[Senate Hearing 110-92]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-92
TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 12, 2007
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
34-906 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2006
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Chairman
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Vice Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
KENT CONRAD, North Dakota PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma
JON TESTER, Montana
Sara G. Garland, Majority Staff Director
David A. Mullon, Jr., Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on April 12, 2007................................... 1
Statement of Senator Dorgan...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 10
Statement of Senator Thomas...................................... 3
Witnesses
Artman, Carl J., Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs,
Department of the Interior..................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Gipp, Dr. David M., Past President and Board Member, American
Indian Higher Education Consortium; President, United Tribes
Technical College.............................................. 14
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Guy, Elmer J., President, Navajo Technical College; Board Member,
American Indian Higher Education Consortium.................... 23
Prepared statemaent.......................................... 25
Keltner, Dr. Bette, Dean, School of Nursing and Health Studies,
Georgetown University.......................................... 33
Prepared statement........................................... 35
Merisotis, Jamie P., President, Institute for Higher Education
Policy......................................................... 27
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Appendix
Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota, prepared
statement...................................................... 45
TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room
485, Senate Russell Office Building, Hon. Byron Dorgan,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
The Chairman. We will call the hearing to order. I will be
joined momentarily by Vice Chairman Thomas.
Because of impending votes this morning in the U.S. Senate,
I want to begin on time and I don't want to have a lengthy
recess for votes and inconvenience witnesses.
I want to thank Mr. Artman for being here. This is Carl
Artman's first appearance before the committee since being
confirmed as assistant secretary for Indian Affairs. We very
much appreciate his being here. We appreciate the other
witnesses as well.
Senator Thomas, I just began as the buzzer started for the
Senate. I pointed out that we have votes this morning, and I am
hoping to get through the witnesses and hear their testimony
before we have to have a lengthy recess for votes. I know that
we also have an Energy Committee meeting concurrent with this.
So forgive me for banging the gavel on time.
Senator Thomas. That is fine.
The Chairman. I want to make a brief opening statement to
try to set the stage for this discussion, which I think is very
important.
The purpose of today's oversight hearing on tribal colleges
and universities is to receive testimony that will instruct us
in amending the Tribally Controlled College or University
Assistance Act of 1978. The Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions is currently drafting a bill to
reauthorize the Higher Education Act of 1965. The Tribally
Controlled College or University Assistance Act of 1978 is
included under Title III of the Higher Education Act. We have
been working closely with the HELP Committee to ensure that
amendments requested by tribal colleges and universities and
considered by us are included in this session's reauthorization
bill.
So today we will hear from the Department of the the
Interior responsible for providing grants for 26 tribally
controlled colleges, funding to two post-secondary career and
vocational technical institutions, and directly operating two
tribal colleges.
We will receive testimony from others, including David
Gipp, President of the United Tribes Technical College, and
Elmer Guy, President of the Navajo Technical College in Arizona
and New Mexico. Jamie Merisotis of the Institute for Higher
Education Policy will share with us recent quantitative and
qualitative analysis and research into Indian higher education.
I have long been a strong supporter of tribal colleges and
universities because I believe they benefit the community and
the individual student substantially. In many cases, the only
kind of higher education that would be available to some of
these students is the higher education that is available in
their community where so many other extended family
opportunities are available for child care and support for
these students, many of whom are non-traditional students.
I have put up a map that shows there are 34 tribal colleges
and universities throughout the United States. There are five
tribal colleges in my State. They offer a wide range of
accredited programs from business administration to nursing,
and many in between.
In addition to college level programming, tribal colleges
and universities also offer high school completion GED
programs, job training and college preparatory courses as well.
They are an essential part of their communities, often serving
as community centers, libraries, tribal archives, career and
business centers, and much, much more.
If I might have a photograph put up, a photograph of the
Oglala Lakota College in Kyle, SD. It has a unique
decentralized campus system featuring college centers in each
of the nine districts of the Pine Ridge Reservation. That
allows students to stay in touch with their communities and
still attend college. It is a very unique and interesting
college that I wanted to bring to your attention. It offers
bachelor's and master's degrees. It has produced 71 percent of
the elementary education teachers who teach on the reservation,
and 76 percent of the nurses.
About 28,000 American Indian and Alaska Native students are
served by these tribal colleges. As I have indicated, it is
critically important to their lives and to their opportunity
for higher education. Let me just show a couple of quick
photos. This is a photo of Joey Awanopei, a student from the
College of the Menominee Nation in Wisconsin. He is a
traditional Menominee family member, remained rooted in their
language, culture and beliefs.
He and his brothers were traditionally raised by their
grandparents in a small remote town on the Menominee
Reservation. Joey has earned an associate's degree from a
tribal college. His goal is to be a certified teacher in a
tribal school, and a positive Indian male role model. He plans
to earn a bachelor's degree. In the meantime, he has obtained
certification as a traditional Menominee speaker and a middle
school language teacher. What a wonderful inspiration.
Here is one additional photograph of Nikki Smoker. In her
early forties, if we could put that chart up, she has dealt
with personal tragedies that would crush most people. In the
past few years, she has lost a 16-year old daughter to heart
failure, a 20-year old son to a car accident, and her husband
of many years to cancer. She is a grandmother to many, raising
many foster children and children of extended families. At one
point, she had 15 people living in her four bedroom home. Her
home is always open to people of need.
Even as she has cared for others, she has attended tribal
college and received a certificate in tribal law and justice
from Fort Peck Community College in Montana. And now she plans
on attending a 4-year university. Again, she is an inspiring
story, and I do that only to point out that this is about
individuals with interests in improving their lives and getting
a better education. Tribal colleges allow that opportunity to
exist. For those reasons, I strongly support the tribal college
system.
Let me call on my colleague, Senator Thomas.
Senator Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Thomas. Welcome, Mr. Artman. Glad to have you here.
I think certainly the tribal colleges are an opportunity
for tribal members to develop skills and gain education that is
especially important. These opportunities include the tribal
colleges for economic development, for energy and
entrepreneurial tracks. We are looking forward to that in
Wyoming, as a matter of fact, and starting to establish a
startup college there. There are lots of opportunities for
things that we haven't yet been able to take advantage of.
So we just obviously need to be more prepared for
competitiveness in this century, and these are the kinds of
things that would help there.
So I welcome the witnesses and I am glad we are having this
hearing, and I certainly support the tribal college program.
The Chairman. Senator Thomas, thank you very much.
Assistant Secretary Artman, thank you for being here. We
will include the full statements of all of the witnesses today
as a part of the permanent record of the Committee. We would
ask that you summarize.
Again, welcome on your first occasion back as Assistant
Secretary. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF CARL J. ARTMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN
AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Artman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Vice
Chairman and Members of the Committee.
I will just hit a few salient points in these opening
comments.
I am pleased to be here today to speak about post-secondary
tribal education, as I served on the President's Board of
Advisors for Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU) from 2002
to 2006. This is an area of great importance to me.
The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) is committed to
improving the overall quality of our education system. The BIE
system includes two post-secondary institutions: Haskell Indian
Nations University and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic
Institute.
The BIE also administers grants to 25 tribal colleges and
universities. In addition, the Department of Education provides
funds to improve and strengthen the academic quality,
institutional management, and fiscal stability of eligible TCU.
Each year, our system serves approximately 46,000 Indian
students in grades K-12, and we are striving to support a
seamless education program from early childhood through
adulthood by providing safe, secure and healthy learning
environments that promote academic achievement and successful
student transition to post-secondary education.
This summer in Denver, CO, on July 24-26, the BIE will hold
its first National Partnership Conference to promote
collaboration and cooperation with the various stakeholders of
the BIE education system. The goal of the conference is to
better use available stakeholder resources to support student
achievement. The American Indian Higher Education Consortium,
AIHEC, will be representing the TCU and is a key conference
partner focusing on student transition to post-secondary
education.
Just a brief overview. Looking at the TCU operations
funding, appropriations for TCU have increased approximately 45
percent in the past 15 years, with authorized appropriations
for tribal colleges remaining relatively steady over the past 3
years. TCU student enrollments have increased and the number of
tribal colleges funded under the Tribally Controlled Community
Colleges Assistance Act have grown from only a few in the early
1980s to 25 as of Fiscal Year 2007.
Funding is limited to a one school per tribe basis, using a
formula that funds each TCU based on the full-time student
equivalency rate. Currently, the act is funded at $54 million
for operating grants.
With regards to the Endowment Program, included in the act
is a provision for endowments at TCU. Each year, based on the
availability, TCU may receive endowments from the BIE which
are, in turn, matched by the TCU at one-half of the
Government's contribution and placed in a restricted interest-
bearing account. Interest received from that account can be
used by the colleges to defray the expenses of running the
college. The BIE has funded close to $8 million in endowments
to TCU since 1999.
Technical assistance is another provision of the act. By
election and resolution of the tribal colleges, AIHEC currently
receives the technical assistance funds in the amount of about
$600,000 per year to provide various technical assistance
services to TCU. Since 1999, just under $2 million has been
provided for technical assistance to the TCU.
In an effort to monitor and promote the success of the
program, the BIE maintains an ongoing collaboration with AIHEC
and the White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and
Universities. This efforts helps ensure that TCU receive
adequate support to carry out their mission. As part of its
annual plan, AIHEC provides the BIE with a progress report each
year, as well as a description of the continuing efforts made
on behalf of TCU.
The Honors Program. Most recently, we have sought out the
help of tribal colleges to implement what we are calling our
Honors Program, a program designed to hire top Indian students
into Indian Affairs. This is broken into three levels: High
school, junior college, community college, and then college, or
university. Graduates can be appointed directly into the Indian
Affairs positions. Our BIE and Human Resources Office are
working with three tribal colleges to provide opportunities for
students attending these colleges to earn class credits, while
developing marketing plans to advertise the program and its
benefits to Indian students.
In terms of economic development, Indian Affairs supports
other initiatives such as our recent partnership with Colorado
School of Mines, United Tribes Technical College, and the
Navajo Technical College to develop an energy-oriented
curriculum for Indian colleges. Our Office of Indian Energy and
Economic Development provided a grant to CSM to develop a
curriculum in partnership with UTTC and NTC. CSM will provide
faculty training and will team-teach some of the course. They
will be retained as technical support in later years.
Internship opportunities are being established with energy-
focused companies, and we hope to create opportunities for high
performing students to transfer into a full 4-year program at
CSM.
On related matters, I had the opportunity yesterday to meet
with Nick Lowery, the acting chair of the National Fund for
Excellence in American Indian Education. I am happy to report
that we made progress at this meeting. I expect that we should
be able to help the Fund achieve its milestones. Some of the
issues discussed included supplementation of personnel during
the startup phase, a commitment to more frequent communications
regarding the progress and the needs of the Fund, and working
with the Fund representatives to facilitate the transfer of
bequeathed moneys from OST to the Fund.
The National Fund provides an important component to the
overall Indian education picture, and I look forward to helping
it achieve its goals.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Members of the
Committee, I want to thank you for inviting me to testify here
today. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Artman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Carl J. Artman, Assistant Secretary for Indian
Affairs, Department of the Interior
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Members of the
Committee. My name is Carl Artman and I am the Assistant Secretary for
Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior. I am pleased to be
here today to speak about post-secondary Indian education. This is a
topic of great interest to me. From 2002 to 2006, I served on the
President's Board of Advisors on Tribal Colleges and Universities.
Background
The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), formerly the Office of Indian
Education Programs within the Bureau of Indian Affairs, is committed to
improving the overall quality of our education system. The BIE is a
unique system which includes 184 elementary and secondary schools
located across 23 states--66 of these schools include residential
components (dormitories) and two post-secondary colleges: Haskell
Indian Nations University and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic
Institute. The BIE also administers grants to 25 Tribal Colleges and
Universities (TCU). In addition, the Department of Education provides
funds to improve and strengthen the academic quality, institutional
management, and fiscal stability of eligible TCU.
Each year our system serves approximately 46,000 Indian students in
grades K-12. We are striving to support a seamless education program
from early childhood through adulthood by providing safe, secure, and
healthy learning environments that promote academic achievement and
successful student transition to post-secondary education.
We must improve our overall high school graduation rate and we also
need to better prepare our students academically so they have the
option of continuing their education at the post-secondary level. In
meeting the workforce needs of the 21st century, nearly 90 percent of
the fastest growing jobs in this country require post-secondary
education. TCU provide for many of our students the next step in that
educational development. However, before students can move on to
college course work, they must acquire foundational knowledge in math,
science, and language skills. We want to work more collaboratively with
our TCU partners to identify better ways to better prepare our students
for college course work. This could include ``student enhancing''
efforts of bridging programs and individualized tutoring services.
This summer in Denver, Colorado (July 24-26, 2007), the BIE will
hold its first national partnership conference to promote collaboration
and cooperation with the various stakeholders of the BIE education
system. The goal of the conference is to better use available
stakeholder resources to support student achievement. The American
Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), representing the TCU, is a
key conference partner focusing on student transition to post-secondary
education.
Overview of TCU Program Functions
TCU Operations Funding
Our elementary and secondary education programs use 90 percent of
the BIE's total budget. Appropriations for TCU have increased
approximately 45 percent in the past 15 years with the authorized
appropriations for tribal colleges remaining relatively steady over the
past 3 years. TCU student enrollments have increased and the number of
tribal colleges funded under the Act has grown from only a few in the
early 1980s to 25 as of FY 2007. Funding is limited to a one-school-
per-tribe basis, using a formula that funds each TCU based on a full-
time student equivalency.
The BIE's primary function in implementing the Act has been
historically more administrative than service-oriented. These functions
include collecting and reviewing applications for eligibility to
receive TCU operating grants, ensuring that funds reach the tribal
colleges, and ensuring tribal colleges receive necessary technical
assistance required to fulfill their commitment under the Act. The BIE
carries out its responsibility to the TCU by administering the
appropriated funds intended to defray expenditures for academic,
educational and administrative purposes, and for the operation and
maintenance of the tribal colleges.
Currently, the Act is funded at $54 million for operating grants.
In 2007 the BIE is administering operating grants to 25 Tribal Colleges
and Universities. In 2006, these schools offered over 350 degree
programs and 180 vocational programs. During 2006, the TCU served
27,897 Indian students and conferred 1,298 degrees and certificates.
