U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

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

26–699 PDF 2006

S. HRG. 109–478

INDIAN CHILD PROTECTION AND FAMILY

VIOLENCE PREVENTION ACT AMENDMENTS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

S. 1899

TO AMEND THE INDIAN CHILD PROTECTION AND FAMILY VIOLENCE

PREVENTION ACT TO IDENTIFY AND REMOVE BARRIERS TO REDUCING CHILD ABUSE, TO PROVIDE FOR EXAMINATIONS OF CERTAIN

CHILDREN

MARCH 15, 2006

WASHINGTON, DC

(
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Vice Chairman

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska

MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

JEANNE BUMPUS, Majority Staff Director

SARA G. GARLAND, Minority Staff Director

(II)
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

S. 1899, text of ......................................................................................................... 3

Statements:

Burrus, James H., deputy assistant director, Criminal Investigations Division, FBI, Department of Justice .............................................................. 24

Chaney, Christopher P., deputy bureau director, BIA, Office of Law Enforcement Services ........................................................................................ 22

Cross, Terry, executive director, National Indian Child Welfare Association ................................................................................................................. 33

Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota, vice chairman,

Committee on Indian Affairs ....................................................................... 21

McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona, chairman, Committee

on Indian Affairs ........................................................................................... 1

McSwain, Robert, deputy director, IHS, Department of Health and

Human Services ............................................................................................ 23

Perez, Jon, IHS, Division of Behavioral Health ............................................. 23

Ragsdale, Pat, director, BIA, Department of the Interior ............................. 22

Steele, Paul, director, Center for Justice Studies, Morehead State University .................................................................................................................. 35

Suppah, Ron, chairman, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, Oregon ............................................................................................ 32

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

Burrus, James H. (with attachment) .............................................................. 41

Cross, Terry (with attachment) ....................................................................... 45

McSwain, Robert ............................................................................................... 71

Ragsdale, Pat .................................................................................................... 73

Steele, Paul (with attachment) ........................................................................ 75

Suppah, Ron ...................................................................................................... 107

(1)

INDIAN CHILD PROTECTION AND FAMILY

VIOLENCE PREVENTION ACT AMENDMENTS

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 2006

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

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m. in room 485

Senate Russell Office Building, Hon. John McCain (chairman of the

committee) presiding.

Present: Senators McCain and Dorgan.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN MCCAIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM

ARIZONA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning.

Today we will address S. 1899, The Indian Child Protection and

Family Violence Prevention Act reauthorization. This bill provides

a 4-year reauthorization of appropriations for child sexual abuse

prevention and treatment grants; requires data collection to identify the scope of child abuse and family violence in Indian country;

and encourages interagency coordination between public and private medical organizations in the treatment and examination of

children through the use of tele-medicine.

The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act

was enacted in 1990 in response to the findings of the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs and the Special Committee on Investigations that certain BIA schools had become safe havens for

child abusers. The investigation of these crimes revealed that the

perpetrators knew that the reporting and investigation of these

heinous acts were in such a sorry state that they would rarely be

detected.

Needless to say, the impact of this neglect on child victims, their

families and their communities were lasting and tragic.

The 1990 Act mandated the reporting and investigation of child

abuse and required character investigations of BIA, IHS and tribal

employees who were in contact with children. In addition, the Act

authorized appropriations to establish a prevention and treatment

program to be operated by the BIA and IHS and by tribes, which

authorizations expired in 1997.

Even before 1997, however, many of the programs provided for

in the act never materialized. Although the obligation for character

investigations is still in effect, it is unclear whether these are being

conducted regularly; whether professionals who are required to report incidents of child abuse are actually doing this; and whether
2

the mandatory investigations of these reports are occurring is also

unclear.

What we do know is that the grants and programs envisioned by

the bill to address child abuse and family violence have received

very little funding since 1990. Other programs to address child

abuse, however, have been initiated by Federal agencies and by

tribes.

I look forward to hearing from the witnesses on what is being

done today to assess and respond to the issue of child abuse and

family violence in Indian country and to hear your recommendations on what should be done to give real effect to the goals of the

Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act.

I want to especially thank Senator Dorgan for his commitment

on this issue. He has been ahead of it. He has had hearings back

in North and South Dakota. I appreciate very much his leadership

on this compelling issue.

[Text of S. 1899 follows:]
3

1

II

109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1899

To amend the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act

to identify and remove barriers to reducing child abuse, to provide

for examinations of certain children, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 20, 2005

Mr. MCCAIN (for himself, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. CRAPO, and Mr. INOUYE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs

A BILL

To amend the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence

Prevention Act to identify and remove barriers to reducing child abuse, to provide for examinations of certain

children, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Indian Child Protec5 tion and Family Violence Prevention Act Amendments of

6 2005’’.
4

2

•S 1899 IS

1 SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

2 Section 402 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam3 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3201) is

4 amended—

5 (1) in subsection (a)—

6 (A) in paragraph (1)—

7 (i) by redesignating subparagraphs

8 (E) and (F) as subparagraphs (F) and

9 (G), respectively; and

10 (ii) by inserting after subparagraph

11 (D) the following:

12 ‘‘(E) the Federal Government and certain

13 State governments are responsible for inves14 tigating and prosecuting certain felony crimes,

15 including child abuse, in Indian country, pursu16 ant to chapter 53 of title 18, United States

17 Code;’’; and

18 (B) in paragraph (2)—

19 (i) in the matter preceding subpara20 graph (A), by striking ‘‘two’’ and inserting

21 ‘‘the’’;

22 (ii) in subparagraph (A), by striking

23 ‘‘and’’ at the end;

24 (iii) in subparagraph (B), by striking

25 the period at the end and inserting ‘‘;

26 and’’; and
5

3

•S 1899 IS

1 (iv) by adding at the end the follow2 ing:

3 ‘‘(C) identify and remove any impediment

4 to the immediate investigation of incidents of

5 child abuse in Indian country.’’; and

6 (2) in subsection (b)—

7 (A) by striking paragraph (3) and insert8 ing the following:

9 ‘‘(3) provide for a background investigation for

10 any employee that has access to children;’’; and

11 (B) in paragraph (6), by striking ‘‘Area

12 Office’’ and inserting ‘‘Regional Office’’.

13 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

14 Section 403 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam15 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3202) is

16 amended—

17 (1) by striking paragraph (14);

18 (2) by redesignating paragraphs (5) through

19 (13) as paragraphs (6) through (14), respectively;

20 (3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the follow21 ing:

22 ‘‘(5) ‘conviction’, with respect to an offense,

23 means a final judgment of guilty through a verdict

24 by a judge or jury or a plea of guilty or no contest,

25 but does not include any final judgment that has
6

4

•S 1899 IS

1 been expunged by pardon, reversed, set aside, or

2 otherwise voided;’’;

3 (4) in paragraph (13) (as redesignated by para4 graph (2)), by striking ‘‘that agency’’ and all that

5 follows through ‘‘Indian tribe’’ and inserting ‘‘the

6 Federal, State, or tribal agency’’;

7 (5) in paragraph (14) (as redesignated by para8 graph (2)), by inserting ‘‘(including a tribal law en9 forcement agency operating pursuant to a grant,

10 contract, or compact under the Indian Self-Deter11 mination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.

12 450 et seq.))’’ after ‘‘State law enforcement agen13 cy’’;

14 (6) in paragraph (17), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the

15 end;

16 (7) in paragraph (18), by striking the period at

17 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

18 (8) by adding at the end the following:

19 ‘‘(19) ‘telemedicine’ means a telecommuni20 cations link to an end user through the use of eligi21 ble equipment that electronically links health profes22 sionals or patients and health professionals at sepa23 rate sites in order to exchange health care informa24 tion in audio, video, graphic, or other format for the
7

5

•S 1899 IS

1 purpose of providing improved health care diagnosis

2 and treatment.’’.

3 SEC. 4. REPORTING PROCEDURES.

4 Section 404 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam5 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3203) is

6 amended—

7 (1) in subsection (c)—

8 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘(1)

9 Within’’ and inserting the following:

10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than’’; and

11 (B) in paragraph (2)—

12 (i) by striking ‘‘(2)(A) Any’’ and in13 serting the following:

14 ‘‘(2) INVESTIGATION OF REPORTS.—

15 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Any’’;

16 (ii) in subparagraph (B)—

17 (I) by striking ‘‘(B) Upon’’ and

18 inserting the following:

19 ‘‘(B) FINAL WRITTEN REPORT.—On’’; and

20 (II) by inserting ‘‘including any

21 Federal, State, or tribal conviction re22 sulting from the allegation’’ before the

23 period at the end; and

24 (iii) by adding at the end the follow25 ing:
8

6

•S 1899 IS

1 ‘‘(C) MAINTENANCE OF FINAL REPORTS.—

2 The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall

3 maintain a record of each written report sub4 mitted under subsection (b) in a manner in

5 which the report is accessible to—

6 ‘‘(i) a local law enforcement agency

7 that requires the information to carry out

8 an official duty; and

9 ‘‘(ii) any agency requesting the infor10 mation under section 408.

11 ‘‘(D) COLLECTION OF DATA.—Not less fre12 quently than once each year, the Secretary, in

13 consultation with the Attorney General and any

14 appropriate Indian tribe, shall collect any infor15 mation not otherwise reported under subsection

16 (b), including information relating to, during

17 the preceding calendar year—

18 ‘‘(i) the number of child abuse allega19 tions and investigations in Indian country;

20 ‘‘(ii) the number of child abuse pros21 ecutions declined or deferred in Indian

22 country; and

23 ‘‘(iii) the number of acquittals of

24 charges of child abuse in Indian country.’’;

25 and
9

7

•S 1899 IS

1 (2) by adding at the end the following:

2 ‘‘(e) CONFIDENTIALITY OF CHILDREN.—No local law

3 enforcement agency or local child protective services agen4 cy shall disclose the name of or information concerning

5 the child to anyone other than any person who, by reason

6 of their participation in the treatment of the child, the

7 investigation, or the adjudication of the allegation, needs

8 to know the information in the performance of the duties

9 of the individual.

10 ‘‘(f) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 year

11 after the date of enactment of this subsection, and annu12 ally thereafter, the Director of the Federal Bureau of In13 vestigation, in coordination with the Secretary and the At14 torney General, shall submit to the Committees on Indian

15 Affairs and the Judiciary of the Senate, and the Commit16 tees on Resources and the Judiciary of the House of Rep17 resentatives, a report on child abuse in Indian country

18 during the preceding year.’’.

19 SEC. 5. REMOVAL OF IMPEDIMENTS TO REDUCING CHILD

20 ABUSE.

21 Section 405 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam22 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3204) is amended

23 to read as follows:
10

8

•S 1899 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 405. REMOVAL OF IMPEDIMENTS TO REDUCING

2 CHILD ABUSE.

3 ‘‘(a) STUDY.—The Secretary, in consultation with

4 the Attorney General and the Service, shall conduct a

5 study under which the Secretary shall identify any impedi6 ment to the reduction of child abuse in Indian country

7 and on Indian reservations.

8 ‘‘(b) INCLUSIONS.—The study under subsection (a)

9 shall include a description of—

10 ‘‘(1) any impediment to reporting child abuse in

11 Indian country and on Indian reservations;

12 ‘‘(2) any impediment to, or advance in, Federal,

13 State, and tribal investigations and prosecutions of

14 allegations of child abuse in Indian country and on

15 Indian reservations; and

16 ‘‘(3) any impediment to, or advance in, the

17 treatment of child abuse in Indian country and on

18 Indian reservations.

19 ‘‘(c) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after the

20 date of enactment of the Indian Child Protection and

21 Family Violence Prevention Act Amendments of 2005, the

22 Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Indian Af23 fairs and the Judiciary of the Senate, and the Committees

24 on Resources and the Judiciary of the House of Rep25 resentatives, a report describing—
11

9

•S 1899 IS

1 ‘‘(1) the findings of the study under this sec2 tion; and

3 ‘‘(2) recommendations for legislative actions to

4 reduce instances of child abuse in Indian country

5 and on Indian reservations, if any.’’.

