Frequently Asked Questions | |
What is blood quantum? Blood quantum refers to amount of Indian blood. For example, if your grandmother is 100% Indian, your mother or father would be ½, and you would be ¼ assuming they were not married to another person of Indian descent. Who can I contact regarding health services for American Indians and Alaska Natives? | |
|
| |
What financial aid is available for American Indian and Alaskan Native students? The AAIA has six scholarship programs which are listed below (for additional information see scholarship page). The number of sources of financial aid available to American Indians and Alaska Natives are too numerous to list. The information that follows is a short sample of what you will find if you do a web search under "Financial Aid available to American Indian or Native American students." These sources either provide specific scholarships or guides where you can find scholarships and financial aid. You may also try to search the curriculum you wish to enter or the state in which you plan to attend school. Public and university libraries usually have books that list grant and scholarship information, and many universities have a 'center for the continuing education of women,' which is generally free to the public. Where can I find information regarding the adoption of an American Indian child and related materials? You
have rights under the Indian Child Welfare Act to access information that will
help you establish your relationship with your tribe. However, there are variations
in how state courts grant this access. Section 1917 of the Indian Child Welfare
Act provides that: National
Indian Child Welfare Association, Inc. FAQ's About Federal AcknowledgmentWhat is the purpose of Federal acknowledgment regulations? The
purpose of the Federal acknowledgment regulations is to acknowledge that a government-to-government
relationship exists between the United States and tribes which have existed since
first contact with non-Indians. Through the process, the Government determines
whether it should extend such a relationship to a particular petitioner. The acknowledgment
regulations do not apply to Indian tribes that are now acknowledged. They apply
only to those tribes which have not yet established such a government-to-government
relationship. The Secretary of the Interior has delegated authority to make acknowledgment decisions to the Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs under the Regulations governing Federal acknowledgment, found at 25 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 83. Most Federal regulations expand on a specific law or statute. However, the Federal acknowledgment regulations are based upon the general authority delegated to the Secretary of the Interior to deal with Indians under 25 United States Code (USC) Sections 2 and 9. Regulations are stronger than policy statements because they have gone through a process of public comment. On February 11, 2000, the Secretary amended the procedures for implementing the Federal acknowledgment process, in an attempt to streamline the process, making it more fair and consistent for both petitioners and interested parties who oppose certain petitioners. Since then, a number of expedited petitions have gone through the process to completion, or are on "Active Consideration," or have been placed on the list of tribes whose petitions are "Ready for Active Consideration." The
administrative work related to the review of petitions for federal acknowledgement
is conducted by the Acknowledgement and Research Branch (ARB), also called the
"Branch of Acknowledgement and Research" (BAR), in the Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA). The BAR staff typically consists of about eleven staff - professional
anthropologists, genealogists and historians - who evaluate petitions for Federal
recognition and make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs
on whether to approve or deny each petition. If the Assistant Secretary approves
the petition, he/she acknowledges tribal existence and formally establishes an
intergovernmental relationship between the tribe and the United States. Status of Petitions As of September 16, 2002, the BAR has received over 250 letters of intent and petitions from tribal groups seeking Federal recognition. Of these, 54 have been received final determinations: 37 by the Department of the Interior (15 acknowledged, 19 denied, one whose status was clarified by legislation, two whose status was clarified by other means and one whose status clarification is pending). There are currently 10 petitions on active status, after recent determinations, and 11 ready, waiting for active status. There are over 175 not yet ready for evaluation: 55 of which have submitted partial documentation for their petitions; 105 of which have submitted only a letter of intent to petition without any other documentation; and nine that are no longer in touch with the Department of the Interior. The FAP process is rigorous, demanding and time-consuming. Exceptional anthropological, genealogical and historical research is required. The cases on active consideration, including those with proposed findings, have been in the process for anywhere from 2 to 9 years. (S. Hrg. 106-569, p. 77, July 11, 2000, Letter from Ass't. Sec. Gover to Sen. Campbell, Chair., Sen. Comm. on Indian Affairs, in response to written questions following the May 24, 2000 hearing on S. 611, "a bill to provide for the administrative procedures to extend Federal recognition to certain Indian groups.") There has been little change since, according to the Department's June 11, 2002 testimony before the Sen. Comm. on Indian Affairs. Many petitions have been in the process much longer (as much as a century). The BAR processes, on average, one and one-half petitions each year. (Id. at 76). Resources for the BAR always have been submordnated to other priority needs in Indian Country. (S. Hrg. 106-569, p. 54, Statement of Honorable Kevin Gover, Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs.) In view of the existence of over 175 unprocessed petitions - even assuming that only the 55 that have submitted partial