XIII. California Indian Program Needs
Our survey included queries about funding levels of
and degree of satisfaction with state and federal programs on California Indian
reservations and rancherias. In
addition, at the numerous hearings held by the Advisory Council on California
Indian Policy, many tribal leaders presented comments about existing program
needs and delivery. Our survey
included federal, BIA, and state programs information such as road, health,
Headstart, aging, commodities, Administration for American Indians (ANA),
housing, and other programs. In
general, California Indians felt they were underfunded and had access to few
federal and state programs, and the often believed they did not have enough
information about state or federal programs. Many small rancherias or reservations believed that they
were too small to administer some programs, such as justice systems, Indian
Child Welfare Act programs, and welfare programs. In many instances, small tribes would like to work within
consortia arrangements in order to gain access to more state and federal
programs. One such example is the
California Services American Indian Block Grant (CSAIBG) grant which is
administered on a statewide basis through three consortia. A welfare grant aimed at families below
the poverty line and homeless people, the CSAIBG grant is allocated from
Congress to California—Department of Economic Opportunity—which
divides the funds according to formula among the reservations, rancherias, and
urban Indian centers. This
arrangement was agreed upon by the state, reservations and rancherias, and
urban centers during the middle 1980s.
For many programs, however, there are no such arrangements, and small
tribes are deprived of badly needed and potentially beneficial services because
they are too small to qualify for a funding program or do not have enough staff
or administration to apply for or administer the grant. An overall discussion of the needs of
small tribes should be conducted by the tribes and federal agencies. Consortia agreements should be created
in order to create more access and administrative capability among small
California tribes. To the greatest
extent possible, any such consortia should be composed of and managed by
California Indian people.
Poverty rates among California Indians are among the
highest of any group in the United States. In general, California Indians believe they can benefit
greatly from more federal and state programs. Most California Indian communities have had little support
for building viable tribal governments capable of exercising their full powers
of self-governance. In the
sections below are summaries of program needs information taken from the ACCIP
hearings and from surveys of 19 federally recognized California Indian communities.
General Federal Programs
Our surveyed communities list a variety of programs as
very important to them. BIA
programs, Aid to Tribal Government, ANA, HUD, IHS-health centers, and
commodities are among the programs most highly regarded by the tribal
communities. These programs help
keep the tribal community alive and provide employment and services to tribal
members. Federal programs do their
best work in the Indian communities when they provide health care, employment
services, housing, child care to parents so they can work, roads, and
development of tribal administration, and improve the standard of living within
the tribal communities. Our
surveyed communities were highly appreciative of federal programs that tangibly
improved the living standards of tribal members.
Nevertheless, the vast majority of the surveyed
communities believe that the funding levels of federal programs are inadequate
for their community needs. They
say that California Indians are underfunded when compared to other
regions. California has suffered
underfunding and less administrative attention from the federal government and
BIA because the California treaties were not ratified and the California
Indians could not establish stable land bases under U.S. law. Furthermore, BIA labor force reports
are erroneous because many of the questions are not applicable to the
California Indian situation.
Consequently, California Indians are undercounted and underfunded. Furthermore, California Indians are
more scattered about the state, with over 100 recognized groups and many
communities yet to be recognized by the federal government. The multiple and fragmented
distribution of California Indian communities increases the administrative
difficulties and costs to the BIA and federal government. The cost of living is higher in
California than in other areas of the country, thereby weakening the already
weak funding effects of federal programs for California Indians. The political environment in California
has been historically more hostile to Indians than in many other states. One respondent to our community survey
wrote, “The state government of California is extremely backward in areas
involving Indians as opposed to Washington or Oklahoma.” Federal programs for California Indians
are underfunded, and all employees at the tribal level are underpaid. More base funding is needed for the
many small California communities, especially for the operation of tribal
government. Funding should be more
directly allocated to tribal governments, with fewer layers of administrative
bureaucracy.
Our surveyed communities state they are greatly in
need of additional BIA services and programs. Some BIA programs have not earmarked any funds to California
Indians, for example in areas such as law and order programs, environmental
protection, and education and scholarships. Aid to Tribal Government (ATTG), small tribes funds, Housing
Improvement (HIP), Community Fire Protection, tribal courts, schools, higher
education, adult education, tribal rights protection, land acquisition, road
building and maintenance, water rights, legal services, realty service, and
base funding for tribal governments are programs for which many communities
desire additional or initial funding. In addition, some tribes believe that the
BIA should provide more technical assistance.
Most of our surveyed communities did not receive
significant program attention from the state of California, but most wanted
additional state-administered services.