6 SEC. 6. CONFIDENTIALITY.

7 Section 406 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam8 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3205) is amended

9 to read as follows:

10 ‘‘SEC. 406. CONFIDENTIALITY.

11 ‘‘Any Federal, State, or tribal government agency

12 that treats or investigates incidents of child abuse may

13 provide information and records to an officer of any other

14 Federal, State, or tribal government agency that requires

15 the information to carry out the duties of the officer, in

16 accordance with section 552a of title 5, United States

17 Code, section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42

18 U.S.C. 264), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy

19 Act of 1974 (20 U.S.C. 1232g), part C of title XI of the

20 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d et seq.), and other

21 applicable Federal law.’’.

22 SEC. 7. WAIVER OF PARENTAL CONSENT.

23 Section 407 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam24 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3206) is

25 amended—
12

10

•S 1899 IS

1 (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ‘‘or forensic’’

2 after ‘‘psychological’’; and

3 (2) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘advise’’ and

4 inserting ‘‘advice’’.

5 SEC. 8. CHARACTER INVESTIGATIONS.

6 Section 408(b) of the Indian Child Protection and

7 Family Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3207(b)) is

8 amended by striking ‘‘guilty to’’ and all that follows and

9 inserting the following: ‘‘guilty to, any offense under Fed10 eral, State, or tribal law involving—

11 ‘‘(1) a crime of violence;

12 ‘‘(2) sexual assault;

13 ‘‘(3) child abuse;

14 ‘‘(4) exploitation; or

15 ‘‘(5) sexual contact or prostitution.’’.

16 SEC. 9. INDIAN CHILD ABUSE TREATMENT GRANT PRO17 GRAM.

18 Section 409 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam19 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3208) is amended

20 by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:

21 ‘‘(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

22 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are nec23 essary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years

24 2006 through 2010.’’.
13

11

•S 1899 IS

1 SEC. 10. INDIAN CHILD RESOURCE AND FAMILY SERVICES

2 CENTERS.

3 Section 410 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam4 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3209) is

5 amended—

6 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘area office’’

7 and inserting ‘‘Regional Office’’;

8 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘The Sec9 retary’’ and all that follows through ‘‘Human Serv10 ices’’ and inserting ‘‘The Secretary, the Secretary of

11 Health and Human Services, and the Attorney Gen12 eral’’;

13 (3) in subsection (d)—

14 (A) in paragraph (4), by inserting ‘‘,

15 State,’’ after ‘‘Federal’’; and

16 (B) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘agency

17 office’’ and inserting ‘‘Regional Office’’;

18 (4) in subsection (e)—

19 (A) in paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking

20 the commas at the ends of the paragraphs and

21 inserting semicolons;

22 (B) by striking paragraph (3) and insert23 ing the following:

24 ‘‘(3) adolescent mental and behavioral health

25 (including suicide prevention and treatment);’’;
14

12

•S 1899 IS

1 (C) in paragraph (4), by striking the pe2 riod at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

3 (D) by adding at the end the following:

4 ‘‘(5) criminal prosecution; and

5 ‘‘(6) medicine.’’;

6 (5) in subsection (f)—

7 (A) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘The

8 Secretary’’ and all that follows through

9 ‘‘Human Services’’ and inserting the following:

10 ‘‘(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary, in con11 sultation with the Service and the Attorney Gen12 eral’’;

13 (B) in the second sentence—

14 (i) by striking ‘‘Each’’ and inserting

15 the following

16 ‘‘(2) MEMBERSHIP.—Each’’; and

17 (ii) by striking ‘‘shall consist of 7

18 members’’ and inserting ‘‘shall be’’;

19 (C) in the third sentence, by striking

20 ‘‘Members’’ and inserting the following:

21 ‘‘(3) COMPENSATION.—Members’’; and

22 (D) in the fourth sentence, by striking

23 ‘‘The advisory’’ and inserting the following:

24 ‘‘(4) DUTIES.—Each advisory’’;

25 (6) in subsection (g)—
15

13

•S 1899 IS

1 (A) in the first sentence—

2 (i) by striking ‘‘Indian Child’’ and in3 serting the following:

4 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Indian Child’’; and

5 (ii) by adding before the period at the

6 end the following: ‘‘(25 U.S.C. 450 et

7 seq.)’’;

8 (B) by striking the second sentence and in9 serting the following:

10 ‘‘(2) CERTAIN REGIONAL OFFICES.—

11 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in

12 subparagraph (B), if a Center is located in a

13 Regional Office of the Bureau that serves more

14 than 1 Indian tribe, an application to enter into

15 a grant, contract, or compact under the Indian

16 Self-Determination and Education Assistance

17 Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.) to operate the Cen18 ter shall contain a consent form signed by an

19 official of each Indian tribe to be served under

20 the grant, contract, or compact.

21 ‘‘(B) ALASKA REGION.—Notwithstanding

22 subparagraph (A), for Centers located in the

23 Alaska Region, an application to enter into a

24 grant, contract, or compact described in that

25 subparagraph shall contain a consent form
16

14

•S 1899 IS

1 signed by an official of each Indian tribe or

2 tribal consortium that is a member of a grant,

3 contract, or compact relating to an Indian child

4 protection and family violence prevention pro5 gram under the Indian Self-Determination and

6 Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et

7 seq.).’’; and

8 (C) in the third sentence, by striking ‘‘This

9 section’’ and inserting the following:

10 ‘‘(3) EFFECT OF SECTION.—This section’’; and

11 (7) by striking subsection (h) and inserting the

12 following:

13 ‘‘(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

14 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are nec15 essary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years

16 2006 through 2010.’’.

17 SEC. 11. INDIAN CHILD PROTECTION AND FAMILY VIO18 LENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM.

19 Section 411 of the Indian Child Protection and Fam20 ily Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3210) is

21 amended—

22 (1) in subsection (c), by striking the subsection

23 heading and inserting ‘‘COORDINATING INVESTIGA24 TION, TREATMENT, AND PREVENTION OF CHILD

25 ABUSE AND FAMILY VIOLENCE’’;
17

15

•S 1899 IS

1 (2) by redesignating subsections (f) through (i)

2 as subsections (e) through (h), respectively; and

3 (3) by striking subsection (h) (as redesignated

4 by paragraph (2)) and inserting the following:

5 ‘‘(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

6 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are nec7 essary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years

8 2006 through 2010.’’.

9 SEC. 12. USE OF TELEMEDICINE.

10 The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence

11 Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.) is amended by

12 adding at the end the following:

13 ‘‘SEC. 412. USE OF TELEMEDICINE.

14 ‘‘(a) CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS.—The Service is

15 authorized to enter into any contract or agreement for the

16 use of telemedicine with a public or private medical univer17 sity or facility, or any private practitioner, with experience

18 relating to pediatrics, including the diagnosis and treat19 ment of child abuse, to assist the Service with respect to—

20 ‘‘(1) the diagnosis and treatment of child abuse;

21 or

22 ‘‘(2) methods of training Service personnel in

23 diagnosing and treating child abuse.
18

16

•S 1899 IS

1 ‘‘(b) ADMINISTRATION.—In carrying out subsection

2 (a), the Service shall, to the maximum extent

3 practicable—

4 ‘‘(1) use existing telemedicine infrastructure;

5 and

6 ‘‘(2) give priority to Service units and medical

7 facilities operated pursuant to grants, contracts, or

8 compacts under the Indian Self-Determination and

9 Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.)

10 that are located in, or providing service to, remote

11 areas of Indian country or Indian reservations.

12 ‘‘(c) INFORMATION AND CONSULTATION.—On receipt

13 of a request, the Service may provide to public and private

14 medical universities, facilities, and practitioners any infor15 mation or consultation on the treatment of Indian children

16 who have, or may have, been subject to abuse or neglect.

17 ‘‘(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

18 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are nec19 essary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years

20 2006 through 2010.’’.

21 SEC. 13. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

22 Section 1169 of title 18, United States Code, is

23 amended—

24 (1) in subsection (a)(1)—
19

17

•S 1899 IS

1 (A) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘or

2 volunteering for’’ after ‘‘employed by’’;

3 (B) in subparagraph (D)—

4 (i) by inserting ‘‘or volunteer’’ after

5 ‘‘child day care worker’’; and

6 (ii) by striking ‘‘worker in a group

7 home’’ and inserting ‘‘worker or volunteer

8 in a group home’’;

9 (C) in subparagraph (E), by striking ‘‘or

10 psychological assistant,’’ and inserting ‘‘psycho11 logical or psychiatric assistant, or mental or be12 havioral health professional;’’;

13 (D) in subparagraph (F), by striking

14 ‘‘child’’ and inserting ‘‘individual’’;

15 (E) by striking subparagraph (G), and in16 serting the following:

17 ‘‘(G) foster parent; or’’; and

18 (F) in subparagraph (H), by striking ‘‘law

19 enforcement officer, probation officer’’ and in20 serting ‘‘law enforcement personnel, probation

21 officer, criminal prosecutor’’; and

22 (2) in subsection (c), by striking paragraphs (3)

23 and (4) and inserting the following:

24 ‘‘(3) ‘local child protective services agency’ has

25 the meaning given the term in section 403 of the In-
20

18

•S 1899 IS

1 dian Child Protection and Family Violence Preven2 tion Act (25 U.S.C. 3202); and

3 ‘‘(4) ‘local law enforcement agency’ has the

4 meaning given the term in section 403 of that Act.’’.

Æ
21

The CHAIRMAN. Just one additional comment. We all know that

the epidemic of methamphetamine has exacerbated dramatically

this problem. When adults fall victim to methamphetamine addiction, there is a dramatically increased incidence of child abuse,

spousal abuse, and violence. According to most objective observers,

this meth epidemic, which is affecting non-Indians and Indians

alike, is having especially devastating effects in Indian country.

This is an important issue. I know we have a war in Iraq and

I know we have many other issues that take up the time and attention of this Congress, but what is happening in Indian country, and

frankly out of Indian country, as caused by this methamphetamine

epidemic is something that should gather the attention of all of us

and a much higher priority.

I want to again thank Senator Dorgan for all his efforts and

leadership on this issue.

Senator Dorgan.

STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM

NORTH DAKOTA, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN

AFFAIRS

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

You are certainly right about the methamphetamine issue and

how it has accelerated all of these problems. I thank you very much

for arranging this hearing. This is an important issue.

I think I have on a previous occasion mentioned a couple of

things. I want to do it again. One of my first acquaintances with

this issue of child abuse occurred with a young woman named Tamara Demaris. I read about her and then I went down to the reservation and met with her and her grandfather, Reginald Bird

Horse.

The story of Tamara was a very simple and tragic story. She was

put in a foster home at age 3. The caseworker who put her in a

foster home was working on 150 cases, and didn’t of course have

time to check out the home, so this 3-year old girl gets put in a

home.

There is a drunken party at the home on a Saturday night. This

3-year old girl has her arm broken, her nose broken and some of

her head hair pulled out by the roots. She will live with those scars

forever. One person handling 150 cases, it was impossible.

I held a hearing after that and had all of the tribes in our region

in. I remember one of the young ladies who came to the hearing.