Endowment Program
Included in the Act is a provision for endowments to TCU. Each
year, based on availability, TCU may receive endowments from the BIE,
which are in turn matched by the TCU at the rate of one-half of the
government's contribution, and placed in restricted interest-bearing
accounts. Interest income received by the colleges is available to the
college to supplement and further defray the expense of running the
college. The BIE has funded close to $8 million in endowments to TCU
since 1999.
Technical Assistance
Technical Assistance (TA) is another provision of the Act. By
election and resolution of the tribal colleges, the American Indian
Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) currently receives the TA funds in
the amount of $600,000 to provide various technical assistance services
to TCU. Since 1999, just under $2 million has been provided for TA to
TCU.
In an effort to monitor and promote the success of the TA program,
the BIE maintains ongoing collaboration with the AIHEC and the White
House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities (WHITCU). This
effort helps to ensure that TCU receive adequate support to carry out
their mission. As a part of its annual plan, AIHEC provides the BIE
with a progress report each year as well as a description of the
continuing efforts made on behalf of the TCU.
Collaboration requires ongoing interaction to be productive and
successful. The BIE participates in meetings with the WHITCU Advisory
Board members, the Tribal Colleges and Universities Annual Presidents'
Planning Session sponsored by AIHEC, and the National 2007 Summer
Conference. AIHEC is one of the partners for this conference.
Honors Program
Most recently, we have sought out the help of the tribal colleges
to implement the Honors Program--a program designed to hire top Indian
students into Indian Affairs. The Honors Program is designed to provide
opportunities at three educational levels--High School, Junior/
Community College, and College/University. Graduates can be appointed
directly into available Indian Affairs positions. Our BIE and Human
Resources Office are working with three tribal colleges to provide
opportunities for students attending these colleges to earn class
credits while developing marketing plans to advertise the program and
its benefits to Indian students and Indian Affairs management.
BIE's Adult Education (Tribal)
Indian Affairs is implementing strategies to support our vision of
``life-long learning'' and to improve the literacy of American Indians
residing on reservations. The BIE's Adult Education Program is funded
at $2,441,000, and allows tribes to direct their Tribal Priority
Allocation funds to adult learning situations where adults are able to
obtain a GED or gain the basic skills they need to transition into a
community or tribal college and/or job placement. Oftentimes, students
attending tribal colleges and universities require remedial education
in basic math and reading skills. This program provides educational
opportunities for individuals who lack the level of literacy skills
necessary for a smooth transition into post-secondary education.
Graduation rates for American Indians are currently lower than the
national average; the program supports the advancement of students to
higher levels of education. Participation in adult basic education,
community education, and developmental courses leads to upgraded skills
and abilities to match job placements with community members, thus
creating opportunities for developing stronger local economies in
Indian communities.
Tribal College Teacher's Aide Training
Indian Affairs has requested program enhancement funds of over $5
million to support initiatives such as the Teacher's Aide Training
program, consistent with the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB), which provides for the Qualifications for Teachers and
Paraprofessionals. The BIE-funded TCU play an important role in
developing specialized certification programs for current, new, and
potential teacher aides for Indian schools. Programs can develop the
training through distance learning or classroom instruction, with local
or regional concentration and emphasis, following the ``grow your own''
philosophy. Indian schools located in remote and isolated areas often
rely on members who have a vested interest in their communities and
wish to remain in jobs on the reservations.
Of the 25 TCU, 15 provide at least an Associate's degree in
elementary education, two are identified as having teacher's aide
programs, and the remaining TCU have classes in early childhood
education and/or development.
Other Tribal College Projects--Partnering With Economic Development
Indian Affairs supports other initiatives such as our recent
partnership with the Colorado School of Mines (CSM), the United Tribes
Technical College (UTTC), and the Navajo Technical College (NTC)
(formerly Crown Point Institute of Technology) to develop energy,
educational, vocational, and technology curriculum for Indian colleges.
Our Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED) provided a
grant to CSM to develop a curriculum in partnership with UTTC and NTC.
The CSM will provide faculty training and will team-teach some portions
of the curriculum; they will also be retained as a future source of
technical expertise for the colleges. Internship opportunities will be
established with energy industries and we will create opportunities for
high performing students to transfer into a full 4-year degree program
at the CSM. We are looking at additional opportunities to expand on
this initiative.
Conclusion
With high unemployment rates in Indian Country, solidifying the
tribal colleges' infrastructures is critical. Increased collaboration
and partnerships between TCU and federal, state, regional and local
entities must be established in a manner that addresses specific needs.
Education and workforce development will lead to local employment
opportunities where tribal members can reinvest in a sustainable local
economy. Education must provide not only a seamless process of
continuing lifelong educational opportunities, but the necessary skill
sets for our Indian communities to offer a vibrant labor pool which
will lead to economic growth for all Indian people.
The challenges as well as benefits are shared by all. In order to
promote change, vested parties must establish economic development
plans that involve potential business and industry opportunities,
tribal college administrators, community-planning officials, and
various federal, state, regional, local and tribal governments.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for inviting me to testify today
on such an important issue for our Indian people. I will be happy to
answer any questions you may have.
The Chairman. Secretary Artman, thank you very much for
your willingness to provide leadership at this important time.
Let me ask an obvious question, I guess, and that is, with
flat funding, which is where we are with tribal colleges on the
appropriations side, and a circumstance where the tribal
colleges are already substantially below the amount of
contribution per student that goes to, for example, junior
colleges, and community colleges, and so on, are we not going
to lose ground rather than gain ground if we only have flat
funding and don't provide at least for inflation with respect
to the tribal colleges appropriation? What is your sense of
that?
Mr. Artman. Right now, the BIE and my office are core-
focused on K-12 education. We are striving to, as I mentioned
in the testimony, to provide a seamless transition. So we are
trying to make the most of the funds that we do have outside of
that K-12 core focus, to get that into the TCU hands. There
have been fluctuations in funding, but we are working with the
Department of Education and others to make sure funds get
there.
We are looking at partnership opportunities with
industries, to provide careers and perhaps other additional
funds to the schools. We are working with schools like the
Colorado School of Mines and similar opportunities perhaps to
that in other areas as well, to provide additional funds, to
amortize the costs to these tribal colleges and universities.
As I mentioned, it is a very important program to us, but
we do have to do with what we have and focus on our core
mission.
The Chairman. Well, I understand making do with what we
have, but if tribal college enrollment is increasing and we
have flat funding, that, it seems to me, will be a problem,
especially if we believe that the tribal college system
contributes a great deal to the lives of these people that now
have opportunities to get educated in their tribal colleges.
So we will have to work on that and talk about that, but
there is an enrollment increase and it reflects the popularity
of the opportunity that is available now that was not available
many years ago.
With respect to K-12, we have had the GAO do an evaluation
of the condition of the infrastructure with respect to the BIA
schools and so on. What the GAO has shown is that there is a
significant problem with respect to the infrastructure
investment that is needed that is not available to bring those
schools up to standard. Do you have any observations about what
your plans are, or what the Department of the Interior's plans
are with respect to that?
Mr. Artman. The GAO report is enlightening. Last week, I
was down in New Mexico and visited Laguna Pueblo. I had an
opportunity to take a look at their elementary school. You can
see stark examples of where facilities moneys are desperately
needed. In their case, there were a number of cracks in the
foundation that went up through the walls. They have supported
it now. They have taken mitigation measures, but that is a good
example.
This is an area of great importance to us. What we have
done is, with our facilities manager, he has been able to
develop priorities and processes. He is expediting the funds
that are getting to the schools. I think what we have now is
not everything will be fixed immediately, but we now have a
schedule that we can look to, and we can point to say that this
school will be fixed in this particular year if funding stays
at the same level. That is what we are focused on.
We have eliminated a lot of bureaucracy and we have given
some assurance to the schools that are out there that need the
funds when they will get the funds.
The Chairman. As you begin your work in these areas, would
you work with us to give us an analysis? The GAO didn't do it
institution by institution, but it evaluated the circumstances
that existed with respect to the BIA-run schools and the
infrastructure needs, and the fact that these children are
going to schools that are in pretty substantial disrepair in
some cases. Can you work with us to give us an analysis of what
are the institutions? Where are they? What is the schedule? How
long would it take to make the investments?
The reason I ask the question is, you walk into a school
that is in substantial disrepair, with a student sitting in a
classroom with 30 kids; desks one inch apart. I went into one
school that I have talked about with 150 kids, two toilets, one
water fountain, crowded classrooms. That young kid that walks
through that third grade classroom isn't going to get the same
education as a kid that is in another school where there are 15
students and new facilities, or facilities at least not in
disrepair.
So could you give us an analysis as you begin to work on
all of this? What are the specific schools? What are the needs?
What is the time line? How do you see us beginning to address
them so that we can talk about it more in the specifics with
the appropriators and others, rather than just the abstract?
Mr. Artman. I would be happy to do that.
The Chairman. Would you be willing to do that?
Mr. Artman. Mr. Chairman, yes.
The Chairman. Senator Thomas.
Senator Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You mentioned this matter of the National Fund for
Excellence in Indian Education. Why hasn't that money been
transferred?
Mr. Artman. There have been a number of legal issues
surrounding that money. Yesterday, we had a good opportunity to
hash through some of those legal issues and come to some
resolution on that. We committed to having an opinion to them
on the legal implications, the legal liability attached to that
money to the National Fund within a month. We are going to be
working with their legal counsel in developing that opinion as
well.
Senator Thomas. Good, very good.
Technology obviously is most important for preparing
students for this century. I have been told that Haskell
doesn't even have internet services in the student dorms. Why
isn't there more emphasis on improving those technological
services?
Mr. Artman. Technology, especially in today's educational
world, is an important part of education. If at home or at
school, the more opportunity students get to use technology,
the more they will be able to adapt to the workplace.
Specifically with regard to Haskell University and Internet
access, Internet access is available in the common areas of the
dorms there. It is available in the individual student rooms,
but it is very much like cable television. If they want it
outside of the common areas, they need to subscribe to it at
this point in time.
Senator Thomas. You mentioned the Colorado School of Mines
affiliation. Isn't it a good idea to have more of that?
Couldn't there be opportunities to be affiliated with other
colleges to increase the opportunities through these
affiliations?
Mr. Artman. I think so, Mr. Vice Chairman. The Colorado
School of Mines examples dovetails extremely well with also our
goals in economic development focusing on the energy aspect of
that. I think you are going to see more partnerships coming out
and created in the area of dovetailing with medical schools
that may have excellent educational opportunities in the
medical profession, or teaching in the teaching area. So yes,
we are going to be taking more advantage of those situations.
Senator Thomas. We don't have many of these facilities in
Wyoming. We just have one small college kind of beginning, but
they are close to a community college. And even in that
instance, it seems as if they could pick up some additional
things.
Funding, of course, is always an issue. What about tribal
colleges participating in State and private funding and other
kinds of ways of helping finances? Is there an opportunity
there?
Mr. Artman. I think there is. I think you are seeing that a
lot of tribal colleges are taking advantage of those situations
and looking for new opportunities. Depending upon which college
you are talking about, the funds that come from the BIE fund 30
percent to 60 percent of the needs of the tribal colleges. So
tribal college presidents are looking to other resources out
there.
Having had the opportunity to work with some of these
presidents before, they are an extremely smart and resourceful
group of individuals who are doing yeoman's work in making
their colleges work. I know that they are looking to other
opportunities. To what degree that we can help facilitate that,
we will put ourselves out there.
Senator Thomas. That is great.
I think Indian colleges are important because they focus on
what we want to have accomplished here, but they can certainly
gain more quickly by affiliating themselves with some other
organizations to help in funding programs.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Tester.
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for being here today, Carl.
Over the Easter break, I had a tribal college summit,
interestingly enough. It is fair to say that we have our work
cut out for us to hopefully address some of those needs.
I just want to start with a comment. One of the individuals
that came and visited with us talked about the K-12 issue.
Potentially, maybe we could have him here someday to be on a
panel here talking about at-risk kids. He told me that his
figures are showing pretty much across the United States, but
in Montana I can tell you that almost every at-risk kid in that
State is Native American. The lines are so clear that it is
scary.
Interestingly enough, those Native American kids that
happen to be in school districts that tend to be more affluent
are at risk. Those kind of things, they are challenges that we
have to deal with here to try to allow everybody to be the best
they can be.
But one of the things that was talked about at the summit
that I didn't hear you speak about a lot in relationship to
tribal colleges is building funds, funds for buildings. There
are tribal colleges, for example, that want to set up dorms for
their college students. What is your assessment of availability
of building funds out there in regards to tribal colleges?
Mr. Artman. Senator Tester, with regard to the specific
amount available for building funds, I would have to look into
that and get back to you, sir, and I will do that. Through our
endowment funds, the interest that is received off of those
accounts, and that has been a varying amount, so I am not
saying that that is going to be the fund that saves it, but
that is available to use for building funds.
As you know, the grants that come from the BIE to tribal
colleges under 471 come with some restrictions on it, which may
or may not allow them to be used for building purposes. But I
will be happy to look into that and get back to you with the
number.
Senator Tester. I would like to know. And with the number,
would you give me, if you have this, Carl, and you may or may
not, some sort of assessment of the need out there versus what
is there. Because we happened to be in the facility on the
Blackfeet Reservation. They have some great facilities there. I
have been just about in every tribal school, and there are some
building needs there. But their overall classrooms, at least in
Montana, are fairly impressive from my perspective. But there
are some needs out there for research facilities, science labs,
and dormitories that they don't have, for sure, and there may
be others, too.
That is it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Artman. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Secretary, let me also say that Mr. Lowery on behalf of
the National Fund for Excellence in American Indian Education
met with me the day before yesterday to talk about those
issues. I am pleased that you are working on that because as
you know it is a federally chartered organization that has not
yet been given an opportunity to really get started. I know
that the Secretary had indicated that they would provide some
space and perhaps some clerical assistance. They are interested
in trying to determine when that which has been contributed to
the Department of the Interior from estates and so on that
could be used in this 501(c)(3) that has been federally
chartered, when that might be transferred to them.
So I appreciate the fact that you are working on that. I
think that, using private sector funds that are donated into
this federally chartered organization, it can also be an
important supplement for Indian education. So your work on that
is important, and I appreciate that.
Let me make another point here that is important to
emphasize. Tribal colleges are different. They are different
because in most cases they are on Federal trust lands. State
governments have their own circumstances. They have no
obligation to fund tribal colleges and they by and large do
not. There are no local property taxes or no local property
base on which to levy taxes. So you can't support the tribal
colleges that way.
