NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS

WELFARE REFORM IMPLEMENTATION IN INDIAN COUNTRY:
A NATIONAL FORUM
Forum Highlights
Saturday, February 28, 1998
Grand Hyatt Hotel
Washington, D.C.
C O N T E N T S

Introduction

Dr. Eddie Brown, Director
Kathryn M. Buder Center for American Indian Studies

Associate Dean, George Warren Brown School of Social Work
Washington University, St. Louis 1
 

Invocation

Frank Chee Willetto, Board Membe
National Indian Council on Aging 1
 

Welcoming Remarks

Honorable W. Ron Allen, President
National Congress of American Indians 1
 

Keynote Address

Olivia Golden, Assistant Secretary
Administration for Children and Families,
Department of Health and Human Services 2
 

Panel 1 - Tribal TANF Plans

Ray Apodaca, Executive Officer
Division of Tribal Services,
Department of Health and Human Services 4

Beth Meyers, Family Services Division Chief
Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewas 5

Gerald Heminger, Jr., Council Member
Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux 6

Joe Finkbonner, Life Center Director
Lummi Nation 6

Panel 2 - Job Creation and Job Training Programs

Tom Dowd, Chief
Division of Indian and Native American Programs,
Department of Labor 8

Norm DeWeaver, Director
Indian and Native American Employment and Training Coalition 10

]Dr. David Gipp, President
United Tribes Technical College 11

Panel 3 - Federal/State/Tribal Government Partnerships

John Meredith, Tribal Welfare Reform Coordinator
State of Montana Division of Child and Family Services 18

Denis Turner, Executive Director
Southern California Tribal Chairman's Association 18

Rhonda Whiting, Attorney
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes 20

Charlene Lewis Meeks, Deputy Director
California Department of Social Services,
Office of Community Relations 20

Panel 4 - Children and Family Support Services

Donald Sykes, Director
Office of Community Services,
Administration for Children and Families,
Department of Health and Human Services 21

Janet Wise, Chairperson
National Indian Child Care Association 22

Alex Yazza, Welfare Coordinator
Division of Social Services,Navajo Nation 23

Leila Help-Tulley, Executive Director
Division of Social Services,Navajo Nation 26

Panel 5 - Impact Data Collection Methodologies

Dr. Shanta Pandey, Associate Professor
George Warren Brown School of Social Work,
Washington University 28

Rick Anderson, President
Tribal Data Resources 30
 
 

Conclusion

Dr. Eddie Brown, Director
Kathryn M. Buder Center for American Indian Studies
Associate Dean, George Warren Brown School of Social Work
Washington University, St. Louis 32

P R O C E E D I N G S

DR. EDDIE BROWN, Director, Kathryn M. Buder Center for American Indian Studies, Associate Dean, George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, served as the day's moderator for the panels.

DR. BROWN: I want to thank NCAI and the Administration on Native Americans and HHS for their support in making this opportunity possible. Today, we're gathered here to discuss a very, very important topic that will have impact on American Indians' lives for years to come. What we do today and what we do in the next four to five years is going to be critical in looking at how we assist our communities in the area of economic development, job creation, and the well-being of our citizens. So with that, we want to open with an invocation.

We are honored today to have Mr. Frank Chee Willetto from the Navajo Nation, from Crown Point, New Mexico, who is a member of the Navajo tribe as well as the Navajo Code Talkers. I'm sure they need no introduction in regards to Navajo Code Talkers. Mr. Willetto is also a Board Member of the National Indian Council On Aging. So we're delighted for that, and we would like to invite Mr. Frank Chee Willetto down to provide our invocation. If you could all stand, please.

FRANK CHEE WILLETTO: Our Heavenly Father, our Creator, I ask for strength, wisdom and courage for each and every one of the people that are here that are Your children. We are Your children. We need Your help. We need Your strength to give us strength and wisdom and courage. Let them, their words be strong and let their words help their people, their responsible people here. And You helped them to be here safely. Please help them to go home to their homes, to their loved ones, to their children, to their homes. Give them strength. Bless them. And we, Heavenly Father, ask for forgiveness, individually, for some of the things that we do, the things we see, without thinking. I ask this and pray to each and every -- for every person that is here. And I say this in the name of Jesus Christ. AMEN.

DR. BROWN: I want to now turn the time over to the Honorable W. Ron Allen, President of NCAI and Chairman of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe to open up the meeting and to give his inspiration and guidance as well as to do a very special introduction for a very special guest we have here today who will be presenting.

PRESIDENT ALLEN: Well, good morning. I'm hopeful that this particular program, or this workshop will be one in which we're going to start talking about where are the solutions so we can start communicating with the administration, to the Congress, what needs to be -- what kind of adjustments need to be made to the legislation and come up with the data to make that case, to make that argument why it works or why it doesn't work and what needs to be done in order to fulfill their goals and expectations or the intent of the legislation itself.

I really do believe that we can come up with solutions. I am always very proud of the fact that Indian country is a very creative set of communities. We have had many obstacles in front of us throughout our whole lives, and yet we have continued to survive; we have continued to make it work. It has been frustrating, and we always find ways to vent that frustration in our many forums, locally, regionally and nationally. But the issue here is, is how are we going to change the situation for us and for our community so that we can make a difference in the reservations and in our urban settings where we have a lot of our people residing.

I thank you all for your being here. In conclusion, let me introduce a very special guest we have here, one who has been with us throughout this whole process with this administration.

I would appreciate a very warm welcome and deep sense of appreciation for making her time available here on a Saturday. Please join me in welcoming our Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families, Olivia Golden.
 

Keynote Address

OLIVIA GOLDEN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES: I want to do three things today: The first is to offer you an overview of TANF. Second, I'd like to report to you on what we've done to carry out the commitments we've made to you, and third, I wanted to leave you with some ideas for reflection.

I wanted to start with some of the central themes. The first theme is work. It is central to the legislation. The second is the theme supports that families need in order to find work and to succeed in it. Third, there are some very specific supports for families that are turning out to be especially important in many places: Child care, child support, because for many of the parents on welfare it's going to take a job plus some support from the parent who is not living with the family.

There are others, of course: health care, transportation, child care and child support in particular. The fourth theme is that states and tribes need to be free to be creative. The fifth theme is that the legislation does provide for some important new tribal roles; provides for child care resources that go directly to the tribe, it provides for a choice for whether a tribe chooses to implement the TANF, the welfare reform provisions or work with the state on those provisions, and it provides, also, for a choice in relation to child support.

I said that the legislation has a central focus on work, and that shows up in a number of ways, shows up in requirements for individuals to work, in requirements that are imposed on states and if the tribe chooses to implement TANF itself, requirements that are also imposed on tribes. One requirement is the participation rate requirement that a percent of families are engaged in a variety of work activities.

The legislation has also called temporary assistance for needy families and focuses on the idea that welfare assistance should be temporary and a transition to access to the work force, so the legislation has a time limit for federal assistance. Other key elements of the legislation; in addition to the TANF provisions is a section on child support. The one other key theme that emerges from the legislation for tribal communities is the critical nature of the conversations between the tribe and state. Other key issues include housing and transportation. Finally, welfare reform in Indian country.

At this point, we've received a relatively small number of plans for tribes to operate their own tribal TANF programs. We've received 10 plans and approved 11; that is the up-to-date number. We've also worked to try to make sure of the financial viability of those plans to work with states.

Let me say a little bit about what we've done in HHS to carry out our commitments.

First, let me tell you about one overall thing we've done, and then some specific commitments. We created an office whose primary job is to carry out the tribal specific provisions of this legislation in Indian country and to assist you in making informed decisions. The first of the commitments that has shaped what we're doing is a commitment to provide you with information early as you are making key choices. In particular, the choice about whether or not to operate the TANF program. The Division of Tribal Services has been a key part of that, and so has some work we've done through the administration for Native Americans under the leadership of Commissioner Gary Kimball.

We've awarded five competitive grants and one contract that are intended to provide with information and the opportunity to make your own decisions. The grants have gone to the Catawba Nation, the Alaska Cook Inlet Tribal Council, the Northwest U.S. Portland Area Indian Health Board, Oklahomans for Indian Opportunity, and the Californian Indian Manpower Consortium.

A second commitment is to assist and support you as you implement your choices across welfare reform or TANF, child care and child support.