She said, ‘‘On my reservation, I am in charge of these child abuse

and sexual abuse issues.’’ She said, ‘‘I have a stack of folders that

high sitting on the floor in my office of alleged sexual abuse and

child abuse on my reservation.’’ She said, ‘‘I have no investigators

and when I deal with a child who needs some help, I have no car.

I have to go beg and borrow a car to take this child to a clinic or

something.’’

And then she began weeping and sobbing uncontrollably. About

2 weeks later, she quit her job. Her point was it is just hopeless.

We have allegations, she said, that are uninvestigated.

So my sense is this is a very serious problem. You can make a

case that adults can fend for themselves, but not children. Child

abuse anywhere in this country is a very serious situation. On
22

America’s Indian reservations, it is very serious because there are

so few resources with which to deal with it.

The chairman just talked about the money for the Iraq war. We

are going to have, I guess it is a $92-billion request, which includes

Katrina, restoration of military funds. Just the small crumbs that

would fall off of a request like that would work wonders in addressing some of these issues of child abuse that exist in areas where

you have this unbelievable poverty, where you have the ravages of

methamphetamine, and all the other things that prey upon these

innocent children.

So this is not just some other issue. It is critically important that

we find the resources to make sure that these children are protected.

Mr. Chairman, again I appreciate your calling this hearing as

evidence of a priority for this committee. Thank you very much.

I appreciate the witnesses coming and sharing with us today as

well.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Dorgan.

We welcome Pat Ragsdale, who is the director of the Bureau of

Indian Affairs [BIA], who is accompanied by Christopher Chaney,

who is the deputy bureau director of the BIA; Robert McSwain,

deputy director of the Indian Health Service at the Department of

Health and Human Services. He is accompanied by John Perez,

who is the director of Indian Health Service, Division of Behavioral

Health.

And James H. Burrus, who is the acting assistant director of

criminal investigation division, Federal Bureau of Investigations.

Welcome, and we will begin with you, Mr. Ragsdale. Welcome

back.

STATEMENT OF PAT RAGSDALE, DIRECTOR, BIA, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ACCOMPANIED BY CHRISTOPHER

B. CHANEY, DEPUTY BUREAU DIRECTOR, BIA, OFFICE OF

LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES

Mr. RAGSDALE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman. Before I formally begin, I wish to offer our regrets and sympathy to Senator

Inouye and his family in the loss and passing of his wife, Margaret.

We are very sorry for him and his extended family and friends. He

has indeed been a champion for Indian country during his service

here in the Senate.

The CHAIRMAN. We will convey those condolences to Senator

Inouye. I know he appreciates them. Thank you.

Mr. RAGSDALE. Thank you.

I am pleased to testify on the Indian Child Protection, Family Violence Prevention Act Amendments. With your permission, Mr.

Chairman, I will summarize my views and request that my written

statement be included in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. All written statements will be made part of the

record, without objection.

Mr. RAGSDALE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

With me today are Chris Chaney and Jerry Gidner, the deputy

directors for the Office of Law Enforcement Services and the Office
23

of Tribal Services, respectively, whose offices have program elements that would be involved if these amendments are enacted.

I might tell you that I am a former tribal law enforcement officer

with about 7 years experience, who investigated child abuse allegations of all kinds. We appreciate the committee’s support in this endeavor to better protect our children.

Subject to the views of the Department of Justice and Health and

Human Services response for the implementation of this bill, the

Department of the Interior supports overall the elements of this

bill which would identify impediments to reporting, prosecuting

and treating child abuse as proposed. We also believe the committee should consider elements that lead to better prevention, support of good parenting, family and community development.

The department supports the addition of the felony child neglect

provision to the Federal criminal code to allow Federal prosecution

of serious instances of harm to our children. Currently, these offenses are left to prosecution in tribal courts. While prosecution

does occur in tribal forums of justice, the tribal courts are inhibited

by Federal law, which limits the sentence and fines to less than 1

year or $5,000 for the conviction of offenses in tribal court.

We cite one example in our testimony of an intoxicated person

harming a toddler, a real case scenario. Another example would be

adults who manufacture dangerous chemical substances in their

homes or exposing children to other toxic substances. There are

many examples the provision would be applied to that would be

useful to both law enforcement and prosecutors to ensure justice of

those who endanger or harm the welfare of our children.

We look forward to working with the committee and our colleagues in tribal and Federal agencies to protect Indian children

and ensure justice to those who harm them.

I hope we can be responsive to your questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Ragsdale appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Mr. McSwain.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT MCSWAIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES, ACCOMPANIED BY JON PEREZ, DIRECTOR, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE DIVISION OF BEHAVIORAL

HEALTH

Mr. MCSWAIN. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and

Vice Chairman Dorgan.

We are pleased to have this opportunity to testify on behalf of

Secretary Leavitt and Dr. Charles Grim, the director of the Indian

Health Service, on S. 1899, the Indian Child Protection and Family

Violence Act Amendments of 2005. I will summarize my written

statement and ask that it be entered into the record please.

Secretary Leavitt has raised awareness of tribal issues within

the department by using the authorities of the Native Americans

Program Act of 1974 and the Interdepartmental Council for Native

American Affairs to address cross-cutting issues throughout the department. This has resulted in many collaborations with other op-
24

erating divisions within the department. Dr. Grim serves as the

vice chair of this council.

Since the enactment of Public Law 101–630 in 1990, the department and the IHS has addressed what we see as two critical parts

of the act. First are the administrative parts that ensure that our

health care providers and support personnel who have duties and

responsibilities involving contact with children, some 9,500 out of

15,000 employees, meet minimum standards of character.

The act requires the IHS and BIA to compile a list of all authorized covered positions. In November 2002, the IHS published its interim final rule establishing minimum standards of character for

positions and incorporating the technical amendments contained in

the Native American Laws Technical Corrections Act of 2000.

Second, and equally important, are the program elements. As you

know, our mission is about raising the health status and spiritual

health of American Indians to the highest level possible. Those include our community-based health care delivery system and partnerships with Indian communities and other Federal agencies,

namely the BIA. In 1996, the IHS instituted the Domestic Violence

and Child Abuse Prevention Initiative to address violence against

women and children, and child abuse, and neglect in American Indian and Alaska Native communities.

In collaboration with the BIA, the IHS-BIA Child Protection

Handbook was published in 2005. This handbook is linked to a

website sponsored by the University of Oklahoma Center on Child

Abuse and Neglect. A copy of this handbook, the CD, is submitted

as a part of our testimony.

In addition, since 1990, the IHS has enhanced its resource management IT system, which is our automated patient record management system, to enable identification and tracking of child

abuse cases that come into our facilities. As you know, the RPMS

reporting system has been a mainstay of our total health care delivery system for the last 25 years.

It is important to point out that much of our program effort is

community-based. It is about enabling American Indian and Alaska

Native communities to have tools to address child abuse and neglect. We will continue to reach out and expand our partnerships

with other Federal and tribal communities to address child protection.

Thank you, and we will be pleased to answer questions.

[Prepared statement of Mr. McSwain appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Burrus.

STATEMENT OF JAMES H. BURRUS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION, FEDERAL

BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Mr. BURRUS. Good morning, Chairman McCain, Vice Chairman

Dorgan and members of the Committee on Indian Affairs. I appreciate the opportunity to appear and provide testimony about the

FBI and its work in Indian country, especially as it relates to the

protection of Indian children.

Before I begin, I would like to ask Senator Dorgan, regarding

those allegations of child abuse, if those were on North Dakota res-
25

ervations, may I work with your staff to resolve those? Thank you,

because that should not happen. We have all the reservations in

North Dakota and we should not have unaddressed allegations of

child abuse.

The FBI has a long history of service to the Native American

people throughout the United States, and dedicated special agents

of the FBI’s Indian country program work hard to deliver quality

law enforcement services to tribal communities of all sizes. We remain strongly committed to our role in Indian country and to the

partnerships with tribal, local, State and Federal agencies in Indian country.

There are 561 federally recognized tribes in the United States,

and 297 Indian reservations with over 1 million Native American

residents on or near reservation lands. The FBI has law enforcement responsibility on more than 200 of those Indian reservations

and Federal criminal jurisdiction over acts directly related to Indian gaming regardless of jurisdictional status.

The FBI has 114 special agents addressing over 2,000 Indian

country crimes and 22 field offices. The FBI’s priority in Indian

country focuses on the most serious crimes of violence, including

homicide, child sexual and physical abuse, and violent assault. FBI

investigations in these priority categories comprise over 70 percent

of all FBI investigations in Indian country.

The challenges do not end there, as crimes related to gangs and

drugs are on the increase, as the chairman and Senator Dorgan

talked about. Indian gaming investigations are important, and the

FBI always stands ready to protect tribal communities from political corruption. The FBI in Indian country is simultaneously addressing many different aspects of crime in Indian country and remains fully engaged.

From the period covering fiscal years 2003 to 2006, the FBI initiated 1,658 investigations and made 537 arrests in matters involving Indian child sexual abuse. During the same period, the FBI initiated 134 investigations and made 39 arrests involving Indian

child physical abuse. This represents approximately 30 percent of

all FBI investigations in Indian country during that period. Crimes

against Indian children have been and will remain a top priority

for the FBI.

The FBI routinely receives reports of Indian child abuse from

various law enforcement agencies in Indian country, including the

Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Law Enforcement Services. In

cases of Indian child abuse reports received by FBI field divisions,

investigations are conducted either by FBI special agents or task

force members working with the FBI on Indian country Safe Trails

Task Forces.

Additionally, the FBI receives referrals of allegations of Indian

country abuse from other public service entities, such as schools,

medical professionals, and child protective service organizations.

Some of these referrals are a direct result of the FBI’s participation

on multidisciplinary teams or child protection teams in Indian communities. There may be instances where child abuse complaints are

received and investigated by other law enforcement agencies, but

the FBI and other law enforcement partners in Indian country
26

strive to ensure all allegations of child abuse are reported to us and

immediately addressed.

Our partnerships with Indian country law enforcement in tribal

communities are critical to our success in addressing Indian child

abuse. There are several successful programs in Indian country

that I would like to highlight.

Since 2004, the FBI has supported a tribal tele-medicine initiative in South Dakota, a joint effort by the FBI’s Minneapolis Division, Midwest Children’s Research Center, Indian Health Service,

the Department of Justice, Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Yankton Tribe,

Midwest Regional Children’s Advocacy Center, and the National

Children’s Alliance. The goals of this initiative are to provide a

means to introduce forensic, pediatric specialists early into the Indian country child abuse investigations and to build stronger multidisciplinary teams in Indian country.

This program utilizes video tele-conferencing capability, along

with specialized audio and video equipment to connect the examining physician in Indian country with child abuse medical experts

in an off-site location.

The FBI also supports the Tohono O’odham Reservation Children’s House, a joint effort between the Tohono O’odham Nation

police department, the FBI, the Southern Arizona Children’s Advocacy Center, which serves to exponentially enhance the overall investigative effectiveness in addressing child sexual assaults.

TORCH provides child victims and their families an immediate,

safe, child-friendly and culturally sensitive environment that is

conducive to effective forensic interviewing.

In circumstances where the establishment of a permanent forensic center is not an option, the FBI partners with other organizations to seek creative solutions to the problem. One example is the

Child Health Children’s Mobile Advocacy Center of Northern Arizona. The mobile unit in Arizona travels to or near the victims’ reservations to prevent the child and family from having to travel long

distances to an advocacy or medical facility for interview and physical examination. By delivering the forensic interview and sexual

assault examination capability to the child victim, the traumatic effect on the child and family is vastly reduced.

The FBI is committed to preparing Indian country law enforcement and specifically special agents with the knowledge skills required to address such important investigations. Since 1997, we

have trained nearly 5,500 Indian country law enforcement officers

and agents, in close association with the BIA’s Indian Police Academy. The FBI is committed to protecting Native American children

from abuse, and we look forward to working with this committee

to accomplish this worthwhile goal.