That is why we have this different system to fund tribal
colleges. They are very important in the lives of Native
Americans. I have spoken about many of them. I have showed a
couple of photographs today of them, that are inspiring because
they in many cases are non-traditional students. I told you,
Mr. Artman, about speaking at a tribal college, and asking at
the graduation ceremony at that tribal college, who is the
oldest one here. And they said, she is the oldest one; and I
went and talked to her; 40 some years old, who had been
cleaning the toilets and the hallways in the college; a single
mother of four who decided, I want to do more than clean the
hallways and clean the bathrooms; I want to graduate.
And the day I showed up, she was wearing a cap and a gown
and a big smile because she had graduated from that college.
She could not have done that except for the tribal college,
because she had relatives that could provide child care. She
could continue to do some work, and at her home area go to a
tribal college. It is the only way this woman got a college
degree.
That is happening all over the country in ways that are
very inspiring. It is why I care so much about these tribal
colleges. We have to have adequate funding. I gently asked you
about the funding because I know what you will do. You are
brand new to this job, but you are so practiced, as have to be
all of the witnesses from the Administration. If I ask you a
lot of drilling questions about funding, you come here and have
to support the President's budget. If you didn't, when you get
back to your office, they will clean out your desk.
So when I ask you the question: Is level funding adequate?
You are going to dance around a little bit because that is your
job. But you and I know, it is not adequate. If they have more
people coming into these tribal colleges, and we have flat
funding, and by the way, were it not for myself and a couple of
others, we wouldn't be at $54 million. We would be at $40
million or $42 million. But flat funding means that with the
ravages of inflation and more students, which is not a ravage,
but is a blessing, but we are losing ground, not gaining
ground. The contribution per student to tribal colleges
relative to other colleges is at a very low level.
So my point is this, Mr. Artman. You can't answer the
question the way I would hope you would or the way that we
might if we were having a quiet conversation in a corner, and
not in a Senate hearing, and I asked the question, are we
adequately funding tribal colleges. You can't answer it, so I
won't ask it quite that way today. But I will say this to you,
I hope that you will be a missionary inside the Department of
the Interior for these issues of education, health care and
housing. With respect to education, it is a labyrinth of
issues, but today we are talking about tribal colleges.
That is the one area, and I think Senator Tester put his
finger on it, where you come away inspired. You go to these
places. You talk to these students. You find out what they have
been confronting in life, and all of a sudden they are in
college. They are so unbelievably proud of that opportunity to
go to college and make something of themselves, because they
know that is the step up and out to opportunity.
So I really want you to be aggressive on these issues in
working with us. I can say what you can't say. We need to fund
these in a manner that is fair. We need more funding when we
have more students. We need to support these students the right
way because these tribal colleges are critically important.
So you may want to respond to that, Mr. Artman, but don't
get yourself in trouble.
[Laughter.]
Just tell me that you are interested in working with myself
or Senator Thomas or Senator Tester and others to accomplish
these goals. That would be helpful.
Mr. Artman. I have been to a number of tribal colleges out
there. In fact, Sitting Bull College in your State, I have been
there before and know very well the former president of Sitting
Bull College, Ron His Horse Is Thunder. He and I have had
numerous discussions about the issues and needs there. I have
been down to the Tohono O'odham Community College, and of
course spent time at Haskell and less time at Sippy, but I want
to spend more time down there as well, and others. They are
doing inspirational work. The teachers and the administrators
are doing excellent work down there. You are right about the
students and their faces. You can see the pride and the
determination in their faces. I look forward to working with
you and the Committee on this issue.
The Chairman. I am hoping at long last that the
Administration, and with your help probably inside as an
agitator, that inside we will probably see in the next budget
that the United Tribes Technical College, which serves tribes
all around this Country and is in my judgment, and we will have
a witness in the next panel, is just an unbelievably good
school, and has been left out of the President's budget. I hope
that you will be able to help us change that.
I talked to the previous Secretary, not the current
Secretary. She even went there. She understands, but she for
some reason through the OMB and the thickheadedness of people
there, was saying we are not going to fund that school. It
should be funded. It was always funded previously.
Anyway, we will talk about that as well. The United Tribes
Technical College is a terrific institution and is providing
hope to a lot of students.
It has been a long time, 2 years, that the position of
assistant secretary was vacant. That was shameful, but we now
have someone there that is, in my judgment, well qualified. I
worked hard to try to get your nomination through the Senate.
Mr. Artman. I appreciate that.
The Chairman. Senator Tester did the same. Senator Thomas
did the same. You are now there, and I know you want to be
there to make a difference. We want to help you make a
difference. So we appreciate your being here today on this
subject. We are going to see a lot of each other on these
issues because we face some very serious challenges, Mr.
Secretary. We are glad that you have this role to play now and
we want to help you be successful.
Mr. Artman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Tester.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for being with us.
We will next hear from a panel that includes Dr. David
Gipp, past President and Board Member of the American Indian
Higher Education Consortium, and currently President of the
United Tribes Technical College in Bismarck, ND; Elmer Guy,
Board Member of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium
and President of the Navajo Technical College in Crownpoint,
NM; Jamie Merisotis, and I hope I have pronounced that
correctly, Jamie, who is President of the Institute for Higher
Education Policy, Washington, DC; and Dr. Bette Keltner, Dean,
School of Nursing and Health Studies at Georgetown University.
Mr. Artman, I did not invite you to, and I should have
identified I guess it was Dr. Keltner sitting next to Mr.
Artman.
Ms. Keltner. Yes.
The Chairman. OK. So we are fine.
Let me thank all four of you for being here. We have Board
Members who are accompanying Elmer Guy: Caroline Tom, the
Chairman of the board. Caroline, where are you? Thank you very
much for being with us. Steve Grey? Steve, thank you for being
with us. I want to recognize also before I begin with this
panel, Chairwoman Myra Pearson, the Chair of the United Tribes
Board. Myra, thank you very much for being with us. We
appreciate your presence today.
Why don't we begin, Dr. Gipp, with you? My understanding is
that next month will mark 30 years as president of the United
Tribes Technical College. I don't want to make you sound like
Gabby Hayes or something, but 30 years is a long time.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. But more than just the United Tribes
Technical College, you have been a real leader in education in
this Country. We appreciate your being here and appreciate your
work on Indian education.
Let me ask, as I have indicated before, your entire
statements will be made part of the record, so if you would
please summarize for us. We will begin with Dr. Gipp.
STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID M. GIPP, PAST PRESIDENT AND BOARD
MEMBER, AMERICAN INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM; PRESIDENT,
UNITED TRIBES TECHNICAL COLLEGE
Dr. Gipp. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate the parallel to
Gabby Hayes and I am glad to be here. I don't know that Gabby
is anymore; 30 years goes by fast in many respects. I have been
in the tribal college business, if you will, for about 35
years, working on this whole effort. We have gone from six
tribal colleges back in 1972, when I first started out working
for that effort. We now have over 35 tribal colleges. So we are
pleased to see the growth.
We serve over 30,000 students now, among all of us
nationwide. I am proud to say that United Tribes Technical
College and Navajo Technical College, and Dr. Guy will be
speaking shortly about that, are part of that effort to really
change the way of life for Native people and for tribal
governments. As you know, we have the fastest growing
population in the United States when we talk about 51 percent
or better of our population is under the age of 25 now. So the
real challenge is really to bring quality education and to give
hope and inspiration, but do it through education so that every
one of our people have the skills and the ability to move ahead
and bring their families and their tribes up to a 21st century
level of participation in society. This is what it boils down
to.
That is how I look at this. That is why I think 30 years
for me has gone by fast. It has been fun. It has been great.
But we have had some disparities and some difficulties
sometimes with the U.S. Government in their obligation to
tribal colleges as part of treaty-based tribes, and that
obligation to provide education for and by Native people. That
is what this is all about, creating our own determination;
creating our own pathway into that future.
So to me, that is really what underlies and undergirds what
we do. I have a student from United Tribes who graduated in
1992. Everybody gave up on him. He had alcohol problems. He had
attempts at suicide. He graduated from United Tribes. He is a
Wisconsin Chippewa. Today, he is Vice President of my campus in
Student Services. He is working on his doctorate right now. He
has a family of eight children. He is a tax-producing citizen,
if you will, on our campus. He lives in Bismarck, ND and is
doing outstanding. Likewise, he is serving as a role model for
other Native people.
I know that we all have these different kinds of stories
within our institutions in terms of the origins of what is
happening back in those tribal communities.
But let me get to the issue of our testimony. I do ask, of
course, that it is part of the record, both for ourselves and
for all of the tribal colleges. Today, I appear for the
American Indian Higher Education Consortium, the 35 member
organization that I referred to a bit earlier. We are talking
about the issues of higher education and how we fit into that
as a part of U.S. policy on higher education.
When I first started out back 35 or 37 years ago in this
effort, we were not welcome into the higher education community
because many of the remarks that were being said was that, hey,
how can you American Indian people do your own thing? You don't
have qualified people to do those things. Well, today we do. By
doing and persevering, I think it is very important that we
continue this effort of being a part of higher education.
To that end, we recommend that the Tribal Colleges and
Universities Act of 1978 be continued as an amendment to the
overall reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, and that
we also see that the title III programs under the Higher
Education Act are provided for more fully, more completely, and
with a formula that will allow for equitable distribution of
funds for those developing institutions, because indeed, we are
developing institutions that participate and provide those
firsthand opportunities to Native people.
Second, we also urge that there be a hard look at this
issue of facilities. Senator Tester, you mentioned this issue
of facilities. We don't get any kind of maintenance money from
the BIA or from anyone else. To build a building, whether it is
a toilet or whether it is a classroom or whether it is a
science lab, we have to go out and really, really dig in every
way we can looking for those resources to put a basic facility
in place on our campuses.
So we need the continued help of title III higher education
facilities programs, by the way. They have been very helpful,
but more is very, very important in the future. Equity is very,
very important when we talk about that, equity and access for
our populations and for the institutions that we administer.
Second, in terms of our testimony, I also want to point out
there is a provision that is being put forth that would allow
for more funds to go to mainstream institutions that perhaps
serve Native American students. While we think this is good, we
are very concerned that we would see a diminishment of dollars
that would go to the students that we serve on our campuses.
Third, we urge that the basic operating funds that are
provided under the Tribally Controlled College or University
Assistance Act be increased from roughly about the $5,200.
Actually, it is authorized at $6,000. We are recommending that
that authorization be upped to $8,000 per annum per student, is
what it boils down to.
Last, we urge that forward funding be included for tribal
colleges and universities. This is a major problem, because our
institutions are poor schools. We don't have the rich, big
endowments. We don't have State funds or even tribal funds to
rely on to keep us going during the interim years when we go
from one fiscal year to the next. So forward funding is very
critical to the day to day operations of our institutions.
Last, we urge that the Congress take a hard look at
providing specific legislative authorization to Navajo
Technical College and United Tribes Technical College. For 6
years now, the Administration has left us out of the budget.
Senators and Mr. Chairman, you know full well that we have been
a part of the budget, at least in the case of United Tribes,
since 1969. We have good tribal support. We have good community
support. We have good results and good data.
Mr. Chairman, I met with the Office of Management and
Budget about 2 years ago on this subject. I will tell you, the
most frank answer I have received from this Administration is
that until you are a favorite of the Secretary of the Interior,
you are not going to get funded. It is a political question. We
know that the BIA and the new BIE have the authority to fund us
and to authorize it, and to ask for these funds, but they do
not. So we ask that legislation be provided under a new Title V
that would be under part of the Tribal Colleges and
Universities Act as it would be reauthorized into the future.
We do have solid support from our colleague institutions.
Just 2 weeks ago, the presidents of the American Indian Higher
Education Consortium passed a resolution supporting legislation
that will be beneficial to these schools.
I won't go into the other details because I know we have
the other witnesses here. But much of this is contained in the
details of our testimony. I would ask that you and others take
a hard look at that, and see that this is all moved forward on
behalf of the tribally controlled movement.
Thank you so much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Gipp follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. David M. Gipp, Past President and Board
Member, American Indian Higher Education Consortium; President, United
Tribes Technical College
United Tribes Technical College (UTTC)
United Tribes Technical College (UTTC) submits this statement in
support of enacting into law a new Title V to the Tribally Controlled
College or University Assistance Act (Tribal College Act). We are very
appreciative of this Committee's inclusion of us in the drafting and
consultation process.
The new Title would authorize Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)
funding for our institutions which do not receive funding under the
Tribal College Act. It is our hope that an explicit authorization of
BIE funding for UTTC and Navajo Technical College (NTC) will encourage
the Administration to reverse its course of the past 6 years when no
Bureau of Indian Affairs funding was requested for us. Having the two
institutions included in an authorization for a Tribally Controlled
Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions program in the BIE will
lessen the likelihood that our funding will be considered an earmark.
The Board of Directors of the American Indian Higher Education
Consortium approved a resolution on March 23,2007 in support of
enacting a new title to the Tribal College Act authorizing funding for
UTTC and NTC provided that it would have no negative impact on funding
the colleges currently receive under the Tribal College Act or other
Acts. We are very appreciative of the support of our sister colleges.
Background. UTTC and NTC do not now receive funding under the
Tribal College Act, but rather receive funding as separate and
unrelated line items in the BIA (now BIE) budget. Funding for both
schools is uncertain every year. In fact, the Administration has
requested zero funds for both schools over the past 6 years. Although
our Congressional delegations have persuaded Congress to put our funds
back into budget, even this action is now coming under scrutiny because
of the controversy about ``earmark'' appropriations. United Tribes
Technical College has been a part of the Executive branch budget
requests since 1969.
Under Titles I (24 tribal colleges) and II (Dine College) of the
Tribal College Act, only one college per tribe may receive operating
funds under that Act. UTTC is governed by a Board consisting of the
Chairs of the five tribes located wholly or in part in North Dakota,
and each tribe represented on our governing board has a tribal college
that receives Tribal College Act funds. Thus, UTTC may not receive
funds under the Tribal College Act. The same is true for NTC, as Dine
College is the Navajo Nation recipient under the Act.
On March 30, 2007 we received a draft bill from the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs amending the Tribal College Act, including
establishing a new Title V as mentioned above. Our comments below will
note where we are in agreement with the draft and where we recommend
changes.