In addition to early information, assistance and implementation -- a third critical commitment is to provide broad consultation with all of you as tribal leaders.
The biggest single thing we've done was to issue a policy announcement which told states that if they put resources into tribal TANF programs, they could count it as "maintenance of effort." That means the states could take credit for that money.
 

Panel 1 - Tribal TANF Plans

MR. RAY APODOCA, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DIVISION OF TRIBAL SERVICES, OCS/ACF/DHHS: There are currently nine tribes and one consortium who have approved plans. There is also an eleventh plan that is currently pending final approval for a May 1 start-up date. We are aware of at least nine other tribes and regional consortia in various different stages of consideration and planning on TANF plans. The plans vary according to the particular needs of the populations they're going to serve.

My focus will be on the Notice of Proposed Rule Making NPRM.

The philosophy with which we approach the NPRM is to set out general rules incorporating the provisions of the law into regulation while maintaining as much flexibility as absolutely possible, within the parameters of the law . We did not seek to augment statutory definitions. In defining Indian family, for example, the tribes will be able to define family in such a way as to better reflect your traditional family structures and relationships.`

Tribes can, through agreements with the state, serve populations outside of your traditional reservation boundaries or traditional service areas -- again, with negotiation and concurrence with your states. Because it's a block grant, we're also making allowance for the tribe to provide services under TANF that are not commonly or normally considered public assistance. Education and training can be included in the definition of assistance, which is something that states are not doing in most cases.

We're allowing flexibility in participation and in the establishment of time limitations. When you read the NPRM, you're even going to find that you can set varying rates in varying time limits for different parts of your service area to reflect economic needs and situations.

In addition to the NPRM, we've completed work on the TANF guidance document. If you read the guidance document, you basically are getting a preview of the NPRM. We're not substantially going beyond that, other than adding on reporting requirements and data collection items. And we are committed to eliminating unnecessary data collection, to simplify as much as possible. The only thing else that I would add is that we would urge is that the discussion of TANF becomes, if it's not already, a priority item on your agenda, and that it become an integral and ongoing priority item in your human services programs.

MS. BETH MEYERS, FAMILY SERVICES DIVISION CHIEF, RED CLIFF BAND OF LAKE SUPERIOR CHIPPEWAS: Wisconsin Red Cliff has administered the AFDC program for over 20 years with a state contract. In taking on TANF, it was a natural progression for us to do that. We actually received more money taking on the federal program than we would have continuing to contract with the state of Wisconsin, even without the state match. So when you're negotiating your TANF program you want to look at how much money the state is spending on your population today versus how much money they spent in 1994 and see if that matching fund is a moot issue or not.

In addition to operating the TANF program since October of 1997, we also administer the Medical Assistance and Food Stamps programs with the state contract. We have the state and federal child care programs. We operate the BIA general assistance program. We have an Indian Child Welfare Department. We have a cooperative agreement with the county in our area to do our child support enforcement and all the money collected goes directly to the family.

One of the deciding factors in operating the TANF program was that we had the basic support services to help tribal members in need of temporary assistance. Coordinating tribal TANF with other social programs is critical to helping tribal members become self-sufficient. And when you're talking about the social supportive services, it's important to keep in mind that those should include: education and training, mental health and AODA services -- in Wisconsin, we call it AODA, Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse.

One of the things we're doing in Red Cliff is a mental health and AODA assessment of our TANF and general assistance population. Initial summaries from this mental health and AODA assessment show that suicide and alcohol and drug abuse are still a very serious issue for tribal members.

When Congress passed PL104-193, I believe it was their sense that tribes have access to all the funding available to agencies to administer these welfare programs, and tribes must demand a level playing field and be given access to the same funding sources that states have. The 60-month limit means that we have to get our tribal members into the work force as soon as possible, and we're going to have to prepare them for that.

States have access to TANF and Welfare to Work performances bonuses; tribes do not. I'm excited to tell you today in Red Cliff the we have 100 percent of our two-parent families in a work component, but we will not receive a bonus for doing that.

MR. GERALD HEMINGER, JR., COUNCILMAN, SISSETON-WAHPETON SIOUX: One of the problems that we've run into with TANF is that we don't have enough money for economic development. We need to create some more jobs. We built a new Dakota Magic Casino to provide jobs. Right now we're looking at getting financing. Next week, we meet on that in Minneapolis, and we hope to create there up to about 700 jobs.

Our two biggest problems that we've run into is child care and transportation. With integration of TANF into our other programs, we did have -- our community college did hire a TANF person, and one thing that the states haven't done that we have been able to do is to allow our participants to go to school and get a GED or get their high school diploma, get them into a one-year course, because we are on a 60-month period.

We would encourage any of you tribes that are looking at it to take a serious look at it. Mr. Brown did say we have the honor of having Senator Daschle on our side; legislation was sponsored last year by him and we did get $1 million for the South Dakota tribes that have their own approved TANF tribe, and so far we are the only ones. Thank you.

DR. BROWN: You  are a 477 tribe. Just very briefly, what does that do for you?

MR. HEMINGER: That allowed us to integrate all our services into one area, one administration, public law. So it came out a couple of years ago. It's been real good for our services. It's been a benefit more to our participants than anything. We can have one person administer everything and it allowed that, and integration of other services that were there.

MR. JOE FINKBONNER, LIFE CENTER DIRECTOR, LUMMI NATION: My name is Joe Finkbonner. I'm the health and social services director for the Lummi tribe. Currently the Lummi tribe is deciding whether we should do TANF or not. Our tribe is very hesitant about taking on risk. Our own experiences with our GA program of knowing that when it was the BIA there was a caseload of 23, and then once we took it over, it went up to 115.

We feel that this will be the case as well for any TANF programs that we start offering, for that's when we'll truly see what our caseload will be.

We've been working with the employment security department and DSHS in Bellingham, which is very close to our reservation, but it's still a huge barrier for our tribal members because of the transportation issue. To establish the Work First Services -- Work First is the TANF state activities with regard to TANF -- out at the Lummi reservation.

What we plan on doing is consolidating a lot of our programs that we already have together, and still maintaining their integrity behind the scenes.

We have JTPA; we operate general assistance. We also have a training program which is for our LIBC employees, but we plan on expanding that further to the community members overall, and we also are going to work our human resources, TARO, and we've got a dislocated workers' federal grant as well, which all of these programs are going to be housed together because they're largely employment-related.

We're approaching this with the premise there of operating TANF. But what we're trying to do is remove the risk factor, and that first to accurately identify

QUESTION: In the food stamps waivers that went through the description for a service delivery area was based on an old criminal code, from what I understand. And that's not consistent with the message that you gave on your NPRM. Is there going to be a way to make those definitions consistent so that you can design programs that are going to be able to use the same service delivery area as you would for the rest of your program?

MR. APODACA: Basically, the service area is the reservation boundaries or BIA-defined service areas. But like I said, you can go outside of those areas through a negotiation with the state. You can reach an agreement with the state to service your population outside, or on or near populations. But it would require negotiations with the state.

MR. GRANT: I'm John Grant. I'm with the Klammath tribes in Oregon. We were the first TANF award in Indian country. One of the things that we were working with on TANF had to do with that 50 percent issue. As far as the TANF plan goes, we did use BIA labor statistics, labor force statistics, and we are exempt. But we are not acting in our plan as if we're going to give our clients exemption forever, so to speak, or for the 24-month or the five-year or 60-month limits.

What we've done in our plan, we've done -- actually, in our plan, we followed what was called "the Oregon option," where, in actuality, you can only receive 24 months of TANF payments or services within an 84-month period of time. But there were a number of exceptions written into our plan so as that -- for example, if a client were just participating and making progress in their TANF plan, they would not have the 24-month limit. We can keep a client on as long as we've determined that they're making progress.

When you write your plans and you submit your plans, you submit them in such a way as to make it advantageous to the tribes so you will not face all those penalties. But at the same time in your terms of your implementation, you implement your plan as if you had these time limits available.

MR. APODACA: Some people will look at the fact that there's not a mass of tribes doing TANF as a negative. I think it's a positive. I think it's a good sign that tribes are taking the time to examine the thing, really study it and really understand, like in their case, before they jump into the thing. The other thing is, why should you do TANF? Because nobody -- the state and the federal government, no bureaucrat sitting anywhere else in the world can tell you what's best for your people and knows how to deal with your people like you do at the ground level. You're there, you're in touch, you're the best to do the job.