I would be happy to answer questions, Mr. Chairman.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Burrus appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Ragsdale, you have been around a long time. Do you remember the Boone case?

Mr. RAGSDALE. Yes, sir; I certainly do.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you had any followup reports recently as

to the situation in that community as regards to recovery from the
27

terrible psychological blows, as well as immediate problems that

they faced?

Mr. RAGSDALE. No, sir; Now that you bring it up, I will do that.

I certainly do remember the Boone cases, in which Boone was the

perpetrator at Cherokee, NC, as I recall.

The CHAIRMAN. Do me a favor and get us a written status there.

It was one of the most, as you may recall, one of the most horrendous things I have ever been associated with. We committed at

that time that we would have a long-term rehabilitation program

there, and I would like to know.

Mr. RAGSDALE. Yes, sir; We had the same situation at Hopi. I

was more involved.

The CHAIRMAN. Boone was a Hopi.

Mr. RAGSDALE. Okay, I am confusing that with the Cherokee,

North Carolina case.

The CHAIRMAN. I think you are confusing that. The Boone case

was a Hopi situation.

Mr. RAGSDALE. I do know that in the Boone case, there was a

massive effort by providers to deal with the families and the victims of child abuse in that particular case.

The CHAIRMAN. I remember. Give me a followup as to what the

status is.

Mr. Burrus, Senator Dorgan and I have come to the conclusion

that the problems of child abuse in particular, but other problems,

have been dramatically exacerbated by the methamphetamine, rise

of methamphetamine. Has that been your conclusion?

Mr. BURRUS. That is certainly one of the factors, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that child abuse is on the rise?

Mr. BURRUS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You know something, I know that Senator Dorgan has to go in about 10 minutes. I yield to you, and then go back.

Go ahead. I yield to Senator Dorgan.

Senator DORGAN. I have to step out and I will be back. Thank

you, Mr. Chairman.

Let me ask a couple of questions. First of all, this authorization

occurred back 15 years ago, really. We began with some hearings

in 1988 and 1989 in this committee, and then passed a piece of legislation. We had hearings again in 1995 on the reauthorization of

the act; hearings in the 108th Congress to reauthorize the act, and

hearings now.

I am trying to understand, with a direction from Congress about

this issue and with an issue that is pretty clearly a serious issue,

what the Indian Health Service has done in terms of requesting

funds in its budget. It appears to me that not much has been done

in the executive branch to respond to the direction of Congress

here. Mr. Ragsdale, Mr. McSwain, can you tell me what your agencies have done?

Mr. MCSWAIN. Senator, I think in terms of the budget request,

it is certainly in our mental health budget. In our mental health

budget, we have requested increases when we can, and certainly

have had increases. I think our current budget for mental health

is a little over $60 million. A portion of that is being used for many

of the activities, not specifically as authorized under Public Law

101–630.
28

Mr. RAGSDALE. I left the Department of the Interior in the early

1990’s and went back home and went to work for my tribe, the

Cherokee Nation. I can tell you that the BIA has strengthened the

screening process for all employees, both Federal and tribal, that

have duties and responsibilities that entail the care and providing

for children.

I will tell you, based on my own personal experience, that our

child protection law enforcement system has been strengthened.

We have better partnerships with Federal authorities and tribal

authorities. We developed child protection teams on many reservations in Indian country. I will not tell you that I think that they

are adequate, because we know that there continues to be a growing problem. However, the Federal sponsors when I was on the

tribal side did provide us with additional tools to investigate, train

and focus on child abuse.

Senator DORGAN. Well, aren’t there portions of the 1990 Act that

have never been implemented, establishment of a central registry

for reports or information on the abuse of children in Indian country, for example?

Mr. RAGSDALE. Yes.

Senator DORGAN. When you tell me what you have asked for, the

question is, have you actually implemented a specific program related to the authorizing legislation that we passed? I mean, we in

Congress said, here is a problem, here is an authorization bill. Has

the Indian Health Service either implemented a specific program

or has the Indian Health Service requested funds for the purpose

of initiating a separate program or a specific grant program that

we described in our authorization bill? If not, why not?

Mr. RAGSDALE. I can address this. The sexual offender registry,

I was not here after the bill was enacted, but my understanding

is that that particular element of the legislation never has been implemented because of problems with due process and review and

how you would coordinate that with the various tribal and State

systems. Some States do have sexual offender registries, which law

enforcement uses as a resource. But I just cannot answer the question about why the national registry was not implemented.

Senator DORGAN. The original authorizing legislation provided

for BIA regional Indian health resource and family service centers

to respond to these issues. Have they been implemented?

Mr. RAGSDALE. The only effort that I am aware of, Senator, is

that there were some coordinating staff placed at both the central

office and at the regions.

Senator DORGAN. Mr. McSwain, are you familiar with any of the

implementation of these issues?

Mr. MCSWAIN. Yes; I am familiar with it, Senator. I think in lieu

of the actual establishment of the centers, we have been very aggressive on implementing the 408 provisions, which is background

checks and the like. Since that time, we have actually, when the

technical amendments in 2002, we actually have terminated close

to 20 people from service because they did not pass background

checks, and going forward, we with background checks, 46 people

have not been hired because they did not clear the necessary background checks in accordance with the law. So we have been very

aggressive on it.
29

In fact, we have just consolidated our HR system into five regions. We are sharing information around the regions in terms of

providers who are not cleared, so that they don’t pop up in another

area and attempt to be hired. But that is in lieu of actually asking

for any resources to implement the centers.

Senator DORGAN. Yes; But you understand, my disappointment

is that we have been through this before, and we are now going to

go through it again. Let’s assume that we pass this reauthorization

bill. What would change, if anything? You either have the will to

do these things or you don’t in the various portions of the administration. I would say through several administrations, I think what

has happened, some administrations have been better than others

in their requests, but we now know that, for example, in the Indian

Health Service, about 40 percent of the health needs of Indians are

unserved; about 60 percent are served, some 60 to 65 percent are

served; the rest unserved.

That being the case, you know, you all come and tell us, well, we

are doing as well as we can, but there is so much that is not done.

I don’t know whether it is a matter of the lack of will by the agencies, deciding, well, we are just not going to do that. Or it is a lack

of money, and you really can’t come to the table and say, we don’t

have the funds to do this; we are desperately short of funds because the Office of Management and Budget describes to you what

you are going to get when it comes up in the President’s budget,

and then you can’t come and say much about that. If you were to

be critical of that, you probably wouldn’t be up here a second time.

So I mean, it is disappointing to me because this is one of those

areas where I think this is not optional. We have a responsibility

and a requirement to really aggressively protect these kids. There

is not much reason to go through the motions of an authorization

bill that addresses these problems if you are not going to implement some of these solutions and consider them seriously.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. I am going to step out. I will be back.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. I would also like to point out the obvious to my friend from North Dakota that we in the appropriations process perhaps have not done what we should do as well.

Maybe you and I should maybe get a letter to the appropriators requesting some of those funds be directed. But we need the support

of the witnesses today in your testimony in order to give us the

weight to argue for that.

Thank you, Senator Dorgan.

Mr. Burrus, going back to our previous line of conversation, there

is an increase, in your view, of child abuse incidents on Indian reservations. You said one of the causes was, well, tell me some of the

other causes?

Mr. BURRUS. There are historical causes, unemployment. I do not

have a background in social work, but from my experience as an

investigator and as the assistant special agent in charge of Minneapolis, with all these reservations, certainly there are so many

different things that contribute to it, alcoholism, unemployment,

and despair.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand that. I appreciate it very much, but

those problems, tragically, have been with Indian country for a

long time, but now we are seeing another increase in child abuse
30

cases. So it seems to me there is an added factor in there, and that

may be methamphetamine. That was what I was trying to get at.

Now, we all know that since 9/11, FBI assets have been diverted

from some areas into protecting the homeland in anti-terrorist activities, which is certainly logical. I do not know anyone who would

argue with that. Have you had to divert some of your assets from

Indian country?

Mr. BURRUS. No, sir; in 2001, our use of Indian country agents

was around 100 or 105. Today, it is around 114, so we have actually increased our presence, thanks in large part to the resources

that Congress has given us to increase and expand our areas in Indian gaming, in violent crimes, and in gangs.

The CHAIRMAN. In the last, say, year or 2 years, do you know

how many child abuse cases were prosecuted and how many convictions were obtained, in whatever period of time you are keeping

these numbers?

Mr. BURRUS. Just 1 minute.

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.

Mr. BURRUS. I do not have those figures, sir. I have the figures

for arrests and investigations, but I do not have prosecutions. I can

get that for you.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you please for the record? I think it would

be helpful.

Mr. BURRUS. Thank you, sir.

The Chairman. What is the record of arrests, then?

Mr. BURRUS. From 2003 to 2006, 537 arrests in Indian child sexual abuse, and 39 arrests in Indian child physical abuse.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Can tribes, Mr. Burrus, access national databases for tracking

child abusers? Do you know?

Mr. BURRUS. If you are referring to——

The CHAIRMAN. Maybe Mr. Ragsdale knows the answer to that?

Mr. RAGSDALE. I can only speak based upon my individual experience, but I think depending on how creative tribal law enforcement agencies are, that they can.

The CHAIRMAN. They can.

Mr. RAGSDALE. There are some impediments, but generally if you

work cooperatively with the State agencies and with the FBI, information is available.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McSwain, do you share the view of Mr.

Burrus that these incidents are on the increase in Indian country,

of child abuse?

Mr. MCSWAIN. We have a system, in fact I will have Dr. Perez

answer, but we have averaged about 4,500 events hitting our system, understanding that with the health care system, the ones that

hit us are the critical ones. They are the ones that hit our system

where they are captured. We have a fair amount, and I think I

need to say that in the program side of the house, we have a lot

going on with the dollars that are appropriated.

I would like to have Dr. Perez answer.

The CHAIRMAN. I think maybe you did not understand me. Let

me repeat the question. Is it your view that the incidence of child

abuse in Indian country is going up? That was my question, not the

non-response you just gave me.
31

Mr. MCSWAIN. Well, let me just reflect on the data.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it your view? Mr. McSwain, I am asking your

opinion. You can answer yes or no.

Mr. MCSWAIN. It is going up.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Ragsdale, is that your view also?

Mr. RAGSDALE. Yes, sir; in fact, on the San Carlos Reservation,

I understand that we have, 30 to 60 meth babies that we are now

going to have to treat. I want to be forthright with the committee.

It is my view that we do not have enough adequate resources in

law enforcement and health services to treat the victims of not only

child abuse, but the epidemic of meth and other dangerous substances in Indian country. I know that from personal experience.

The CHAIRMAN. I thank you.

Mr. McSwain, would you like to elaborate for the record? Go

ahead please. I am sorry if I interrupted you.

Mr. MCSWAIN. What I was explaining, Senator, is the fact that

we have put in place a system that is actually tracking more carefully the actual incidence of child abuse as it hits our system. Dr.

Perez is actually the one who is managing this whole process, and

we have seen some numbers. The problem we have is, is it the reporting or is it the events? But generally speaking, even controlling

for both, there is a definite increase.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Doctor, would you like to add anything to that? It is not necessary, but if you would like to, please go ahead.

Mr. PEREZ. Let me just add a couple of things. I think when we

are talking about the legislation, particularly from the program

side, that what has happened with us at IHS is there are many

promises that are not completely realized yet. If I were to frame

it, that would be how I would put it.

We have, for example, demonstration projects that we started.

The demonstration projects were a direct result of the legislation.