Eligibility. We support the draft bill's provision (Section 502)
making United Tribes Technical College and Navajo Technical College the
only eligible institutions under Title V of the Tribal College Act and
specifying that and that we must continue to meet the definition given
the term ``tribally controlled postsecondary career and technical
institutions'' in Section 3 ofthe Carl Perkins Act (20 U.S.C. 2302).
Exempted From one College Per Tribe Provision. We support the draft
bill's provision exempting Title V from the provision that allows
funding for only one college under the Act. The bill does this by
exempting Title V from certain provisions of the Tribal College Act.
These exemptions are listed in Section 503(a) of the draft bill. This
section says that the paragraph that contains the definition of
``tribally controlled college'' (Section 2(a)(4) of the TCCUAA), which
also contains the statement that only one college per tribe may receive
funding, does not apply to Title V.
Indian Self-Determination Act Contracts. We support Section 503(b)
which provides that funding is to continue to be made available
pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act.
UTTC has been administering funds from the BIA under an ISDEAA grant
since 1978. NTC is also now administering its funds under an ISDEAA
contract.
Use the terms ``Funds'' or ``Funding''. We ask that the terms
``grant'' or ``grants'' in the draft bill be changed to ``funds'' or
``funding'' throughout Title V. Funds administered under ISDEAA
contracts are not ``grants'', and even though the draft bill provides
that the funds will be continued to be made available pursuant to the
ISDEAA, we want it clarified that these funds are not ``grants''.
Grants are far more limiting and do not generally bring with them
contract support costs funding; whereas funds administered under an
ISDEAA do bring with them funding for contract support costs.
Distribution of Funds. We support a distribution of funds that:
Holds harmless the two schools at the higher of their FY
2006, 2007 or 2008 BIA funding levels. In other words,
contingent upon appropriations, the schools could not be funded
at an amount less than the amount for their base year (the
higher of FY 2006, 2007 or 2008). This could mean that each
institution uses a different base year, which is acceptable. It
is likely that each institution's FY 2007 funding will be the
same as its FY 2006 funding, although final FY 2007 allocations
have not yet been made. The draft bill leaves open the year
which would be considered the base year.
Distributes appropriations above the ``hold harmless'' level
of the two institutions combined according to the Indian
Student Count formula used to distribute Section 117 Perkins
Act grants. This formula was just enacted into law in 2006. For
instance, if the hold harmless amount for both schools combined
is $6 million, but the total appropriation is $7 million, then
the $1 million above the hold harmless amount would be
distributed according to the Indian Student Count formula. The
draft bill would have the Secretary of Interior establish a new
formula for distribution of funds that are in excess of the
base amount--we do not favor the Secretary having this
responsibility.
Justification for ``hold harmless'' language. Each institution has
established a budget for its operations according to current and
expected funding levels for the coming year. BIA funds are critical for
core functions such as curricula development and hiring of instructors.
Neither institution can afford to take a significant reduction in
funding. Further, it is not unusual for Congress to enact ``hold
harmless'' provisions when a funding methodology is changed--one
current example is the hold harmless provision under Title I of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
Justification for formula distribution of those funds in excess of
the ``hold harmless'' amount. United Tribes Technical College and
Navajo Technical College agreed to the Indian Student Count provision
included in the 2006 reauthorization of the Carl Perkins Career and
Technical Education Act. Under that formula every 12 credits taken by
an Indian student is valued as one Indian Student Count. Each school is
provided funds based upon a division of the total ISC for both
institutions into the amount appropriated for the program.
A major reason why we reached an agreement on the formula for the
ISC contained in the newly reauthorized Carl Perkins Act is that it is
almost the same formula as set out in the Tribal College Act. Since we
are now proposing to be authorized under a new title V of the Tribal
College Act, it makes sense to utilize the Carl Perkins ISC formula, so
similar to the Tribal College Act's ISC formula, for funds in excess of
the ``hold harmless'' amount.
Justification for eliminating the discretion of the Secretary of
Interior. The draft bill would require the Secretary of Interior to
develop a formula for the distribution of the ``excess'' funds. As this
Committee knows, the Secretary of Interior is the one who has regularly
left NTC and UTTC out of the President's annual budget six times in a
row. We have no reason to trust the Secretary's discretion. Further,
the process of developing a formula for distribution could take a very
long time and delay distribution of funds. It would further create
great uncertainty about funding for the two institutions.
Since we already have a formula for fund distribution that works,
and both parties understand how it works, we see no reason why the
Secretary should have discretion to create a new formula or a new
process for distribution of funds. The formula we have proposed is fair
to both institutions and recognizes the needs of both institutions, to
the extent Congress provides adequate funding.
A formula also has the advantage that it avoids the issue of
``earmarks''. Funding that is competitive or formula driven is not
generally considered an ``earmark'', even by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
We also do not support the idea of the Secretary distributing funds
utilizing information provided by the Government Accountability Office
as has also been suggested (but it not in the draft bill). A GAO study
of the ``needs'' (a subjective and undefined term) of the two
institutions could take years to complete--the request would go to the
bottom of the long list of requests for reports. Even requests from
Committee Chairs on reports of national significance do not happen
quickly. In 2003 Finance Committee Chairman Grassley asked the GAO to
study Indian participation in Medicare and Medicaid programs, a study
that 4 years later is just now getting underway. Therefore, a GAO study
is not a practical or efficient way to distribute core funding that is
so vitally needed now by both institutions.
A study of tribal needs nationally regarding human resource capital
relative to career and technical education. We feel strongly that there
should be a study that focuses on the present human resource
development needs of all Indian tribes in relation to career and
technical education. Tribal governments, Federal agencies, and private
entities are making plans to develop Indian Country, but not enough
thought has gone into assessing the present tribal human resource
capital--economic/business, social, political, cultural, nor what needs
to be done to involve the Indian/Alaska Native population in guiding
and benefiting from such development. Broad questions that could be
assessed could include: (1) the status of the workforce infrastructure
available to tribes; (2) workforce and infrastructure needs of tribes;
(3) economic development opportunities that would expand tribal
economies; (4) tribal education and job training needs. A study of this
kind could go a long way toward helping tribal colleges meet the needs
of the tribes they serve, point the way for new tribal colleges to be
developed, and assist Congress to more effectively help meet the needs
of tribes as they continue to develop their economies.
Thank you. We look forward to continuing with work with the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs.
______
American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC)
Chairman Dorgan, Vice Chairman Thomas, and distinguished Members of
the Committee, on behalf of this Nation's 34 Tribal Colleges and
Universities (TCU), which comprise the American Indian Higher Education
Consortium (AIHEC), I thank you for extending us the opportunity to
testify. I am honored to be here.
My name is David Gipp, I am a Member of the Hunkpapa Lakota tribe
and for the past 30 years I have served as the President at United
Tribes Technical College, which is located near Bismarck, North Dakota
and serves Indian students from over 75 federally recognized tribes
across the Nation.
United Tribes began as a residential employment training program
and was called United Tribes Employment Training Center. Today, UTTC
offers over 30 Associate degree and certificate programs, with five
degrees being offered through online delivery. The college employs over
330 faculty, staff and administrators and serves over 1,400 full- and
part-time students.
The idea of tribally controlled institutions of higher education
has spread rapidly throughout Indian Country, over the past 30 years.
Today, despite decades of severe funding inequities and Federal budget
cuts, there are 35 Tribal Colleges and Universities located in 14
states educating many thousands of full- and part-time students from
over 250 federally recognized Indian tribes.
This morning, I would like to give you some background on the
tribal college movement and to detail some specific issues and how they
might be addressed during the 11Oth Congress reauthorization of the
Higher Education Act (HEA) and the Tribally Controlled College or
University Assistance Act--or Tribal College Act.
I. Background: The Tribal College Movement
Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU) are young, geographically
isolated, and poor. Forty years ago there were no Tribal Colleges or
Universities. Most TCU are located in areas of Indian Country that the
Federal Government defines as extremely remote. We serve our
communities in ways far beyond college level programming, and are often
called beacons of hope for our people. We provide much needed high
school completion (GED), basic remediation, job training, college
preparatory courses, and adult education programs. We function as
community centers, libraries, tribal archives, career and business
centers, economic development centers, public meeting places, and elder
and child care centers. In fact, an underlying goal of all TCU is to
improve the lives of students through higher education and to move
American Indians toward self-sufficiency. This goal is important to us
because of the extreme poverty in which most American Indians live. In
fact, three of the five poorest counties in America are home to TCU,
where unemployment rates range from 50 to 75 percent.
We are the most poorly funded institutions of higher education in
the country. And apart from the U.S. Military Academies and Howard and
Gallaudet Universities, we are the only institutions of higher
education whose basic operating budgets are funded--by legislative
mandate--by the Federal Government.
Most of our institutions are located on Federal trust land.
Therefore, states have no obligation to fund tribal colleges. Most
states do not even provide funds for the non-Indian state-resident
students who account for 20 percent of our enrollments. Yet, if these
same students attended any other public institution in the state, the
state would provide that institution with basic operating funds.
Ironically, TCU are accredited by the same regional agencies that
accredit state institutions.
Despite their strong support, our tribal governments are able to
provide us with only modest financial support. Our tribes are not the
handful of small and wealthy gaming tribes located near major urban
areas; rather, they are some of the poorest governments in the Nation.
Only a handful of tribal colleges currently receive any revenue from
tribal gaming. Gaming is not a stable or viable funding source for TCU,
nor should it be a factor when considering the funding of tribal
colleges. And as you know, it is a very few casinos that are located in
or near major urban areas that are realizing the vast majority of the
highly publicized profits from Indian gaming.
Revenues from state run gaming operations far exceed revenues from
Indian gaming. Although some form of gaming is legalized in almost
every state, the Federal Government has not used the revenue generated
from state run gaming to justify decreasing Federal funding to state
operated colleges or universities. The standards that apply to states
and state operated higher education institutions should apply to tribes
and tribal colleges. Unfortunately, it appears that this is not the
case.
II. 110th Congress Reauthorization of the Tribally Controlled College
or University Assistance Act and Higher Education Act
(A) Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act--Key
Issues
Institutional Operations and Forward Funding: Despite trust
responsibilities and treaty obligations resulting from the exchange of
millions of acres of land, the Federal Government has not, over the
years, considered funding of American Indian higher education a
priority.
Since 1981, when the Tribally Controlled College or University
Assistance Act, or ``Tribal College Act'' was first funded the number
of tribally chartered institutions funded under Title I of said Act has
quadrupled and it is expected that three to five additional
institutions will be eligible for Tribal College Act funding in the
near future. In addition to the increasing number of tribal colleges,
enrollments of full-time Indian students have grown over 300 percent.
Despite the much appreciated increases that Congress has
appropriated over the last several years, Tribal Colleges and
Universities are chronically under-funded. Today, 26 years after the
Act was first funded, the TCU are receiving $5001 per Indian student,
just 80 percent of their authorized level. And if you factor in
inflation, the buying power of this appropriation is $1,337 LESS per
Indian student than it was in the initial FY 1981 appropriation, which
was $2,831 per Indian student.
Clearly, an increase in the per Indian student authorized level is
warranted and necessary and adjusting the new level to annual inflation
is a way to keep the authority level from becoming a false measure of
adequate funding.
On the face of it, the holdups due to impasses and the resulting
continuing resolutions or even delays in the Department's distribution
of operating funds after Congress makes them available, might seem
easily remedied. However, the consequences have a cumulative effect
that create even greater financial difficulties that grow
exponentially, the longer the payments are left undistributed.
The stop gap measures, such as short term loans, that must be
employed to keep tribal colleges operating only serve to further
exacerbate the tenuous financial circumstances under which these
institutions are continually forced to operate. The situations created
by budget impasses or Department delays lead to strained relations with
banking institutions and a lack of credibility with businesses in the
colleges' respective communities. It creates a need to identify
emergency lines of credit to secure daily operational cash-flow. These
lines of credit come with burdensome interest rates that immediately
reduce the appropriated level of funding included in the final enacted
bill.
Over the past several years, funding has not been available until
well after October 1 of the relevant fiscal year. In FY06, although the
Interior appropriations bill was signed into law in August, TCU did not
receive their operating funds until late November and December, several
months into the academic year. This year, due to the protracted FY07
appropriations process, TCU did not receive operating funds until
February or March--4 to 5 months into the fiscal year and 6 months
after our academic year begins. Delayed appropriations and less than
timely distribution of funds, which are becoming the regular order,
make it difficult to properly plan and project operation funding needs,
hamstring long-range strategic planning, and force heavier reliance on
grants and soft-money funding, which is a recurring concern of the
accrediting agencies. In short, TCU are forced into a credibility
crisis with their faculty, staff, communities, and students. Forward
funding of our institutional operations would go a long way to breaking
this unfortunate cycle.
Recommendation:
Increase the Authorized Institutional Operations Funding
Level: Tribal Colleges and Universities request that the
Committee include an increase to the per Indian student
authorized level for operations to ``$8,000 adjusted annually
for inflation,'' in its bill regarding the reauthorization of
the Tribal College Act.
Forward Funding: No additional language is needed as the
authority already exists in the Tribal College Act to forward
fund the institutional operations of eligible TCU. Tribal
Colleges and Universities request that the Committee recommend
that the Appropriations Committee and the Administration work
to secure the one time appropriation needed to achieve forward
funding in Fiscal Year 2009.
Authorizing BIE funding for Tribally Controlled Post-secondary
Career and Technical Institutions: Navajo Technical College and United
Tribes Technical College: United Tribes Technical College (UTTC) and
Navajo Technical College (NTC) very much appreciate this Committee's
including a Title V to the Tribally Controlled College or University
Assistance Act during the reauthorization of said Act. The new Title
would authorize Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) funding for our
institutions. By establishing this authorization for the Tribally
Controlled Post-secondary Career and Technical Institutions in the BIE
it will lessen the likelihood that their funding will be considered an
earmark, and may reverse the trend of the past 6 years of eliminating
funding for our institutions in the President's annual budget.
The Board of Directors of the American Indian Higher Education
Consortium approved a resolution on March 23, 2007 supporting the
inclusion of a new title to the Tribal College Act to authorize
institutional operating funds for UTTC and NTC provided that it would
have no negative impact on funding of any tribal colleges currently
receiving institutional operating funds from the Department of the
Interior.