MS. MEYERS: I agree with Ray. Take on the TANF program if you are ready to help tribal members foster their self-sufficiency skills, boost their self-esteem, address their AODA and mental health issues and make sure that there is job creation going on at the same time and job development. We know our tribal members better than anyone else. We know their needs. We know how to do it.

MR. HEMINGER: And by taking on TANF, we're helping our own people and we're strengthening our own sovereignty. And that's one whole thing behind it all. Our tribe is a treaty tribe, and that's one of the reasons that we took it. We figure, like these other panelists have said, we can help our own people better than anybody else can because we know them, we live with them, we see them, and we're there every day.

MR. FINKBONNER: I see the major advantage in a tribe operating its own TANF program, as reflected in some of the comments already stated. But also, that nobody is going to have the dedication to your people like your own tribe will.
 

Panel 2 - Job Creation and Job Training Programs

DR. BROWN: As welfare reform is implemented in Indian country, Tribes will be challenged , employment training, to address the issues of economic development and education. So today, we hope to touch a little on all of those, so we will begin by talking with, or having Tom talk with us in regards to the Department of Labor, welfare reform and anything else that goes with that.

MR. THOMAS DOWD, CHIEF, DIVISION OF INDIAN AND NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR: I just want to share one important thing for you to put a little perspective on the Department of Labor's involvement with Welfare to Work and how it touches on welfare reform in general.

Within the Department of Labor, Division of Indian Native American Programs, we have, under Title IVA and 2B, the total sum of about $60 million.

We have received 79 Welfare to Work plans. We have reviewed and approved about 25 of those. The remaining 50 or so have been reviewed initially and are pending additional information and some corrections. None of these are major and they will move forward.

We've brought together representatives from 12 different tribes throughout the country to ensure that the implementation process would, in fact, be based on consultation with tribes and a commitment to tribal initiative and strategies with how they would see this program work best for them.

The Department of Labor is also working with our partners at the Department of Health and Human Services, and particularly the Division of Tribal Services in trying to coordinate. Our implementation, therefore, is with their TANF responsibilities and Native Employment Works Program.

We realize that Welfare to Work does allow for job creation and we have tried to be as flexible as we can as permissible by law to ensure that tribes can describe how they want to, in fact, utilize the allowable activities to perhaps do that -- create jobs wherever appropriate.

Most importantly, we see this as a continuing process to work with the tribes in improving and distilling what we hope will be a program that is successful for the tribes.

DR. BROWN: What does this Welfare to Work do that's different from any of the others? What does it add, or is it only for certain things?

MR. DOWD: The employment training programs have always been, historically been predicated on providing employment training. The very opposite of the coin for Welfare to Work is put people to work, not train them. And so that is the opposite side of that coin, that is very different than what we've always been responsible for administering and working with tribes on. So that caused us all to think how best to use the resources we have. We have over 187 tribes and Indian organizations that have employment training programs currently. Many of them, of the 79, will be also administering the Welfare to Work program.

They have to now begin to look at their plans; how do we do employment training and utilize those resources, at the same time utilize our Welfare to Work resources for the eligible TANF recipients. The Welfare to Work program as you, again, probably already know, is targeted toward a specific slice of the TANF population. And so it is there, it's additional money, it's $30 million over two years that we didn't have before in Indian country, but it does have its narrow window of opportunity and we think it's an important one, and we're going to be working with tribes to help them to sort of sort through in their strategies how best to put those TANF recipients that are eligible into work.

If a tribe has a TANF-approved plan they're eligible. If they have a former Jobs Now Native Employment Works Program, they're eligible. Any tribe that does not meet those two criteria, though, still have an opportunity into what we call "substantial services." They can come forward and work with the department and negotiate, hopefully through providing this information, to substantiate that they have provided, through some form of employment training services, services to at least 20 percent of that population that -- or former AFDC or public recipient-eligible clients, as well as have served at least 50 in terms of total number.

So it's a combination of both. I want to make sure that we don't end up with programs that are extremely tiny, that the amount of money would be so negligible it wouldn't be much help. And we have a number of tribes who have come forward who have met that criteria and others we're still negotiating with -- trying to clarify what is their material and their data that, yes, you don't necessarily have to just be a TANF or new tribe to be eligible for the program.

MR. NORM DEWEAVER, DIRECTOR, INDIAN AND NATIVE AMERICAN EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING COALITION: In terms of helping people to reduce their dependence on public assistance and address the conditions of poverty in reservation areas, we look at the fact and it's been said again and again in this day and many other discussions, that employment is central. It may not be the only answer; child support enforcement is also extremely important. But employment is clearly the key for most people if they're going to be able to feed their families without resort to public assistance.

That is, of course, true no matter what the tribe decides to do about TANF. If a tribe decides to go into TANF, the first question is, what are we going to do to be able to move people into work, and what role can the tribal employment services play in that process. If the tribe is not going to undertake TANF at least in the short run, the same question is there. In order to assist tribal families that are on assistance, what can a tribe do to help move them into work?

The resources available to tribes are limited. The employment resources available to the tribes will not attain their maximum effectiveness as stand-alone programs. The money from any individual program is too small, and the difficulty in being able to help people piecemeal, those difficulties are too great. Services need to be integrated in order to capitalize on what is available.

There is one way to do that. It is not appropriate in the case of all tribes, but it is appropriate in the case of a number where, legally, the money can actually be rolled into one pot, run as a single program under a single budget, under authority that passed -- legislation that passed the Congress in 1992, commonly referred to as Public Law as 102477.

I don't think it's a coincidence that of the 10 TANF tribes, two of them are running their TANF programs through 477, and the 11th plan that's pending is also a 477 tribe. It enables that kind of integration where people can be served by coming into one room and getting services before they walk out of that room without the tribe having to worry about how do we account for the money, program by program.

We've talked about the need for job creation, and that's a very serious need. The issue about infrastructure is a real one. The issue about financing for tribal enterprises and other Indian enterprises is a real one. But I would submit there is a glimmer of hope. There are some things that can be done within existing tribal employment and training programs. We have, under all the programs, entrepreneurial training and micro enterprise development as an allowable activity now under all of the tribal employment and training programs I'm familiar with. I can't speak for the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Under Welfare to work, we've achieved a breakthrough. We now have legislation which says specifically that you can subsidize wages in the private sector without limitation, without limitation under Welfare to Work money. We also have in Welfare to Work the opportunity to address the job retention issue. These are options we did not have in the former programs. I think we're moving in the right direction. We've got a long way to go, but there is some potential for job creation-oriented services within what we have, particularly in Welfare to Work.

State resources are also essential in expanding tribal resources. In those cases where states can work with tribes to develop tribal state agreements for the coordination of services, it is possible to increase the amount of services available to tribal members, even in some cases when the tribe itself is not delivering those services. I would point to the Tribal State Agreement in North Dakota as a very good example of that constructive collaboration; in that particular case, centered heavily upon employment resources and child care resources.

The key issue is how to move tribal people off welfare, how to make tribal families economically self-sufficient. Employment resources are a key part of that solution.

DR. DAVID GIPP, PRESIDENT, UNITED TRIBES TECHNICAL COLLEGE: In North Dakota we've been practicing welfare reform for about 29 years. We focus on American Indian families and children. And so what we really try to do is practice the issue of training and vocational education and even higher ed training with the whole family. And we're very, I suppose, unique in that sense, but we also have a very good opportunity because we are campus-based.

Tribes that have colleges have an advantage in addressing the issues of welfare reform, particularly when we talk about issues of training and higher education.

We serve about 40 different tribes annually at our place at United Tribes. And all of the issues that relate back to Indian country and to rural reservation life are some of the things that each of our children and our adult families face when they come to our campus; they bring some of those social and behavioral and other learning skills issues. So those are some real critical issues that really still need to be addressed with respect to welfare reform.

If there's any major flaw in the welfare reform law, it's what has been pointed out. It's a work type of law. It does not really adequately account for issues of training, of skills-learning, of literacy and of the long-term issue of getting our population up to a level -- educational level where they can successfully compete with respect to economies. So I guess that's the major obstacle as I would look at it with respect to the current law.