The fact is that we actually have hard numbers now. We may not

know exactly how to interpret those numbers, but we have hard

numbers.

We are not guessing anymore. These are actual hard data. That

is a result of the Act, the fact that we are actually routinely doing

reviews now of everyone that comes through. On top of what I do

here in Washington, DC, I am also on staff at Phoenix Indian Medical Center. I can assure you that the staffing requirements and

the background checks are exhaustive.

But what you are asking is how do we bring this forward. From

a program point of view, we have lots of roads that we can go down

depending upon the funding that might be there for them.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

We may be a little bit unfair here because methamphetamine is

a national problem, international problem. But from most of the information that I have received, including a very in-depth study

that was in the New York Times a couple of weeks ago, the burden

is falling disproportionately on Indian reservations. So I appreciate

the witnesses’s testimony today. We will try to get the attention of

our colleagues on this issue.
32

If you have additional information or recommendations how we

can best address this issue, we would dearly love to hear about it.

Go ahead, Mr. Burrus. Thank you.

Mr. BURRUS. Senator McCain, if I might, when you asked me

child abuse cases, or if child abuse in my opinion is on the increase,

I said yes. I think so much of what we hear about empirically was

the basis for my opinion. My colleague has handed me some information. Actually, the number of cases has leveled off, and that is

a little bit troubling, but I think it may be a bit misleading, too,

because we certainly do not have all the data from all the reservations.

So I am going to stick by my story and say I believe it is on the

increase, but I wanted to qualify that by saying it is difficult to

prove when I look at the number of FBI cases and specifics. I want

to clarify that.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. But I think if you talk to any Indian

tribal leader, especially those that are in border areas where a lot

of this stuff is coming through, I think you would receive not only

anecdotal evidence, but hard evidence of a dramatic increase as a

result of meth, just as in non-Indian country. Any local law enforcement person in Arizona will tell you we are seeing an increase

because, again, this meth does such terrible things to people and

one of the first victims seems to be the helpless.

I thank the witnesses. Thank you very much.

Our next panel is Ron Suppah, who is the chairman of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, who is

becoming a frequent visitor here; and Terry Cross, who is the executive director of the National Indian Child Welfare Association;

and Paul Steele, who is the director of the Center for Justice Studies at Morehead State University in Kentucky.

Welcome back to you, Mr. Chairman, and we will begin with you.

Please proceed, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OF RON SUPPAH, CHAIRMAN, CONFEDERATED

TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON

Mr. SUPPAH. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, good

morning.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Mr. SUPPAH. I am Ron Suppah, tribal council chairman of the

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon.

Thank you for this opportunity to be here today to testify in support of S. 1889, the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence

Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005.

This is extremely needed legislation. The Warm Spring Tribe located in north-central Oregon, share many of the modern characteristics of Indian reservation life. Our communities are rural and

many individual dwellings are isolated. Economic opportunities are

limited and unemployment and poverty rates are persistently high.

Unfortunately, so too are rates of child abuse and family violence.

About 4,400 people live on the Warm Springs Reservation; 3,300

are tribal members and of them about 1,600 are 18 years old or

younger. Last year during 2005, 453 Warm Springs children received services from our child protective services or CPS. That is

up from 402 children that received CPS services in 2002. These
33

numbers are very distressing and our tribe is doing all we can to

try to address this problem.

Because we are exempt from Public Law 280, and our reservation is almost all tribal trust land, we have exclusive jurisdiction

over child welfare issues, allowing us to fashion and run a program

without competing State regulations. But we try to work closely

with the State of Oregon and are one of the few tribes in the Nation with a tribal-State title IV(e) foster care maintenance payment

agreement that treats us much like a State for developing and

maintaining a foster care program.

But even with our fairly comprehensive child protective services

program, key jurisdiction differences do remain. Non-Indians on

our reservation with criminal child abuse charges have to be referred to the State, and Federal child abuse charges require calling

in the FBI. Also, the local public schools that educate our children

first report signs of child abuse to the county, and the county then

sends them along to us.

S. 1899 seeks to address these sorts of problems by providing for

a broader sharing of child abuse data among jurisdictions and urging cooperation among agencies. But more than anything else, the

act itself and its funding must be reauthorized.

Addressing child abuse and family violence is very labor-intensive. Our police, our courts, prosecutors, youth services and medical

services are all involved. But child protective services must tie together and provide a tremendous range of services. One on one

care and attention often from specialists is essential.

At Warm Springs, our CPS capacity to deliver those services is

severely strained. We have a staff of just 19, including three caseworkers, who must each handle well in excess of 100 cases a year.

We need assistance almost across the board.

Mr. Chairman, I am sure other tribes across the country have

similar problems. Child abuse and family violence are silent and

generally out of the public eye, but they are devastating to our

communities.

So this act must be reauthorized and the BIA and IHS must

commit to seek the appropriations that will help fulfill the hopes

that our children represent for our communities and our future. S.

1899 will help meet that promise.

That concludes my testimony. Thank you. I guess maybe just a

general statement for the committee. Mr. Chairman, I was not able

to bring our child protection expert with me today, so I may have

to submit answers to your questions for the record.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Suppah appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you

for coming.

Mr. Cross, welcome.

STATEMENT OF TERRY CROSS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

NATIONAL INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ASSOCIATION

Mr. CROSS. Thank you.

I want to thank the committee for asking for this testimony. My

name is Terry Cross. I am the executive director of the National

Indian Child Welfare Association. We are an organization national

in scope, membership-driven. We work with tribes all over the Na-
34

tion, providing training, technical assistance, consultation, policy

analysis and conducting research in this area.

The problem of child abuse and neglect is growing in Indian

country. The methamphetamine epidemic is affecting tribes across

the Nation, not just in border communities, but across our Nation.

We have an increasing problem, at the same time we have decreasing resources.

This is a complex area. Child protection, whether it is in Indian

country or not, is complex. It is one of the most important responsibilities of any government. It requires three major things to address it. One is ownership, a belief that there is a problem, and the

right to sovereignty to do something about it; the stewardship to

address the problem, in other words, the political will to address

it; and finally, the capacity, which means the infrastructure and

the resources to do something about it.

That complexity is a major challenge across the country, but

more so in Indian country. While reporting is difficult everywhere,

who to report to, where to report in Indian country can be a major

challenge. Investigations can be a major difficulty when it is not

clear who is to investigate. Jurisdictional issues give us a challenge

because it is not always clear who is responsible, either for the

prosecution or even the services, whether those services are child

protection services or the mental health services that you mentioned following up on serious cases of child abuse and neglect.

Funding is a major area, complex both in Indian country and

mainstream America, but in Indian country. It seems that this

Committee has the obligation to address those issues that are

unique to Indian country, but the whole Nation’s child welfare system should be addressing the needs of all children. The lack of tribal access to programs like title XX social services block grants that

are used for child welfare services across the Nation is appalling.

The fact that CAPTA, the Child Abuse Prevention Treatment

Act, does not reach tribal communities is unacceptable. The fact

that under Title IV(b) of the Social Security Act that helps fund the

Safe and Stable Families Act, tribes across the country on average

receive less than $20,000 apiece. This is a major funding source for

States and counties across the country to prevent child abuse and

work with families.

The fact that there are children’s trust funds for child abuse prevention in every State in this Nation, not one of them available to

Indian children, is not acceptable.

Particularly, these things are appalling when we know what

helps. We know that tribal-State agreements and local protocols,

like the chairman from Warm Springs just talked about, are essential to providing effective services; cross-deputization and interagency agreements between law enforcement agencies, child protection teams and multidisciplinary teams when they are implemented properly. I recently conducted a training on child protection

teams for a number of people from across the country in tribal communities, most of whom had no child protection teams in place.

We have seen that tribal control in exercising tribal sovereignty

on child welfare issues improves services across the board. There

are cultural strengths models, holistic models that work with the

whole family, that prevent child abuse and help families solve their
35

own problems. These things work in Indian country. Family group

conferencing, family group decisionmaking are approaches that

work in Indian country. Systems of care approaches work in Indian

country.

But none of these can be in place without the resources, and

without the help to get those things in place. Technical assistance

is needed throughout Indian country to help implement programs

where there are resources.

The National Indian Child Welfare Association is deeply committed to improving data collection. It is essential to informing the

stewardship with a public will to do something about this. We continue to work on a demonstration project showing how tribal data

can be shared across the Federal data systems.

A study to examine the impediments of reducing child abuse in

Indian country is essential. We recently completed a report for the

Bureau of Indian Affairs on the status of child welfare and child

abuse and neglect in Indian country. That report needs broad dissemination.

I want to also declare that the availability of treatment and prevention and technical assistance is essential, but it has been unfunded. There is a fundamental problem with insufficient resources, particularly under this particular law. But among many of

the other things that I mentioned, and I will just mention the Pew

Commission report on foster care financing reform and their recommendation that tribal children be covered, and tribes have the

same access as all other children to title IV(e), the foster care reimbursement program.

We also believe that that should be extended to CAPTA and

other programs, as I mentioned. I would urge this committee to inform your colleagues about supporting those reforms as they

emerge in the coming year.

In conclusion, we have several recommendations. We support the

legislation. I want to make sure that we support the authorization

of funding for tribes to operate their own child welfare programs,

and tribes cannot currently access resources from other programs;

to provide authorization for funding to build on and refine the tribal child abuse data collection systems, where they are just emerging; to provide for the establishment of national technical assistance and training centers for tribes; to provide authorization for

funding for tribes to support background checks; and to correct a

flaw in the system in which tribes are required today to have three

background checks on the same family because the legislation in

the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Child Protection and

Family Violence Act and the Child Care Act are similar, but not

in alignment with each other, so we have duplication of this background check issue. That is easy to correct.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Cross appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Steele.

STATEMENT OF PAUL STEELE, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR

JUSTICE STUDIES, MOREHEAD STATE UNIVERSITY

Mr. STEELE. Good morning, Chairman McCain, Vice Chairman

Dorgan.
36

My name is Paul Steele and I am currently director of the Center

for Justice Studies at Morehead State University in Morehead, KY.

Prior to assuming this role in January, I was associate professor

of Sociology and Senior Research Associate of the Institute for Social Research at the University of New Mexico, and director of the

New Mexico Criminal Justice Analysis Center, which is the statistical analysis center for that State.

I was recently involved in research supported by the Department

of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the Justice Research

and Statistics Association, which allowed me to study child sexual

abuse on Indian lands in New Mexico. My testimony today will

draw from that research, an updated version of which I have submitted for the record.

I want to direct my comments today to three topics addressed in

S. 1899: reporting procedures, removal of impediments to reducing

child abuse, and the use of tele-medicine.

Concerning section 4, recording procedures, this section is

amended to denote specific information concerning child abuse that

should be collected and reported to Congress. The collection and reporting of this information should be very useful in promoting

Congress’s awareness of the impact of child abuse on Indian lands.

Since the general intent of the law is to ensure Indian child protection, I recommend that this report to Congress also present findings of child protective service activities, as well as criminal justice

interventions. Both law enforcement and child protective service

agencies are legally mandated to conduct investigations.

Since just a small portion of child abuse criminal cases from Indian country result in criminal convictions, the bulk of protection

against re-victimization enjoyed by children and other family members is the result of tribal court and child protective service administrative interventions. In addition to the number of allegations

and investigations, information concerning the number of cases

validated through investigation, the results of court and administrative supervision, the length of time under child protective service supervision, and civil court outcomes should also be documented.

Concerning section 5, removal of impediments to reducing child

abuse, the report to Congress concerning removal of impediments

also has great potential for improving conditions in Indian country

and protecting Indian children. The report to accompany the bill

states that:

The committee is aware that Indian children continue to be traumatized by multiple interviews and physical examinations due to the lack of a coordinated approach

by Federal, State, and tribal investigators, prosecutors and mental health professionals.