Under Titles I (24 tribal colleges) and II (Dine College) of the
Tribal College Act each tribe may charter only one college to receive
operating funds under the Act. UTTC is governed by a Board consisting
of the Chairs of the five tribes located wholly or in part in North
Dakota and each tribe represented on our governing board has a tribal
college that receives funds under Title I of the Tribal College Act. It
is for this reason that UTTC may not receive funds under the Tribal
College Act. The same is true for NTC, as Dine College, which is
chartered by the Navajo Nation, receives funds under Title II of the
Act.
Recommendation:
Authorization for Tribally Controlled Post-secondary Career
and Technical Institutions: The Board of Directors of the
American Indian Higher Education Consortium approved a
resolution on March 23, 2007 supporting the inclusion of a new
title to the Tribal College Act to authorize institutional
operating funds for UTTC and NTC provided that it would have no
negative impact on funding the tribal colleges currently
receiving institutional operating funds from the Department of
the Interior. Tribal Colleges and Universities urge the
Committee to work with the presidents of our two affected
institutions in determining the details of language and
implementation of the proposed new title.
(B) Higher Education Act--Key Issues
Department of Education--HEA Title III-A section 316: Title III-A
of the Higher Education Act supports minority and other institutions
that enroll large proportions of financially disadvantaged students and
have low per-student expenditures. Tribal colleges clearly fit this
definition. TCU fulfill a vital role by providing access to quality
higher education programs to some of the most impoverished areas of the
country. Their programs are specifically designed to focus on the
critical, unmet needs of their American Indian students and
communities, in order to effectively prepare their students for the
workforce of the 21st Century. A clear goal of the Title III program is
to improve the academic quality, institutional management, and fiscal
stability of eligible institutions, in order to increase their self-
sufficiency and strengthen their capacity to make a substantial
contribution to the higher education resources of the Nation.
TCU are the youngest and least developed institutions of higher
education in the Nation. As such, they are the most in need of these
funds yet, our funding level increases lag behind other programs, and
we must struggle to submit competitive applications under the arduous
requirements and volume of Title III Part A grants for the funds that
are available. Many higher education institutions spend thousands of
dollars on grant application preparation and submission. This is simply
not an option for TCU. In addition, the pool of eligible applicants for
the TCU program is small and although new TCU are emerging, the pool is
expected to remain below 45 institutions for the foreseeable future.
Creating a formula funded program would result in a win-win situation.
Current applications submitted for Title III Part A competitive grants
must have each of the required areas individually judged by application
reviewers, by converting the TCU program to formula funding
considerable administrative time and cost savings could be realized by
the Federal Government. For these reasons, the Department of Education
supports formula funding for the Tribal College Title III development
grants program.
Recommendation:
Expand and increase authority for the Tribal Colleges and
Universities' Title III-A Developing Institutions Program--The
Tribal Colleges and Universities request that the Committee
include the language contained in Sec. 303 of S. 1614, reported
from the Senate HELP Committee in the 109th Congress to formula
fund the Tribal Colleges' 5-year developing institutions grants
and also retain the critically needed construction grants that
are competitively awarded on an annual basis, in its bill or
any recommendations sent to the Senate HELP Committee regarding
the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.
Proposed Native American Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions Program:
In the 109th Congress, the Senate bill to reauthorize the Higher
Education Act included a new Title III program for ``Native American-
Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions''. Tribal colleges have serious
concerns regarding this proposal--but the underlying issue is one of
equity.
Tribal Colleges and Universities have a special relationship with
the Federal Government, which is based on our status as extensions of
the federally recognized Indian tribes that charter us. Our tribes have
binding treaties with the U.S. Government that include certain
responsibilities, including education, in exchange for millions of
acres of land. The reason the Tribally Controlled College or University
Assistance Act exists--and resources are allocated to tribally
controlled colleges and universities--is because of these treaties and
the Federal trust responsibility. In short, this is solely a political,
and not race-based, distinction. Funding of tribal colleges and
universities raises no affirmative action issues. This Native American
Serving, Non-Tribal Institutions proposal, however, does.
Additionally, the vast majority of tribal colleges has open
enrollment policies. Approximately 20 percent of our enrollments are
non-Indian students and these students receive the same education
opportunities as enrolled tribal members. However, the tribal colleges
and universities cannot include anyone who is not an enrolled member of
a federally recognized tribe in their student count that is used to
determine their institution's operating budget. There are no parameters
for determining Native American students under the proposed American
Indian Serving Institutions. Native American students would simply be
determined by self-reporting, there is no definition of parameters to
determine what constitutes a ``Native American''.
Tribal colleges receive little, or as in many cases no,
institutional operating funds from the state for either the Indian or
non-Indian state residents who attend a tribal college or university.
State supported institutions that would be eligible to receive funding
under this proposed Native American Serving Institution Title III
program already count their American Indian students, as well as non-
Indian state residents, when tallying their institution's student count
for determining their allocation of funds from the state.
Further, there is no practical way of separating out funds going to
improve education opportunities for Native Americans within these state
institutions. As noted earlier, these institutions already receive
funding for the education of their Native American students. This
program would just result in creating a source of additional funds for
state supported institutions to increase their basic operating and
program budgets--without any means for measuring its effect on Native
American students.
Recommendation:
Proposed Title III-A Native American Serving, Non-Tribal
Institutions Program: As a matter of equity and for the reasons
noted earlier in this statement, the Tribal Colleges and
Universities respectfully request that the Committee on Senate
Indian Affairs oppose the establishment of a new Title III-A
program for so-called Native American Serving, non-Tribal
Institutions.
III. Conclusion
Tribal Colleges and Universities bring high quality, culturally
relevant higher education opportunities to thousands of American
Indians. The modest Federal investment in the TCU has paid great
dividends in terms of employment, education, and economic development.
Continuation of this investment makes sound moral and fiscal sense.
Tribal colleges need stable funding sources and competent agency
administration of our various programs to sustain and grow those
programs and achieve our missions.
We greatly appreciate the long standing support of this
distinguished Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to present our
views and recommendations to help achieve equality in higher education
and economic opportunities in Indian Country through the Nation's
Tribal Colleges and Universities.
The Chairman. Dr. Gipp, thank you very much.
I should just mention that the question of funding the
United Tribes, for example, is not solely within the discretion
of the Department of the Interior or the Secretary of the
Interior. The Congress has weighed in on that each year that
this President has left it out of the budget.
But you are quite correct that you were always a part of
the budget until this Administration. Congress has, as you
know, decided this Administration is wrong and has continued
that funding. But I think the authorization request is a
reasonable request that we should proceed on.
Dr. Gipp. I deeply appreciate the bipartisan effort by the
Congress, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Elmer Guy is a board member of the
American Indian Higher Education Consortium, and president of
the Navajo Technical College in Crownpoint, NM. Mr. Guy, thank
you for being with us.
STATEMENT OF ELMER J. GUY, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO
TECHNICAL COLLEGE; BOARD MEMBER, AMERICAN INDIAN
HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM
Mr. Guy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee.
I am here today in partnership with Dr. Gipp from United
Tribes Technical College, in order to ask for support for the
new title V section of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and
Universities Act of 1978. This new title will authorize funds
to tribally controlled post-secondary career and technical
institutions.
Navajo Tech was founded in the largest American Indian
Nation, the great Navajo Nation, to help turn a tragedy into
educational success. Navajo Tech has had a distinguished
history in Indian education. Part of the challenge is the
realization of the depth of the tragedy of Indian education in
1968. Back in 1969, we began to discover how to use education
and training as a tool to address the immediate needs of
unemployed populations.
In 1979, the Navajo Skills Center was founded to meet that
critical need. Unemployed Navajo citizens not only mastered
vocational and technical skills, but they found jobs. In 1985,
I response to the limited offerings by the Navajo Skills
Center, this school became Crownpoint Institute of Technology.
The Institute began to expand its program in order to offer
associate degrees at that time, and responded to the national
trends as they relate to career technical education.
While Navajo Tech responded positively to the call for the
Nation's colleges and universities to begin working toward
programs that would bolster science, technology, engineering,
math and competitive needs of the 21st century by developing
impressive associate programs, it continued to build programs
like culinary arts, nursing assistants, automotive and so
forth, to keep with the knowledge revolution and career fields
and insure that job certificate degree priorities are aligned
to achieve high placement rates.
In 2005, Navajo Technical College was accredited by the
Higher Learning Commission as a higher education institute.
Navajo Tech has maintained retention rates over time that
exceed 60 percent of the student population using cohort
analysis, besting the national community retention rate below
50 percent. This does not mean that Navajo Tech comes close to
meeting the Navajo people's higher education needs. The 2000
census acknowledges a Navajo population at 225,298. On trust
land alone, we have 106,432 citizens that are over age 18 and
needing higher education.
In spite of the success by Navajo Tech, the BIA in 2000
began to zero out the budget for critically needed operational
funds. This is part of the operational funding that receives
the Indian Self-Determination Act contracts. Both colleges also
receive funding from Department of Education funding under the
Carl D. Perkins Act.
But through the wisdom of Congress and the deeply
appreciated help of this Committee, and Senators and
Representatives from our home States, the BIA decision has been
reversed every year since then, thus keeping both Navajo Tech
and United Tribes Technical College alive and providing
services to students.
The truth is that, Members of the Committee, Navajo Tech
needs to stabilize its funding base. Without BIA and Carl
Perkins funding, in spite of the discretionary target funding
the college is eligible to apply for, Navajo Tech and UTTC
cannot provide even the modest services that it now provides to
students of the United States.
We especially want to support the formula for funding
between Navajo Tech and UTTC that will hold harmless that two
schools at the higher of their 2006, 2007, or 2008 funding
levels. We want to ensure that the two schools will not be
funded at an amount less than the amount of their base year
based on congressional appropriations, and to distribute
appropriations above the hold harmless level of the two
institutions combined, according to the Indian student formula
used to distribute Section 117 Carl Perkins Act grants.
Ensure that the legislation passed includes a provision
which provides that funding is continued to be made available
pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination Education Assistance
Act. Ensure that the two colleges will continue to receive the
base funding that they need through sources from BIE and
Perkins Act funding.
Recognize that the Navajo Nation is the largest American
Indian Nation in the Country, with by far the largest
population base, and should not be therefore limited to only
one institution of higher learning to serve its people. In
comparison, Members of the Committee, the Navajo Nation is
larger than West Virginia and other smaller States like
Connecticut and Rhode Island, and they are not limited to one
college.
Ensure that there is authorization for forward funding, as
well as to allow both colleges to use non-Federal match, and to
use their funds as the non-Federal match.
Therefore, the greatest respect for the Members of this
Committee, which number among Navajo Tech's friends, we ask
that you support the new title V language before you so that we
can end the uncertainty and provide stability to our colleges.
We are hoping that you will, on a bipartisan basis, help us to
live up to our educational responsibility to current Navajo
students, future students, and even unborn students of the
future.
The job identified in 1969 is still with us today. We need
to change the tragedy of Indian education into a success of
Indian education. The United States needs us to succeed since
our human resources are always our greatest asset. If we
succeed, all of us serve the American people well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Guy follows:]
Prepared Statement of Elmer J. Guy, President, Navajo Technical
College; Board Member, American Indian Higher Education Consortium
Honorable Members of the Committee on Indian Affairs. My name is
Elmer J. Guy, President of Navajo Technical College (Navajo Tech) that
has two campuses on the Navajo Nation in Crownpoint, New Mexico and
Chinle, Arizona. I am here today in partnership with Dr. David Gipp,
the President of United Tribes Technical College (UTTC) located in
Bismarck, North Dakota, in order to ask for support for a new Title V
section to the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Act of
1978 (25 USC 1801, et seq.). This new title will authorize funds to
tribally controlled postsecondary career and technical institutions.
Navajo Tech, like UTTC, has had a distinguished history in Indian
higher education. In the famous 1969 report by the Committee on Labor
and Public Welfare of the U.S. Senate, made by its Special Subcommittee
on Indian Education, Indian education throughout the United States was
found to be ``a National Tragedy--a National Challenge.'' The stark
reality painted by the statistical and policy analysis in that report
shocked the Nation at that time. U.S. education policy toward American
Indian people had not improved their lives and prospects for a better
future. It had, instead, taken resources from the national treasury in
a way that perpetuated a historical tragedy of major proportions.
I will let the able Dr. Gipp speak for his institution, of course.
He is one of the most distinguished American Indian educators in the
Nation and has been so for a long period of time. But Navajo Tech was
founded on the largest American Indian Nation, the great Navajo Nation,
in the U.S. to help turn a tragedy into educational success.
Part of the challenge in the wake of the realization of the depth
of the tragedy of Indian education in 1969 was to begin to discover how
to use education and training as a tool to address the immediate needs
of an unemployed population. In 1979 the Navajo Skill Center was
founded to meet that critical need. Through the dedicated work of
Navajo education leaders at that time, the Skill Center was a success.
Unemployed Navajo citizens not only mastered vocational and technical
skills, but they found jobs.
With a Navajo population of the time at over 150,000 people, this
success was limited, however. There were a lot of reasons for this.
Funding was limited; too few training and educational programs were
available; student and trainee interests were broader than the
curriculum; jobs in the Nation were limited and highly competitive; job
requirements became more demanding as the national economy demanded
higher levels of education, and dreams among students and Navajo
educators were larger than the Navajo Skills Center structure could
contain.
In 1985, in response to these new challenges, the Skills Center
became the Crownpoint Institute of Technology. A new era was begun. The
Institute began to expand its programming in order to offer associate
degrees. It began to pay close attention to national trends as they
related to careers and technical education. And, was previously true,
it began to succeed as it developed programs to meet the challenges
present during the late 1980s and 1990s.
I am telling this history to make two points: (1) That Navajo
Technical College has played a vital role in the effort by the U.S.
Senate and government of the United States to address problems in
Indian education that stretch back into U.S. history and (2) that,
although it has not managed to meet even one half percent of the
technical and career needs on the Navajo people living in New Mexico,
Arizona, and Utah, it has been making slow progress on national
education goals as they relate to American Indian people.
While Navajo Tech was the Crownpoint Institute of Technology it
managed a number of significant achievements. It responded positively
to the call for the Nation's colleges and universities to begin working
toward programs that would bolster the science, technology,
engineering, and math competitive needs of the 21st century by
developing impressive associate degree programs. It continued building
its strengths in programs like culinary arts and automotive technology,
sometimes keeping up with the knowledge revolution in career fields and
sometimes ensuring that jobs, certificate, and degree priorities were
aligned to achieve high job placement rates.