documentation will ever complete the process - it will take no fewer than 42 years to complete the processing of the present petition backlog. Who can petition for recognition? Under 25 CFR Part 83, an Indian group seeking to be acknowledged by the Federal government can submit a letter of intent to the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs requesting such acknowledgement. Who may not petition? Tribes, organized bands, Pueblos, Alaska native villages, and communities already recognized and receiving BIA services are not eligible for the FAP process. Neither can associations, organizations, corporations or groups of any character that have been formed in recent times (the fact that a group that meets the mandatory criteria under the regulations has recently incorporated or formalized its existing autonomous political process recently does not affect the Assistant Secretary's final decision on its petition). Splinter groups, political factions or groups of any nature that separate from the main body of a currently recognized tribe cannot be acknowledged under the FAP process unless the group can establish that it has functioned throughout history until the present as an autonomous tribal entity. Groups that are subject to Federal legislation terminating or forbidding Federal recognition as a tribe cannot be acknowledged under the FAP process. Groups that have petitioned without success cannot petition again. How was Federal acknowledgment done before the regulations went into effect? Before 1978, requests from Indian groups for Federal acknowledgment as tribes were determined on an ad hoc basis. Some tribes were acknowledged by Congressional action. Others were done by various forms of administrative decision within the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, or through cases brought in the courts. How were the Federal acknowledgment regulations developed? Requests for Federal acknowledgment increased in the 1970's. As a result, the Federal Acknowledgment Project (FAP) was started in the Department of the Interior. Regulations governing the administrative process for Federal acknowledgment first became effective October 2, 1978. The regulations were designed to provide a uniform process to review acknowledgment claimants whose character and history varied widely. When
the Federal Acknowledgment Project was first established, the regulations were
designated as Part 54 of Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations (abbreviated
as 25 CFR Part 54). The regulations were officially redesignated as Part 83 of
Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations (abbreviated as 25 CFR Part 83) by
Final Rule which was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol. 47, No. 61, pages
13326-13328, Tuesday, March 30, 1982. After an extensive process of public consultation
and comment, the Federal acknowledgment regulations under 25 CFR Part 83 were
revised in 1994. The revised regulations were published in the FEDERAL REGISTER,
Vol. 59, No. 38, pages 9280-9300, Friday, February 25, 1994. The revisions became
effective March 25, 1994 and are designated 25 CFR Part 83. These revised procedures do not change the acknowledgment regulations, 25 CFR Part 83. The Federal Acknowledgment process has a substantial backlog causing delays of years before the Branch of Acknowledgment and Research (BAR) begins to review a petition that is sitting, ready for active consideration, and years more before there is a final resolution of a petition on its merits. The Assistant Secretary -- Indian Affairs found it "essential to change the internal processes so that acknowledgment decisions may be made in a more timely manner." The Assistant Secretary -- Indian Affairs enabled these changes to provide a different means of implementing the existing regulations, primarily to reduce the overwhelming backlog of cases, "in order to resolve more expeditiously pending petitions for acknowledgment." While the regulations at 25 CFR Part 83, first issued in 1978 and revised in 1994 created the acknowledgment process, and the Notice specifying the February 11 changes relies on general legislative and administrative authority for its action, the Assistant Secretary -- Indian Affairs admits that no specific legislation established the acknowledgment process, adding: "An agency may change its procedures and implementation of its own regulations where these changes do not contradict or alter the regulations." Title 25 CFR Sec. 83.5(b) provides that the Department can update guidelines for preparation of documented petitions as necessary. These changes will require minor revisions of the guidelines the BAR has provided to petitioners since 1998. Until BAR issues these revised guidelines, the new "policies and procedures in this memorandum supersede the existing guidelines where they may be in conflict." How do the current regulations work? The current regulations require petitioners to show that they meet seven mandatory criteria. Section 83.5(c) of the acknowledgment regulations, describing the duties of the Department, provides: ``the Department shall not be responsible for the actual research on the part of the petitioner.'' Section 83.10(a) of the regulations provides that the Assistant Secretary -- Indian Affairs may ``initiate other research for any purpose relative to analyzing the documented petition and obtaining additional information about the petitioner's status.'' While such research discretionary, it does not make any additional research mandatory. Formerly, BAR staff have used this section to justify substantial additional research to supplement a petitioner's research and compensate for perceived deficiencies, even after petitioners have responded as comprehensively as possible to one or more technical assistance letters from BAR. The BIA no longer thinks this research is appropriate or necessary. Therefore, the Assistant Secretary -- Indian Affairs is not requiring BAR staff to locate new data to any substantial extent. BAR staff only will verify and evaluate the materials that petitioners and third parties submit. The BAR will limit its review of a petition to examining the arguments