom to contact about building maintenance issues. The GAO has noted 

that frequent staff turnover and a lack of a strategic plan for the BIE have compounded problems. The GAO has also noted additional problems including many vacant positions at the BIE, staff lacking requisite knowledge and skills, and inconsistent accountability of school construction and monitoring of school construction. 

Many issues arise from the fragmented organizational responsibilities at BIEfunded schools. One area of significant concern is school facilities and construction. 

Navajo schools have to deal with the BIE on many issues, but then deal with Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for construction. This lack of coordination causes confusion and inefficiency. Overall, the school construction program has been a tediously 

slow process. 

Another common complaint among BIE-operated schools (not grant schools) are 

that decisions regarding personnel, procurement, accounting, school operations take 

a very long time within the BIE structure. 

The inability of the BIE and BIA to properly maintain BIE school facilities has 

had an impact on the Navajo Nation’s deliberations on the extent to which it can 

exercise greater sovereignty in education by assuming control of the remaining 32 

BIE-operated schools on the Navajo Nation. This is because the dilapidated and 

poor conditions at existing facilities would expose the Navajo Nation to a tremendous financial liability. 

The BIE needs to improve how it monitors finances and audits. The BIE has been 

better at communicating with and informing the Department of Dine ́ Education on 

school finances and audits, but there remain problems. One of the schools 

(Rockpoint) that was cited in a previous GAO report, with $1.2 million in federal 

funds being sent to off-shore bank accounts, that was missing three (3) federal audits, and accused of misusing school funds, was eventually taken over by the Department of Dine ́ Education in 2012. Working in partnership with the BIE/BIA and 

DODE, the school is now in compliance with the law and is an example of how 

tribes can assume greater control and responsibilities over schools. 

The organizational challenges to transforming opportunities for Native children do 

not end at the managerial. The BIE is undergoing another reorganization, but still 

has no meaningful plan for how they will hold schools accountable or intervene in 

failing schools. The BIE uses state accountability systems. On the Navajo Nation, 

this plus the many different school systems existing on the Navajo Nation make it 

difficult to measure the academic performance of Navajo children or adequately 

evaluate the effectiveness of academic programs. Because of the highly fragmented 

education system that exists on the Navajo Nation, there is also no consistent or 

uniform method to measure the effectiveness of teachers, principals and school administrators on the Navajo Nation. 


513a22.eps
40 

Recommendations for Reform 

The organizational challenges to transforming opportunities for Native children 

are many, but we have some recommendations for reform. 

Support Tribal Sovereignty in Education—Properly executed, greater sovereignty 

in education will help to improve academic outcomes and alleviate the systemic 

challenges at BIE-funded schools. The Navajo Nation’s Alternative Accountability 

Workbook (AAW) is the foundation of the Navajo Nation’s efforts to develop the 

tools to effectively govern Navajo education. The AAW also provides the foundation 

for a true Navajo standards-based curriculum for use at our schools. The Navajo Nation is still waiting for final approval of the AAW by the BIE and the Department 

of Education. 

Approval of the AAW by the BIE and the Department of Education has been unreasonably delayed for several years while Navajo children continue to receive a 

substandard education. Most recently this unreasonable delay has taken the form 

of the BIE and Department of Education seemingly losing track of our last submitted draft. The Navajo Nation Alternative Accountability Workbook must have its 

final review and approval in order for the Navajo Nation to exercise its right to sovereignty in education. 

As the BIE reorganizes, and Congress debates changes to the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act, the ability of tribes to exercise sovereignty in education 

must be maintained, and tribes must be given additional tools to be able to meaningfully assert control over the education of their children in a timely manner. The 

Navajo Nation seeks the ability to be designated and recognized as a ‘‘State Education Agency (SEA)’’ under federal law. Tribally developed assessments or accountability plans should be deemed approved if they are not denied within a specified 

timeline. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act should be amended to 

allow tribes that are able to ensure the security of sensitive student data access 

their students’ educational data. This will enable tribes to be able to properly evaluate the effectiveness of their tribally developed academic programs. 

Providing tribes with the tools to meaningfully assert sovereignty in education, 

where a tribe is able to and desires to take such control, would also vitiate many 

of the systemic management challenges at the heart of the GAO’s reports by removing the fragmented federal bureaucracy from the equation. 

The BIE Needs to be a ‘‘Stand Alone Agency’’—Based on the comments and feedback provided by Navajo schools and school boards, the current BIE needs to function as a ‘‘stand alone agency,’’ which aligns with the reform goal of ‘‘building an 

agile organizational environment.’’ Many issues arise from having to deal with separate agencies for separate functions. In particular, one area of significant concern 

is school facilities and construction. Navajo schools have to deal with the BIE on 

many issues, but then deal with Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for construction. 

This lack of coordination causes confusion and inefficiency. At the moment, the current BIE reorganization does not seem to include merging the authority of the BIA 

over school facilities and construction into the BIE’s organizational structure. Overall, the school construction program has been a tediously slow process, which needs 

to be streamlined and restructured to be more efficient. 

Funding for School Replacement and Construction Needs to be Prioritized—The 

BIE/BIA and federal government also needs to prioritize upgrading, fixing and replacing existing schools just as they do for the Department of Defense Education 

Activity (DODEA) schools. As noted above, the poor conditions at BIE facilities is 

a disincentive to the Navajo Nation to exercise greater sovereignty in education. 

Operational and Financial Decisions within BIE-Operated Schools Needs Quicker 

Action—As noted above, a common complaint at BIE-operated schools is that decisions regarding personnel, procurement, accounting, school operations take a very 

long time within the BIE structure. Operational and ‘‘back office’’ decisions should 

not unnecessarily impede schools. 

BIE Needs Better Fiscal Management and Oversight of School Spending—As noted 

in previous GAO reports, the BIE needs better management and accountability, improved oversight of school spending. To the BIE’s credit, they have been providing 

better communication and information to the Department of Dine ́ Education on 

school finances and audits. The BIE and DODE have also been working together 

to ensure greater oversight over tribally controlled grant/contract schools regarding 

late audits and misuse/mismanagement of school funds as demonstrated by the example of the Rockpoint school described above. 

Conclusion 

We must have first access to the minds of our children to ensure a bright and 

prosperous future for the Navajo Nation. With your help, we can achieve this future. 

Thank you for your time and attention to these matters. 

41 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Dr. Lewis. I appreciate 

your testimony and your determination. Thank you. 

We will head to questions at this time and start with Senator 

Hoeven. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso. 

I would like to start with Director Roessel. As follow-up to the 

GAO report that was very critical of how the Bureau of Indian 

Education is expanding their funds, can you detail the steps you 

are taking in response to that GAO report? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Thank you, Senator. Before the GAO report even 

came out, we started with a listening session and a review for the 

blueprint for reform, so many of the items that are identified in the 

GAO report we had already started looking at and we had found 

and we had heard, and we started setting up our organization to 

meet those challenges. 

I think one of the things I would say up front is that in listening 

to the testimony, one of the things that we want to make sure that 

we wanted to do as we started to implement the Blueprint for Reform and the restructuring to meet those challenges is that we 

didn’t do it in a band-aid fashion. We need to do a comprehensive 

approach. 

So the first thing that we did is we realigned roles and responsibilities so we have clear lines of authority now. One of the challenges that we faced is in the past we had line offices which are 

closer to the schools, and they did a lot of different things in the 

line office. What we did is clarify their role, so now people deal 

with just education issues, just contracting issues, just grant management issues. That has cleared up a lot of things. 

In 2014, we had 23 overdue management decisions. As of right 

now, we have zero, partly because we have aligned a lot of these 

roles and responsibilities. That is one thing. 

I think the other thing that we are doing right now, as we move 

forward in looking at the GAO report, but also taking a step back. 

I really want to emphasize this. I don’t want everything to be done 

in our reorganization just on GAO. There are many things in there 

I disagree with, but there are certain things that I think that we 

need to focus on. 

Ensuring that our staff are trained I think is very important as 

we move forward. We are looking at trying to improve that training 

process. That comes in two areas: one, we need to train Tribes so 

they can handle some of these issues; and we need to train our 

staff that are out there. So we have implemented a training program along those lines. 

Communication is critical. How do we try to communicate not 

just within BIE, but with Tribes and other agencies? We focus on 

a communication plan that is developed and we are using now. We 

have weekly webinars for areas from school improvement to facility 

O&M budgeting, all of these different areas. So information getting 

out there, I think is very important for us as we move forward. 

So we are doing this in a comprehensive approach and I think 

we are hopeful that as we move forward and continue with our reVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK
42 

organization, which is a big part of the reform plan, that then we 

will be able to see even more return from what we have achieved 

so far. 

Senator HOEVEN. Now I would like to follow up with you and 

with Ms. Emrey-Arras. Is there a plan for follow-up and reporting, 

then, to this Committee as you implement these steps to be responsive to the recommendations made by the GAO? Maybe both could 

kind of weigh in on that. 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. Sure. At GAO we track recommendations for 

a period of four years and put the status of the follow-up on our 

Web site so it is available to everyone publicly. I would say that 

the recommendations from that report we did regarding oversight 

of spending issues are still outstanding; they have not been implemented. Some really basic ones in terms of making sure you have 

folks with the right skills to oversee expenditures have not been 

fulfilled. Similarly, having written procedures to oversee some of 

the larger funding has not been fulfilled either. So there is a lot 

more that needs to be done on that front. 

Senator HOEVEN. Director? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, I think in response to that, we are in the 

process of a major reorganization, so to develop piecemeal approaches when it is not actually impacting the entire organization 

I think would be irresponsible for us. So what we are looking at 

doing is trying to make sure that we are focused on the overall picture as we move forward so our workforce plan is aligned with our 

reorganization plan. That is part of the secretarial order that is 

due September 30th of this year. So it is aligned, but it is aligned 

in a way that I think is comprehensive. Again, I will come back, 

to I don’t think it is appropriate for us to do a little here, a little 

there, and we end up fixing a problem only to fix it again in a couple months. 

Senator HOEVEN. And I want to make sure that we are tracking 

that follow-up. I think 10 of us wrote a letter to Secretary 

Washburn and said we wanted to make sure that we were informed of your efforts in response to that report, so that is what 

I want to make sure, is we have a clear line of communication on 

how we are following up and tracking that progress. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes, sir. We would be glad to have that process. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Hoeven. 

Senator Udall? 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, Mr. Roessel, I appreciate the efforts of the BIE in 

working with me on the Pine Hill Elementary School and its safety 

issues and all of that, and working with the superintendent and 

others. We have been able to get a temporary certificate of occupancy issued, which I am really happy about. 

I want to acknowledge that progress, but I am still frustrated 

that students have not yet moved into the building. There is still 

work to be done. I hope that we can work on that together to move 

43 

it to the point to get the students in there. Do you have any additional progress to report on that and will you work with me on 

that? 