State government could provide more funds for education, juvenile
justice programs, Indian education centers, funds to fight drug abuse, and real
estate services to help obtain land necessary for some HUD programs.
Our surveyed tribal communities believe that
California tribes face special issues that differ from those of tribes in other
states. The failure to ratify
treaties in California was an issue already mentioned above. But California Indians say,
“People outside California don’t understand small tribal
governments.” Small
California tribes are over-legislated, restricted by state and federal law, and
over-patronized, but have few funds or independent resources to counter these
constraints. In small tribal
governments, tribal employees have little job security, since grants are
usually short term and often cannot be relied upon for stable planning and
secure employment. With no support
for administration, small tribal governments have great difficulty conducting
normal business and often cannot pay for heating oil, telephones, and
lights. Some small tribal
governments operate on as little as $3,000 to $5,000 for administrative
expenses per year. Without a
sufficient administrative base, small tribal administrations have difficulty
mobilizing grant writing for securing additional programs and funds for the
community. Many small tribal
governments must rely on volunteer hours from members of their tribal
communities. Some small tribes
state that each tribal government needs a guaranteed base funding of at least
$160,000 for administrative expenses.
Without base funding, many small tribes will be unable to create viable
tribal administrations, will fail to exercise significant community
self-governance, and will be severely constrained in any efforts of economic
development. Significant base
funding must be a high priority for most small California Indian tribes.
Maintenance of Roads
California receives a small share of BIA roads funds
for building or maintaining roads.
Furthermore, California reservations and rancherias are often located in
areas where there are few state or county roads, and therefore access to many
rancherias and reservations is difficult.
Where the terrain is mountainous or desert, there are few roads, and the
cost is high for building and maintaining the roads in such isolated
locations. Because of the
difficult terrain, the limited funding that the BIA provides to California
Indians supports construction of only a few miles of roadway, which is inadequate
for the needs of the over 100 California reservations and rancherias. Some reservations and rancherias do not
have public access roads, and the Indian residents must gain access from
private owners. The lack of access
roads and on–reservation or rancheria roads presents difficulties for
adequate police protection and inhibits potential for economic development.
Most reservations or rancherias in our survey were not
directly involved in road maintenance.
This task was left primarily to county and local officials, since the
BIA maintained only a small amount of roadway. In order for tribal governments to effectively maintain
roads on their lands, they need more funding, more work crews, more
equipment. Tribal governments
wanted clearer definition between tribal and county roads. Since there were few BIA roads and
relatively more county roadways, tribal governments were concerned about
jurisdiction issues concerning county roadways on California Indian land. There are some complaints that counties
do not keep up their roads on Indian land. Sometimes, the BIA funded the building of roads, but then
turned the roads over to county government, who gave such roads little or no
attention for upkeep.
When the BIA maintains reservation roads, most tribal
governments believe that the funds for maintenance are inadequate. Several communities were satisfied with
BIA road maintenance in recent years, and that the roads had been properly
managed with new road signs, repaving and grading. There is a waiting list for building BIA roads, when the BIA
does build roads, they perform satisfactory work. However, the waiting list is long and funds scarce, and
therefore most communities must wait a long time for even modest road
improvement.
According to our survey sources, BIA road building and
maintenance could be improved by more funding and more direct funding to the
BIA. At least some tribes
preferred that road building and maintenance funds come directly to the BIA,
and not channeled through the California State Highway Department. Tribes thought that there should be
more information provided about tribal roads, more consultation with tribes on
roads projects, more tribal control over BIA roads, and more 638 contracting
and greater technical assistance to design and maintain roads in the areas
where they are needed.
USDA Commodity Programs
Most California Indian communities responding to our
survey indicated that they did not receive commodity foods directly from the
Department of Agriculture programs or agencies. Those communities that received commodities got them from
the Sherwood Valley Food Distribution program, the Aid on Aging program, county
programs, and programs administered by other tribes. The Sherwood Valley Food Distribution program is a consortium
for food distribution to the community, and at least 7 tribal reservations and
rancherias participate. Most or
our surveyed communities believed that at least some members of their
communities needed commodities, with the percentage ranging from 3 percent to
70 percent. A median of 40 percent
of tribal members within the surveyed tribal communities were estimated to need
food supplements from the commodities program. Most California Indian communities in our survey believed
that a significant portion of their people needed access to the commodity
program.