In 2005 Crownpoint Institute of Technology became Navajo Technical
College, in part because of the expansion of services into the Arizona
side of the Nation. Navajo Tech has maintained retention rates over
time that exceed 60 percent of the student population using cohort
analysis, besting a national community college retention rate of a
little over 50 percent. It became a land grant institution in
partnership with other tribal colleges in 1994. In 2005 it became fully
accredited by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central
Association.
This does not mean that Dine College, the other tribal college on
the Navajo Nation and Navajo Tech are coming close to meeting the
Navajo people's higher education needs--although both institutions of
higher learning provide absolutely vital eduacational services to the
Navajo people. U.S. Census acknowledges a total of Navajo population of
225,298. On trust land alone, 106,432 Navajo citizens are age 18 and
over. This population is spread throughout a 17,500,000 acre
reservation (26,897 square miles) extending into three states. The
Navajo reservation is 2,810 square miles larger than the State of West
Virginia. The median Native American population age is 27.4 years, 8
years younger than the median age for mainstream America. Approximately
10,000 Navajo students graduate from area high schools each year.
Dropout rates from high school are as high as they are in the most
challenging urban schools. Large percentages of those Navajo students
who graduate lack basic reading, writing, and math skills. Navajo Tech
alone only serves a little over 500 full-time equivalency students
where it should be serving thousands if persistent poverty on the
Navajo Nation is going to be ended before the 21st century ends.
In spite of the success realized by Navajo Tech, and the needs that
I just brushed over with the lightest of touches--I will be glad to
provide the Committee or staffers with more extensive statistics if
that will be useful to your deliberations, the Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA) in 2002 began to zero out the budget for critically needed
operational funds, the authorization for appropriations that enables
Navajo tech is Pub.L. 84-959, ``Vocational Training for Adult
Indians.'' This is part of the operational funding that Navajo Tech
receives under the Indian Self-Determination Act Contract. Both
colleges also receive U.S. Department of Education Funding under
Section 117 of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act as part of
its operational funding.
Through the wisdom of Congress and the deeply appreciated help of
this Committee and the Senators and Representatives from our home
states, the BIA decision has been reversed every year since then, thus
keeping both Navajo Tech and UTTC alive and providing services to their
students. But the uncertainty and stress on communities, which read
about the yearly drama in area newspapers and hear about it on area
media, students, faculty, and staff damages Navajo Tech every single
year. ``Will Navajo Tech survive another year or not? '' People say.
``What's wrong with the college if the Bureau of Indian Affairs wants
to shut it down? '' They say. Education is about the future, and when
the future is clouded and troubles seem to always verge on creating
disaster, then planning efforts go awry, key professionals look for
other jobs, students question if they should make a decision that is in
their best interest, and keeping everyday tasks going gets harder.
The truth is that Navajo Tech needs to stabilize its funding base.
Without BIA and Carl Perkins funding, in spite of the discretionary and
targeted funding the college is eligible to apply for, Navajo Tech
cannot provided even the modest services that it now provides to the
Navajo Nation and the people of the United States. We especially want
to support the formula for funding between Navajo Tech and UTTC that
will:
Hold harmless the two schools at the higher of their 2006 or
2007 funding levels. We want to ensure that the two schools
will not be funded at an amount less than the amount for their
base year based upon Congressional appropriations.
Distribute appropriations above the ``hold harmless'' level
of the two institutions combined according to the Indian
Student Count Formula used to distribute Section 117 Perkins
Act grants.
Ensure that the legislation passed includes a provision
which provides that funding is continued to be made available
pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistant Act.
Ensure that the two colleges will continue to receive the
base funding they need from their sources of BIA and Perkins
Act funding.
Recognize that the Navajo Nation is largest American Indian
nation in the country with by far the largest population base
and should not therefore be limited to only one institution of
higher learning to serve its people.
Therefore, with the greatest of respect for the Members of this
Committee, which number among Navajo Tech's greatest friends, we ask
that you support the new Title V language before you so that we can end
the uncertainty and provide stability to our college. We are hoping
that you will, on a bi-partisan basis, help us to live up to our
educational responsibility to current Navajo students, future students,
and even unborn students of the future. The job identified in 1969 is
still with us. We need to change the tragedy of Indian education into
the success of Indian education. The United States needs us to succeed
since our human resources are always our greatest asset. If we succeed
all of us serve the American people well.
A further truth is that both Navajo Tech and UTTC are making
strides in spite of the institutional stress and challenges we face
because of the zeroing out of BIA funding every year. Again, I will let
Dr. Gipp speak for his institution, but at Navajo Tech our enrollment
is increasing. Our technology education program has become a world
class program. It is currently in the process of developing an
initiative called Internet to the Hogan that is using science and
technology research in areas like high speed wireless connectivity and
supercomputing and using those technologies to end the digital divide
on the Navajo Nation. The Congress of the United States provided the
funds through the National Science Foundation and other Federal
agencies to make the work we are doing possible. Navajo students are
learning world class skills as a result of this project, and some of
our graduates, both working at the college and elsewhere, are becoming
leaders in research, education, and the entrepreneurial use of
technology.
We are currently working hard with the Superintendent of Navajo
Education, Dr. Tommy Lewis, to improve K-20 student performance in pre-
college science, technology, engineering, and math skills, working on
an answer to the problem of underperforming high school students. We
are extending our service area, strengthening curriculum and increasing
academic rigor in fields as diverse as nursing, automotive repair,
electrical trades, and alternative energy. Title V will not provide
solutions to all of the challenges that still must be overcome to end
the national tragedy in Indian education that we have fought to
overcome since 1969. More resources, fresh ideas, an entrepreneurial
drive for excellence, and the kind of determination present in the
students, staff, faculty, and administrators at Navajo Tech will all be
needed. But the passage of this legislation will be an important step
toward Navajo Tech's long-term future.
The Chairman. Mr. Guy, thank you very much for being with
us today.
Next, we will hear from Jamie Merisotis, President of the
Institute for Higher Education Policy in Washington, DC. Mr.
Merisotis, thank you for being with us.
STATEMENT OF JAMIE P. MERISOTIS, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR
HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY
Mr. Merisotis. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Improving access to higher education continues to be one of
the most important contributions that the Federal Government
can make to our national well being. For many American Indians,
the path of educational attainment is one of many journeys
reflecting the complex challenges that face people who have
been under-served by America's educational system for more than
two centuries.
A combination of historical, economic, social and
demographic forces have shaped the educational challenges and
constraints that American Indians face. Today, almost 28
percent of American Indians aged 25 and over have not graduated
from high school, compared with the national average of 15
percent. And only 42 percent of American Indians pursue any
form of higher education; 13 percent of whom attain a
bachelor's degree or higher, half the national average. More
than one-third of all American Indian students are 30 years or
older, which puts them at risk for dropping out prior to
earning a degree. At tribal colleges, entering students have
family incomes that average less than $14,000, 27 percent below
the Federal poverty threshold.
Despite these significant obstacles, we know that investing
in higher education results in widespread dramatic benefits for
both individuals and the Nation as a whole. For example,
American Indians with a bachelor's degree or higher earn almost
four times as much as those who did not graduate from high
school, and more than twice as much as those who hold a high
school diploma. Participation in Federal welfare programs is
there times less for those with a college education than for
those who graduated from high school. Only about one-third of
American Indian students who did not graduate from high school
voted in the November 2004 election, compared to over half of
those with a bachelor's degree or higher.
Tribal colleges play an important role in workforce
development and skills, and they emphasize areas that are of
particular importance to the development of reservation
communities, such as health services, primary and secondary
education, and rural farm and business development. They offer
a variety of social services for students and community
members, such as family life and parenting courses, and
domestic and community violence prevention programs.
The very presence of tribal colleges on reservations
encourages even further pursuit of post-secondary education, as
evidenced by the fact that one-half of tribal college graduates
continue their education.
So investment in higher education through tribal colleges
isn't just a nice thing to do for American Indians. It is a
necessary step that is required to allow these colleges to
serve the growing numbers of students who will contribute in
significant ways to their communities and to our Nation.
I urge the Committee, therefore, to focus on the following
key Federal policy priorities. First, increase funding for the
operating expenses of tribal colleges and increase the level
authorized under the Tribal College Act. The current act
allocates funding through a formula based on the number of
Indian students enrolled. No funds are distributed for non-
Indian students, who make up 20 percent of total enrollment at
these schools. In 2006, as prior witnesses pointed out, total
funding per American Indian student was $5,001. Appropriations
have never reached the authorized level of $6,000, and in fact
have decreased by almost 30 percent after inflation. Future
funding increases should be tied to inflation to ensure that
student support does not decline.
Second, improve the capacity of tribal colleges to serve
students by increasing support for facilities and critical
infrastructure needs. While many mainstream colleges and
universities have benefited enormously from infrastructure
support from the Federal Government, most that have received
such support were created prior to the establishment of the
first tribal college. Congress can correct this inequity by
establishing a facilities and infrastructure equity plan to
tribal colleges that provides a level of support that is
comparable on a per-student basis to the sums available to
other land grant institutions.
Third, enhance the development of tribal colleges through
increasing support under Title III of the Higher Education Act.
Inexplicably, the President's 2008 budget proposed slashing
funds for tribal colleges under title III by more than 20
percent, an unprecedented cut. Given the enormous educational
needs served by the tribal colleges, this must not stand. I
urge the Committee to make title III funding for tribal
colleges formula-based so that institutions do not have to go
through the complex and time consuming task of developing
detailed competitive proposals. I also recommend that the
authorized level be increased to at least $40 million, and that
the Committee work with appropriators to fund this section at
its authorized level.
These and other strategies targeted at tribal colleges and
universities must be combined with broader Federal policies to
assist low income educationally disadvantaged students.
Increasing support for Pell Grants, the Federal TRIO Programs,
and programs that are aimed at building the high order
workforce skills of our Nation are essential to combat the
challenges of limited college access and success for our
Nation's growing emerging majority populations.
As one of the main drivers of economic and social
development for all American Indian communities, tribal
colleges and universities are critical to the future success of
these communities. I hope that you will continue the
Committee's bipartisan history of support for tribal colleges,
and act without delay to make these investments that are so
critical to the future prosperity and security of American
Indian communities. In so doing, our Nation will be
strengthened and sustained for many generations to come.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Merisotis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jamie P. Merisotis, President, Institute for
Higher Education Policy *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) is an
independent, nonprofit organization that is dedicated to access and
success in postsecondary education around the world. Established in
1993, IHEP uses unique research and innovative programs to inform key
decision makers who shape public policy and support economic and social
development. The Institute's work addresses an array of issues in
higher education, ranging from higher education financing to
technology-based learning to quality assurance to minority-serving
institutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for this opportunity to appear before the Committee
regarding the important topic of Tribal Colleges and Universities
(TCU).
The 110th Congress faces the ongoing challenge of promoting access
to higher education for all Americans who have the interest and ability
to attend college. Improving access to higher education continues to be
one of the most important contributions that the Federal Government can
make to our national well-being. For many American Indians, the path of
educational attainment is one of many journeys, reflecting the complex
challenges that face people who have been underserved by America's
educational system for more than two centuries. That path may take
students on an array of journeys through the postsecondary educational
system: Tribal Colleges and Universities; mainstream institutions of
higher education; adult education programs; associate's, bachelor's,
and master's degrees; outreach and support programs; financial aid
programs; and many others. Yet for many Native people, those journeys
represent the best and most important opportunities available for
cultural preservation and growth, social mobility, and economic
prosperity.
Today I will discuss some of the evidence that has been amassed
about why investment in Native people matters to us as a society, and
why the specific investment in Tribal Colleges and Universities brings
enormous benefits both individually and collectively to Native people
and communities. I also will discuss some of the most important
strategies that you can pursue at the Federal level to make this
investment pay off in economic, social, and cultural terms.
The Institute for Higher Education Policy's acclaimed recent
national report The Path of Many Journeys: The Benefits of Higher
Education for Native People and Communities (made possible through the
generous support of USA Funds, in collaboration with the American
Indian Higher Education Consortium and the American Indian College
Fund) has been provided in advance to the Committee. The report points
out that a combination of historical, economic, social, demographic,
and educational forces have shaped the challenges and constraints that
American Indians face.
Historical forces: For decades U.S. Federal policy toward Indian
tribes was made without knowledge or consideration of the values of
Native people themselves. In addition, educational curricula and
teaching came from a Eurocentric-White perspective and completely
neglected any mention of tribal ways of life.
Economic and social forces: American Indians, especially those who
live on reservations, are among the poorest groups in the country.
Approximately 26 percent of the American Indian/Alaska Native
population lives below the official poverty level, compared with 12
percent of the total population. Factors such as geographic isolation,
limited opportunities for upward mobility in rural areas and on
reservations, and low labor force participation rates contribute to a
continuous poverty cycle among American Indians. This poverty is often
accompanied by a range of social problems--injuries and violence,
depression, substance abuse, inadequate health care and prenatal health
care, unhealthy or insufficient diets, and high rates of diabetes--that
can greatly affect the ability and desire to pursue education.
Demographic forces: The American Indian population has experienced
tremendous growth, from 237,000 in 1900 to 4.3 million in 2000. An
estimated 33 percent of this population is under the age of 18,
compared with 26 percent of the total U.S. population. American Indians
reside primarily in the Western part of the United States: 48 percent,
compared with 22 percent of the total U.S. population. Currently, more
than a third of American Indians live on reservations or in other
American Indian Areas, with the remainder living in other communities.
American Indians tend to be more rural, geographically isolated, and
younger than the U.S. population as a whole.
Educational forces: American Indian college enrollment more than
doubled, from 76,100 in 1976 to 165,900 in 2002. An important reason
for that growth was the advent of the Tribal College and University
movement, which began in the late 1960s and has grown at an impressive
rate over a nearly 40 year period. However, American Indians continue
to have much lower educational attainment rates than persons from other
racial/ethnic backgrounds. Almost 28 percent of American Indians age 25
and over in 2004 had not graduated from high school, compared with the
national average of 15 percent. Further, only 42 percent of American
Indians pursued any form of higher education and 13 percent attained a
bachelor's degree or higher, compared with 53 percent and 28 percent
nationally.
In addition, more than a third of all American Indian students are
30 years or older, which puts them at risk for dropping out prior to
earning a degree. Most (65 percent) are financially independent,
compared to a national average of 50 percent. At TCU, entering students
have family incomes that average $13,998, or 27 percent below the
poverty threshold.