Dr. ROESSEL. I will certainly work with you on that. The progress 

that we have heard from the school board is that they do not want 

to move into the building until the new school year. So the school 

board and administration are making that decision, and it is not 

because of the BIE. 

Senator UDALL. So that would be this fall, I guess. 

Dr. ROESSEL. This fall, yes, sir. 

Senator UDALL. Great. 

One of the issues that I have worked on a lot is language immersion, sharing opportunities to learn Native languages in the 

schools. What have you run into there? What are your obstacles, 

what are the challenges you have run into? As part of your reform 

process, are you trying to deal with that issue? And then I would 

also be interested with the GAO, if they saw anything on that 

front. But please go ahead. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, thank you, Senator. I think one of the areas 

that we are really focused on is trying to make sure that we work 

with Tribes in partnership. It is not enough just for us to have a 

program and an initiative; we need to have a goal of fluency, not 

just teaching language. 

I think we have started to change that conversation to say that 

our BIE plan for Native language is fluency. That changes the 

whole landscape as we move forward. We have identified $3 million 

out of our budget to identify and, as mentioned earlier, tried to develop language programs, get the foundations what is needed. 

In our reorganization, we have offices that are proposed that will 

set up at the central office, as well as our regional offices, for Native language, history, and culture; not to dictate to Tribes what to 

do, but to be able to give them the resources if they want an immersion program or bilingual program or heritage language program. So it is something that is very important to me also. 

When I was at Rough Rock, I implemented an immersion program for Navajo, so I know what it takes to implement that, and 

it is something that we will really push. The schools that we directly operate, we are going to be doing things that are specific to 

those schools and then try to encourage and give the support to 

tribal schools so that they too then can start looking at fluency; not 

just the language program. I think we need to go and set the bar 

even higher for fluency. 

Senator UDALL. And I think it is important that somebody like 

you have worked at a school like Rough Rock as a superintendent 

and now you are managing the BIE bureaucracy. So that is tremendously important. 

Ms. Emrey-Arras, do you have any thoughts on the language immersion, learning Native languages, those issues that you saw in 

your report at all? 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. To date, we have not done work on the language issue; however, we would be happy to do so if this Committee is interested in us pursuing that in the future. 

Senator UDALL. Okay, thank you. 

44 

And, Mr. Roessel, just to finish out here, I know that people 

across the board are interested in reform. I mean, this is something 

the word has been used a long time, it is a real challenge. All of 

us have said that these 42,000 to 50,000 students you have in the 

BIE schools should be a model for the Country. It is the right size 

that if you really apply your best thinking and best teaching, you 

can really make a difference. 

I think there is enthusiasm for that, but one of the real issues, 

and this is always the case in dealing with Tribes, is how good has 

the consultation been. My sense is, from listening to my Tribes in 

New Mexico, they are excited about moving forward, but they are 

not so sure that they have been involved in a consultative process. 

Can you speak to that? 

Dr. ROESSEL. As we have gone down this path of school reform 

within BIE, we have actually started consultation two years ago, 

and then last year at this time we had consultation on the Blueprint for Reform. We are in the process of having consultation right 

now on the reorganization plan that is aligned with that blueprint. 

In fact, Friday I will be going to Albuquerque for a consultation. 

One of the things that we tried to do is not just focus on bigscaled consultations, but actually individual tribal consultations 

with Tribes that are being impacted. I have had meetings with 20 

different Tribes, separate Tribes, individually, talking about their 

issues and their concerns as this implementation plan takes hold; 

what is it going to do to their Tribe. 

So I think in this situation we have gone even further because 

I think one of the issues that we look at when we have a largescale consultation is everyone gets 10, 15 minutes to speak. These 

meetings that I have had with tribal leaders have been six hours, 

eight hours, in one case ten hours just to be talking specifically 

about their issues. 

We can’t improve the BIE unless Tribes are with us, and I think 

one of the things that we are really excited about moving forward 

is that we need to have that partnership, and for the first time now 

Tribes are being asked to sit at the table to talk about their future 

and their education; and it is not just something that is done to 

them, but now it is something that is done with them. 

So we continue with that. We have added two additional consultations just to try to meet that need from what we heard out 

in the field. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Udall. 

Senator Daines? 

STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator DAINES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Emrey-Arras, in reading your testimony, I have to say I was 

struck by some of the inefficiencies that seemed to come about from 

the decision-making process, and I think that probably is using the 

term loosely, there is a decision-making process at times, being removed from BIE schools themselves and put in the hands of bureaucrats a long ways away. 

45 

One example you mentioned, there was a school that GAO visited where the students and teachers went for an entire year without hot water because the request for a new water heater got lost 

in the shuffle at the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Wouldn’t it make a 

whole lot more sense to have these sorts of decisions made on the 

ground by those who know better and what the school needs when 

they need a new hot water heater or not, rather than Washington, 

D.C. or Albuquerque? 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. It is a shame. You should not have children 

and staff going without hot water at an elementary school for close 

to a year. I think we are firmly advocating that there be accountability for making sure that needed repairs get done and that there 

is also clear communication. Schools often don’t know who to contact about repairs when they need help. 

Just a very basic example which I think illustrates what is going 

on is that something as basic as a directory for BIE, so you know 

who to contact, has not been updated since 2011. We have mentioned this in prior testimonies. It has yet to be updated as of this 

afternoon. So something very simple about who do you call when 

you have a problem is difficult to figure out because the numbers 

aren’t there. 

Senator DAINES. Have they ever heard of the term customer 

service? 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. That is a good question. 

Senator DAINES. And maybe this example is something we can 

learn from. What was the root cause of that particular issue where 

children went for a year without hot water? 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. I think the folks in charge of making those 

repairs were not aware that the request had been made about a 

year before. They were not aware of that request until we actually 

visited the school and brought it to the attention of Indian Affairs. 

After that point it took about a month before the new hot water 

heater was brought in, and it was only $7,500. So this was a pretty 

minor purchase, and it took quite a while to have it achieved. 

Senator DAINES. Thank you. 

Dr. Roessel, according to the GAO’s testimony, BIE students consistently score lower in math and reading than their Indian peers 

attending public schools. Additionally, graduation rates for BIE 

students are significantly lower. In fact, during the 2011 and 2012 

school year, the graduation rate for BIE students was only 53 percent, compared to 67 percent for Indian students attending public 

schools. 

So my question is, what is the reason for this gap in performance? And then the second part would be what are some reforms 

that are needed to address this problem? 

Dr. ROESSEL. The biggest impact in improving educational outcomes, of course, is in the classroom, and that is what we are focusing our reform efforts. What we need to do, and I would say that 

we need to build a quality of instruction with our current teaching 

staff, so we need to have reform efforts that are aligned with professional development; and we are doing that. We have instituted 

an alignment with the National Board for Professional Teaching 

Standards. We have 252 teachers that are in that program right 

now. 

46 

Senator DAINES. Is there a challenge in attracting and retaining 

the best teachers into that program that you are saying is in the 

classroom, and then it comes back to the administration, the teachers? Can you zero in on that for me? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes. I think in that instance it was difficult to get 

the word out. They are giving three years of their life for a much 

higher standard, so we had to provide incentives, and we did that. 

We provide bonuses in each year that they were complete, the first 

phase, second phase, and then they become nationally board certified. So we would provide those incentive bonuses from BIE, not 

the individual schools, so it doesn’t impact their school budget. So 

that is one thing in the reform effort, is trying to ensure that we 

have professional development to improve the quality of instruction 

for our current. 

The other is we need to recruit, and the recruiting is hard because we have, again, the facilities. We talk about the school facilities, many being in poor condition. That is not even talking about 

the teacher housing or the lack of teacher housing in many of these 

remote locations. So one of the things in the President’s budget for 

2016 is an effort to also have, with HUD finding, a pilot program, 

a $10 million set-aside specifically for BIE-funded teacher housing 

so Tribes and schools could build that. So I think that is something 

that would help attract quality teachers to come in there. 

But, again, I think the focus that we have with the BIE reform 

effort is we need to focus on that classroom; improve instruction, 

improve leadership, improve governance, improve tribal partnerships, each step taking it a little higher. 

The graduation rates? One of the problems I think that we have 

faced in Indian education is that when we are faced with those low 

academic data, we begin to narrow the curriculum; more math, 

more science, or just more of those, and the kids are bored. 

I don’t think any of us would want to go to school in some of the 

schools they have now; they just have two subjects, reading and 

math. There is nothing else there. So we need to expand and integrate tribal culture, tribal language, tribal history into math, into 

reading, into science so that we expand the curriculum and create 

opportunities, I think; and that is what we are trying to do with 

the reform efforts, is provide that professional development to expand the opportunities for teachers who then can deliver that to 

the classroom. 

Senator DAINES. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Daines. 

Senator Heitkamp? 

STATEMENT OF HON. HEIDI HEITKAMP, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

Senator HEITKAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I don’t think anyone can look at these pictures and read the GAO 

report and expect that children who go to school in that kind of 

physical plant can feel valued or appreciated. Or even going without hot water for a year tells you something about what your position is in life. 

I think we have to begin with that problem. It is so enormously 

frustrating when we look at this because as we try and build out 

47 

greater opportunities, greater success rates, whether it is lower 

rates of behavior in mental health, more economic opportunity, 

more high school graduation rates, we project so many demands 

onto these kids. But the message they get every day is that they 

are not really worthy, they are somehow less than other kids, because we would never let this happen in a public school in North 

Dakota. We would never let this happen. 

I used to do inspections when I had the fire marshal service 

under my jurisdiction when I was attorney general. We shut down 

schools like this. So we all share that responsibility, whether it is 

the folks at BIE, whether it is the folks at BIA, whether it is this 

Committee, whether it is Congress, whether it is the Administration. 

We can’t fix this problem without resources. The difficult problem with getting resources is until we don’t read some of the waste 

and abuse and fraud, it is hard to convince folks to put more 

money into this problem. So that is the impasse. 

Dr. Roessel, I so enjoyed our first meeting because I had great 

hope for the Bureau of Indian Education under your leadership. 

You came from the Navajo; you understand what it is. Can you tell 

me, now that you have had over a year since we visited, probably, 

what have been your worse frustrations, like you would really like 

to tell someone what it is? Can you just share some of those ideas 

with us? Here is your chance. 

Dr. ROESSEL. And keep my job? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator HEITKAMP. Now, you know, it is too important to these 

kids. I know you and I know you aren’t worried about keeping your 

job. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, I will be honest and blunt. We need more 

money to build our schools, $1.3 billion. Everyone knows that figure. And I think we are starting to get there. It is a small step, 

but at least there is hope; whereas, in the past budgets were not 

prepared. 