A small majority of our surveyed communities believed
that the commodities program adequately serves the nutritional needs of their
communities. Those communities
that felt that the commodities program fell short of their nutritional needs,
said that the types and amounts of foods offered by the program were
limited. Commodities could not
satisfy any community’s complete nutrition needs. There is little attention to diabetic
concerns, and a better emphasis on healthy eating and diabetic diet should
accompany or complement the program.
A diet of cheese and butter is inadequate. One tribe remarked that the commodity program served the
overall needs of those tribal members who qualified. Nevertheless, this community supplemented the food program
with nutrition workshops to help people prepare food and to educate them about
low-fat, low-salt, diabetic, low-sugar cooking. One community reported that the commodities program has
improved over the years.
Nevertheless, the food is still too full of salt, sugar, fat (cheese,
real butter, peanuts, peanut butter), and canned red meat. The food content of commodities must be
reconsidered, and healthier foods such as fresh fruits, fruits packed in natural
juices, and vegetables should be made available.
In addition to fresher, more varied, and healthier
food, our respondents suggest that the commodities program could be improved in
terms of better access to storage, and more direct tribal control of the
program. Tribes need to deal
directly with the USDA and not California state agencies. The commodities program should also be
more sensitive and knowledgeable about tribal eating practices and
preferences. A nutritionist should
develop more culturally sensitive menus for use by tribal peoples. Federal regulations of the program are
too restrictive. For example,
people on food stamps don’t qualify no matter what amount of food stamps
are received. Regulations should
be reconsidered in order to better serve Indian people. More information should be disseminated
about the program within the Indian communities. Needy urban Indians need to be granted access to the
commodities program. In
California, a high proportion of tribal members do not live on reservations,
and have migrated to nearby urban areas in search of employment and other
goals. Needy urban Indian
residents are not granted access to commodities, even if they have membership
in a California tribal community.
Many California Indian people have difficulty getting transportation
access to commodity distribution points.
More transportation to commodity distribution points needs to be
provided for needy members of the tribal communities. Home delivery of food should be considered for the neediest
and most isolated tribal members.
Food could be distributed on a weekly basis, rather than on the current
biweekly, or longer, schedules now in place. California Indians have many pragmatic suggestions for the
commodities program, and adopting many of their suggestions will materially
improve the value of the program to the neediest community members.
Administration on Aging
Our surveyed communities estimate that their resident
population aged 65 or over ranges from very few to 40 percent. The median for this group of
communities is 5 percent of the population aged 65 or over. Of this elders group, those who are in
need of care varies from very few to 100 percent in some communities. The estimated median need for program
care among the elderly is 30 percent.
Those elderly in need of care and without care ranges from very few, or
none, in some communities to 100 percent in two communities. In some instances, the elders are cared
for by family members.
Seven communities had Title VI Administration for
Aging programs, while 7 communities did not. For those without programs, their elderly were cared for by
the county, by subcontracts, by non-Indian community agencies, and through the
Toiyabe Indian Health project.
Those communities with Title VI programs report that only a slight
majority are satisfied with program services. Most complaints focused on the lack of funding and
inadequate services. The services
were not able to meet the needs of the elderly. Several members of the community who lived off the
reservation could not be served by the program. Transportation for the elderly was not sufficient; buses
would not travel to some parts of the county. At least one community suggested that their Title VI program
did not make a serious effort to reach out to Indian elderly.
Our surveyed communities suggest that the Title VI
Administration on Aging program could be improved in a variety of ways. Their foremost suggestion is that more
funding and services are needed.
Small tribes have difficulty organizing Title IV programs, but
organizing program consortia to serve many small Indian communities would
improve chances of service. Better
transportation and regular provision of food for the elderly would improve the value of the program to
Indian elders.
Headstart
Most of our surveyed communities did not have
Headstart programs. Several
communities thought they were too small to organize a Headstart program, but
would be interested in a consortium of California Indian communities that would
administer Headstart programs.
Some communities send their children to city and county programs, but
their attendance is restricted by availability. A slight majority of communities with Headstart expressed satisfaction with the
program. Some communities were
dissatisfied because many community members had difficulty transporting their
children to the program site. One
community expressed the need for more supplies and equipment. Full day programs are preferred to
half-day programs. Possibilities
of program cutbacks are discouraging to some communities that already
administer the program or are contemplating future application.
Administration for American Indians (ANA)
Most of our surveyed communities had ANA programs, and
those that didn’t either had one in the recent past and/or were working
on an application to fund a program in the near future. Current grants ranged from $58,000 to
$176,000. ANA grants are used for
a variety of purposes. Several
communities use their grant for developing tribal legal codes and ordinances or
to amend their constitution.
