According to 2009 population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau, about 3.2 million U.S. residents identify themselves as solely of American Indian or Alaska Native origin. Furthermore, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) in DOI reported that for 2005—the most recent year for which data are available—the total number of enrolled members in federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages was nearly 2 million. American Indians have high rates of poverty, unemployment, single-parent families, and substance abuse relative to the population as a whole. BIA reported that the unemployment rate for American Indians living on or near a reservation was 49 percent in 2005, the most recent year for which data are available, while the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported a national unemployment rate of 5 percent for the same year. A recent study by the Economic Policy Institute noted that from the first half of 2007 to the first half of 2010, the national American Indian unemployment rate—which includes individuals living in both urban areas and on tribal lands—increased 7.7 percentage points to 15.2 percent, while it increased 4.9 percentage points to 9.1 percent among Caucasians. Additionally, in 2009, 53 percent of American Indian children lived in single-parent families, compared with 34 percent of all children nationwide. HHS data estimates for 2004 through 2008 indicate that the percentage of American Indians or Alaska Native adults who needed treatment for alcohol or illicit drug use problems in the past year was higher than the national average (18 percent and 10 percent, respectively). As of October 2010, there were 565 federally recognized tribes—340 in the continental United States and 225 in Alaska. Federally recognized Indian tribes are Native American groups eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians. Under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, as amended, federally recognized Indian tribes can enter into self- determination contracts or self-governance compacts with the federal government to take over administration of certain federal programs for Indians previously administered by the federal government on their behalf. Tribal lands vary dramatically in size, demographics, and location. The largest reservation, that of the Navajo Nation, is about 24,000 square miles in size and is inhabited by more than 176,000 American Indians. In comparison, some of the smallest tribal lands, held by California tribes, take up less than 1 square mile and some tribal lands have fewer than 50 Indian residents. Some Indian reservations have a mixture of Indian and non-Indian residents. In addition, most tribal lands are rural or remote, although some are near metropolitan areas. Although tribal members were previously served through state AFDC programs, under PRWORA, they can be served through tribal or state TANF programs. Tribal and state TANF programs may use TANF funds in any manner reasonably calculated to accomplish the purposes of TANF. These purposes are to (1) provide assistance to needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end needy parents’ dependence on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage; (3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and (4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. Like states, tribes generally have the flexibility to set their own TANF eligibility requirements, to determine what policies will govern mandatory sanctions for noncompliance with program rules, and to determine what types of work supports they will provide to recipients, such as child care, transportation, and job training. However, some of the federal requirements for state TANF programs differ from those for tribal TANF programs (see table 1). Before the 1996 welfare reforms, some tribes were operating their own Tribal Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) programs that provided work and training activities. These tribes remained eligible to provide these services through the Native Employment Works (NEW) program when PRWORA repealed the JOBS program. As of January 2011, 31 tribes and tribal organizations operate both a tribal TANF program and a NEW Program. More recently, in 2006, DRA made several modifications to state TANF programs, none of which applied to tribes. DRA also reauthorized TANF through fiscal year 2010, and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 extended it through fiscal year 2011. TANF has a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) provision that requires states to maintain a significant portion of their historic financial commitment to their welfare programs. States are not required to provide funding to tribal TANF programs, but many do so. As of July 2010, HHS data indicate that 54 of 64 tribal TANF programs received state funding. Contributions made by states to tribal TANF programs generally count toward a state’s MOE requirement. The Office of Family Assistance within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in HHS is the main federal agency responsible for overseeing tribal TANF programs. Both HHS’s headquarters office and 6 out of 10 regional offices have staff that work directly with tribes to help them implement and maintain their tribal TANF programs. Tribal TANF is a block grant, and we have previously found that building accountability into block grants is an important, but difficult, task requiring trade-offs between federal and state—or in this case, tribal—control over program finances, activities, and administration. HHS holds tribes accountable, in part, through the tribes’ reporting requirements, which are similar to those for state TANF programs. For example, tribes have to submit quarterly reports that include caseload data, data used to calculate work participation rates, and financial information. In addition, per the Single Audit Act, as amended, all states—including tribal governments—local governments, and nonprofit organizations expending $500,000 or more in federal awards during one fiscal year are required to obtain an audit in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Single Audit Act. In addition to the TANF block grant that tribes receive from HHS, the Recovery Act’s TANF Emergency Contingency Fund provided up to $5 billion to help states and tribes in fiscal years 2009 and 2010 that had an increase in caseloads or in certain types of expenditures. HHS provides these funds to tribes as a reimbursement for expenses incurred no later than September 30, 2010. According to HHS, the funds a jurisdiction receives as reimbursement are available without fiscal year limitation and can be spent in any way permissible under TANF. According to HHS, 24 tribes have received Emergency Contingency Fund grants totaling approximately $14 million as of June 2011. The Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 provides tribes with additional program and funding flexibilities. Specifically, it allows DOI to authorize federally recognized Indian tribes to combine funds they receive from various federal agencies and programs for employment, training, and related services, such as TANF, into one program, called a “477 plan.” These plans help tribes streamline funding from as many as 11 different federal sources by utilizing a single budget and a single reporting system. According to a DOI official, eligible grant funds include formula-funded programs in HHS, DOI, and the Department of Labor. DOI oversees these plans at the federal level. As of July 2011, 15 tribes incorporate their tribal TANF programs into these plans. The number of tribal TANF programs has increased from 36 in 2002 to 64 in 2010 (see fig. 1), and several additional tribes are actively pursuing administering their own programs. Most of the tribes that have begun administering their own program since 2002 had no previous experience managing a TANF program; however, according to information provided by HHS, at least two tribes that were previously served as part of a larger tribal TANF consortium of tribes have decided to administer their own programs. For a list of all tribes administering a TANF program, including those tribes who were previously served as part of a larger tribal TANF consortium, see app. II. In addition to the 64 tribal TANF programs in operation in 2010, HHS officials stated that as of April 2011, 11 more tribes were actively pursuing starting their own program. The number of tribes served by tribal TANF programs has also increased from 174 in 2002 to at least 272 in 2010, and more of the tribes administering their own programs are serving Native families outside of their own tribe. Tribes have the flexibility to determine whom their program will serve as well as their service area—the geographic area that their TANF program will cover. In 2002, we reported that 16 out of 36 tribes (44 percent) served only their own enrolled tribal members. According to our review of tribes’ TANF plans, 16 out of 64 tribes (25 percent) administering a program serve only members of their tribe whereas 48 tribal TANF programs (75 percent) extend their services and benefits to families who are not enrolled members of their tribe. For example, according to their most recently approved TANF plan, the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin serves both enrolled tribal members as well as other Indians who are members of federally recognized tribes residing on its reservation who are eligible for TANF, whereas the Hopi tribe serves only its own enrolled tribal members. We also found that according to HHS data, 11 of the 64 tribal TANF programs have expanded in order to serve more Native families in nearby or surrounding areas. For example, the California Tribal TANF Partnership began administering TANF in 2003 and has expanded its program at least three times since then to include more tribes. As of May 2011, this partnership was associated with 35 tribes and other organizations, and its TANF program service area spanned 14 different counties in California.