In regard to our tribal colleges, welfare reform and what's happening there I think are impacting on the 30-plus colleges that we have in the United States, tribal colleges that we have in the United States, in a twofold manner. One is that enrollments are going to, or have begun to increase from anywhere from 20 percent to 150 percent, depending on what particular reservation or tribal government you're talking about and where there is a tribal college. Ft. Peck Community College, for example, has seen a tremendous growth that it will probably be about 160 percent in terms of increases of numbers that they will serve through some of their training programs.

Likewise, they are working with the TANF program to do a lot of the different kinds of orientation and other kinds of skills development that are necessary for some of those people that will be or that are on the TANF programs. At United Tribes, we're serving 60 additional slots for child care in our child care centers for TANF recipients, and providing additional support services so that some of those people can meet some of the work requirements, they can participate in things like cooperative education, additional classroom training, do their volunteer training requirements, develop their own social and job skills and goals, and do that both in terms of the day programs as well as the evening programs, because time is short with respect to TANF recipients.

There is another significant piece of policy information that is happening. The White House Executive Order on Tribal Colleges and Universities. This White House Executive Order on Tribal Colleges and Universities is significant to Indian country for a number of reasons which I won't go into all of them, but the point is that this is the last executive order with respect to first Americans.

DR. BROWN: We're talking about probably, when we talk about our tribal populations on TANF, probably the hardest to place and the hardest to work with population group. We're talking to people who predominantly -- and I don't know what percent you might have, but in some of the other tribes, over 50 percent who lack GED's, who have no education or little education or their reading levels are far below the average who have no work experience, et cetera. What can higher education do? What can a tribally-controlled community college do to support a group like that who aren't ready to enter a college?

DR. GIPP: I think we need to expand our services, for one thing, and one of the issues that I mention when we talk about the increase in loads that are coming on the tribal colleges is that they're doing that with no really great increase in their existing appropriations. But we can and we have provided a lot of that skills development, and it's very, very critical for any of our folks going through these programs to be able, as I said, to successfully compete. I think it's very important that we coordinate our activities. And that's what we've begun to do in North Dakota among the tribal colleges in that region, but also coordinate with programs like the JTPA programs that Chief Dowd mentioned here. There is a very important role for assessment, including educational assessment in all of this, both in terms of the development of family self-sufficiency plans under TANF, in terms of identifying some of the barriers that are required to enable one to participate in Welfare to Work programs, and I think the tribal colleges have a very unique role to play because their capability in taking on those assessment services as well as the educational services that follow.

DR. BROWN: Tom, welfare to work doesn't really address training and education; it addresses how do you keep people in a job. Is that going to be sufficient?

MR. DOWD: Well, that's correct. But one thing, going back to your initial question, nothing is ever absolute, so in 24 months for some people it will work, but for all people, probably not. And those tribal leaders and those who are implementing the service delivery systems will have to look at whether or not they need an amendment to make that more realistic.

But I would add that even though welfare to work is predicated on putting people to work tribal colleges in the system can work with the tribes, they can work together with the tribal colleges as a part of post-employment services. If you're able to get a welfare to work recipient who is TANF eligible into a job, that person may also be enrolled in any of the tribal colleges as part of the post-employment. Part of the idea is to upgrade their skills so they can keep that job and advance and move on to other things.

So there is that part of it that the department, I think, has taken a very bold step in interpreting the law to say that it's allowable, because initially it was felt that there really was no provision at all for training, but there is some that has to be post-employment.

QUESTION: Norm, people -- I've heard some of the statistics of the TANF tribes and other tribes under 477 a dramatic kind of reduction in putting people to work.

MR. DEWEAVER: There have been caseload reductions. I think Councilman Heminger mentioned the figures for Sisseton-Wahpeton whose economic circumstances are perhaps not quite as good as some of the other tribes. I think one of the interesting things to me is that, yes, in fact, welfare reform has resulted in a number of people that are working, who have also a number of people who have gotten badly hurt by welfare reform, particularly state-administered programs, but that there is an added stimulus, and there are services available, including increased child care services, a variety of other services that people can take advantage of. It's a matter of getting them up to the point where they can do that.

I would like to say a good word for the Division of Tribal Services in terms of their work with tribes negotiating TANF plans on being willing to negotiate what work activity is. I think that's a very important step. I was very surprised they took it because it does go a bit beyond the edge of the law, so to speak, pushing the envelope; but that there's a spectrum of activities available, from very sheltered activities where people in community service positions can get a lot of support, all the way up to a completely competitive workplace environment.

A PARTICIPANT: I just wanted to follow up on a statement that Norm made. When you go in to look at the NPRM, the proposed rules that we're going to be publishing, one of the areas you need to look at is that -- exactly that in terms of definitions. Because we have, in fact, as Norm said, chosen to push the envelope, whereas in state TANF programs, education is not considered related work activity and does not count toward your participation rates and is not a basic element in eligibility. We are proposing greater flexibility in allowing education activities related to work development preparation to be allowed, and that is going one step beyond, and tribes really need to look at that real closely and make that an element of your planning and your negotiation.

MR. DOWD: On the business end of trying to administer programs, we don't actually deal with legislation. But let me just say that within Welfare to Work, the tribes do have the flexibility which you do not have under the employment training programs, JTPA, to create jobs and provide a wage subsidy. To me, that's a tremendous opportunity for tribes that otherwise have been sort of cut out of that sort of option under JTPA. And so to the degree that you're able to create some jobs and provide the wage subsidy, both private and public, that, I think, will be of some benefit to tribes.

DR. BROWN: There have been a number of initiatives tried to stimulate economic development on reservation, but it hasn't been all that successful in the long run. What are some creative things that are happening that we can maybe pin our hopes on here in the near future that will allow us to marry that economic development with welfare reform?

A PARTICIPANT: I think that people do have to kind of look at the options that are there, particularly in terms of entrepreneurial type of activity, which might be more appropriate in a rural area in any event. It's particularly important to get a dialogue going between the economic development community which by and large has not paid much attention to the welfare population and people interested in social welfare that, by and large, have not paid much attention to economic development. This is particularly crucial because we're talking about a population that is largely female, and by definition has children. So that particular target group is not a traditional target group for the economic development community, and that dialogue is crucial and is necessary for a start, but that's not to say that money isn't essential, you're absolutely right; where that money is going to come from is not clear.

MS. DAVIS: Hello. My name is Tanya Davis, and I'm the policy director with First Nations Development Institute. And on the issue of economic development and what can be done in communities and some of the different options, I wanted to bring up the concept of IDAs, which are individual development accounts. They're leveraged savings accounts that allow people to save with an incentive -- usually a one-to-one match -- towards things like education, home ownership, business development. We're issuing an RFP to do a demonstration on that issue. We're including a wider range of issues, such as saving for subsistence activities so that we can supplement things in a more culturally appropriate way to look at other issues that might be there, whether it's the need for transportation.
We're also looking at some of the options that are out in Congress. IDAs are allowed underneath welfare reform. Twenty-five states have IDA programs. I don't know if the tribes are looking at it; the ones that I've talked to have not. It's also allowed under welfare to work. There is legislation in Congress, S-12555 HR2849 that is legislation to create a $100-million IDA demonstration program. In typical oversight fashion, tribes aren't currently included, but they will be, I am assured, when the bill does hopefully make it to committee. But there are options out there.

MR. HOMER: My name is Pete Homer, President and CEO of the National Indian Business Association. This past Tuesday, we had a Hub Zones Act of 1997 Symposium at the Russell Senate Office Building and we discussed the plans for the HUB zones program (historically underutilized business zones). Indian reservations are HUB zones. This is a job creation/welfare reform incentive. And what we feel is that right now we're developing and helping the Small Business Administration develop the rules and regulations for the Indian portion of that program.

We're very optimistic about this program because we feel that jobs are very important on Indian reservations. We will know more at the end of April around -- we're trying to implement the program on June 2nd of this year. We feel that it's a bipartisan program, it passed December 2nd. The federal agencies are putting that in motion. Its 10 agencies are going to mandate one percent of all of the contract dollars to go to this program, which is $7 billion to $8 billion.

This is going to be a shot in the arm for the existing 8A companies that are out there, the graduated 8A programs that are out there, new programs, bringing non-Indian businesses to Indian reservations as partners with the Indian tribes or other individual Indian businesses.