My research lends support to the committee’s assertion that Indian children are unnecessarily subjected to re-interviewing. It

seems that each investigative agency requires its own interview.

Recent research suggests, however, that system-induced trauma experienced by child victims is more a result of encountering multiple

interviewers, rather than multiple interviews.

Very effective and non-traumatic techniques for eliciting children’s disclosures through a series of carefully planned sessions

with a single forensic interviewer have been developed. For exam-
37

ple, the forensic evaluation model developed by Connie Carnes at

the National Children’s Advocacy Center is a multiple interview,

single interviewer model that has been evaluated as very helpful

with some children. This model has not been implemented in Indian lands as of yet.

Concerning section 12, the use of tele-medicine, tele-medicine

technologies have great potential for improving the welfare of Indian children. Research has shown that only a small proportion of

sexual abuse cases are confirmed through medical evidence. Rather, health professionals with particular expertise in child abuse

often best serve by helping local practitioners to interpret the medical evidence in combination with the demeanor and comments of

the child, parents, and others to reach conclusions about suspected

abuse episodes.

There is a dearth of professionals with special expertise in the

diagnosis of child abuse. Still, those that are available should be

actively recruited to increase the application of tele-medicine technologies. As with our experience in New Mexico using tele-medicine

to connect pediatric specialists to rural practitioners in cases of infants who were fetally exposed to drugs, improved diagnostic capabilities can result in identifying the need for increased treatment

capacity.

Tele-medicine can also be very helpful in supporting on-site mental health treatment providers, addressing risk factors associated

with child abuse such as alcohol and drug problems, and many of

the consequences of child abuse such as depression and suicide.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to present these comments, and I would be happy to respond to any questions you

might have.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Steele appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Dr. Steele.

Mr. Cross, what is your view of what the administration and/or

Congress has been doing about this issue?

Mr. CROSS. Well, there is failure to implement this particular

legislation. I think the questions earlier were very appropriate.

When you have a Federal law that is designed to deal with an

issue and then there is no appropriation, not even a request for an

appropriation that comes out of any administration from either side

of the aisle, it is extremely disappointing to our tribal communities

who are struggling to do something about this issue.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Steele, you state that few child abuse criminal cases from Indian country result in convictions. Why is that?

Mr. STEELE. Many reasons. First of all, the issue of disclosure,

I think because of cultural issues and communal living patterns,

these cases are not as often reported. I think there are certainly

issues of communication and coordination between tribal police and

Federal Bureau of Investigation. I know that U.S. attorneys that

in our district in New Mexico were often dissatisfied with the information that they were presented with to go forward with a criminal prosecution in those cases. That is a start.

The CHAIRMAN. Chairman Suppah, how long have you been a

member of your tribe? All your life? I guess my question was, how

long have you been in tribal government?
38

Mr. SUPPAH. This is my second term on the tribal council. Each

term is three years. So I have been in tribal government for 6

years. I have lived there all of my life, except for about 6 years

when I was away to college.

The CHAIRMAN. And what trends have you seen in your time on

the reservation, both as a tribal member and as a member of the

tribal government, on child abuse?

Mr. SUPPAH. I guess I can tell just generally, Senator. But I

guess in looking, reflecting back, when the effort was made for

maybe something called sexual predator registration in Indian

country, and the roadblocks that immediately came up as far as

sovereignty, et cetera, et cetera. I guess, parroting what my fellow

witnesses have said, I guess the lack of good communication, linkage between all of the parties, whether they are tribal, IHS, or

BIA, and the lack of coordinated data and statistics.

As far as like your questions earlier, it is good to arrest somebody, but then what is your conviction rate? I think that data is

not sufficient for us as a tribal government to really kind of take

a closer look at this stuff and coordinate and proactively do something for that.

I think that this is a very cross-cutting issue, as are many issues

in Indian country in that I think that maybe just an example of

what I talk about is, say, the new IHS policy of if my tribe chooses

to develop and hire a new position, say, like a tribal psychiatrist,

to, say, work with the, I guess the victims in this sense. We could

do that under the existing money in IHS, but there would be no

contract support dollars that would come along with that. So we

are kind of like in a catch-22 situation, just like we are in many

other places.

I guess investigation, we are very restricted as far as how many

FBI or Federal people or staff we have 638-ed over to Warm

Springs. The one maybe that we do have is multi-tasks, and depending on his schedule et cetera, then we are at the mercy of if

he has time to take these investigations on.

The CHAIRMAN. I thank you.

Mr. SUPPAH. May I say one more thing, Senator?

The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead, please. Sure, absolutely.

Mr. SUPPAH. I think that a common issue and problem among Indian country today in many areas is, say, like a transition house,

you know, whether it is for meth or whether it is for sexual abuse

or whatever, but it seems like that the tribes have a very difficult

time in accessing money for anything like that. You know, it would

make sense for us to maybe put together some sort of proposal, say,

like on a Northwest regional basis to say how can we work together

as Northwest tribes to maybe develop a centralized regional transitional house to where our victims have someplace to go to.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Senator Dorgan.

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you.

I would like to ask Mr. Cross, I mentioned that 60 or 65 percent

of the health care needs are met, according to the Indian Health

Service. They will not say that on the record, but off the record

they will say that. I think the fact is, no administration is asking
39

for sufficient money, not the previous administration, not this one.

But what happens to us is the Indian Health Service and folks in

the agencies come to that table and they can’t say anything other

than what OMB asks them to say, and that is support the President’s budget and telling us everything is nirvana and just fine.

But isn’t it the case, as you view these agencies and view the

Congress, that the reason that this is not implemented, these authorization requirements are not implemented, is that they do not

have the resources to implement them?

Mr. CROSS. That is correct. You heard I think in the testimony

two things I think that are very telling. One is the mental health

budget that was talked about in behavioral health. What was not

said was that the current budget for mental health is for adult

chronically mentally ill, less than 2 percent of that figure goes to

children’s mental health. In that behavioral health budget, that 2

percent of that is a fairly small amount of money when you start

lumping all of these things in. That is where the child protection

stuff falls out.

So by the time you get to the crumbs for any kind of child protection issue, there is very little left for any meaningful program.

Senator DORGAN. Would you submit some additional information

about the 2 percent? We could use that as well.

Mr. CROSS. I would be glad to.

I think the other issue that I would mention that, with all due

respect to Mr. Burrus, those 100 agents that he talked about, 114

agents addressing tribal communities, somewhere in the neighborhood of 30,000 Indian children are thought to be abused and neglected each year. Most of that is neglect, about 80 percent, somewhere in that neighborhood.

Of those that experience abuse, probably about 10 percent of

those are raised to the level of any kind of criminal investigation,

prosecution. That means there is about somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,000 cases to be investigated each year, and 100 agents

to try to investigate 3,000 cases serious enough to be taken to Federal prosecution is not even close to what is needed for an effective

response.

So I think it is important to take a look at these numbers and

to see what the reality is on the ground. What we are hearing in

the Northwest, for example, is that of 100 cases that rose to that

level, only two will go to Federal prosecution.

Senator DORGAN. Chairman Suppah, have there been youth suicide problems on your reservation or the reservations in Oregon?

Mr. SUPPAH. Senator Dorgan, yes, there have been. A lot of it,

like the Chairman kind of speaks to, is because of the meth epidemic and its implications to push our people from 2002 to 2005

to have an increase of approximately 50 percent. So yes, everything

is bumping everything.

Senator DORGAN. I had a listening session a while back—I guess

it was probably 6 months ago—with some tribes and some people

that just showed up. One young woman stood up and she said that

she had tried to kill herself. I think she was about 19 years old.

She said she had tried to take her own life. She said, ‘‘My father

repeatedly raped me over many, many years,’’ and she described
40

the circumstances of her youth and what had caused her to try to

take her own life.

I asked, was there not someone you could report to, or could call?

She said, ‘‘Well, I obviously couldn’t tell my mother. My mother

would not have believed me.’’ She went through the whole list of

things that a young child goes through in a circumstance like that.

It was really pretty unbelievable testimony. It wasn’t at a hearing,

but just a listening session, and pretty unbelievable.

Obviously, she tried to take her life, and she survived. She is

now in college and doing pretty well, but she was a victim of child

abuse, very serious child abuse, for a long period of time, and felt

like there was nothing really that she could do to reach out. So she

didn’t, and it took her some years then to stand up at a meeting

at some point and say, ‘‘I was a victim.’’

I do think one of the things that the chairman and I have done

is introduce a piece of legislation that provides for some funding for

what is called tele-mental health. That is not certainly a full substitute for the mental health services that ought to be available to

children, abused children, but it nonetheless at least begins walking down the road to address some of these mental health issues

that are at this point not available on these reservations. So we are

trying to find some other innovative ways, but the fact is we are

not ever going to begin to address this issue in a significant way

unless we add some resources and require there to be programs established on these reservations and in the regions. As I said, just the crumbs that would fall off of a $92-billion request would more than adequately fund most of these things, but

we don’t even get the crumbs in most cases, and that is regrettable.

I think the reason the chairman and I have been holding these

hearings dealing with a wide range of Indian issues, today child

abuse and child protection, is because there is such a need and

there is such an important requirement for us to determine how we

can provide some focus to this and get the Congress to understand

its urgency.

So I appreciate the testimony from all three of the witnesses.

You and the previous panel will add to the information that we

have and give us the opportunity to decide exactly how we want

to proceed to see if we can’t better address this problem as the U.S.

Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the witnesses. Thank you very much.

This hearing is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the chair.]
(41)

APPENDIX

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES H. BURRUS, JR., ACTING ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Good morning Chairman McCain, Vice Chairman Dorgan, and members of the

Committee on Indian Affairs. I appreciate the opportunity to appear and provide

testimony about the FBI and its work in Indian country, especially as it relates to

the protection of Indian children.

The FBI has a long history of service to the Native American people throughout

the United States and dedicated Special Agents of the FBI’s Indian Country Program work hard to deliver quality law enforcement service to tribal communities of

all sizes. We remain strongly committed to our role in Indian country and to our

partnerships with tribal, local, State, and Federal agencies in Indian country.

There are 561 federally recognized Indian tribes in the United States and approximately 297 Indian reservations with over 1 million Native American residents on

or near reservation lands. The FBI has Federal law enforcement responsibility on

more than 200 of those Indian reservations and Federal criminal jurisdiction over

acts directly related to Indian gaming regardless of jurisdiction status.

The FBI currently has 114 Special Agents addressing 2,076 Indian country matters in 22 field offices. Eight FBI field offices account for nearly 90 percent of all

Indian country casework in the FBI and the FBI’s Indian country resources are focused on reservations where the FBI has primary Federal investigative authority.

The FBI’s priorities in Indian country focus on the most serious crimes of violence,

including homicide, child sexual and physical abuse, and violent assault. FBI investigations in these priority categories comprise over 70 percent of all FBI investigations in Indian country. The challenges do not end there as crime related to gangs

and drugs are on the increase, Indian gaming investigations remain important, and

the FBI always stands ready to protect tribal communities from political corruption.

The FBI in Indian country is simultaneously addressing many different aspects of

crime in Indian country and remains fully engaged.

During the period covering fiscal years 2003 through 2006, the FBI initiated 1,658

investigations and made 537 arrests in matters involving Indian child sexual abuse.

During the same period, the FBI initiated 134 investigations and made 39 arrests

in matters involving Indian child physical abuse. This represents approximately 30

percent of all FBI investigations in Indian country during that period. Crimes

against Indian children have been, and will remain, a top priority for the FBI.