Despite the significant obstacles that confront American Indians,
we know that investing in higher education results in widespread,
dramatic benefits to both individuals and the Nation as a whole,
including higher rates of employment, less reliance on public
assistance, increased levels of health, and a greater sense of civic
responsibility. Figure 1 details some of the many benefits that result
from such investments. For example, American Indians with a bachelor's
degree or higher earn almost four times as much as those who did not
graduate from high school, and more than twice as much as those who
hold a high school diploma. Further, the more education that is
attained, the less likely it is for individuals to rely on public
assistance programs. Participation in Federal welfare programs is three
times higher for those with a high school degree compared to
individuals with a bachelor's degree or higher.
A number of social benefits also correlate with postsecondary
education attainment. For example, 88 percent of American Indians with
a bachelor's degree or higher said they were in ``excellent, very good,
or good'' health, compared with 73 percent of those without a high
school diploma. Only about a third of American Indians who did not
graduate from high school voted in the November 2004 Presidential
election, compared with over half of those with a bachelor's degree or
higher.
Figure 1: Benefits resulting from higher education in general and from
TCU on reservations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particular to
Private Public Reservations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Higher Salaries and Increased Tax Workforce and
Benefits Revenues Skills
Development
Employment Greater Greater
Productivity Opportunities
for Leadership
and Small
Businesses
Higher Savings Increased Economic Growth
Levels Consumption and Development
Improved Working Increased Employment for
Conditions Workforce Graduates on
Flexibility Reservations
Personal/ Decreased Agriculture and
Professional Reliance on Land
Mobility Government Development
Financial
Support
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Improved Health/ Reduced Crime Mitigation of
Life Expectancy Rates Social Problems
Improved Quality of lncreased Centers for
life for Offspring Charitable Preservation of
Giving/ Culture,
Community Language and
Service Traditions
Better Consumer Increased Provision of
Decision Making Quality of Further
Civic Life Educational
Opportunities
Increased Personal Social Cohesion/ Technology
Status Appreciation of Transfer
Diversity
More Hobbies and Improved Ability Community
Leisure Activities to Adapt and Programs
Use Technology
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TCU and other nearby colleges contribute to the economic
development of reservations. Despite persistent unemployment in
reservation communities, graduates from TCU are employed at encouraging
levels--for example, in one survey, 60 percent of alumni were employed
outside the home, in the military, or self-employed. TCU also play an
important role in workforce and skills development, and they emphasize
areas that are of particular importance to the development of
reservation communities, such as health services, primary and secondary
education, and rural farm and business development.
Students at TCU, as well as the colleges themselves, contribute to
the social health of reservation communities. The goals and activities
of the colleges and their students translate into direct benefits to
communities, such as the provision of social services, the preservation
of language and tradition, and the encouragement of educational
opportunities. TCU offer a variety of social services for students and
community members, such as family life and parenting courses and
domestic and community violence prevention programs. In addition, the
very presence of TCU and college graduates on reservations encourages
postsecondary educational attainment in these communities. About one-
half of TCU graduates continue their education, and of those, over 86
percent pursue a bachelor's degree.
Thus, investment in Native American higher education through TCU
and other postsecondary institutions is not just a nice thing to do for
American Indians. It is a necessary step that is required to allow TCU
to serve the growing numbers of students who will contribute in
significant ways to their communities and to our Nation.
I therefore urge the Committee to focus on the following key
Federal policy priorities that will greatly improve the postsecondary
educational prospects of American Indians.
Recommendations
Increase funding for the operating expenses of Tribal Colleges and
Universities and increase the level authorized under the
Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act of
1978 (TCCUAA).
TCU are in a unique funding situation. States have no obligation to
provide funding for TCU because of their location on Federal trust
territory. At the same time, the Federal trust territory status
prevents the levying of local property taxes, which are often used to
support community colleges elsewhere in the United States. Thus, the
main source of funding for the TCU is the U.S. Government. This puts
TCU in a unique category of institutions that includes only the U.S.
military academies, Howard University, and Gallaudet University.
According to treaty obligations and the trust responsibility between
the sovereign Indian tribes and nations and the United States, the
Federal Government is bound to provide funding for American Indian
tribes for a variety of programs, including higher education.
The TCCUAA currently allocates funding to 24 of the TCU through a
formula based on the number of Indian students enrolled (called the
Indian Student Count or ISC). No funds are distributed for non-Indian
students, who make up 20 percent of total enrollments at these schools.
In 2006, the total funding per American Indian student provided under
TCCUAA was $5,001. Appropriations have never reached the authorized
level of $6,000 per student. Despite increases in total appropriations,
funding per Indian student has increased only slightly since 1981 (by
only $1,616 over a 26 year period) and, in fact, has decreased by
almost 30 percent when inflation is considered. Future funding
increases should be tied to inflation to ensure that support for
students at TCU does not decline and therefore negatively impact the
ability of the colleges to effectively serve American Indian students.
Improve the capacity of TCU to serve students by increasing support for
facilities and critical infrastructure needs.
In 1994, 29 TCU were awarded land-grant status in Federal
legislation. As land-grant institutions, these TCU have the right to
receive resources that can be invested in additional faculty or
equipment to conduct agricultural research, either independently or in
collaboration with 4-year institutions. The 1996 White House Executive
Order on Tribal Colleges and Universities aims to more fully integrate
the colleges into Federal programs and reaffirms their important role
in reservation development by directing all Federal departments and
agencies to increase their financial support to the colleges. However,
only modest sums that have been invested in TCU have been allocated for
facilities construction and improvement. While many mainstream colleges
and universities have benefited enormously from infrastructure support
from the Federal Government, most that have received such support were
created prior to the establishment of the first TCU. Congress can
correct this inequity by establishing a facilities and infrastructure
equity plan for TCU that provides a level of support that is comparable
on a per-student basis to the sums available to the other land-grant
institutions.
Enhance the development of TCU to better serve students through
increased support under Title III of the Higher Education Act.
Part A, Section 316 of the Higher Education Act provides vital
services to the growing number of TCU and the students they serve.
These funds are used to support basic enhancements to curriculum,
faculty development, and some infrastructure costs. Inexplicably, the
President's 2008 Budget proposed slashing funds for TCU under Title III
by more than 20 percent--an unprecedented cut. Title III represents an
important opportunity for TCU to assist in their academic development.
This funding is similar in scope to funds made available to other
institutions with low average revenues, including many mainstream two-
and 4-year colleges as well as Historically Black Colleges and
Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions. Only funding for TCU
was cut under Title III in the President's Budget (funding for other
developing institutions was level funded and also disappointing). I
urge the Committee to focus on two key issues to aid in institutional
development at TCU under Title III. First, make funding for TCU under
Section 316 formula-based so that institutions do not have to go
through the complex and time-consuming task of developing detailed
competitive proposals. All TCU have major development needs and should
be recognized with support based on their FTE enrollments. Second,
increase the authorization level for Section 316 funds to at least $40
million and use the Committee's leverage with appropriators to fund
this section at its authorized level.
These and other strategies targeted at the unique circumstances of
Tribal Colleges and Universities must be combined with broader Federal
policies to assist low income, educationally disadvantaged students.
Increasing support for Pell Grants, the Federal TRIO programs, and
programs that are aimed at building the high-order workforce skills of
our Nation (such as the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement
Program) is essential to combat the challenges of limited college
access and success for our Nation's growing emerging majority
populations.
Low college access and degree achievement rates have been a
persistent problem for American Indians, the result of decades of
neglect, marginalization, and discrimination. As one of the main
drivers of economic and social development for all American Indian
communities, Tribal Colleges and Universities are critical to the
future success of these communities. I urge you to continue the
Committee's bipartisan history of support for TCU and act without delay
to make these investments that are so critical to the future prosperity
and security of American Indian communities. In so doing, our Nation
will be strengthened and sustained for many generations to come.
Thank you again for this opportunity to appear before the Committee
on this important issue.
The Chairman. Mr. Merisotis, thank you very much. Those
were some very interesting statistics you have compiled and
offered this Committee.
Dr. Bette Keltner is the Dean of the School of Nursing and
Health Studies at Georgetown University. Dr. Keltner, thank you
very much for being with us. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF DR. BETTE KELTNER, DEAN, SCHOOL OF NURSING AND
HEALTH STUDIES, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY
Ms. Keltner. Thank you so much.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee.
Thank you for this opportunity to address the Committee
concerning tribal colleges and universities.
I am Bette Keltner, not from a tribal college, but on
behalf of Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health
Studies, to support this community. We at Georgetown NHS do
offer bachelor of science and master's degrees across a variety
of programs, nursing of course, human science, health systems,
and international health.
Our school also is co-founding with Georgetown Law Center
the O'Neill Health Law Institute. I am a member of the Cherokee
Nation and have decades of experience supporting American
Indians and Alaska Natives. I served two terms as President of
the National Alaska Native American Indian Nurses Association,
and I am an active member of the Society for the Advancement of
Chicanos and Native Americans Into Science.
My interest and involvement in science spans a variety of
industries. I have also been on the production side of the
economy as a corporate officer for Honda of America
Manufacturing before coming to Georgetown in 1999. I would echo
Elmer Guy's support for the importance of investment in human
assets. As one of the auto manufacturers' success stories in a
material business, the competitive edge is given to those who
can manage the human assets. It is true that we have evidence
from today that tribal colleges and universities have
experience in developing and supporting the human assets for
American Indians.
Today, I would like to focus my comments on the importance
of science and technology at TCU, and the need to further
collaboration between TCU and major research universities to
advance these fields of study as a means of promoting health
and well being.
Certainly, we are familiar with the fact that the Bureau of
Labor Statistics' projections for the year 2014 are that
professional and science-related occupations will be the
fastest growing segment of the labor market, forecasted with
over a 20-percent increase in the coming years. We are all
familiar with the fact that the fields of science, technology
and health care are experiencing explosive growth.
It is also clear that the economy and individual and
community well being are dependent upon the new world that we
live in, and science and technology open these doors.
It is certainly tragic that the American Indian culture so
rooted in traditions associated with nature, that has given us
the great first steps in pharmacotherapy with the introduction
of aspirin, have fallen behind in participation with their
natural affinity for sciences, and particularly life sciences.
In talking to several presidents of TCU, it has become clear
that the lack of science faculty and their preparation is one
of the things that contributes to this gap. This fact creates a
barrier for Indian students who would wish to participate in
the most rapidly growing segment of the economy.
There are some bright spots. Certainly, we have heard that
today, for example, with the energy initiative. We have also
become familiar with the Navajo Technical College and the good
work they have done. I would point to their Hogan Project that
ensures that technology and computer skills are brought to bear
and can afford students, as well as faculty and the community,
important growth in education and economy.
TCU are challenged because students often come needing
remediation. This is even more important that we have science
faculty and education.
I would propose that as we examine the ways to do this
efficiently, that we take a look at what Mr. Thomas has said
earlier, about leveraging partnerships. As a former resident of
Wyoming, I was particularly pleased that he made my point in
starting this.
I would suggest that we do envision those opportunities,
and we have heard some examples, for partnerships between TCU
and major universities, but particular major research
universities, as having leveraging benefits. These benefits
include research collaboration, student services, educational
pipeline programs, and a unique perspective that would enhance
cultural competence in a range of fields that include
informatics, life sciences, public health, nursing, social
work, medicine, and linguistics.
To point to an example, I would say that two summers ago,
Stacy Phelps, the science educator at Oglala Lakota College,
and we have seen pictures demonstrating their great vitality,
visited my office at Georgetown University. One of his roles is
to get more students interested in pursuing science. Their
capacity has some limitations, and they have been innovative in
deploying what they can do through a partnership with South
Dakota School of Mines and Technology to address some of those
limitations. That collaboration is a good thing, but could be
further advanced with partnerships with research-intensive
universities, especially those with life sciences.
We had at that time 16 students from Pine Ridge who have
come over the summers as high school enrichment programs,
students who are primed to have their appetites whetted for
science. Stacy Phelps and I sat in a room with great enthusiasm
and ideas about the desirable goal, and just the limitation of
those opportunities to get together and move an idea forward.
As we know, science learning is a long continuum. We have
heard the importance of students being prepared from early
education through elementary school, high school, and of course
college. This continuum is even more important in science. We
cannot expect students to drop in on page 85 and understand the
content. They must learn it from page one or they are lost.
At Georgetown School of Nursing Health Studies we have had
Pathways to Success, which leverages another dimension that
major research universities can bring to a partnership with
TCU. This project bringing high school students to the
Georgetown campus for life science study began with startup
money from Goldman Sachs Foundation, QUALCOMM and FedEx.
Pathways is an initiative to enhance interest in academic
preparation for high school students who are prepared to attend
college and to instill in them both the skills and the interest
in life sciences.
At research universities, we can also introduce students to
destinations and to opportunities. One of the things that
connects the activities is that the Imaging Science and
Information Center at Georgetown University, with the help of
Senator Conrad, has been implementing an internet-based
diabetes management program focused specifically on American
Indian populations. I have served on the board of this group
since its inception. The success in managing diabetes at these
remote locations has been remarkable. We can also do testing at
a distance of (B)(1)(c) and get a real sense of the progress.
The Chairman. Dr. Keltner. I am going to have to ask you to
summarize the remainder of your testimony if you would.
Ms. Keltner. The remainder of my testimony is that I would
support the continued support for TCU, and that as we look
forward to the vitality of this capacity, that we encourage
investment in science education and look to potential
collaborations for TCU in research-intensive universities.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Keltner follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Bette Keltner, Dean, School of Nursing and
Health Studies, Georgetown University
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, and thank
you for this opportunity to address the Committee concerning tribal
colleges and universities (TCU).
I am Bette Keltner, dean of Georgetown University School of Nursing
and Health Studies (NHS). We offer bachelors and masters degrees of
science in Health Systems, Human Science, International Health and
Nursing. Our school also operates, in partnership with Georgetown
University Law Center, the Linda and Timothy O'Neill Institute for
National and Global Health Law.
I am a member of the Cherokee Nation and have decades of experience
supporting American Indian and Alaska Natives. I served two terms as
president of the National Alaska Native American Indian Nurses
Association and am an active member ofthe Society for Advancement of
Chicanos and Native Americans in Science.
My interest and involvement in science spans a variety of
industries. I have also been on the production side of the economy as a
corporate officer for Honda Mfg before coming to Georgetown University
in 1999.