It's up to the Indian businessmen to come together and help write those rules and regulations and see that the program is implemented, and we're involved in that.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs fits into this because they certify which reservations are HUB zones. And they give all the statistics to the Small Business Administration for implementing that program. The statistics would be based on unemployment, underemployment and economically disadvantaged people.

DR. GIPP: For those that weren't aware of it, NAHASDA, the Native American Housing Assistance Self-Determination Act is a block grant system now that's going to replace the old housing system, and that program is also being forced to work with Welfare to Work. So the little money they're providing for us is also sort of saddling that and strapping that responsibility on the housing entities now.

However, with regards to that, I'd like to know from the panel or anybody here how people are anticipating working with Welfare to Work, School to Work and enterprise zones. So I'd like to see what's been developed with regards to that, because I haven't heard anybody mention School to Work or enterprise zones. I'm glad Mr. Homer mentioned the HUB zones. The other thing is, as far as creativity, last night we were speaking to a gentleman from Oklahoma.

DR. BROWN: Let's have a response from the panel. What about those programs he mentioned and how they're working together. Particularly, this is the first time we've heard of the School to Work, which has certainly been active out there in the community, but we've yet to hear in regards to employment or training.

MR. DOWD: There is a very small amount of money for the Indian set-aside for schoolwork and there are a number of awards. I don't believe there are more than 20 at this point. So it just depends on those who have gotten the grant awards in terms of how they're working through their tribe to coordinate those at the local service delivery area. There's no mandate by the department that has to be done, but certainly it is desirable; but it's up to them to develop that strategy.

MR. DEWEAVER: Just very briefly, it's an interesting example of how these programs are all in different compartments. Somebody pointed out to me when Welfare to Work started that, given its target population, which is people that have been on assistance for 30 months or more, going back into AFDC, that almost by definition excludes teen parents. So by definition, of "excludes," the younger people that might be affected by that who might be the target population for School to Work.

To me, it's another argument for integration and for a tribe's ability, inside or outside of 477, to be able to have an overall master design for what can be done to marshal a number of resources, both tribal resources and resources that are available in the non-Indian community, to be able to work in some kind of together way to make these things work, because if you look at the things program by program, you've got formidable barriers in terms of the reach of any one program.

DR. BROWN: Is there one creative thing that a tribe could do in tying employment and economic development together, what would it be?

MR. DOWD: a clear understanding about all of the programs that are available currently and how you can mix and match integrate them in a way that best develops the service delivery for you in your community.I still think that the 102477 program is an excellent program by law that allows tribes to consolidate their employment training programs.

MR. DEWEAVER: In the economic development business, it is common to be able to line up a bunch of incentives to talk to potential entrepreneurs or investors that are interested in starting up a business. I think more could be done in that respect.

DR. GIPP: I think, really, tribes need to take a hard look at matching up human resources to this issue of economic development. If we don't do that, then we tend to respond to carrot and stick approaches. In other words, the first thing that's out there or the first thing that we're forced to do. And we really need to take a look at that. And that's why I emphasize that critical issue of literacy, curriculum development at the local level, what we need to do in terms of changing the requisites of welfare reform that fit us more appropriately, and a third, of really doing the collaborations that I talked about earlier. And we need to begin to do that at the local level and then we need to make sure that it happens at the national level.
 

Panel 3 - Federal/State/Tribal Partnerships

MR. JOHN MEREDITH, TRIBAL WELFARE REFORM COORDINATOR, STATE OF MONTANA DIVISION OF CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: Montana had its own welfare reform package in February of 1996. In fact, we started implementation in February of 1996. The Assiniboine and Gros Ventre at Ft. Belknap were involved because they did not have a tribal jobs program. Most of the tribes, at least in Montana at that time, decided that they would not go on their own, and that was because of a lack of any kind of demographic information and because they knew that the state or felt that the state probably wouldn't continue with the state chair. We have community advisory councils in the state of Montana, we asked that they go ahead and think about doing that at the reservation level. And they're looking at, shall we go ahead and file our own state plans, or shall we do something maybe as an interim step, which we call "community operating plans."

Montana does have a post-secondary education option. We had that available to us in our original plan, we grand fathered it in, so post-secondary education in Montana is and will remain to be an allowable work activity. We make approximately $40,000 available to each tribe to do that with and it's available each year of the biennium. What we saw was that things were not working as well as they should there, and that people needed a lot more information. There needed to be some demographic studies done, and that whatever happened on the reservation, at least in my view, needed to be culturally appropriate.

MR. DENIS TURNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRIBAL CHAIRMANS' ASSOCIATION: A bill called AB1542 authorizes what is called "Cal Works in California," and from then on, we had our input into the committee that did allow language specifically so that tribes could obtain a match from the state of California to develop their TANF and Welfare to Work programs. We do have an agreement with the state to develop our Welfare to Work, and/or TANF programs. That's not easy because tribes need some kind of safety net because they don't have surpluses of money.

Some of the gaming tribes have diversified and they're going into other businesses. So we knew where we were going to have jobs at and think out what would be the best-possible jobs in the future.

We have a provisionally approved TANF plan currently, and we have agreements with the counties. The state of California has agreed to match the federal grant, so we have a 50-50 match, and there is a cost to the tribes in terms of what they invested some years ago. Tribal/State relations have come along way in California.

What we did was to form an advisory committee to get input from the tribes. We developed a mission statement, which is: "To promote and achieve meaningful tribal involvement in the development, implementation and review of the California Department of Social Services programs and services that address the needs of Indian children and their family."

We have four primary objectives. The first is to achieve meaningful involvement of the Indian Advisory Committee members appointed, designated -- that were appointed and designated by tribal leaders to represent their organizations in developing and establishing priorities related to social service issues of concern for Indian children and their families. Second, we seek to promote and provide and opportunity for the California Department of Social Services to provide technical assistance and support to Indian communities and their families. Third, we encourage collaboration and coordination between the counties and the Indian tribes in providing social services to Indian communities and families. We have 58 counties in California. I've talked to other states that have more counties, but not as large or huge geographic area as we have on the West Coast. We also are providing training to our own staff so that they are more sensitive to the history of California and the relationship between the tribes because it wasn't common knowledge, at least not in state government, and certainly not in our department, as to why there was so much distrust between government and our tribal members. And finally, we continue to strengthen the relationship with Indian communities to enable Indian tribes to fully implement the intent of the Indian Child Welfare Act and most recently -- as I said, goals always evolve. We know that all of our tribes are not going to be able to implement tribal TANF; we know that.

Our follow-up activities include: forming partnerships with state government agencies that have programs that fully impact Indian country. The Department of Social Services, certainly, the Employment Development Department because that is going to be the funding stream for Welfare to Work. The Department of Community Services and Development and the Department of Health Services, just to name four that we've formed in terms of a collaborative in getting information out to our tribal members, but also receiving input as to what kind of work we're doing in California.

We've also partner shipped with the CIMC and tribal leaders and of course, with this organization to try and get the word out about what needs to be done.

MR. BUSHMAN: Is the state of Montana going to provide the state match to those tribes in Montana who assume TANF responsibilities? Because, as everyone in this room can imagine, without that state money, tribal TANF is really an illusion for just about every tribe without its own resources to put into it. And the number of tribes that have that capability are few and far between.

MR. MEREDITH: The state's position right now, John, is that we will provide the match through June 30th of 1999, and that's because of the allocation that the '97 legislature made.

Beyond that, I'm a little bit skeptical because I know that we didn't believe that there could possibly be a more conservative legislature in Montana than the 1995 legislature, and sure enough there was in '97, and so we're expecting something similar to happen in '99.

DR. BROWN: In the case of Salish and Kootenai, you would have state commitment for matching funds for at least one year of the plan. Rhonda, in a tribe, are you willing to submit a three-year plan to us knowing that you're only going to have one year of state funding, a commitment, and then sort of bet , if you will, that an additional two years of funding will be there?

MS. RHONDA WHITING, CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES: We believe that if no tribe put in with that 30 percent match, that they were more apt to lose that 30 percent match from the legislature. If we are able to put it in and we have been successful as far as being a self-governance tribe and feel like we have the capabilities, then we pave the way and it's going to be much harder for them to take that money away and to reallocate.