Senator HEITKAMP. But I think some of the cynics would say, 

how do we know it is not going to get wasted? How do we know 

it is not going to get deployed in building a school building that 

isn’t big enough for the buses or fixing a roof that ends up looking 

like that? How do we know that? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Well, I don’t think you can ever guarantee it. But 

I think that if you have the system and the structure in place that 

has accountability, lines of authority, I think if you have people 

that want to do the right thing, and I think they do, I think one 

of the things is that, we need to change the way we view the problem. When you ask what am I concerned about, we are in love with 

the problem. We should be in love with the solutions. So we focus 

so much on just reiterating the problems that we never get to solutions. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Do you think that chart is the problem? 

Dr. ROESSEL. I think that chart is part of the problem. 

Senator HEITKAMP. I think that is a big part of the problem. 

Dr. ROESSEL. And I think we are addressing it in our reorganization. 

48 

Senator HEITKAMP. How do you have accountability when you 

have that kind of jurisdictional morass? How can anyone be held 

accountable when everybody can point fingers? 

Dr. ROESSEL. I agree with you, and I think that the reorganization that we have in place has clear lines of authorities; not lapped 

over each other, but BIE having facilities under BIE will help us, 

because we will be able then to drive the proposals for budgets because they will come from education experts, not from somebody 

else. 

Senator HEITKAMP. And this is part of the discussion we have 

been having. I think it is critically important that you begin almost 

immediately to address some of the lines of authority, some of the 

waste, fraud, and abuse. 

I don’t think you can wait for the whole plan to gel together before you start saying, we are on top of this and we will not let offshore bank accounts, we will not let incompetent people with 

maybe bad motives sign contracts that will not result in improvements to the schools. 

So that answer that you gave before, which is we are waiting to 

put all this together, I would really suggest that you begin a razorlike focus on the waste, fraud, and abuse, because it is going to be 

very difficult to get more dollars in this environment without understanding that we are spending every dollar the way it should be 

spent. 

Dr. ROESSEL. Yes, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Heitkamp. 

Senator Franken? 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you. 

Thank you, Chairwoman Jones, for being here. I would like to 

pick up with your testimony and tie it to what Senator Heitkamp 

started with. 

You talked about a student at the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School 

saying, I don’t want this for me, I want it for my siblings. This 

child knew kind of where he stood in relation to what Senator 

Heitkamp said, that you can tell Indian kids you are not going to 

have what other kids in the United States have, what you see on 

TV, because you are on an Indian Reservation. 

And I feel like we are at a catch-22. How do you attract teachers 

to teach, high-skilled teachers to teach on a BIE school when housing is bad, when you don’t want to bring your own kids into an environment where there is so much unemployment and drug use 

and domestic violence? 

And I agree with Senator Heitkamp that we have failed you and 

that child. We can’t say, well, we are just not going to put any 

more funding in until you prove that you will absolutely not waste 

a dime. That is a catch-22. That is basically saying, well, in that 

case, we will never do it. 

You know that I have been talking about the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig 

School for quite a while. That school needs to be torn down, am I 

right, and a new school built there? Am I right? 

Ms. JONES. Yes, sir. 

Senator FRANKEN. And you are doing great things there. You 

have an immersion language program there, and I think that is a 

beginning of all of this, which is having the pride in your culture 

49 

that these kids get. And I was glad, with Senator Murkowski, in 

the education bill to get language immersion funds to you. But tell 

me what does a starting teacher make at Leech Lake, do you 

know? 

Ms. JONES. I think approximately, it is less than $40,000 a year 

for a starting wage for one of our teachers over there. And part of 

that, it is really hard to be able to recruit individuals. Some of the 

things that I was looking at is a lot of it is you try to recruit individuals to a facility that it is almost incapable of teaching at. 

One of the examples that I talked about in my testimony is the 

science classroom. You walk in there, the students can’t do any 

hands-on labs at all. So we are lacking any learning experiences 

there, where they just have to read about it or they have to watch 

a video about it. So for an educator coming in, trying to give that 

experience to a child, they can’t. It is really hard to be able to recruit individuals when we can’t have the proper tools or equipment 

in our classroom in order to educate our youth. 

Senator FRANKEN. Yes. If you are a chemistry teacher and you 

see your science room, you can’t do lab. 

What I am frustrated with is sort of the idea that we have to 

look at the organization. 

Dr. Roessel, it sounds like you have improved remarkably the 

number of children who are succeeding, even though you are building on some very low numbers. But we can’t wait until you prove 

that you have solved every problem until we start funding you. We 

need to build you a new school there with a lab in it. 

And I want to just say that you have done a remarkable job, because when I took this last tour of the school, I was very impressed 

with the teachers there. I was impressed with the engineer for the 

school, who it is like a comedy, a tragic comedy, but it is like a 

comedy in what this guy does to jerry-rig stuff at this school. 

Thank you for being here. You know that I asked Secretary 

Jewell. Describe that. 

Is it okay if I go a couple minutes? 

The CHAIRMAN. Please, go ahead. 

Senator FRANKEN. I asked the Interior Secretary, before she was 

Interior Secretary, when she was nominated, I told her about the 

Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School, and I urged her, every time I see her, 

no matter when I have seen her, I talked about this school, and she 

finally went. Tell me about that visit. 

Ms. JONES. Yes, I want to thank you for sending the invite out 

for her. I know the Minnesota delegation also kind of pushed that 

effort as well. 

In August, Secretary Sally Jewell and Assistant Secretary Kevin 

Washburn came up to the school there. It was quite the opportunity to have them go out there to visit the school. Because she 

mentioned that listening to testimony did not do justice for any of 

it, that the school is in even worse condition than she even imagined it to be. We were fortunate enough she actually stayed with 

the visit an hour longer to talk to the students, to get their input 

of what it is like over there. 

We had some of the parents and school board members there, 

and we had a grandparent telling them that, well, I have to pull 

my child out of school after they reach the middle school because 

50 

he has asthma problems; they can’t be in a facility with a high 

school like that because of health conditions with it. 

So I think it was a real powerful message to Secretary Jewell for 

being able to visit the school and actually visualize it and hear the 

testimonies from the students and the faculty themselves, because 

they are the ones that have to go over there day in and day out. 

During the winter months they are wearing jackets all day, they 

are wearing gloves. Any time that the weather gets a little too cold, 

we have to close our schools, which also causes a problem with our 

children learning because now they are not attending schools. 

Senator FRANKEN. Is it ever cold in northern Minnesota? 

Ms. JONES. Oh, it has been brutally cold. 

Senator FRANKEN. I am way over my time, but my only regret 

about Secretary Jewell going there is that she went in August. I 

mean, there are blankets over every door because it is so cold in 

the winter, and I think it is a disgrace. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Franken, and 

thank you, Chairwoman Jones, for your thoughtful answers on 

those questions. 

A couple of questions. I wanted to start with Dr. Roessel. 

In his written testimony, Dr. Lewis, and correct me if I don’t 

have this right, Dr. Lewis, suggested that the Bureau of Indian 

Education should have authority over facilities and construction 

matters. But he notes that the current plan for the Bureau of Indian Education reorganization doesn’t really extend that authority 

and that, as a result, tribal schools are going to have to continue 

dealing with multiple agencies on school facilities and construction 

issues, which have caused the kind of delays in the past that you 

have experienced. 

So how is the secretary’s reorganization plan going to expedite 

and streamline the school construction and facility maintenance 

programs, which is a concern that I have heard from Dr. Lewis? 

Dr. ROESSEL. Thank you, Chairman. The school facilities issue 

with the reorganization, that oversight will fall under BIE in our 

proposal, so we would, I would have, BIE would have oversight 

over the school facilities operations and maintenance. Now, the 

school construction area is actually in a different line item, and 

that is still within the division of Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Management. 

So the oversight, what we would have at BIE, we would have 

people that know education facilities and can help drive the budget 

in terms of doing the research, doing the background to say, okay, 

this is what we need in projections for next year for new schools, 

this is our facility condition index, and try to drive budgets so that 

we can have a plan. We brought on board as part of the American 

Indian Education Study Group Marilee Fitzgerald, who used to be 

the Director for the Department of Defense Schools. She has been 

helping us to a spot where we can develop a six-year, seven-year 

plan for construction. 

But to answer the question, the facilities would fall under BIE, 

and the O&M would fall under BIE. 

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Lewis, do you think that is adequate? 

51 

Dr. LEWIS. I strongly agree with that. That is what we need to 

do. Right now it is very confusing with the BIA overseeing facilities 

and BIE running the academic portion. It needs to be transferred 

over so that the educators can have a stronger voice as to what is 

best for children in the classroom. Currently, that is not the case. 

The CHAIRMAN. And then, Dr. Roessel, thinking about the written testimony that we have from Ms. Emrey-Arras, she identified 

several management problems which compound the current challenges in overseeing how money is spent, as well as academic improvements; lack of knowledge and communication between the Bureau of Indian Education, other offices responsible for various management functions for the schools. 

She also pointed out a lack of expertise in training of Bureau of 

Indian Education employees. So how is the Bureau addressing 

these issues, including developing and implementing strategic 

plans in your reorganization to improve coordination among agencies? 

Dr. ROESSEL. In response to the strategic plans and communication plans, we have one, and have had it on our Web site now for 

about a year. The reason it is not finalized is we are still in tribal 

consultation. So until we are through with that, which, again, we 

are ending tribal consultation on Friday and then we have a comment period for an additional week on the 22nd, then we can take 

all those comments and develop; and any kind of comments that 

are specific to the strategic plan or the communication plan will be 

listened to and then will be incorporated. So those two areas. 

In terms of oversight, I come back to the same process: we are 

defining the roles and responsibilities in a way so that we are separating out the education portion with the management and administrative portions, making very clear roles and responsibilities. 

That is how we are addressing it. 

In the secretarial order we have a development of a school operations division that will oversee contracts and grants, that will 

oversee IT, that will oversee HR, that will oversee budget execution 

and formulation. That we have had to go outside of BIE to get 

done. Now it will be within BIE, so then BIE could be held accountable for everything dealing with school education. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Emrey-Arras, your written testimony highlights misspending of school funds and the Bureau of Indian Education’s limited oversight of school spending. You talk about the 

agency didn’t use a risk-based approach for monitoring spending, 

lacked written procedures to oversee spending. They are undergoing this reorganization now, which presumably, hopefully, from 

everybody here on the panel, would include improved spending 

oversight. 

Do you have some specific recommendations that have for improving spending oversight in the context of their reorganization 

plan? 

Ms. EMREY-ARRAS. I think it goes to the workforce analysis, to 

make sure that you have people with the right financial skills looking at audits. We had people who were responsible for looking at 

single audits tell us that they were not auditors, they were not accountants, and they didn’t know how to look at the documents, 

52 

which really presents issues in terms of accountability and oversight. 