The FBI routinely receives reports of Indian child abuse from various local law

enforcement agencies in Indian country, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Law Enforcement Services [BIA-OLES]. In cases of Indian child abuse reports

received by FBI field divisions, investigations are conducted either by FBI Special

Agents or task force members working with the FBI on Indian Country Safe Trails

Task Forces [STTF]. In limited circumstances, the allegations may be referred to

tribal, BIA, or other law enforcement agencies for investigation and presentation to

tribal courts as deemed necessary.
42

Additionally, the FBI receives referrals of allegations of Indian child abuse from

other public service entities such as schools, medical professionals and child protective service organizations. Some of these referrals are the direct result of FBI participation on Multi-Disciplinary Teams [MDT] or Child Protection Teams [CPT] in

Indian communities. There may be instances where child abuse complaints are received and investigated by other law enforcement agencies in Indian country and

the FBI is not made immediately aware of those allegations. However, the FBI and

other law enforcement partners in Indian country strive to ensure all allegations of

child abuse are reported to us and immediately addressed.

Allegations of child abuse are documented in FBI investigative files if an investigation is initiated. In cases where the FBI refers the allegations to either tribal

law enforcement or BIA–OLES, the allegation may be documented in a complaint

form or other communication. Child abuse allegations received by the FBI and documented in a format other than an investigative file represent child abuse reports

with various dispositions, including unsubstantiated reports, referral to other investigative agencies, or immediate declinations of prosecution.

The Office for Victim Assistance [OVA] ensures that victims of Federal crimes investigated by the FBI are afforded the opportunity to receive notification of investigation status and receive victim services. OVA employs 31 Victim Specialists dedicated to Indian country, serving 38 Indian nations. In addition to providing information on victim’s rights and the criminal justice process, these Victim Specialists also

provide on-scene crisis intervention, accompany agents to interviews, arrange forensic exams, and accompany victims to court proceedings. Victim Specialists establish

working relationships with tribal councils to coordinate services and assure cultural

understanding.

Our partnerships with Indian country law enforcement and tribal communities

are critical to successfully addressing Indian child abuse. There are several successful programs in Indian country that I would like to highlight.

Since fiscal year 2004, the FBI has supported the Tribal Tele-Medicine Initiative

in South Dakota, a joint effort by the FBI’s Minneapolis Division, Midwest Children’s Research Center, Indian Health Service, Department of Justice, Rosebud

Sioux Tribe, Midwest Regional Children’s Advocacy Center, and the National Children’s Alliance. The goals of this initiative are to provide a means to introduce forensic pediatric specialists early into Indian country child abuse investigations and

to build stronger multi-disciplinary teams in Indian country. This program utilizes

video teleconferencing capability, along with specialized audio and video equipment,

to connect the examining physician in Indian country with child abuse medical experts in an offsite location. This process not only allows expert medical evaluation

of the child victim but also minimizes trauma to the child that may result from multiple medical examinations and interviews. Through this project, experienced medical and treatment personnel are also accessible to service areas and tribal facilities

in rural or isolated communities.

The FBI also supports the Tohono O’Odham Reservation Children’s House

[TORCH], a joint effort between the Tohono O’Odham Nation Police Department

[TOPD], FBI, and the Southern Arizona Children’s Advocacy Center [SACAC],

which serves to exponentially enhance the overall investigative effectiveness in addressing child sexual assaults. TORCH provides the child victims of sexual/physical

abuse and their families with an immediate, safe, child-friendly and culturally sensitive environment that is conducive to effective forensic interviewing. These two efforts are directly aimed at improving the quality of child abuse investigations while

minimizing additional trauma to the child victim.

In circumstances where the establishment of a permanent forensic center is not

an option, the FBI partners with other organizations to seek creative solutions to

problems. One example is the FBI’s use of the Childhelp Children’s Mobile Advocacy

Center of Northern Arizona during child abuse and sexual assault investigations.

This mobile unit in Arizona travels to or near the victim’s reservation to prevent

the child and family from having to travel long distances to an advocacy and medical facility for interview and physical examination. By delivering the forensic interview and sexual assault examination capability to the child victim, the traumatic

effect on the child and family is vastly reduced.

The FBI faces many unique obstacles in investigating crimes against children in

Indian country. Included among those are remote territories requiring substantial

travel for investigation, long travel distances for access to technical expertise, reluctant witnesses due to close family structures in most tribal communities, and cultural sensitivities in tribal relations.

The FBI is fully committed to preparing Indian country law enforcement, including FBI Special Agents, with the knowledge and skills required to address such important investigations. Pursuant to a mandate from Congress to provide training to
43

Indian country law enforcement officers, the FBI has trained nearly 5,500 Indian

country law enforcement officers and agents since 1997. This training is closely coordinated with the BIA’s Indian Police Academy and together the FBI and BIA will

offer 21 regional training conferences during fiscal year 2006, including specialized

training in child abuse, forensic interviewing of abused children, crime scene investigation, child sexual assault and abuse investigations.

The FBI is committed to protecting Native American children from abuse and

what clearly constitutes a threat to the future of Indian children and their communities. We look forward to working with this committee to accomplish this worthwhile goal. I would now be happy to answer any questions.
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT MCSWAIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE INDIAN

HEALTH SERVICE [IHS]

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee:

Good morning, I am Robert McSwain, Deputy Director of IHS. Today, I am accompanied by Dr. Jon Perez, director, Division of Behavioral Health, IHS. We are

pleased to have this opportunity to testify on behalf of Secretary Leavitt on S. 1899,

the ‘‘Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act Amendments of

2005’’.

The IHS has the responsibility for the delivery of health services to more than

1.8 million federally recognized American Indians and Alaska Natives through a

system of IHS, tribal, and urban [I/T/U] operated facilities and programs based on

treaties, judicial determinations, and Acts of Congress. The mission of the agency

is to raise the physical, mental, social, and spiritual health of American Indians/

Alaska Natives to the highest level, in partnership with the population we serve.

The agency goal is to assure that comprehensive, culturally acceptable personal and

public health services are available and accessible to the service population. Our

foundation is to promote healthy American Indian/Alaska Native people, communities, and cultures and to honor and protect the inherent sovereign rights of tribes.

Secretary Leavitt has also been proactive in raising the awareness of tribal issues

within the Department by contributing to our capacity to speak with one voice, as

One Department, on behalf of tribes. As such, he recognizes the authority provided

in the Native American Programs Act of 1974 and utilizes the Intra-departmental

Council for Native American Affairs to consider cross cutting issues and seeks opportunities for collaboration and coordination among Department programs serving

Native Americans. The council serves as an advisory body to the Secretary and has

responsibility to assure that Native American policy is implemented across all divisions in the department including human services programs. As vice chair of the

secretary’s council, the IHS Director facilitates advocacy within the department, promotes consultation, reports directly to the Secretary, collaborates directly with the

assistant secretary for Health, advises the heads of all the department’s divisions

and coordinates activities of the Department on Native American Health and

Human Services Issues.

Our Indian families are strong, but many are besieged by the numbing effects of

poverty, lack of economic resources, and limited opportunity. The Indian Child

Abuse and Family Violence Prevention Act [title, IV of Public Law 101–630] was enacted in 1990 and the IHS has since endeavored to meet the spirit and intent of

that act. In 1996 the IHS instituted the Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Prevention Initiative to address more directly the concerns regarding violence against

women and child abuse and neglect in American Indian/Alaska Native communities.

The initiative’s purpose is to improve the IHS, tribal, and urban Indian health care

response to domestic violence by providing education, training, and support to

health care providers. The overarching goal is to improve health care providers’ capability to provide early identification and culturally appropriate responses to victims of familial violence, particularly women and children, in American Indian/Alaska Native communities.

In support of the initiative, the IHS works independently as well as collaboratively with other Federal agencies concerned with domestic violence issues to:

1. Provide programs and products.

2. Provide training and training materials.

3. Identify other resources and potential funding streams for American Indian/

Alaska Native programs.

4. Seek to identify sources for funding and services for IHS and American Indian/

Alaska Native tribal community clinics and organizations that provide services to

domestic violence victims and their children.

5. Facilitate the development of protocols on domestic violence that are being implemented in IHS clinics and hospitals to ensure that victims of domestic violence

receive appropriate treatment and referrals.

6. Insure the quality and character of the IHS staff providing services to our

American Indian/Alaska Native families and children.

Some of the actions taken to achieve these goals include:

The IHS and the Bureau of Indian Affairs [BIA] published the IHS/BIA Child

Protection Handbook in 2005. It contains a wealth of information for everything

from forming child protection teams to offering model tribal legislative language for

child protection codes on reservation. In addition, it is a comprehensive guide to

child protection for community programs. The Handbook is also connected to the

University of Oklahoma’s Center on Child Abuse and Neglect website

(www.ccan.ouhsc.edu), so up-to-date information is shared in realtime with pro-
72

grams nationally. We are submitting a copy of the handbook on CD as part of this

testimony for the committee’s information and use. We believe it is a landmark publication and a means to support communities with limited resources for such efforts.

As part of this overall approach, a train-the-trainer child protection model project

is funded through an Interagency Agreement with the Department’s Administration

for Children and Families, Office of Child Abuse and Neglect. As part of this program, the University of Oklahoma’s Making Medicine project was funded for several

years and trained over 150 professionals working with Native children on reservations around the country. Currently the project is being implemented by Support

Services International, Inc. The project is a 2-week, culturally sensitive training program on the treatment of child physical and sexual abuse with consultation and follow-up. Once the participant completes the 2-week training, the Project Making

Medicine staff schedules an on-site visit at the participant’s local community and

assists the participant in conducting a community wide training in the prevention

and awareness of child abuse and neglect.

With funds provided by IHS, the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center

has completed a child protection manual available to the IHS, BIA, and tribal and

urban Indian health staff involved with providing child abuse and neglect and domestic violence services in American Indian/Alaska Native communities. The Handbook is formatted to serve dual purposes as a training manual (goals, objectives,

agenda, small group activities, et cetera.) and/or as a technical manual (statistics,

definitions, indicators, legal and ethical responsibilities, group dynamics, confidentiality, referrals, treatment issues, standard forms/templates, resources, et cetera.)

The IHS has developed the Mental Health and Community Safety Initiative

[MHCSI] for American Indian/Alaska Native Children, Youth, and Families. This

grant program currently receives annual funding of $400,000. For fiscal years 2003–

2006, the project has operated under cooperative agreements to develop innovative

strategies that focus on the mental health, behavioral, substance abuse, and community safety needs of American Indian/Alaska Native young people and their families

who are involved in or at risk for involvement with the juvenile justice system. Beginning in fiscal year 2007 the projects will be implemented as grants. This effort

was first initiated through the White House Domestic Policy Council to provide federally recognized tribes and eligible tribal organizations with assistance to plan, design, and assess the feasibility of implementing a culturally appropriate system of

care for American Indians/Alaska Natives. The MHCSI Planning Phase [years 1–

3] cooperative agreements will be completed at the end of fiscal year 2005 with an

Implementation Phase beginning in fiscal year 2007 which will provide program

services planned in the first phase. An important focus will be to integrate traditional healing methods indigenous to the communities with conventional treatment

methodologies. One of the primary foci of the program is child abuse and neglect

to identify and develop systems of care for victim of child abuse and neglect who

are involved and/or at risk of being involved with the juvenile justice system. These

cooperative agreements are established under the authority of 25 USC 1621h(m).

Plans are to continue funding of only one cycle for each of the fiscal years.