DR. BROWN: I'm going to ask in conclusion if each of you would just take 30 seconds and tell what you think is the most critical things in building or establishing state tribal relations that has been most important to you in your work. And let's start over here with Rhonda.

MS. WHITING: I think going through that process and sitting down face to face has been a real advantage for us. We are now coming up with a model and looking out for the other tribes within our state in how they can work with the state programs.

MS. CHARLENE LEWIS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS: I think the key is developing a meaningful partnership which starts with respect and understanding. I think what other states can do, as California has done, is to realize that our officials, our staff don't know everything and don't have a great sense of education about the history of California and the tribes.

So the first thing, first, foremost, would be to provide that training of cultural sensitivity. The other thing I need to mention is that every tribe should be thinking about the community service part of welfare reform. Even if you don't implement TANF, you're going to have someone implementing and someone telling people they have to have some type of work experience.

MR. TURNER: We've been talking in this conference about sovereignty. Creating an opportunity for a tribe to operate their own welfare reform program is an exercise in sovereignty. The best advantage that you can give your tribal members is what you offer them first at home. I think TANF and Welfare to Work, which is a big part of California's overall social service reforms, is really an advantage for tribes. And not only that, we can go on to compact the other things that we need, All we need to do, as Sen. Inouye stated yesterday, is to work with the states. And I really believe what he had to say, and that welfare reform is an opportunity to continue developing those state/tribal relations.
 

Panel 4 - Children and Family Support Services

MR. DONALD SYKES, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICES, ACF/DHHS: In the Office of Community Services, we have a number of programs that really do focus on trying to move people out of poverty. Many of you are already familiar with the fact that our office operates the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) funds which fund some of you directly or through community action agencies in your communities. The Low-Income Energy Assistance program and the Domestic and Family Violence programs are two others that help in these efforts. I mention these simply because I want to lay out the litany of programs available to tribes.

In all three, the Energy Assistance, CSBG and Family Violence, there is a set-aside for tribes. And those all three come out of our particular office, as does the Social Services Block Grant of Title XX which goes to the states. And, of course the tribal TANF program.

The importance of those programs, I think, is that those along with some programs that are discretionary, we have the jobs for low-income individuals, or JOLI, as we call it, and the Rural and Urban Community Economic Development and Community Food and Nutrition. Those three are discretionary programs that are given out on a highly competitive basis. What we've tried to do with the JOLI program for the last five years is to look at the kinds of things that really are important to moving people out of poverty or off of welfare.

Post-employment support is in a very crucial one. I think there's been a lot of focus in welfare reform on getting people jobs, but getting a job is one thing; maintaining a job is equally important and, often times, more difficult. So what we have been working on with JOLI is also looking into the whole issue of micro-business development.

We have been trying to center a lot of what we do around the issues of transportation and moving people from where they live to where we think the jobs are. We are also interested in focusing in on economic development activities in communities where people live. I think this is going to become increasingly important when we move people off of welfare who have no experience in employment, who have very little education and may have substance abuse or other problems. It's going to be hard to move them out of their communities into competitive environments with other folks.

To me, placed employment, placed economic development should be a focus in Indian country because land is tied to that whole issue. You should look at how to create and develop those kinds of comprehensive approaches that will provide the social service support you want. Also, begin to prepare a strategic plan for your community, similar to what the goals are for empowerment zones and enterprise communities. It would be advantageous for tribes to look at what their community problems are and develop a comprehensive plan that brings together education, social services and economic development.

MS. JANET WISE, CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL INDIAN CHILD CARE ASSOCIATION: What I want to talk about briefly is that the authorization of the Child Care and Development Block Grant in 1990 afforded tribes the availability of dollars, federal dollars to provide comprehensive child care services. We've been able to increase the availability in a majority of areas of Indian country for services for children. Reauthorization in 1995 afforded us other funding resources that we didn't have previously.

There had been six major child care sources that the states were able to enjoy, but the tribes were not. So as of 1995, they put those sources together and created the Child Care Development Funds. What we're looking at, though, is that is not enough money. There is a one- to two-percent set-aside within welfare reform for child care services. Previously, with the 1990 authorization, we had 3 percent set-aside. Even though the monies increased because of the funding sources, the number of tribes applying for child care services also increase. So although the pot rose, it also decreased with the increased number of participants and tribes.

The President has come recently in January and announced A $21.9-billion program for child care. What we're looking at there is the only money set aside for Indian tribes is within the child care and development block grant. So we're seeking help for those resources within his initiative.

A problem that we have in Indian country is, training is not available for child care providers. Child care providers are probably paid the least amount of money of anyone.

There are several major child care proposals right now in the Senate and in the House. We're seeking assistance from the tribes on those as far as lobbying or advocating for more funds. There are no tribal set-asides in any of these bills. The first one is, of course, the President's proposal. The second is the -- it's called SID-Care Act, Senate Bill 1037. This bill uses the Tax Code to address afford ability issues, but there's no direct subsidies for child care in that.

The Early Childhood Development Act of 1997, S. 1309, increases the child care block grant by $3.75 billion within five years. That does have a tribal set-aside, but it's still at that lower percentage of 2 percent.

The Healthy and Smoke-Free Children's Act, S. 1492, sponsored by Sen. Kennedy, increases money to pay for child care services for low-income families by increasing cigarette taxes. There is also a Caring for America's Children, Senate Bill 1577, and a Senate Bill 1610, which is called the Child Care Access.

When we all first started with the Child Care and Development Block Grant, there was about 142 grantees. Now, there's 237 with the possibility of almost 400. So as you see that one pot of money cannot provide the kinds of services that the children need for all the tribes.

One thing that I wanted to add, too, is that child care services is not just putting children in a room and watching them all day long. There's comprehensive services as far as social services programs to the families that are involved.

DR. BROWN: Mr. Yazza, I know the Navajo Nation has been very much involved in welfare reform. You have a unique situation. You have three different states. You have, I guess, one central region that you report to. You're working with -- where most tribes have to deal just with one state, you're dealing with three different states, three different programs, trying to develop three different state tribal agreements, looking at services that range across the largest reservation in the nation. Give us your feedback or experience in regards to try to coordinate these services.

MR. ALEX YAZZA, WELFARE COORDINATOR, DIVISION OF SOCIAL SERVICES, NAVAJO NATION: What Navajo has that probably not many other tribes have is the experience in operating and the administration of several key programs that would make a TANF program very successful, at least within the Indian tribal program. One of the areas I want to touch on since we're talking about family support services and child care programs, what we administer at this point are several programs that already are outlined within the requirements of the law and the titles that you see within Section 412, also the titles that we have in the law itself. In addition to that, we have a number of other programs that are state as well as federally funded which we operate.

Just as an example in child care services, we provide services under the Child Care Development Block Grant Programs, which provides day care services, in-home care programs and before and after school programs for the Navajo kids. We also have Child Protective Services, which is funded under our Title XXVIII programs from the states of Arizona and New Mexico. From these 638-funded programs, we have child welfare assistance programs which provides youth home services, children in need of services and other specialized services for our children.

Currently, the Navajo Nation has a joint powers agreement with the state of New Mexico. We do have two state offices that we're working with -- one's in Crown Point and one's in Ship Rock, New Mexico which, in itself, has a unit that's already been established with the state Health and Human Services Department in regards to the child support issue.

MS. BACA: My name is Rebecca Baca, Managed Care Consultant with the National Indian Council on Aging. We've been tracking welfare reform and its impacts on elder programs for a while now. I would like to make the audience aware that we have five elders in our audience that are tracking the issues and have some pretty serious concerns about the impacts of welfare reform. I think this community of people will probably absorb a lot of the negative downside of if these programs don't work.

It is important to engage the single parent community in this, and also the elder community as advisory in the process of how do we really make this work. Oftentimes, we talk in a very technical sense at a very arms-length distance on these issues. Instead we need to take the extra effort and achieve that personal level of involvement. I can't tell you how many people I've literally taken by the hand and gotten them into a classroom, or GED program, or into college. It's a very difficult process, oftentimes, but one well worth the investment of time and effort. I would like to see a more personalized approach to our efforts, and also, to consider the elders as a wonderful source of wisdom in how we can really, truly address these issues. They should be offered the opportunity to become fully engaged in the process.