I think, going forward, it is really critical that the folks who are 

in charge of making sure that the money is well spent have the 

skills to really oversee it. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Then, Dr. Lewis, final question. In your written testimony, several times you mention that the Navajo Nation wants to exercise 

greater sovereignty in education. I think you noted that 17 school 

districts, 244 schools operate on the Navajo Reservation. That is 

quite a number. And with multiple school systems on your Reservation, there is really not a uniform educational system that allows for consistent regulatory oversight. So can you expand upon 

how your recommendation that your Tribe be designated as a State 

Education Agency, how that would provide some consistent oversight and improve the educational outcomes for the students? 

Dr. LEWIS. Mr. Chair, members of the Committee, the Navajo 

Nation has a law called Navajo Sovereignty in Education, passed 

in 2005. The goal of that law is to make our Department of Dine ́

Education have a similar status as a State education department, 

similar power, similar authority. The Navajo Nation is sovereign, 

like any State. 

As an SEA, State Education Agency, we would be able to exercise 

regulatory authority over schools regarding academic accountability. At this point, the Navajo Nation is not recognized with this 

authority, and that is why tribally-controlled schools continue to 

fail, because we have a fragmented system encompassing three 

States with different standards. 

So the whole intent of us getting involved in the education of the 

32 BIE schools is to have a uniform set of standards. The department would serve as the regulatory authority to make sure that 

the content standards are there, the policies are there so that 

schools can use it effectively. The Navajo Nation did not have an 

opportunity from the beginning of time. Instruction, this education 

program that we have in our Nation; it was brought in by other 

governments. Now we find out that it is not all that great because 

of the high numbers of failures in academic achievement and dropout rates and so forth. 

So we are determined in building a Navajo education system 

where culture and value is infused through the system. We strongly believe that is the key to our survival. If a child understands 

their roots, their culture, their way of life, they will have a better 

understanding about the beauty of life, the sacredness of life, and 

learning will become natural. So that by the time they graduate 

from high school, they know their destiny, they are full of confidence that they can enter the workforce or into higher education. 

Currently, the system fails these students because of the fragmented system and because of the way that it is structured. 

Through this initiative that we are working on, in partnership 

with the BIE, we want to build a system that is connected, where 

Head Start, elementary, secondary, and higher education are 

aligned, knowing that when a child enters Head Start, we know 

that in 13 years they will be graduating at proficiency level in 

math and science. 

53 

As of the moment, these students struggle. They graduate with 

a high school diploma, but they don’t score high enough on ACT or 

SAT to enter into higher education; therefore, they become a part 

of the problem. And we are hoping that this whole system, when 

we align it in our way, the way we understand our children’s educational needs, we will see better results. 

So being recognized as a State Education Agency is critical. We 

will develop the assessment tool to make sure that the academic 

learning is measured properly so that we are at the same level as 

a State educational program. 

Thank you, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much for your answer. 

I want to thank all four of you for being here to testify. I know 

Senator Tester was trying to get back. He had an unavoidable conflict, but he may have some written questions, as may some of the 

other members of the panel, so the hearing record is going to be 

open for two weeks. I want to thank you again for your time and 

your testimony. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:38 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(55) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN YELLOW BIRD STEELE, PRESIDENT, OGLALA SIOUX

TRIBE


513b1.eps
56 


513b2.eps
57 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

Introduction 

Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony regarding the Committee’s 

May 13, 2015 hearing on the Bureau of Indian Education’s (BIE) organizational 

challenges. Founded in 1969, the National Indian Education Association (NIEA) represents Native students, educators, families, communities, and tribes. NIEA’s mission is to advance comprehensive educational opportunities for all American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians throughout the United States. NIEA advocates for educational excellence by working to ensure that students receive equal 

access to high-quality academic and cultural education models. By serving as the 

critical link between our communities and the diverse array of institutions that 

serve our students, NIEA holds all accountable for improving achievement. 

The State of Emergency in Native Education 

Native education is in a state of emergency. As Interior Secretary Sally Jewell has 

stated, ‘‘Indian education is an embarrassment to you and to us. It is not for the 

lack of desire. This [the BIE] is the one part of the Department of the Interior that 

deals directly with services to children. We know that self-determination and selfVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK

513b3.eps
58 

1 Hearing before the Committee on Indian Affairs, S. Hrg. 113–92 (May 15, 2013). 

2See GAO, School Facilities: Physical Conditions in School Districts Receiving Impact Aid for 

Students Residing on Indian Lands, GAO–10–32 (Oct. 29, 2009). 3See, e.g., GAO, Bureau of Indian Education Needs to Improve Oversight of School Spending, 

GAO–15–121 (Nov. 2014). 

governance is going to play an important role in bringing the kind of academically 

rigorous and culturally appropriate education that children need.’’ 1

The Department of Education has recently applauded the improvement in nationwide graduation rates, particularly the improvement among students of color. BIE 

students, however, are not experiencing the progress in graduation rates that the 

rest of the country is witnessing, with Native graduation rates often over around 

50 percent in many states. Native students also continue to lag behind their peers 

on other important educational indicators. 

The Trust Responsibility for Native Education 

Established through treaties, federal law, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions, the 

federal government’s trust responsibility to tribes includes the obligation to provide 

parity in access and equal resources to all American Indian and Alaska Native students, regardless of where they attend school. The federal government’s trust responsibility in the field of Native education is a shared responsibility between the 

Administration and Congress for federally recognized Indian tribes. 

To the extent that measurable trust standards in Native education can be evaluated, NIEA suggests this Committee refer to the government’s own studies encompassing Native test scores, treaty-based appropriation decreases, and Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) Reports, among other reports, which illustrate continued failure to uphold the trust responsibility and effectively serve our students. This 

is unacceptable because only through equal educational opportunities can we expect 

our future generations to be prepared for academic achievement and, consequently, 

successful in college and careers. 

Bureau of Indian Education Schools 

There are only two educational systems for which the federal government is directly responsible: Department of Defense (DOD) schools and federally operated and 

federally funded tribal schools. BIE schools, however, lag far behind DOD schools 

in funding, school construction, and student achievement. While DOD schools are 

being renovated and remodeled, schools within the BIE system are woefully outdated and, in some cases, dangerous for students and staff. As America’s most vulnerable population, Native students should have equal access to resources and opportunities. Congress should fulfill its responsibility to Native students by remedying the disparities between these two federally operated school systems. 

Over 60 BIE schools currently rated in ‘‘poor’’ condition, and construction issues 

continue to put Native students at an educational disadvantage. Meanwhile, GAO 

reports have found that better school facilities are associated with better student 

outcomes. 2 We urge support for a long-term school replacement plan that would set 

out priorities for school construction and replacement over the next 40–60 years and 

that would include a plan for adequate maintenance funding. Accountability, in addition to funding, is required to ensure that BIE’s school construction funds are used 

to effectively and efficiently improve the educational opportunities of Native students. Therefore, we also urge increased oversight over BIE school construction 

funds. 

BIE schools also face enormous challenges regarding their staffing and operation. 3 Currently, over 40 percent of regional positions are vacant. Additionally, employees are often not placed in positions for which they have the necessary skills. 

Communication is lacking, as school staff are often confused about who to contact 

within the BIE when they have problems. Finally, as the Government Accountability Office has noted, the BIE lacks staff with the expertise required to oversee 

school expenditures. These staffing and administration issues must be overcome, 

and increased oversight must be provided, for the BIE system to work effectively 

and efficiently for Native students. 

Recommendations for Reform 

NIEA is generally supportive of BIE reform. However, we urge transparency in 

the design and execution of the reform in order to include tribal participation, facilitate congressional oversight, and ensure that reform fulfills the federal government’s trust responsibility regarding delivery of trust- and treaty-based educational 

rights. See NIEA Resolution #2014–11. NIEA has several recommendations regarding how reform can be undertaken in a way that honors the federal government’s 

responsibilities, respects the government-to-government relationship between tribes 

59 

4See GAO, Indian Affairs: Better Management and Accountability Needed to Improve Indian 

Education, GAO–13–744 (Sept. 2013). 

and the United States, and achieves much-needed progress regarding our Native 

students’ education. 

Keeping the BIE Within the Department of Interior 

Although reform is needed, it is essential that Native education remain the purview of the BIE and that BIE remains housed within the Department of Interior, 

which has extensive experience carrying out the United States’ trust responsibility. 

Tribal leaders have repeatedly stated that the BIE should stay within the Department of Interior. NIEA joins tribes in strongly opposing any effort to move Native 

education to the Department of Education. However, we look forward to follow-up 

hearings to determine what the BIE and the Department of Education are doing to 

work together to address the needs of Native students. 

Follow-up Hearings With Both BIA and BIE Officials 

The BIE is extremely limited in what it can do without its partners in the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs (BIA). A number of the areas that the GAO has identified as needing reform are areas that involve BIA responsibilities, operations, and staff. 4 Therefore, follow-up is needed that involves both BIE and BIA officials in order to facilitate dialogue regarding BIE reform and to determine how communication can be 

strengthened between the BIE and BIA. 

Stated Authority 

Tribes have repeatedly questioned whether BIE authority to move forward with 

reform based on the Tribally Controlled Schools Act (P.L. 100–297). NIEA has requested an opinion from the Department of Interior’s Office of the Solicitor on this 

matter. However, an opinion has not yet been provided. 

Facilities and Maintenance Funding 

As stated, over 60 BIE schools currently rated in ‘‘poor’’ condition. Native children 

are learning in buildings that are crumbling around them. We appreciate the attention that has been paid to the dilapidated Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig school. This school 

is, unfortunately, representative of the significant problems facing schools that linger on the BIE’s school construction list. Additional funds for facilities and maintenance are desperately needed so that the BIE can reduce the construction and repair backlog, addressing schools in the order they appear on the BIE construction 

list so that schools that have long awaited facilities funding will not continue to be 

neglected. We also urge the creation of a long-term school replacement plan and increased oversight over school construction funds to ensure the effective administration of federal funds. 

BIE-Focused Budget Advisory Committee 

Additionally, we recommend the formation of a tribal budget advisory committee 

focused specifically on BIE issues to advise the Department of Interior on educational issues. Although the Tribal-Interior Budget Council (TBIC) provides an avenue for tribal input on budget issues, TBIC focuses on all issues relevant to Indian 

Country and therefore lacks the education-specific knowledge required to help transform Native education. A tribal education advisory committee would form an important point of contact for tribal leaders and tribal educators. Such a committee would 

also be well positioned to make recommendations that would address both BIE and 

BIA educational activities. 