of petitioner and third parties. BAR will decide whether the petitioners' or third parties' evidence establishes that the petitioner meets each of the seven mandatory criteria. BAR will focus on assessing the accuracy and reliability of the submissions. After a petition goes on Active Consideration, BAR will not accept any more submissions of documentation or analysis either from petitioners or interested parties. BAR will not request or accept additional information until the comment period begins following the publication of the Proposed Finding. This creates additional problems for petitioners who have limited funding (which means the overwhelming majority). In the case of those who rely on funding from the Administration from Native Americans, where ANA frequently denies funding to petitioners after they complete their additional submissions on the theory they don't really need additional funding, the result could be fatal, unless the petitioners ask for a delay on going on Active Consideration until they are ready. A "proposed finding" contains the BAR's conclusions, based on the evidence in the record as presented at that point. If petitioners or third parties submit raw data without providing any analysis during the active consideration of a petition, BAR shall not analyze these data intensively to establish whether a petitioner has met the criteria. Instead, BAR shall refer the responsibility for analysis to the petitioner or third parties, and require them to carry the evidentiary burden during the six month comment period. The main purpose of the 180 day comment period on the proposed finding is to give the petitioner and third parties time to present additional evidence refuting allegations of deficiencies and weaknesses in the petition that appeared in the proposed finding.. The BAR no longer will do its own additional research after the proposed finding. The appropriate means to remedy any deficiencies is for the petitioner and third parties to offer supplementary submissions during the comment period. Therefore, BAR will retain any materials it receives from the petitioner or third parties during active consideration for review during preparation of the final determination. Also, the BAR staff members evaluating the petition no longer will request additional information from the petitioner and third parties during the preparation of the proposed finding. If necessary information and analysis are lacking, the petitioner or third parties may supply it in response to the proposed finding. BAR researchers review petitions as a team, in consultation with each other. The acknowledgment decision does not pass a definitive scholarly judgment on the submissions of the petitioning group. All the BAR staff will do is decide whether, based on a preponderance of evidence, a petition sufficiently addresses, or establishes a "reasonable likelihood," that each of the seven criteria. BAR's job is not to conduct research as an exercise in preparing for eventual judicial battles over the Final Determination. Although, presumably, BIA researchers will apply professional standards review in reviewing petitions, they must act within the expected time limits with the limited resources available, "as appropriate to the role of the Government in these procedures," and simply see whether the petitioner has met its burden under 25 CFR 83, not seek creative means to sandbag the petition (see the Samish case). The Assistant Secretary does not expect BAR to conduct its review and design and report recommendations in contemplation of all possible court challenges. Lawsuits happen, and it is no longer perceived to be necessary for the BAR to do full litigation defense in advance to reach a decision, even though BAR has its foundations in the BIA's Court of Federal Claims litigation defense team of the late 1970s and early 1980s. The
regulations (83.6(a)) state that a petition may be ``in any readable form that
contains detailed, specific evidence . . .'' Petitioners or third parties often
submit poorly organized materials, fail to identify their sources, or even explain
the nature of the documents they provide. Such documents or exhibits may be partly
or entirely ``unreadable,'' within the meaning of the regulations, and BAR researchers
will not longer go to heroic lengths seeking to identify or explain the materials.
Petitioners and third parties must cite their sources for all documents in their
submissions, or the BAR may not be able to weigh it properly as evidence. The
message is, spell it out to BAR so that nothing is left to chance, and so there
is as little room left for interpretation as possible. Leave no gaps, no "open
texture" where your arguments or evidence can slip through the net. The acknowledgment process will continue to apply the precedents that these past decisions have established, as a kind of canon, including precedents under 83.6(e). Indeed, the Notice actually acknowledges that the "established precedents now make possible this more streamlined review process." BAR will no longer continue to insist that decisions can provide no precedent for later decisions, because each exists, as it were, in its own universe. BAR now will only prepare a "summary evaluation report," along with a chart, or charts, "listing the evidence under each criterion, describing how the evidence has been weighed, and indicating the sections of the regulations and the precedents from past [acknowledgment] decisions that have been applied to that evidence." BAR staff probably no longer will devote considerable energies to doing their own field research in and around the petitioner's community. The BAR staff no longer will be direct, percipient witnesses concerning the character of the community, but then there will be no more fishing expeditions to undermine petitioners' evidence, or defeat a third party's collateral attack. It may become more difficult than ever to sort out the claims of splinter groups. Perhaps alternative and multi-media presentations, reflecting new technologies, will take on new importance. | |
| About
Us: History
· What
We Do · Who
We Are © 2003 Association on American Indian Affairs, All Rights Reserved. | |