DR. BROWN: Good. Thank you. I know the Navajo tribe had made an extensive effort in developing a process, even in pictures, the use of pictures, to show what welfare reform meant for those elders that did not read or write English, that they could then follow along in Navajo as to what the program meant and its impact. But I think it's critical that we do capacity-building in the community to make sure we're going to have the support when the plan comes out. If I were to ask the question: If you were to go to your recipients right now and ask them, the tribes are going to take it over from the state, would they be happy, would they be nervous, or would they be saying no? And I think that's important to note, too, that you've got to build your constituency out there to make sure that when you take it over, you're going to have the kind of support and help from those recipients and community members as well.

DR. BROWN: Another issue of major concern is the lack of funding for adequate child care. Tribes are being asked to prioritize TANF clients under Head Start or other tribal child care programs. However, if we don't have enough child care money to begin with, what's going to happen if we take on these TANF clients? We're going to put the working poor out of child care as well. It's almost a give-and-take. How do we resolve that problem?

A PARTICIPANT: What we have to do is we have to look at developing people within our community and not only is there not enough money, but there is not enough child care providers. So we need to look at relatives, at grandparents, aunts, uncles, friends, relationships within the communities, try to develop those people into providers as far as child development curriculum and things that they need to be working with the children. And the tribes are going to have to start putting some money into child care.

Many of the tribes access federal dollars, but they don't put any tribal money into child care. We also need to look at state dollars. We need to go and apply through the state and try to access their money. The money that the states have, our children are all duly eligible for child care services with the state and with the tribes as a U.S. citizen, resident of their state and as a tribal member. So we have been lacking and only accepting federal dollars to the tribes. We need to go to the state and access money that our children are eligible for in this categories.

DR. BROWN: Some of the tribes have really worked out a state agreement. Indian clients have dual eligibility for child care services not only from the tribe, but also from the state. Some of those tribes that have been most successful have worked out agreements with the state as to the kind of recipients they were going to fund and the kind of recipients that tribes were going to use their money, and they've been able to really stretch those dollars in some creative ways.

Now, the last part -- you may have heard that the Navajo tribe, a number of months ago decided to take a new approach to rather than doing Section 412 in the legislation, that is, developing the tribal plan and submitting it through that legislative process, or that process has been laid out in the legislation, decided that they would take a different approach and look at the 638 process and said, why can't the tribe's 638 contract this and under 638 contracting. They have done that. I know a number of tribes have been following this and have been curious as to what's taken place.

I wanted Leila to just address that very briefly. Leila has had the opportunity, if you might want to call it, to chair the Welfare Reform Task Force there for the Navajo Nation and was partial in setting down in developing that approach. Could you just briefly tell us what the approach was and what the outcome is right now in that regard?

MS. LEILA HELP-TULLEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SOCIAL SERVICES, NAVAJO NATION: In Navajo Nation's effort, we are pursuing a 638 contract TANF plan. What we are doing in this effort is addressing forthcoming changes in BIA and IHS services. We've really taken a close look at the 638 amendments that happened as of 1994 to actually assess that and to see what opportunities could be available to us. And I know -- and this new authorization of amendments that have happened, that Indian tribes are going to be able to request for federal programs such as education, social services, health, law enforcement and many other federal programs, we have that opportunity that's available to us now.

These are the things that we've really begun to look at. Initially, we intended to maintain strict compliance with Section 412 of Pub. L. 104-193. But we realize, also, that we were very limited in resources to actually end up operating for our 27,000 recipients as to what would be best implemented. We end up initiating our efforts according to the 25 CFR Part 900, and this is where an outline is provided to us to say that the Secretary of DHHS shall, upon request of an Indian tribe or tribal organization is subject to the availability of appropriation, provide technical assistance on a non-reimbursable basis to such Indian tribes or tribal organizations to develop a new contract proposal or to provide for the assumption by Indian tribes or tribal organizations of any program, service, function or activity.

The Navajo Nation firmly believes that this is contractible under the Act. On October 7^th, 1997 we submitted our 638 application to implement TANF to the Secretary. On November 13th, the Navajo Nation received a fax copy of the letter from DHHS Secretary Shalala informing the Navajo Nation of her decision to decline the Nation's position 638 contracting our TANF plan.

The Secretary's reasons for denying our request are as follows: 1) the TANF program is intended to operate for the benefit of needy families without consideration for the status of these families as Indian or non-Indian; 2) the TANF program is not a program under which the federal government would otherwise directly provide services to Indian tribes pursuant to the federal law. Since a TANF program cannot be characterized as either a programs that operate for the benefit of Indians because of their status as Indians, or, a program under which the federal government would otherwise directly provide services to Indian tribes, our request to 638 contract TANF was denied. The Secretary's summation was that pursuant to federal law, the TANF program cannot be lawfully carried out by an Indian tribe pursuant to the Pub. L. 93-638.

Another area the Secretary cited was that the TANF program is beyond the scope of programs, functions, services, or authorized under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance. She also indicated in the letter that her decision was final. But there is an opportunity under 25 CFR 900 that some options be provided. One of those options would be for Navajo to request an informal hearing. Another would be to appeal the process. And finally, there's always the option to enter the federal district court.

We carefully assessed and analyzed the whole appeal process with our legal department at the Navajo nation, and we decided to pursue the second option mentioned, which is to appeal the Secretary's decision. We asked for and filed a notice of appeal and on January 27^th, 1998 our notice of appeal was dismissed from the Department of Interior Board of Indian Appeals. The dismissal was based upon the grounds that the IBIA would end up affirming the Secretary's decision. The IBIA also stated that another option the Navajo Nation has is to pursue further action in federal district court.

As of this week, February 24th, Navajo Nation has filed a complaint with the U.S. District Court in Phoenix, Arizona. We are informed that the process would possibly take from 15 to 30 days, depending on if there is to be a settlement based on the briefings that could be entered in, or if the actual hearings kick in, then it could possibly take longer than that period. So Navajo is asking for a discovery and if hearings are to be held, to actually challenge the decisions that have been made.

The Navajo Nation firmly believes in the concept of self-governance. If we can challenge these decisions based upon the principles of self-governance, we may provide Indian country with a litmus test of the 1994 amendments. Let us pursue that as Indian country. It is important for all of us to know that as ideas of self-governance are pushed upon us as Indian nations, we end up taking that challenge as an Indian nation.

This is important for us, you know, as we've taken a lot of consultation from our elderly people. As we've conducted numerous public hearings, we've also done all of our education in Navajo. Many of our elderly people have strongly encouraged us to implement our own plan for our Navajo people. They feel that the tribe will be more sensitive to the issues that would be forthcoming.

DR. BROWN: Let me ask on that, what is the difference? Why push for 638 when you can get it through 412? What's the benefit of 638? And this is so that we can all understand what the issue is.

MR. YAZZA: Control. Seriously. We, as tribes and as the Navajo Nation, have a number of 638-funded contracts. With the times of BIA streamlining, budget reductions, budget cuts, somewhere, or rather, the Navajo tribe, or as well as any other tribes, has that opportunity to approach the Secretary DHHS, DOI and possibly DOL and say, look, we want to contract these dollars in a way that we're familiar with.

What we have also seen in our assessment is -- okay, we have welfare reform as Pub. L. 104-193 that we have to deal with. There's provisions in that law that calls for certain requirements that the tribe has to meet with. There is another law that just came out recently: 10533, which allows a one percent set-aside for tribes to establish a Welfare to Work program which would basically coordinate with the TANF program.

There is also another law previous to that -- Pub. L. 102-477, which is asking for consolidation of programs within the Indian tribes and Indian country so that these programs could be properly administered and that avenue. So we reflect back to 638 and say, look, we've done this, we have the experience, we have the authority to continue to provide these services under this law, so why are we faced and posed with all of these different requirements and regulations and so on and so forth, so that we can simply streamline the process, make things easier for ourselves and make things easier for those that we serve within Indian country.

The most underlining fact here is that we are basically again reminding the government that we are pursuing a self-determined initiative, we are pursuing a self-governance initiative, so let us continue to do so.

MS. TULLEY: Just a real quick response to that. Contract support costs, indirect costs, any type of pre-award costs for startup implementation and any of the monies -- 412 does not have any monies for tribes to implement this program. And we took a look at 638 as that option to do so.
 