Continued Oversight Over the Reform Process 

As NIEA has previously stated, and has expressed in Resolution # 2014–11, continued congressional oversight over the BIE reform process is necessary. In particular, the proposed offsets that the Department of Interior has identified in order 

to pay for the BIE redesign should be made public. NIEA has requested this information, but it has not yet been provided. Additionally, now that we are a year into 

the BIE redesign, the BIE should be required to provide more detailed plans regarding the reform as well as a timeline for implementation. This timeline should include a public list of the proposed closings of line offices. As the reform moves forward, details of the reform should continue to be made public, tribal input should 

be prioritized, and congressional oversight should continue. 

Conclusion 

We thank the Committee for holding this oversight hearing. The current BIE reform process has the potential to make a meaningful difference in the lives of NaVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:22 Feb 03, 2016 Jkt 098453 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\98435.TXT JACK
60 

tive students. We urge Congress and the Administration to use this opportunity to 

work closely with tribes. NIEA firmly believes that self-governance in education is 

the answer to the current crisis in the Native education system. Tribes have demonstrated time and time again that we are better equipped to address the needs of 

our own peoples. Working together, with bipartisan support from Congress, we are 

confident that BIE can be reformed in a manner that furthers tribal self-determination in education. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ERMA J. VIZENOR, CHAIRWOMAN, WHITE EARTH

BAND OF OJIBWE

Honorable Chairman John Barrasso and members of U.S. Senate Committee on 

Indian Affairs, my name is Erma J. Vizenor, Chairwoman of the White Earth Nation in Northern Minnesota. Miigwech—thank you—for the opportunity to submit 

this testimony regarding the Bureau of Indian Education as you look at improving 

educational opportunities and outcomes for Indian children. 

The Bureau of Indian Education, as we all know, is responsible for the success 

of our Indian children enrolled in the 185 elementary and secondary schools which 

it oversees. The outcomes of these 41,000 students is poor, and something needs to 

change because the outcomes impact our children, our families and our future. 

Communication with the BIE has been fragmented. We understand that is partly 

due to the turnover of key positions and positions left vacant for several months. 

However, in order to effectively and efficiently provide services to our students, communication with BIE officials must be remedied. As an example, during the several 

years it took for White Earth to receive school replacement funding, our staff and 

I struggled to communicate effectively with (BIE and BIA) staff in Albuquerque and 

DC. Staff turn-over resulted in frustration when communication and information 

changed as staff changed—a factor in the number of years it took for replacement 

funding. 

Fragmented communication also happens when it comes to the outcomes of our 

children. How can we, as a Tribal Nation, do what is best for our students when 

we receive notification of Adequate Yearly Progress based upon test scores from two 

years prior? We cannot. How can the BIE say its doing its job when the expectation 

of adequate progress and achievement is far lower than that of the State Education 

Agencies? We want the best for our students—and if the best means we have to 

meet higher standards, then that is what we should have. 

BIE School Funding 

Circle of Life Academy is a tribally-controlled K–12 BIE school just on the outskirts of White Earth Village. We have 130 students attending from across the reservation. Our school is underfunded, but we still look for creative and innovative 

ways to help our students succeed. 

This year, for the first time ever, we have five students who are taking advantage of the College in the High School/PSEO program. The ability to offer these 

courses came through a partnership with White Earth Tribal and Community 

College. By taking care of transportation issues, we were able to offer students 

opportunities to take advanced coursework at our school and at WETCC to challenge them academically. One of the students currently attending was on the 

verge of dropping out. We were able to work with her and the college; she is 

now enrolled in the courses she needs and is on track to graduate on time. 

Total per pupil funding for BIE students is under $6,000, in comparison, per pupil 

funding for students in Minnesota’s public schools is $10,700 ($13,000 for students 

in the metro areas). Our BIE students must be funded and treated equally. We 

must realize an increase in per pupil funding so we can provide the same opportunities and learning environments students and teachers are afforded in schools 

throughout the state and nation. 

Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) funding must include additional funding opportunities in the base funding. The Federal Government’s additional competitive grant funds are rarely awarded to smaller Tribes or to Tribes with small BIE 

school enrollment. These competitive grant opportunities, such as the Demonstration Grant for Indian Children, must have a set-aside for 41,000 students in our 

BIE schools. 

ISEP base funding also does not consider student, instructional and safety support personnel, such as school counselors, mental health therapists, school nurses 

and general education paraprofessionals. Technology and technology support are 

61 

also left unfunded, thus system upkeep, maintenance and replacement relies on the 

availability of ISEP funds and the internal prioritization of such. 

The following needs have been identified but are not feasible with current funding: 

1. An after school/extended year program where we could offer academic support and credit recovery options to keep students on track for graduation and 

to improve reading and math skills. 

2. Instructional coaches and Reading/Math specialists to improve our pyramid 

of interventions. 

3. Adjusted salary schedule to make us competitive with nearby districts so that 

we can recruit and retain highly qualified and talented teachers 

4. Preschool program 

5. Intensive professional development during the summer and year for teachers 

in high-leverage teaching strategies. 

A group of four junior high Circle of Life Academy students were at high-risk 

for having to be retained because of their lack of academic progress due to 

having a difficult time regulating their emotions and leaving class when they 

were upset. These young girls were screened and identified as having elevated 

symptoms of depression and PTSD. This qualified them for an evidence-based 

therapy group called CBITS (Cognitive Behavioral Interventions for Trauma 

in Schools), which is offered to students at school. 

The girls worked hard during their 10-week group therapy sessions; they 

learned how to relax their bodies when they felt stress and triggers coming 

on, how to identify their feelings in times of real or imagined stress, and several other stress reduction techniques. The group also incorporated Native 

American cultural practices to help them feel connected to their culture 

throughout the group process. 

Post-group assessments showed a decrease in depression and PTSD symptoms. In addition, there was an increase in academic scores and none of the 

students ended up being retained. One student stated ‘‘I can’t believe I can 

actually sit through a class period and be able to chill myself out all by myself; I might actually be able to stay in school and graduate now!’’ It is evident that the skills learned in this therapy group were able to transcend into 

the classroom, seeing positive results in many areas. 

Early Childhood Funding 

Funding for quality Early Childhood Programs is vital. We are all aware of the 

impacts of investing in early childhood programs. Schools, programs and agencies 

on White Earth provide services to approximately 500 children ages 0–5. We have 

another 250 children not receiving any type of early childhood programming. The 

Bureau does not fund pre-school programming. We ask that you continue to support 

increased resources for Early Childhood programs so we can bring our children into 

the school before kindergarten and provide them that key opportunity to succeed. 

Facilities 

All students deserve to receive a quality education in a safe environment. The 

BIE’s oversight and management of school replacement, repair and improvement 

has been poor. It took White Earth over 12 years to receive funds for a replacement 

school. During that time, our students attended school in a building that leaked 

every time it rained, had poor foundation issues and several other citations—making it an unsafe and unhealthy environment for students and staff. It is my understanding that there are other BIE schools throughout the nation that are in the 

same disrepair. This is not acceptable. 

During the post-award and planning stage for the new Circle of Life Academy facility, I was quite dismayed at the Bureau’s commitment to building a facility to 

meet our needs. The BIE only approved the construction of six classrooms, which 

would force us to provide combined classrooms from 1st through 12th grades. We 

found that unacceptable and committed $4,000,000 of our own funds so that each 

grade would have its own classroom. This was accepted by the Bureau, only to be 

informed that Operation & Maintenance (O&M) funds for the additional classrooms 

would not come from the BIE. This is an injustice to Indian students. 

I am pleased that we have a new facility, and although it is much smaller than 

what we wanted, it is a grand improvement from the condemned building we were 

using prior. It is of utmost importance that the BIE address the needs of construction, repair and maintenance for all schools—nationwide. 

62 

Position Paper 

The creation of the Tribal Nations Education Committee was endorsed by both the 

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe and the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council in 2007. The 

Tribal Nations Education Committee consists of representatives appointed by each 

of the eleven Tribal Nations in Minnesota, representatives from the Twin Cities 

Metro area and Greater Minnesota, and a representative from the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe. The TNEC is recognized in State statute 124d.79 subd. 4 as the body 

with which the Minnesota Department of Education must consult (affirming the 

government-to-government relationship). Many of the TNEC members are here 

today. 

Each year, the Tribal Nations Education Committee prepares a Position on Education which outlines priorities in Indian Education from birth through post-secondary education. A copy of the Position on Education is attached for you today to 

read and use as a guide to making a difference in Indian Education not only in Minnesota, but nationwide as well. 

Attachment: 


513c1.eps
63 


513c2.eps
64 


513c3.eps
65 

ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY TRIBAL SCHOOLS, INC. 

Sicangu Lakota Nation, May 4, 2015 

Hon. JOHN BARRASSO, Chairman 

Senate Committee on Indian Affairs 

838 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

Chairman Barrasso, 

This letter is to express our concern for the Bureau of Indian Education’s attempt 

to re-organization, AGAIN. 

The BIE does not need to move valuable federal positions and other financial resources from poor reservations and move them to urban areas. Maybe 6 of the 15 

Education Resource Centers could be considered on Indian lands. 

The BIE does not need to continue dictating what is best for tribal children. The 

5 pillars of the reform effort use educational beliefs that continue acculturation and 

assimilation of the tribal learners. 

The Study Group and Blueprint is moving forward even when the majority of 

tribes and tribal schools do not support the effort of tribal control. 

The 50∂ positions for the ADD-Tribally Controlled Schools could be reduced in 

half. If the Tribally Controlled Schools Act is functioning properly, the schools are 

required to deliver 4 reports and an audit to the tribes and then to the BIE. The 

processing and monitoring of these requirements should not take over 50 staff to 

process. 

The real paternalistic control over tribal school is NCLB and other federal legislation which dictates what is best for tribal learners. 

I am willing to provide more specifics, if interested. 

DR. ROGER BORDEAUX, 

Executive Director. 