Section 408 of Public Law 101–630 requires the IHS and the BIA to compile a

list of all authorized positions within the IHS where the duties and responsibilities

involve regular contact with, or control over, Indian children; to conduct an investigation of the character of each individual who is employed, or is being considered

for employment in a position having regular contact with, or control over, Indian

children and to prescribe by regulations the minimum standards of character that

an individual must meet to be appointed to positions having regular contact with,

or control over, Indian children. The law also requires that the IHS and BIA regulations prescribing the minimum standards of character ensure that none of the individuals appointed to positions which involve regular contact with, or control over,

Indian children have been found guilty of, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or

guilty to, any felonious offense, or any two or more misdemeanor offenses under

Federal, State, or tribal law involving crimes of violence; sexual assault, molestation, exploitation, contact or prostitution; crimes against persons; or offenses committed against children.

Section 408 (c) requires that tribes or tribal organizations who receive funds

under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, Public Law 93–

638, employ individuals in positions involving regular contact with or control over

Indian children only if the individuals meet standards of character no less stringent

than those prescribed under the IHS regulations.

The IHS published an Interim Final Rule establishing minimum standards of

character and the regulations became effective November 22, 2002. The final regulations incorporate technical amendments enacted by Congress on December 27, 2000,

pursuant to section 814, the Native American Laws Technical Corrections Act of
73

2000. The final regulations established that the minimum standards of character

have been met only after individuals, in positions involving regular contact with or

control over Indian children, have been the subject of a satisfactory background investigation and it has been determined that these individuals have not been found

guilty of, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to, any felonious offense, or

any two or more misdemeanor offenses under Federal, State, or tribal law involving

crimes of violence; sexual assault, molestation, exploitation, contact or prostitution;

crimes against persons; or offenses committed against children.

The results of the efforts highlighted above, as well as the increased IHS and tribal emphasis on daily clinical identification of and care for victims of abuse have

served to stabilize, not reduce this problem. Data indicate an average of approximately 4,500 clinical contacts a year related to child abuse, neglect, and the psychological after effects of such victimization. The number of contacts has remained at

approximately the same level for several years. It is high, it is unacceptable, it happens for many reasons, but it does not happen in isolation from the economic and

social problems plaguing Indian Country. It will take resources, not only for IHS,

but for a broad range of Federal and tribal support to improve not just clinical services for abuse victims, but to positively affect the underlying economic and social

conditions from which so much of the violence in Indian Country springs. IHS’s fiscal year 2007 budget request includes a total of $212 million for behavioral health.

(mental health, alcohol and substance abuse), an increase of 5 percent over fiscal

year 2006.

The IHS plans to continue its present projects and initiative efforts to address domestic violence and child abuse and neglect. It will also seek to expand services

within American Indian/Alaska Native communities by consulting with IHS health

care facilities, tribes, and urban Indian clinics as well as through collaboration with

other Federal agencies because the goal of reducing and ultimately preventing violence among our families and against our children will require all our efforts. I am

confident in IHS’s commitment to that goal and its ability to effectively and innovatively use the resources it is given to maximum positive effect. There is a long

road ahead of us, but we are prepared to continue our efforts to address these important issues.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks and I would be pleased to

answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM P. RAGSDALE, DIRECTOR, BIA, DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman and members of the committee.

My name is Patrick Ragsdale and I am the director of the BIA at the Department

of the Interior. I am pleased to be here today to provide the department’s testimony

on S. 1899, a bill to amend the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act to identify and remove barriers to reducing child abuse, to provide for examinations of certain children and for other purposes.

The department appreciates the committee’s efforts to prevent violence to children

and families in Indian country. As Chairman McCain stated when introducing the

bill, the benefits of the existing act have not been fully realized. We do not have

a firm grip on the extent of violence to families and children in Indian country and

that information is crucial for any planning effort to reduce such violence. Therefore,

the data collection provisions proposed in section 4 of the bill are critical.

The department supports the bill’s efforts to identify and remove impediments to

reducing child abuse. The majority of governmental efforts regarding child abuse

have focused on treatment or law enforcement options after the abuse has occurred.

While these are important aspects of a comprehensive child protection program, of

course, it is equally essential that we develop ways to assist tribes in their ability

to prevent the abuse before it occurs. Therefore, the department supports the study

to identify impediments to reducing child abuse, but believes the study should not

only include descriptions of reporting, prosecuting, and treating child abuse, as proposed in the bill, but should include an assessment of impediments to preventing

child abuse as well. We believe that there may be other provisions that could be

added to the bill that would bolster our efforts to develop culturally appropriate prevention techniques, and we would be happy to discuss these ideas with the committee.

With regard to the implementation of the law, we agree there may be circumstances in which a pardon, set aside, or reversal should be considered, but we

recommend the definition of ‘‘conviction’’ at section 3202(5) require a judicial funding regarding the guilt of the individual to avoid inclusion of expungements, par-
74

dons, reversals, and set asides for ‘‘employment purposes’’ or that are limited and

intended only to ‘‘restore certain civil rights’’. Limiting the exclusion to pardons, set

asides, or reversals based on innocence gives clarity to the application of the minimum standards of character at section 3207 and is consistent with Merit Systems

Protection Board decisions regarding suitability for Federal service and eligibility

for access to classified information. See also Delong v. Department of Health and

Human Services, 264 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2001), cert denied, 536 U.S. 958 (2002)

and Bear Robe v. Parker, 270 F.3d 1192 (8th Cir. 2001).

Under the Indian Law Enforcement Reform Act the BIA is responsible for, or for

assisting in the provision of, providing law enforcement services within Indian country.

Our Office of Law Enforcement Services meets that function by enforcing Federal

criminal laws. In our efforts to protect children we have become all too aware of

a hole in the law that should be addressed. Under the Major Crimes Act 18 U.S.C.

1153, child neglect within Indian country is not a Federal felony. For example, if

an intoxicated driver runs over a toddler, and the child dies, Federal felony manslaughter, may be charged. If the child survives but is disabled for life, no Federal

charges can be filed. The department supports fixing the omission by adding the

words ‘‘felony child neglect’’ to the list of Federal offenses.

The BIA, other Federal agencies, and Indian tribal governments are ready to work

together to develop and implement a comprehensive child protection program that

addresses abuse prevention, law enforcement, and treatment efforts in those unfortunate cases where abuse does occur.

This concludes my prepared statement. I want to thank you for introducing this

legislation and for your support for the protection of Indian children. I will be happy

to answer any questions you may have.
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RON SUPPAH, CHAIRMAN CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE

WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am Ron Suppah, chairman of the

tribal council of the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of S. 1899, the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005.

In presenting this testimony, I would like to acknowledge former Warm Springs

Chairman Garland Brunoe, who testified last Congress before this committee, in

September 2003, on very similar legislation, S. 1601. I would also particularly like

to acknowledge Warm Springs Tribal Judge Lola Sohappy, who retired this past

July after many years of dedicated service to our community and to our young people. Judge Sohappy was very active in the National Indian Child Welfare Association.

The 650,000 acre Warm Springs Reservation in north Central Oregon is the home

of about 3,300 of our 4,400 tribal members. Additionally, we estimate about 950

non-members reside on our reservation. Within our residential population, about

1,600 of our tribal members, or better than 40 percent, are 18 years old or younger.

Like many reservations, our communities are rural, and individual residences are

often isolated. Economic opportunities are limited, and unemployment and poverty

are well above national averages by almost any measure. So, too, are substance

abuse and violence, including family violence. When much of your population is

young, that violence all too often involves children.

As Chairman Brunoe testified last Congress, unfortunately this applies to Warm

Springs. In 2002, 402 Warm Springs children were served by Warm Springs Child

Protection Services [CPS]. In 2005, the number of our children that received CPS

services was 453. The trend appears to be increasing and, in any event, is persistently too high.

Our tribe is doing all we can to address the very serious issue. While our basic

capacity in this field is strained, we are trying to make use of our unique circumstances.

Our population is not large, and because Warm Springs is exempt from Public

Law 280 and our reservation is almost a solid block of trust land, we exercise exclusive jurisdiction over our tribal child welfare cases. We have our own Child Protective Services agency, and do not have to rely on the State for case management,

investigations, and other services. Without competing demands of state regulation,

we are able to craft our policies and actions in a manner that is sensitive to the

needs of our own community.

While we exercise our own jurisdiction, we do try to work closely with the State

of Oregon. Warm Springs is one of the few tribes nationwide that has developed a

tribal-State title IV-e Foster Care Maintenance Payment agreement with the State

that allows the tribe to receive Federal funds for maintenance payments for children

placed in foster care. The agreement also allows the tribe to receive an administrative match for services, training, and associated expenses for children qualifying for

IV-e support. This allows the tribe to participate on the same footing as a state in

developing and maintaining a foster care program for children rather than placing

them in the custody of the state for these services.

Warm Springs still has an array of jurisdictional issues with which we must deal.

Criminal child abuse actions by non-Indians must be addressed by the State. When

Federal crimes are specifically identified, be they Indian or non-Indian related, the

Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] must be called in. And because Warm Springs

children attend local public schools, any child abuse or neglect issues identified

there are reported first to the county, and only thereafter to our Child Protective

Services or the Warm Springs Police Department.

Jurisdictional issues are complicated and not easy to resolve, but improved communication and coordination can help. Accordingly, we support S. 1899, including

section 4 which will provide centralized gathering of data on Indian child abuse and

annual reporting to Congress so a clearer picture of this often unreported or underreported activity can be developed. We also understand the need for section 5, to

address due process and other central registry implementation issues. We particularly support section 8, which clarifies the range of personnel who may be subject

to background checks and specifies standards for those checks.

But more than anything else, the overall reauthorization of the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act, and its funding, is essential.

As Chairman Brunoe testified last Congress, child abuse and family violence continue to devastate Indian communities. Because these problems tend to occur in private and the victims are frightened and silent, they do not attract much public attention. But their consequences are far reaching and long lasting.
108

Because child abuse and family violence are often hidden from view and their consequences can be so personal and profound, child protection and the prevention of

associated family violence is very labor intensive. Abused or neglected children require attentive and careful handling. Their family situations can often be explosive.

At Warm Springs, in addition to our Child Protection Services agency, child protective activities significantly involve the tribal police, the tribal courts, tribal prosecution, community services, and medical personnel, including mental health practitioners and physicians experienced in child abuse forensics.

But Child Protection Services is the agency that ties all these functions together,

and their task is multi-faceted and complicated. CPS must remove children from the

home, temporarily house them, and find short term and long term foster homes,

which must be monitored. CPS must provide for the direct needs of the child, including counseling and treatment, clothing and education, and transportation. And CPS

seeks to reunite families and help their stability. They have to investigate and help

prosecute child abuse charges. And throughout all this, they must meet rigorous reporting requirements. At Warm Springs, our Child Protective Services staff totals

nineteen full time personnel and three part time. Currently, we have three case

workers, each of whom must handle well in excess of 100 cases a year. We also engage five full-time and two part-time Protective Care Providers to operate our 24-

hour emergency shelter.

Clearly, our child protection capacity at Warm Springs desperately needs assistance, almost across the board. Based on our circumstances, we particularly need at

least two additional case workers, and two additional CPS assistants, who monitor

and assist in-home situations. We also need a supervisor to oversee personnel and

help gather and process reporting requirements. We also need our own investigator,

because the single investigator now on our reservation can only devote a very insufficient portion of his time to child abuse cases. The need stretches out to other community service agencies, including Juvenile Services, police and medical services,

and our court system.

Mr. Chairman, this long list only serves to highlight that the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act needs to be reauthorized. But more importantly, it highlights that the basic promise of the act needs the commitment of Federal agencies—the BIA and the IHS—to be realized. The BIA and the IHS must live

up to their obligations to the act and to our communities by budgeting and pursuing

the appropriations that are vital to securing our children’s future. As many tribes

know, our children are our future, and our children all too often are hanging by a

thread.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. Thank you very much.

Æ