Panel 5 - Impact Data Collection Methodologies

DR. BROWN: One of the major concerns is, is what is the data or the process that tribes are using to collect data to ensure that they have something to present to Congress. So the idea that becomes critical is to what tribes are doing in developing systems to collect information, to do case management and follow-up, but even more so, to be able to show the impact, whether positive or negative, in regards to Indian people.

DR. SHANTA PANDEY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, GEORGE WARREN BROWN SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK, WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: In the first year, we wanted to see what sort of administrative changes are being made in order to adjust with the new system. In the subsequent years we wanted to follow a group of former TANF recipients and current TANF recipients to see the strategies that they use in order to survive through the new system.

With this in mind, we have collected the first wave of data that is targeted toward looking at the administrative changes. We are currently looking at the nature of programs, processes and the kind of impacts they have. In addition, we are scrutinizing current administrative structures and available training programs to determine how congruent these programs are with regard to the type of jobs that are available. In tandem efforts include studies of demographic characteristics of welfare recipients who find jobs and those who don't find jobs as well as a look at major support services such as child care.

We also wanted to know how tribes are preparing for the impact of inflation. We know the dollars are fixed for the next five years; we wanted to know how they're going to plan to adapt with that.

Other necessary information includes impacts to local services and programs such as general assistance. Also, we want to know about other community-level variables such as crime, child abuse and neglect, and other factors: are they being affected in some form or the other?

We asked every reservation that we visited if they had other concerns that they would like us to take into account in our studies. Our goal is to help the policy makers, administrators and implementers provide up-to-date, as early as possible.

The next step that we have done is, we're still going to go in and try and see if we can get the Census data electronically so we can look at every single tribe in the nation. At this point, because we had to analyze manually, we are analyzing only for the state of Arizona.

The other thing we have done is to collect information that the BIA had from 1995 through 1997 to see how general assistance costs have risen, if at all, as well as any identifiable trends in increased child abuse and neglect cases. We are currently analyzing this data and will release it only aggregately. No information will be released by tribe, eliminating any concern over individual or tribal identity.

So far, the most important thing that we noticed was that the tribes wanting to go independent were also wanting to subcontract back to the state to operate the program. We could understand this type of practice because many tribes think that the states have the technical skills to implement the program for the time being, and most tribes are not ready to do that.

General assistance, other community-level information, general assistance, cost has not gone up since 1995. It hasn't gone up significantly -- 1995 and 1996 -- and we didn't expect it to go up, because in the state of Arizona even though they did start implementing the program two years ahead, they are -- the program two-year time limit ended on November 1st, so we expect that if, in case, general assistance does get affected, we expect to see it in the next few years.

We did notice that there is more coordination, collaboration and communication between the state service providers and the tribal service providers as well as within the tribes. Service providers are meeting more often trying to figure out what should be done, which in a way, has created somewhat of a blessing in bringing a lot of state program discussion to the tribal level.

There were barriers to employment. One of the major issues that we encountered in almost all the tribes that we visited were the lack of employment opportunities. The tribes remain socioeconomically, particularly economically, isolated completely from the economic boom. That is a major issue. Transportation and child support are major issues, as well.

MR. RICK ANDERSON, PRESIDENT, TRIBAL DATA RESOURCES: My company, Tribal Data Resources, has undertaken the task of developing a process, a uniform data collection process for all of Indian country, both for the reservations, for the membership of each reservation, each Native American Indian in the country, not just from within the tribe, but even in the urban areas.

We have developed the survey mechanisms that to a great degree address all the needs for the Bureau of Indian Affairs programs, for HUD's programs. We have recently made adjustments for the new regulations for the housing programs.

At the tribal level, we need to know information that's current and accurate. We find that the Census data, because it's virtually an impossible source to gain for every single tribal member, is skewed for two reasons: Number one, we have a lot of people who claim Native American heritage and have no social or economic ties to the reservations, and their information is being weighed against the Native American statistics.

The problem that we have with this is, we don't have names, addresses, phone numbers, we have no case history, we have nothing from the Census on those individuals where we're getting the data from.

Case management is being developed now. And I'm referring to the case management system that affects anyone dealing with welfare reform issues. These case management systems include not just AFDC program beneficiaries, but other social services programs which now come in to one intake system. It's very manageable. These systems are being put into place right now around the country and are being tested. Those systems can feed our system and other systems like ours as they become developed. Where our system reports on all Native Americans from a particular tribe, not just within our tribal land base, but wherever our members are across the United States, a case management system at my tribe is going to deal with it on or near my reservation, within my service area. But those statistics, as they change daily, through these case management systems can update these larger systems. So that's our place and that's the role that we have played and are currently expanding within Indian country.

DR. BROWN: Let me ask some of the tribes that are TANF tribes: What system do you have at Red Cliff that you're using now as far as your case management or tracking system?

MS. MEYERS: By paper and pen. Don't let the system's cost prohibit you from taking on case management.

MS. BIG POND: White Mountains is working with Eagle Sun's program. The White Mountain tribe is not actually in operation. They have an approved plan, they're still negotiating with the state.

MS. QUINCY: The only viable solution that we have come up with is to access the states' database with regards to welfare recipients and/or public assistance recipients, because we found that our tribal members, by and large, who are receiving our TANF services were also being asked to do monthly reporting on their income for food stamps as well as which was something different than the average participant in the AFDC program as a whole within the state they do not have to do.

We also want to say to our state that we would like access to the state's computer system -- that means full access, not just read only access. We want to be able to enter information into the system so that we can put data -- not necessarily data, but at least the monthly amount that they're receiving on a TANF grant into the system, then the other thing that we want to be able to do is to create a child support case.

MS. SANCHEZ: My name is Lorenda Sanchez, Executive Director of the California Indian Manpower Consortium based in Sacramento, California. CIMC has been very aggressive in the technological field, both in collecting demographics for our tribes as well as being one of the major investors in the Eagle Sun Case Management Development Program. Both are important and our initial involvement with the demographics for the tribes had nothing to do with a foresight of the need in welfare reform; it was more in that our funding, especially for our job training programs, is based on the 1990 Census. Although we tried to do a really good job in getting our tribal members in our urban Indian communities counted, it was not a real successful job, particularly in California. And the demographic survey processed through tribal data resources was one of five different projects that we looked at before we made the investment. So our goal over five years was to survey all 102 tribes that are receiving some type of service through our organization.

The data case management system through Eagle Sun is a very expensive process. Our involvement only was agreed to because of the White Mountain and the Navajos' commitment to be partners in getting this whole thing actually started. One thing that hasn't really been mentioned here is, in the state of California, we did go to get legislation not only for the match, but we also made a request that the state utilize some of their dollars, both at state level and at county level, to help us design or have integration money for reporting and exchange of information. So we will be utilizing some of those state dollars or county dollars to perfect the case management and reporting system of those levels.

DR. BROWN: Good. Thank you. I think while we talk about the development of systems, people, I think it's important to point out from my estimation and looking, we have several tribes that are attempting to develop. I have yet to see one developed. And I say that only as a precaution that we're not there yet. What I know as we talk about White Mountain is certainly working. I've gotten various reports as to the progress on that and where they are on that.

Navajo tribe has decided to take a different initiative and do and RFP for theirs and have identified some dollars. But I've yet to know of any program that's in place, and I think that's still up for grabs in looking at what you might want to do and being as innovative as possible.
 

Conclusion

DR. BROWN: Welfare reform has been presented to the American people as a grand experiment that's going to take us into the 21st century. There has been a lot of talk today of great potential and promise of what can come out of welfare reform. We talk about for the first time being able to put together education and training programs that talk about unifying the resources that we have.

We talk about the possibility of redesigning and for the first time, rather than developing programs that reflect what the federal government has through 477, through 638, through Section 412, for the first time, we have within our grasp the opportunity to truly design programs that reflect the needs of tribes and individual tribal members.

I think that's important that there has to be a time of some real analysis and to watch those other tribes who have taken the lead and to follow them closely. We need to also be looking at creative negotiation with the state.

One of the problems when you look at some of the early TANF plans as well, many of those reflect very closely to state plans. And we know that some of them are beginning to rethink, renegotiate; that's a potential promise for these other tribes who are doing critical thinking of what can we do that's more creative, what can we do that's different. How can we negotiate the greatest flexible time requirements, work requirements that really fit the needs of our people.