Attachments: 


513c4.eps
66 

BIE FUNDED SCHOOLS REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE—MARCH 2015 

Schools are ranked based upon their Facility Condition Index (FCI)—Worse to 

Best 

No. School Condition 

1 Crow Creek Sioux Tribal Elementary School .................... Poor 

2 Crow Creek High School ...................................................... Poor 

3 Little Singer Community School ......................................... Poor 

4 Cove Day School ................................................................... Poor 

5 Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shing School ................................................ Poor 

6 Lukachukal Boarding School ............................................... Poor 

7 Richfield Residential Hall .................................................... Poor 

8 Dzilth-na-o-dith-hle Community School ............................. Poor 

9 He-Dog ................................................................................... Poor 


513c5.eps
67 

No. School Condition 

10 San Simon School ................................................................. Poor 

11 Red Rock Day School ........................................................... Poor 

12 Greasewood Springs Community School ............................ Poor 

13 Cottonwood Day School ........................................................ Poor 

14 Wounded Knee District School ............................................ Poor 

15 Na’Neelzhiin Ji’Olta (Torreron) ........................................... Poor 

16 Rock Point Community School ............................................ Poor 

17 Shonto Boarding School ....................................................... Poor 

18 John F. Kennedy Day School .............................................. Poor 

19 Tonalea/Redlake Day School ............................................... Poor 

20 Jemez Day School ................................................................. Poor 

21 Laguna Elementary School .................................................. Poor 

22 Little Wound/Kyle ................................................................ Poor 

23 Rosebud Elementary School ................................................ Poor 

24 Greyhills High School .......................................................... Poor 

25 Naa tsis aan (Navajo Boarding School) .............................. Poor 

26 Rock Creek Grant School ..................................................... Poor 

27 Aztec Dormitory .................................................................... Poor 

28 Nazlini Boarding School ...................................................... Poor 

29 Coeur D’Alene Tribal School ............................................... Poor 

30 Crystal Boarding School ...................................................... Poor 

31 Chinle Boarding School ........................................................ Poor 

32 Te Tsu Geh Oweenge (Tesuque) Day School ...................... Poor 

33 Sicangu Owayawa Oti (Rosebud Dormintory) ................... Poor 

34 Spring Creek School ............................................................. Poor 

35 Mandaree Day School .......................................................... Poor 

36 Gila Crossing Day School .................................................... Poor 

37 Duckwater Shoshone Elementary School ........................... Poor 

38 Hotevilla Bacavi Community School ................................... Poor 

39 Black Mesa Community School ........................................... Poor 

40 Tse’ii’ahi’ (Standing Rock) Community School ................... Poor 

41 Tonono O’Odham High School (Papago) ............................. Poor 

42 Okreek School ....................................................................... Poor 

43 Little Eagle Day School ....................................................... Poor 

44 To’haali’ (Toadlena) Community School ............................. Poor 

45 American Horse School (Allen) ............................................ Poor 

46 Alamo Navajo School ............................................................ Poor 

47 Theodore Jamerson Elementary School ............................. Poor 

48 Choctaw Central ................................................................... Poor 

49 Quileute Tribal School ......................................................... Poor 

50 Santa Rosa Boarding School ................................................ Poor 

51 Dibe Yazhi Habitiin Olta, Inc (Borrego Pass) .................... Poor 

52 Riverside Indian School ....................................................... Poor 

53 Moencopi Day School ........................................................... Poor 

54 Theodore Roosevelt School ................................................... Poor 

55 Casa Blanca Day School ...................................................... Poor 

56 Rocky Ridge Boarding School .............................................. Poor 

57 Atsa Biyaazh Community School (Shiprock) ..................... Poor 

58 Pierre Indian Learning Center ............................................ Poor 

59 White Shield School ............................................................. Poor 

60 Cheyenne Eagle Butte School ............................................. Poor 

61 Hopi Day School ................................................................... Poor 

62 Beatrice Rafferty School ...................................................... Poor 

63 Dennehotso Boarding School ............................................... Poor 

64 Taos Day School ................................................................... Poor 

65 Pinon Community School ..................................................... Poor 

66 Santa Rosa Ranch School .................................................... Poor 

67 Crazy Horse School .............................................................. Poor 

Fair Condition Schools need to be replaced within 20 years 

No. School Condition 

68 Ahfachkee Day School .......................................................... Fair 

69 Aneth Community School .................................................... Fair 

68 

Fair Condition Schools need to be replaced within 20 years—Continued 

No. School Condition 

70 Salt River Day School .......................................................... Fair 

71 Pine Springs Day School ...................................................... Fair 

72 Hunters Point Boarding School ........................................... Fair 

73 Laguna Middle School .......................................................... Fair 

74 Indian Island School ............................................................ Fair 

75 Jones Academy Dormitory ................................................... Fair 

76 Lower Brule Day School ...................................................... Fair 

77 Keams Canyon Boarding School ......................................... Fair 

78 Sequoyah High School .......................................................... Fair 

79 Noli School (CA) ................................................................... Fair 

80 Northern Cheyenne Tribal School (Busby) ........................ Fair 

81 Havasupi School ................................................................... Fair 

82 Pine Hills School & Rama Dorm ......................................... Fair 

83 Kickapoo Nation School ....................................................... Fair 

84 Oneida Tribal School ............................................................ Fair 

85 Joseph K Lumsdem Bahweting Anishnabe School ............ Fair 

86 Chief Leschi School System ................................................. Fair 

87 Many Farms High School .................................................... Fair 

88 Chilchinbeto Community School ......................................... Fair 

89 Ohkay Owingeh (San Juan) Community School ................ Fair 

Good Condition Schools need to be replaced within the next 30 to 40 years 

No. School Condition 

90 Blackwater Community School ........................................... Good 

91 H’anaa’dii Community School/Dormitory, Inc .................... Good 

92 Cibecue Community School ................................................. Good 

93 Indian Township School ....................................................... Good 

94 St Francis Indian School ..................................................... Good 

95 Turtle Mountain Elementary & Middle School ................. Good 

96 Pine Ridge (Oglala Community School) ............................. Good 

97 Chemewa Indian School ....................................................... Good 

98 Lake Valley Navajo School .................................................. Good 

99 Two Eagle River School ....................................................... Good 

100 Eufaula Dormitory ............................................................... Good 

101 Tlis Nazba Community School ............................................ Good 

102 Sherman Indian High School .............................................. Good 

103 Leupp School, Inc ................................................................. Good 

104 Miccosukee Indian School .................................................... Good 

105 Menominee Tribal School .................................................... Good 

106 Standing Rock Community School ...................................... Good 

107 Kinlani Bordertown (Flagstaff) Dormitory ......................... Good 

108 Sante Fe Indian School ........................................................ Good 

109 Twin Butte Day School ........................................................ Good 

110 Marty Indian School ............................................................. Good 

111 Tucker Day School ................................................................ Good 

112 Jicarilla Dormitory ............................................................... Good 

113 Tuba City Boarding School .................................................. Good 

114 Sho-Ban School District No. 512 ......................................... Good 

115 To’haali’ (Canoncito) ............................................................. Good 

116 Flandreau Indian School ...................................................... Good 

117 Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa School ..................................... Good 

118 Chi-Ch’il-Tah/Jones Ranch .................................................. Good 

119 Pearl River Elementary ....................................................... Good 

120 Hopi Junior/Senior High School .......................................... Good 

121 Sky City Community School (Acomita) .............................. Good 

122 Rough Rock Community School .......................................... Good 

123 Kin Dah Lichi’I’Olta (Kinlichee) .......................................... Good 

124 Meshwaki (Sac & Fox) Settlement School .......................... Good 

125 Ch’ooshgai (Chuska) Community School ............................ Good 

126 San Ildenfonso Day School .................................................. Good 

127 Nenahnezad Boarding School .............................................. Good 

69 

Good Condition Schools need to be replaced within the next 30 to 40 years—Continued 

No. School Condition 

128 St Stephens Indian School ................................................... Good 

129 Tate Topa Tribal School (Four Winds) ............................... Good 

130 Fond du Lac Ojibway School ............................................... Good 

131 Conehatta Elementary School ............................................. Good 

132 Seba Dalkai Boarding School .............................................. Good 

133 Mariano Lake Community School ....................................... Good 

134 Wa-He-Lut Indian School .................................................... Good 

135 Pyramid Lake High School .................................................. Good 

136 Circle of Nations (Wahpeton) .............................................. Good 

137 Chitimacha Day School ........................................................ Good 

138 Hannahville Indian School .................................................. Good 

139 Tiyospaye Topa School ......................................................... Good 

140 Boque Chitto Day School ..................................................... Good 

141 Paschal Sherman Indian School ......................................... Good 

142 Standing Pine Day School ................................................... Good 

143 Lummi Tribal School System .............................................. Good 

144 Holbrook Dormitory, Inc ...................................................... Good 

145 T’siya Elementary & Middle School (Zia Day) ................... Good 

146 Baca/Dlo’ay’ Azhi Community School ................................. Good 

147 Dunsieth Day School ............................................................ Good 

148 Beclabito Day School ............................................................ Good 

149 Bread Springs Day School ................................................... Good 

150 Cherokee Central High School ............................................ Good 

151 Cherokee Elementary School ............................................... Good 

152 Chickasaw Children’s Village .............................................. Good 

153 Circle of Life Survival School .............................................. Good 

154 Dilcon Boarding School ........................................................ Good 

155 Enemy Swim Day School ..................................................... Good 

156 First Mesa Elementary School ............................................ Good 

157 Isleta Elementary School ..................................................... Good 

158 Jeehdeez’a Academy (Low Mountain) ................................. Good 

159 Kayenta Boarding School ..................................................... Good 

160 Kaibeto Boarding School ...................................................... Good 

161 Loneman Day School ............................................................ Good 

162 Mescalero Apache School ..................................................... Good 

163 Muckleshoot Tribal School ................................................... Good 

164 Navajo Preparatory School .................................................. Good 

165 Nay Ah Shing School ........................................................... Good 

166 Ojibwa Indian School ........................................................... Good 

167 Ojo Encino Day School ......................................................... Good 

168 Porcupine Day School .......................................................... Good 

169 Pueblo Pintado Community School ..................................... Good 

170 Red Water Day School ......................................................... Good 

171 San Felipe Day School ......................................................... Good 

172 Sanostee Day School ............................................................ Good 

173 Second Mesa Day School (Old Polacca) .............................. Good 

174 Takini High School ............................................................... Good 

175 T’iists’oozi’Bi’lta (Crownpoint Community School) ............ Good 

176 Tiospa Zina Tribal School .................................................... Good 

177 Turtle Mountain High School .............................................. Good 

178 Wide Ruins Community School ........................................... Good 

179 Wingate Elementary School ................................................ Good 

180 Winslow Residential Hall .................................................... Good 

181 Yakama Tribal School .......................................................... Good 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MIKE CRAPO TO

CHARLES ‘‘MONTY’’ ROESSEL

Funding 

Question 1. The Department of the Interior has requested lower funding for the 

Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) to provide funds for the Education 

Turnaround Pilot Program. These funds are used for Student Improvement Grants, 

which are temporary programs and do not provide long term funding to selected 

70 

schools. How can real educational reforms be achieved when funding for student improvement relies on temporary arrangements? 

Answer. On December 18, 2016, Public Law 114–113, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, was enacted. The FY 2016 budget request included funding proposals for investments in education that will yield long-term benefits, and those proposals were funded under the enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act These benefits include focusing on improving instruction, improving teachers through national 

board certification, bringing Internet connectivity into all Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) schools, increased funding for tribal grant support costs, and assisting 

tribes with the development of tribal education departments. The increased funding 

for operations and maintenance will assist the BIE in improving conditions of BIE 

facilities. 