Others have grants for economic development projects. Most communities are satisfied with ANA
grants and administration.
Nevertheless, several communities expressed the need for more funding
opportunities and higher levels of ANA funding. Economic development funds were among the most mentioned
needs for ANA funding.
Housing Programs
Most of our surveyed communities received federal
funds for new construction or renovation of housing, and most received Housing
Improvement (HIP) funds from the BIA.
HIP funding levels varied from $2,000 to $53,000, and the number of
housing units affected ranged from 1 to 30 units. About half of our surveyed communities received Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) funding for building new houses. Those who did not receive HUD funds
stated that they were too small and needed the help of a consortium for grant
writing and administration; others had not applied, or had their applications
rejected. An overwhelming portion
of our surveyed communities did not believe that HUD funding was adequate. The large majority stated that more
housing was needed. Housing needs
ranged from 5 to 214 housing units.
Many communities complained that the HIP and HUD funding levels
currently received were so small that they were of very little practical or
effective value. For example, as
one community referred to their HIP funding level, “How much can you do
with $13K?” . Most
California Indian communities in our survey stated that they were in desperate
need of new housing and home repair programs. Some communities have homeless tribal members. More funds were needed for housing and,
in some cases, funds for land acquisition for suitable property to build on.
Department of Health and Human Service (DHHS)
Programs
Most of our surveyed communities received funding from
DHHS. Many of the programs are
administered through health consortia, such as the Toiyabe Health Project, by
the Indian Health Service (IHS), and through county administered services. The types of programs
funded include general health programs, Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA)
programs, child care, tribal management through the ANA, family services,
alcohol programs, dental services, and substance abuse programs.
Our surveyed communities were evenly divided over
satisfaction with the DHHS programs, with half stating they were satisfied and
half stating they were dissatisfied.
Problems reported were that the programs were not sufficient to take
care of community health needs.
There are inadequate staff and a need for service delivery people who
are conscious and sensitive to the needs and cultural preferences of Indian
community people. Indian people
are generally reluctant to come to clinics if they are not sensitively treated.
DHHS programs could be improved with more funding,
more cultural sensitivity training for service delivery personnel, placement
of more clinics within reach of
tribal communities, better transportation to health facilities for tribal
members, greater training of tribal advisory board members in contract
monitoring, administrative, and fiscal management, and reevaluation of program
monitoring procedures.
Most surveyed communities believe that they have great
and pressing health and welfare needs.
Many tribal community people are in need of health and welfare service,
but are not currently being served.
More funds are needed for patient care, dental services, elderly
services, and contract health care.
More funding and more programs are needed for Education and Child Care,
Meals on Wheels, Senior Nutrition Programs, and food vouchers. More programs and funds are also needed
in health treatment, youth and substance abuse treatment, parent training, and
community activities. Full-time
health clinics and health care beyond levels provided by the IHS should be
considered, especially for California Indians. Our surveyed communities believe that they have significant
health and welfare problems that need greater administrative and funding
attention from the DHHS.
Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) Services
About a one-third of the reporting communities
indicated they were involved in an ICWA consortium, and most were satisfied
with this arrangement. Even those
within consortia, however, thought that ICWA services needed increased funding
at rates two to six times present levels, and also indicated the need for more
staff and better staff training.
Those tribal communities that did not work within a
consortium had similar comments.
More funding was needed to run adequate programs, and more training of
personnel was necessary. Not only
were greater funding levels needed, but more consistent funding and more
consistent delivery of technical services are desirable. One tribe suggested that ICWA programs
might be improved by reducing layers of bureaucracy and delivering ICWA program
funds more directly to the regional offices and to the tribal governments.
Most tribal communities valued their ICWA programs,
although they did not always win jurisdiction over orphaned members of their
tribe. Nevertheless, all the
tribal communities voiced a need for increased ICWA funding and for greater
community and tribal government attention about ICWA matters.
Summary
California Indian communities greatly value BIA,
federal, and state assistance programs.
High rates of poverty in California Indian communities foster many
social, economic, and health problems.
Federal and state programs are often the only available means to provide
aid to needy tribal members.
Government programs are very helpful, but most California Indian
communities believe that they need significantly more funding, technical
assistance, access to more BIA funding categories, and more training of tribal
members. Tribal governments prefer
to gain more control and input into programs that serve their communities. The large numbers of small tribes in
California creates special needs for minimum base funding to manage tribal
governments and the need to consider group alliances or consortia for
application and administration of many BIA, federal and state programs. California Indians believe they are
underfunded and underadministered when compared to other Indian communities,
and the data provided in this report support their belief.