Question 2. ISEP funding has steadily decreased over the past 3 years and BIE 

schools have to look toward short-term grants and pilot programs to provide basic 

educational services for their students. How will the BIE provide Native students 

with world-class education when schools barely have the resources to hire teachers 

or provide modern learning environments? 

Answer. The funding for school operations has gradually increased since the sequestration of Fiscal Year 2013. In FY 2013, school operations was funded at 

$493,700,867, in FY 2014 it was funded at $518,318,000, and in FY 2015 it was 

funded at $536,897,000. However, the FY 2015 base funding for school operations, 

the Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP), at $386,565,000 is still lower than 

the FY 2012 funding at $390,706,867 due to the FY 2013 sequestration and the FY 

2014 adjustment for the Education Turnaround Pilot Program. The FY 2016 budget 

of $391,837,000 restores ISEP funding to an amount greater than the pre-sequestration FY 2012 funding. 

Organization and Structure 

Question 3. The proposed organizational model as outlined by the BIE takes the 

agency from a ‘‘direct provider of education’’ and makes it into an ‘‘innovative organization that will serve as a capacity-builder and service-provider.’’ The reorganization activity seems counter to this mission statement. For example, the ShoshoneBannock Tribe was one of around 25 schools under one Associate Deputy Director. 

Under the reorganization, that same person has responsibility for approximately 90 

schools. How does this reorganization actually further the goal of providing worldclass education, and how does the reorganization work to provide better communication and coordination with BIE schools when more schools are overseen by the same 

number of personnel? 

Answer. The Department of the Interior’s (Department’s) proposed Education Resource Centers scales up a best practice. Previously, when Director Roessel was the 

Associate Deputy Director for Navajo Schools, as a part of a Navajo pilot project for 

BIE-operated Navajo schools, he clarified roles and responsibilities within the field 

to enable specialization and avoid the ‘‘jack of all trades’’ approach. In addition, he 

restructured six separate Education Line Offices into one school district, established 

school improvement teams (made up of school improvement specialists) and established school clusters organized around strengths and weaknesses. 

As a result, the percentage of BIE-operated Navajo schools that made ‘‘adequate 

yearly progress’’ (AYP) increased from 29 percent to 55 percent. Because this approach improved outcomes for students attending BIE operated Navajo schools, the 

Department seeks to apply this approach to the entire BIE school system. A key 

part of the restructuring will be clarifying the roles of everyone involved in delivering a world-class education to students. The proposed changes will result in better 

support to each tribe so it is better able to address student outcomes. These changes 

in the field will be supported by clearer central accountability through the Chief 

Academic Officer and the Chief Performance Officer who will be dedicated to the 

improvement of educational performance and operations. 

Reorganization 

Question 4. Regarding the overall structural reforms, I have heard concerns that 

tribes in Idaho and in neighboring states have been assigned to an Associate Deputy 

Director based out of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Previously, Idaho tribes had agency 

resources closer to home at an office in Montana. How does moving resources further away from tribes the agency serves help BIE students? 

Answer. We considered two major factors in planning the 15 Education Resource 

Centers (ERCs): (1) proximity to schools served, and (2) needs of the schools. Proximity was based on the school’s distance to the ERCs, the number of students per 

school, and the number of schools per ERC. At that time, school needs included 

71 

1The term, adequate yearly progress was deleted by P.L. 114-95, the Every Student Succeeds 

Act, signed into law, December 10, 2015. 

their adequate yearly progress 1 (AYP status, special education, and other student 

data, and distance from other schools and the number of tribes per ERC. The reorganization supports a ratio of ERC staff to BIE-funded schools as follows: (1) Associate Deputy Director (ADD)-Bureau Operated Schools; one Full Time Employee 

(FTE) to one school; (2) ADD Tribally Controlled Schools: one FTE to one school; 

and (3) ADD Navajo Schools: one FTE to three schools. The reorganization will locate several ERCs in new locations closer to schools to more effectively serve all BIE 

students. The ERCs will be staffed by employees who are currently in Albuquerque. 

The focus of reform is looking at the total BIE structure being closer to the schools 

and not just a line office with no services. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. TOM UDALL TO

CHARLES ‘‘MONTY’’ ROESSEL

Question 1. I understand that the Navajo Nation is interested in being a Tribal 

Education Agency for the entire Nation. Wouldn’t this result in some of the Navajo 

autonomous school boards losing their autonomy? 

Answer. The United States has a government-to-government relationship with the 

Navajo Nation and a deep respect for principles of tribal self-governance. In Part 

B of Title XI of the Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.), the 

various legislative and technical amendments since 1978, and the annual appropriations process, Congress has repeatedly stated that it is the policy of the United 

States to fulfill the Federal Government’s unique and continuing trust relationship 

with, and responsibility to, the Indian people for the education of Indian children 

and for the operation and financial support of the Bureau of Indian Affairs-funded 

school system to work in full cooperation with tribes. Tribal nations and the United 

States share the same goal: to provide education of the highest quality and provide 

for the basic elementary and secondary educational needs of Indian children, including meeting the unique educational and cultural needs of those children. 

The tribally operated schools on the Navajo Reservation operate as autonomous 

schools only by authorization of the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Nation has the authority, under existing tribal legislation, to withdraw the authorization, and through 

the tribal authority provided through Part B of Title XI of the Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.), as amended. The Navajo Nation, in its interactions with individual schools, must consider the well-being of all its students and 

community members, particularly when the autonomous school boards are not providing the sound governance required for a school to be a success, and are not providing the high-quality academic programs and services that students need to be 

successful in the 21st century. 

The enactment and implementation of Title V of Public Law 100–297 in 1988 was 

an important milestone in the tribal control of Bureau-funded schools. But the success of the schools controlled by tribal organizations has been limited and has not 

met the full expectations of both Public Law 93–638, the Indian Self-Determination 

and Education Assistance Act, which allows a tribe to perform federal functions 

under contract to the Federal Government and receive funding for that role, and 

Public Law 100–297, the Tribally Controlled Grant Schools Act, which allows a tribe 

to take over the responsibilities for the operation of a school under what is called 

a P.L. 100–297 grant. Many tribes have limited input in the operation and control 

of their schools after they approve a tribal organization, independent of the tribe, 

to operate a school. One outcome is that tribal organizations have not coordinated 

well with neighboring schools on standards, procedures, policies, curricula, and instructional programs. Lack of coordination produces inequities and has a negative 

impact on students who may move between schools during the academic year. 

We defer to the Navajo Nation on the organization of education on the Navajo 

Reservation. That said, we seek to provide options to tribal nations to improve education. The desire of the Navajo Nation, as well as other tribes, to function as a 

Tribal Education Department is an important step in the Navajo Nation assuming 

greater control of the 66 Bureau-funded schools on or near the Navajo Reservation. 

The Navajo Nation is exploring various options to strengthen oversight, governance, 

and control of its schools. Although the final decision has not been made by the 

Navajo Nation on the oversight, governance, and control of its schools, the Bureau 

is comfortable with, and will support, the Navajo Nation’s decision based on the 

stated policy of the Education Amendments of 1978, as amended. 

72 

The Bureau believes that greater coordination in the operation of its schools will 

strengthen the capacity of tribes to operate education programs and high-performing 

schools. It will also improve student performance, improve the quality of the instructional program, and develop an education system with uniform standards, policies, 

and procedures that better meet the needs of students and tribal communities. Tribal control of schools will allow tribes to implement innovative programs and curricula for their students, including an emphasis on their history, language, and culture. As a result, tribal communities are likely to be more invested in their schools. 

Question 1a. How will BIE manage this conflict as you make decisions on how 

to move forward with the proposed reorganization? 

Answer. The future of Navajo education is a matter for the Navajo Nation to decide. The United States has not had a good historical record when it has used paternalistic approaches directed by federal entities, whether Congress or the Executive 

Branch. The question of how the Navajo Nation will operate its school system 

should be debated within the Navajo Nation. The BIE’s role is to support whatever 

decision is made by the tribal government, provided that it is consistent with the 

law. The BIE Director and his senior managers hosted a tribal consultation session 

on April 27, 2015, which was open to the public, and have had formal and informal 

meetings, seven stakeholder conference calls, and eight webinars to provide information to the Navajo Nation, tribal and education department leaders, community 

members, and both tribally operated and BIE school board members and school 

staff. These activities were to collect information and input on the restructuring of 

BIE, including the feasibility of tribes operating all of the Bureau-funded schools on 

their reservations, and the strengthening of tribal departments of education. 

Through these efforts, the BIE has sought to become more supportive of educational 

endeavors on the Navajo Reservation. 

In addition, BIE has provided the Navajo Nation $400,000 through a feasibility 

grant and a ‘‘Sovereignty in Indian Education’’ (SIE) Enhancement initiative. These 

funds allowed the Navajo Nation to hold numerous listening sessions with school 

boards, school staff, and community members to determine the feasibility of operating the Navajo Bureau-funded schools, and other considerations to strengthen the 

Navajo Nation Department of Education and update tribal education codes, policies, 

and procedures. 

Question 1b. Do you have an opinion from the Department’s Solicitor’s office on 

the authority of the BIE to enter into its current restructuring? Is there any conflict 

between PL–297 and the proposed changes to increase tribal authority? 

Answer. The answer to the first question is ‘‘yes.’’ The Department’s Office of the 

Solicitor has reviewed the restructuring proposal and opined that the Tribally Controlled Schools Act does not prevent the restructuring. The Act envisions tribal governments as authorizing bodies and informed partners in the management of tribally controlled schools when not directly operating tribal schools themselves. The 

answer to the second question is ‘‘no.’’ 

The Solicitor’s office has been actively involved with BIE’s restructuring planning 

and implementation process, and with BIE’s outreach to tribes to discuss the restructuring of the Bureau, including the transformation of the BIE from a direct 

service provider and school operator to a technical assistance provider to tribally operated schools. 

Question 2. I have great respect for the tradition of Tribal Consultation, and its 

importance for respecting tribal sovereignty. I understand you are using a range of 

tools to garner reaction from tribes for the BIE reorganization plan.What changes 

have you made to the proposed reorganization plan based on consultation received 

from tribal leaders? 

Answer. Both the development and implementation of the BIE reorganization 

have evolved as tribal consultation has proceeded. In response to concerns in the 

Great Plains, for example, the reorganization was modified to establish an Education Resource Center (ERC) in Kyle, South Dakota and create an Education Program Administrator at Pine Ridge to oversee Cheyenne Eagle Butte, Flandreau, and 

Pine Ridge schools. In several areas, a smaller-scale support center was included as 

part of the proposed reorganization plan. An additional change came following input 

from the tribes in Oklahoma during the tribal consultation sessions in April and 

May of 2014. 

In addition, during the tribal consultations, we heard that most of the tribal nations in Oklahoma are interested in programs supporting Native youth attending 

public schools (there are only three BIE-funded schools in that state). Because of 

this concern, we have proposed to transform the only regional office in Oklahoma 

to a national ‘‘Johnson O’Malley (JOM) Center.’’ The new JOM Center will provide 

support and technical assistance to all tribes receiving JOM funds. 

73 

Question 2a. My constituents tell me they want to hear more about how the BIE 

expects this new reorganization ‘‘to be better able to provide more resources and 

support to Indian students at the local level.’’ How will you be doing that? 

Answer. Our reorganization is designed with the best interests of the student and 

the success of their schools in mind. The 15 Education Resource Centers (ERCs) will 

address a key recommendation of the Blueprint for Reform to provide improved 

technical assistance and more comprehensive services to schools. The ERCs will be 

geographically positioned close to schools and staffed with School Solutions Teams 

to provide customized support to meet the unique needs of each school. Instead of 

issuing mandates to schools, these teams will ensure that principals and teachers 

have the resources and support they need to operate high achieving schools. The 

ERCs will leverage expertise from other parts of the organization, including school 

operations, to offer a variety of technical skill supports in the field. With support 

from BIE Education Program Enhancement funds, the ERCs will assist schools in 

their improvement efforts by making available to schools data-supported ‘‘best practice’’ models in professional development, curriculum development, instruction, 

intervention strategies, school leadership, and tribal education support. 

Question 2b. I understand that part of the proposed restructuring will be the closing of line offices. How have all tribes been notified of these closures? 

Answer. The BIE is transforming the current 22 Education Line Offices reporting 

to the Associate Deputy Directors into 15 Education Resource Centers (ERCs), four 

facility support centers, three technical support centers, and one National Johnson 

O’Malley Center. The ERCs address a key recommendation of the Blueprint for Reform to provide improved technical assistance and more comprehensive services to 

schools. The ERCs will be geographically positioned close to schools and staffed with 

School Solutions Teams to provide customized support to meet the unique needs of 

each school. Instead of issuing mandates to schools, these teams will ensure that 

principals and teachers possess the resources and support they need to operate high 

achieving schools. The ERCs will leverage expertise from other parts of the organization, including school operations, to offer a variety of technical skill supports in 

the field. With support from BIE Education Program Enhancement funds, the ERCs 

will assist schools in their improvement efforts by making available to schools datasupported ‘‘best practice’’ models in professional development, curriculum development, instruction, intervention strategies, school leadership, and tribal education 

support.Information on the transformation is shared during Tribal Consultation 

meetings, during monthly stakeholder calls, through webinars in partnership with 

the National Indian Education Association and the National Congress of American 

Indians, and through individual meetings with tribal leaders, tribal councils and 

tribal community members. Information on these consultation sessions can be found 

at the following link on the bie.edu website: http://www.bie.edu/cs/groups/xbie/ 

documents/document/idc1-031687.pdf. 

Question 3. Understandably, tribes are concerned about the financial impact of operating schools previously run by the BIE. Currently, what are the per pupil costs 

at BIE operated and BIE grant schools, and what is the breakdown of contributing 

factors for those costs? 

Answer. The BIE does not have access to cost information from all schools. However, most BIE-appropriated and Department of Education funds received by the 

BIE are distributed to BIE-funded schools by formulas based on student count variables or characteristics of each school. For School Year 2015–2016, the average Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) funding was $9,280 per student; the average BIE-appropriated dollars per student, including ISEP, was $15,386; and the average for all funds was $20,153. The $20,153 per student was not adjusted for the 

funding generated by the residential students. 

Question 3a. When tribes agree to take control of their schools now run by BIE, 

how can they compensate for the lack of resources and staff, insufficient infrastructure (buildings, technology, and broadband) and needed wraparound services to 

achieve academic excellence? 

Answer. Since most BIE-appropriated and Department of Education funds received by the BIE are distributed to BIE-funded schools by formulas based on student count variables or characteristics of each individual school, individual schools 

would receive the same dollar amount per program regardless of whether they were 

BIE-operated or tribally operated. In either case, the school determines the number 

and type of staff needed based on available funds. When a school transfers from 

BIE-operated to tribally operated, the school receives the same dollar amount for 

facilities, operations, and maintenance, and has the same eligibility for facilities repair funds. However, a school gains more flexibility and will be more accountable 

to the community, giving the school the opportunity to better serve the community. 

74 

BIE funds the broadcast and Internet broadband for all of its schools from funds 

appropriated for Education Information Technology (IT) services, and the broadband 

at individual schools expands as school needs change and funds become available. 

The funding increase provided in FY 2016 will increase the broadband and hardware to better meet the needs for 21st century schools, especially in remote locations where broadband access benefits are not available to the local community except at BIE-funded schools. 

The BIE will continue to work with other Federal, State, and private agencies to 

establish wraparound services at all BIE-funded schools. BIE continues to work 

with the Indian Health Service to increase the availability of health care services 

at or near BIE-funded schools. 

Question 3b. What resources will BIE make available to them, and will it be sufficient and sustainable? 

Answer. BIE routinely provides technical assistance as tribes seek to convert to 

tribal control. Moreover, the BIE Sovereignty in Indian Education (SIE) Enhancement Initiative and the Tribal Education Department (TED) grants provide funding 

to build the capacity of Tribal Education Departments. On August 5, 2014, the BIE 

awarded $1 million to five tribes under the SIE: Gila River Indian Community, Navajo Nation, Tohono O’odham Nation, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, and the Turtle 

Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. In November 2015, the BIE awarded ten 

tribes under the TED Grant: Pueblo of Acoma, Santa Clara Pueblo, Navajo Nation, 

Hopi Tribe, Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Mississippi Band of 

Choctaw Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Muscogee Creek Nation Tribe, and Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe. These funds are intended to support 

tribes to build the capacity of their educational departments. The Oglala Sioux Tribe 

opted not to accept the SIE awards and were provided a full year to resubmit a new 

budget narrative. Unfortunately, the Tribe never resubmitted and funds were reallocated to fund technical assistance programs for Education Line Offices being contracted by five tribes. These grants were announced for second-year funding in August 2015. 

In addition to providing grants to tribes, the BIE is taking the necessary steps 

to ensure that employees are trained in how to provide technical assistance. BIE 

is working across the agency to ensure that BIE will be a capacity-builder and service-provider to tribes. Monthly BIE calls provide an opportunity for updates with 

stakeholders and offer an open forum for questions and answers. There are also BIE 

training webinars announced by newsletter and mass emails through standard BIE 

communications protocols. 

Question 4. What is the risk of New Mexico staff losing their jobs if they are not 

able to relocate or retrain for the new roles? 

Answer. Employees are the lifeblood of any institution. It is BIE’s intention to 

work with current employees to ensure that they have a place within the new BIE. 

Every effort will be made to ensure a smooth transition. The BIE has sought to provide all BIE staff with webinars on developing resumes and a walkthrough of how 

to apply for positions on USA Jobs, which are specific to job announcements. In addition, job announcements are shared across the BIE, and managers are encouraged 

to share the job listings with staff. New positions are being advertised and individuals are encouraged to submit applications for these positions. Training and professional development go hand in hand in the BIE and employees will be provided necessary training through webinars. 

Question 4a. If fully implemented, is it true that Albuquerque would be at risk 

for losing 35 jobs? 

Answer. No. Currently, the Albuquerque Regional Office supports a staffing level 

of 44 positions and includes the following functions: (1) Associate Deputy Director 

West; (2) Albuquerque Education Line Office; (3) Division of Performance and Accountability; and (4) School Operations staff. 

Under the proposed reorganization, the Albuquerque regional office will undergo 

several changes, but it will continue to support 44 positions, covering a variety of 

important functions: 

1. An Office of the Associate Deputy Director for BIE-Operated Schools and an 

Education Resource Center (ERC) reporting to the Associate Deputy Director; 

2. An Office of the Associate Deputy Director for Tribally Controlled Schools (3 

positions) and an ERC reporting to the ADD; and 

3. Staff supporting the Division of School Operations. 

The most significant change will be within the Division of Performance and Accountability (DPA), for which the following changes are proposed: 

75 

1. The reassignment of the Associate Deputy Director for DPA to Washington, 

DC; 

2. The reassignment of a majority of the DPA staff to ERCs around the country; 

and 

3. The reassignment of DPA’s data unit to Washington, DC. 

Question 4b. What is the potential economic impact to New Mexico of fully implementing the proposed BIE reorganization plan? 

Answer. The number of federal jobs will remain the same and we anticipate that 

Indian education in New Mexico will improve. This will produce a more successful 

workforce in the State. While we cannot quantify with certainty the overall economic impact, we believe that it will be positive. 

Question 5. Thank you for your assistance with getting the Pine Hill Elementary 

School (Bldg. 803) prepared for occupancy. I understand that significant problems 

on the campus remain, including connecting all of the buildings to the fire alarm 

system and fencing the campus to protect it from uninvited guests. Do I have your 

commitment that BIE will continue to work with the Pine Hill schools to address 

the security and life safety features needed to create the appropriate learning environment for the students and staff? 

Answer. The Bureau of Indian Affairs Southwest Region Facilities Manager confirmed that building 803 and the campus-wide fire alarm system are complete. Yes, 

we are committed to working with the Ramah community in addressing other identified security and life-safety issues. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. AL FRANKEN TO

CHARLES ‘‘MONTY’’ ROESSEL

Question 1. From 2007 to 2012, the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe operated its Pine 

Grove School as a charter school, but then outside assistance for the school ended. 

Without Pine Grove, children in the Band’s Lake Lena community must be bused 

to the Band’s Nay Ah Shing School 80 miles away or lose access to culturally appropriate education. 

Last year’s appropriations bill included language allowing BIE to waive the prohibition on funding satellite schools in limited circumstances. The Band has requested 

such a waiver so it can reopen Pine Grove as a satellite of the BIE-supported Nay 

Ah Shing School. And the Band would like to see this waiver approved in time for 

about two dozen kids in Lake Lena to start classes at Pine Grove in the 2015–2016 

school year. 

Can you assure me that BIE will review the Mille Lacs Band’s waiver request in 

a timely manner? 

Answer. The BIE director traveled to meet with Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians Chief Executive Melanie Benjamin and agreed to the new satellite school. The 

BIE has worked with Pine Grove to identify students who are eligible for the Indian 

School Equalization Program (ISEP) funding but, as of this writing, the students 

listed by Pine Grove do not meet the ISEP eligibility requirements and are not eligible for ISEP funds. The BIE continues to work with Pine Grove to identify eligible 

students who will generate funds for Nay Ah Shing to provide education services 

to the Pine Grove students. 

Æ