Role of Tribal Colleges and Universities
The important role of TCU in education and their contributions to
their communities has been well documented and discussed.
Today, I would like to focus my comments on: (1) the importance of
science and technology at TCU and (2) the need for further
collaboration between TCU and major research universities to advance
these fields of study as a means of promoting the public's health and
well-being.
According to 2005 Bureau of Labor Statistics projections for the
year 2014, professional and related occupations will be the fastest
growing segment of the Labor Market by 21.2 percent over the coming
years.
I am sure we all understand that fields in science, technology, and
health care are experiencing disproportionate growth.
It is clear that the economy and individual and community well-
being are dependent upon the new world that we live in where science
and technology open doors.
Investment in the sciences has worked in various cultures,
including in countries like Ireland that currently has a low
unemployment rate and high standard of living.
It is certainly tragic that the American Indian culture--which is
so close to nature--has never adequately translated that love to life
sciences, science, and technology.
In talking to several presidents of TCU, it became clear they lack
science faculty and preparation. This fact creates a barrier for Indian
students who wish to participate in most things that science allows us
to do.
There are some bright spots, however.
A review of recent issues of the Tribal College Journal of American
Indian Higher Education highlights some examples where TCU programs in
science and technology are serving the greater interests of American
Indians and their communities.
The Native Grass Project at Haskell Indian Nations
University in Kansas focuses its research on switch grass--a
warm season, perennial grass found throughout the United States
with biofuel potential. The program will help identify the
attributes desirable for the revitalization and expansion of
the grass for future use by Native people and for the
restoration of Army installation lands.
In New Mexico, the Navajo Technical College has partnered
with Navajo Nation on the Internet to implement the Hogan
Project. The project will ensure technology is an integral part
of the Navajo community development in education, health care,
public safety, and economics. The project will bring
supercomputing capabilities to research and education projects
at the college and allow integration with other research and
computing facilities such as the University of New Mexico. E-
Learning programs will bring advanced collaborative education
models to remote communities.
This sampling highlights a fertile ground in the area of science
and technology at TCU. As American Indian communities seek to address
their educational, economic, and health needs, the importance of
science and technology and collaboration grows.
Yet, TCU are challenged because students are not well-prepared.
Their ability is limited to offer strong education in life science,
science, and technology because of faculty who lack depth in these
fields and a remote location.
I propose that we look to unite resources from major universities
to address this problem.
University Collaboration with TCU
Partnership between TCU and major universities with strong research
programs can have wide-reaching benefits.
Those benefits include research collaboration, student service
opportunities, educational pipeline programs, and a unique perspective
that would enhance cultural competence in a range of fields, including
informatics, life sciences, public health, nursing, social work,
anthropology, medicine, and linguistics.
Today, I want to talk about start-up opportunities at Georgetown
University.
Two summers ago, Stacy Phelps, the science educator at Oglala
Lakota College, visited my office at Georgetown University. One of his
roles there is to get more students interested in pursuing science.
The college's capacity is limited. Faculty members at this TCU lack
a depth in the sciences. The college has begun a partnership with South
Dakota School of Mines and Technology to begin addressing this
shortcoming.
That collaboration is a good thing. However, it will not provide
the strong base in science that these students would encounter at a
research intensive university.
So Stacy Phelps and I sat in my office with a well-known problem, a
desirable goal, and a great deal of enthusiasm.
With seed money, we could have launched a substantive program that
would leverage the strengths of OLC and South Dakota School of Mines
and Technology, as well as the major scientific and research capacities
of Georgetown University.
But none existed.
As we know, science learning is a long continuum, from early
education through college and beyond. Students cannot drop in on page
85 of a science textbook and be expected to understand the content.
They have to learn it from page one. Or else they are lost.
One project we launched at the School of Nursing and Health Studies
is ``Pathways to Success.'' We have begun this effort with start-up
funding from the Goldman Sachs Foundation, QUALCOMM, and FedEx.
Pathways is an initiative designed to enhance the interest and
academic preparation of underserved high school students. A goal is for
students to attend college and pursue careers in biomedical science,
life science, health care, and technology.
Between 2003 and 2006, 16 high school students from the Oglala
Lakota tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota
participated.
Such a program whets the appetite of these students for science and
technology. With seed money, we could capitalize on these initial
investments and develop a stronger partnership with TCU to offer
students even greater exposure to a top-tier research institution.
At research intensive universities, students can be exposed to
state-of-the-art science, such as the Imaging Science and Information
Systems Center at Georgetown University Medical Center.
Over the last several years, the Center--with the help of Senator
Conrad--has been implementing an Internet-based diabetes management
program focused specifically on American Indian populations. It also
holds potential for expansion through partnerships with Tribal
Colleges.
In the area of education, the School of Nursing and Health Studies
participates in the Association of American Indian Physicians' National
Native American Youth Initiative.
This is an academic enrichment and reinforcement program designed
to prepare American Indian and Alaska Native high school students for
admission to college and professional school and to encourage them to
pursue a career in the areas of health science and biomedical research.
These students are hosted at Georgetown for a half-day where they
hear a faculty lecture and view the Georgetown University Simulator
(GUS)--a full-body, robotic mannequin that can realistically replicate
a human patient in a clinical setting. In addition, our Admissions and
Outreach staff at NHS conducts a 2-hour seminar with the students that
focuses on the college admissions process.
Bettering, Building The Relationship
For various reasons--including health, education, and workforce--it
is clear that a solid grounding in science and technology is a missed
opportunity for American Indians. I have discussed the potential that
TCU themselves hold.
But clearly this is just a beginning. In terms of a well-trained
workforce, sustainable jobs, and addressing tribal needs, American
Indian Nations require more Indians and Indian youth, in particular, to
pursue education in the sciences and technology. TCU hold a key to
achieving that goal, particularly through collaboration with research
intensive universities.
These collaborations require dedication at the ground level, as
well as external funding and a smart sustainable framework that allow
programs to flourish.
Congress could catalyze such collaboration by brokering
partnerships between TCU and research intensive universities--through
Federal funding of pilot projects and national centers of excellence.
Adding competitive advantages for collaboration between TCU and
universities to the proposal process for existing grant programs would
also encourage increased collaboration to build scientific and
technological bridges.
I thank you again for giving me the time to address this issue of
consequence, as well as for your work on behalf of American Indian and
Alaska Native communities. I am happy to respond to any questions that
Members of the Committee might have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Keltner, for your
perspective on these issues. This is an interesting panel, and
there are some very interesting perspectives on this very
important issue.
It seems to me, hearing from the four of you, that there is
a consensus that there needs to be a better funding source for
tribal colleges. Senator Tester made the point, and I think it
is an accurate point as well, that just an adequate funding
source for the students that are coming in, the increase in
students, is not in itself sufficient either because you have
to have an infrastructure program to build the buildings and
complete the campuses and so on, and to deal with those issues
that are present at every college.
Dr. Gipp, for example, at your college, you have inherited
some very old buildings in a very nice campus setting, but very
old buildings that I assume require a substantial amount of
repair. Tell us just a bit about the infrastructure problems.
Dr. Gipp. Well, as you know, we occupy an old military
fort. It is a good case of the Indians taking over the fort in
this case for peaceful and educational purposes. But our core
buildings are about 105 years old. Fort Abraham Lincoln is what
it was called. We have added other buildings, classrooms and
some labs, but we have a major, major need for new classroom
space as well as new housing, because we are campus-based. We
have gone from roughly 375 students several years ago to close
to 1,100 or 1,200 students this year. That will continue to
grow, as I talked about earlier, as is the case with Navajo
Technical College and the other schools.
So that issue of both maintaining as well as building new,
and addressing the new problems, but maintaining what you have,
is very, very critical.
The Chairman. Mr. Guy, with respect to your request for the
authorization language, was your college also funded in
previous Presidential budget requests prior to the year 2000?
Mr. Guy. Yes, Mr. Chairman; we have been in the funding
before.
The Chairman. And were you told any reason that the funding
was dropped, beginning with the current Administration?
Mr. Guy. Yes; the explanation that we received is that we
were not authorized as one of the colleges under the
legislation, the American Higher Education Act.
The Chairman. Mr. Merisotis, your data that you presented
is especially gripping with respect to this shortfall on
funding, the dramatic increase in the number of students that
have come into the system, which describes the popularity of
the tribal college system offering something that had not been
previously an opportunity for many of these students, many of
whom, you say, are nontraditional students. You indicated that
one-third of the students are over years of age?
Mr. Merisotis. Correct. Yes; the tribal colleges are one of
the great untold success stories in American higher education.
We tend to look at the funding challenges of the tribal
colleges, which are severe. We at times may view them in a sort
of deficit mentality. In fact, what tribal colleges have been
able to do with such limited resources is really extraordinary.
An example of that is the way that they are serving these
nontraditional students. But I think a broader example is the
way that the tribal colleges have become community resources,
community centers in terms of tribal languages, economic
development, and social services. They really play an enormous
role in these communities, well beyond what you see in an awful
lot of other mainstream institutions of higher learning.
I think one of the most important things from the
perspective of the tribal colleges is that the tribal colleges
are absolutely dependent on the Federal Government for
operating support. We do have the important issue of
infrastructure, which is outside of the operating expenses that
we need to concentrate on. But remember that the operating
support of the tribal colleges cannot come from the States for
the reasons that you pointed out in your prior comments and
cannot come from the levying of local property taxes. It must
come from the Federal Government in terms of the Federal trust
responsibility.
I think that in that sense when I try to describe to
individuals in mainstream higher education about the role of
the tribal colleges, I say the Federal Government plays the
same role to tribal colleges that the State plays to public
institutions of higher education. The difference is that in no
State in the Country would a public higher education
institution stand for the level of uncertainty that exists in
terms of basic operating expenses. Their existence is literally
annually threatened because of the uncertainties of the funding
process. I think that is something that really needs to change
and be stabilized over time.
The Chairman. Well, you have described the dilemma that
most tribal college presidents would tell you is a very serious
problem their offices address all year long, trying to
determine what kind of student support will I get; what kind of
funding will I get that provides the opportunity for me to
continue to run this college.
One of the things that I am hoping we can do in the
Committee on Indian Affairs is to begin to describe the success
of this system, even with those challenges. We should not
apologize for holding up a student to say, as Dr. Gipp did, he
described a student that everybody had given up on, who was now
a very significant success. We should never shy away from that.
These success stories are very important for people to
understand the conditions under which those who otherwise could
not get a college education have not only gotten a college
education, but been able to use that to do that something very
significant in their communities.
So I am hoping that we can begin to gather more and more
anecdotal information from these colleges about these success
stories. I think that is a story, the untold story, as you
describe it, Mr. Merisotis.
I am going to turn the questions to Senator Tester and ask
him to complete the hearing. I have to be on the floor and then
we have votes that will begin momentarily, but I have to be on
the floor at 10:45. So I will call on Senator Tester. Let me,
as I do, thank all four of you for being here today. We
consider the health, education and housing issues to be very
significant issues that represent a priority for this Committee
in the Indian nations. So this is one part of that today, the
issue of tribal colleges, something that I have very
significant and strong interest in. This Committee will play a
significant role in the reauthorizations. We also will play, as
I will play on the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, a
significant role on the funding side as well. I thank all four
of you.
Senator Tester.
Senator Tester [presiding]. Yes; thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I guess I will ask you, Dr. Guy or Dr. Gipp, and I will
just make the assumption that both UTTC and Navajo Tech, the
reason they were able to survive is because Congress stepped in
and put money toward them. Is your funding level the same at
the $5,000 figure? What did they use for funding level for you?
Dr. Gipp. We don't operate under a current formula right
now. It has been basically what Congress has been able to
provide to us, as opposed to really no policy by the BIA in
regard to the two institutions you just mentioned. So we are
left to the whim and the will, if you will, of what the
Administration has said, which is zero request at this point in
time. You are correct that the Congress has intervened and
restored those funds. The operating funds under the Interior
Appropriations for United Tribes are a little less than $3.5
million and I believe about $1.7 million for Navajo Technical
College annually from the Interior-BIA side of the operating
dollars.
Senator Tester. Did you guys do something to tick off the
Administration?
[Laughter.]
Dr. Gipp. We don't know. At least I don't know, and maybe
President Guy has another story on this. But as I say, the OMB
fellow said hey, until you are somebody's favorite, you are not
going to get financed.
Senator Tester. It is a situation we will have to deal
with, it appears, again.
Mr. Merisotis, you talked about enhancing title III support
and making it formula based. Are you talking so much per
student? What kind of formula did you have in mind?
Mr. Merisotis. Well, formula meaning that each college
would not have to go through a complicated competitive annual
process each year, much like is done, for example, in funding
for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, also under
title III, part B, where there is a formula based on the
students that are enrolled and then resources are allocated
based on the student enrollments.
It seems like this sort of annual competitive process that
the colleges have to go through is not very productive.
Senator Tester. I understand.
Mr. Merisotis. They have limited staff to do this kind of
work, and I would much rather see them focusing those staff on
academic issues, rather than on these competitive grant
processes. They have significant need for all of them.
Senator Tester. Right. Then you talked about a facility
improvement line item, if that is the proper term. If you were
in a position of power, how would you structure that?
Mr. Merisotis. I would look at the funding that is already
allocated to the other land grant institutions of higher
education that have been around for many years, the tribal
colleges gained land grant status in 1994, and provide support
that is comparable on a per-student basis to the land grant
support. I don't know what that exact number is right now, but
it seems like the support that the tribal colleges should get
as land grant institutions should be comparable to the support
that other institutions receive.
Senator Tester. OK. And then in the last question, and I
will start out with Dr. Keltner, but you can all answer this. I
don't mean to be negative toward the tribal colleges at all, by
the way. I think they do a great job and they are a great hope
for economic development in Indian country. Make no mistake
about it. But the dropout rate is something that concerns me.
I have a couple of questions. Does it concern you? Is it
something we need to be concerned about? And number two, if you
are concerned about it, what do you attribute it to? And what
do you think we can do to help reduce it?
We will start with Dr. Keltner, and any of the rest of you
can respond to that if you would like. It is your choice. The
reason I direct it at you is because of the collaborative
efforts of you. I assume that you work with a number of
schools. So go ahead.
Ms. Keltner. That is correct, Mr. Tester. The graduation
rate certainly is a concern, and the preparation for a
competitive market is generally very good. I speak to one
partnership that we have initiated in working with Sisseton-
Wahpeton College, where the pass rate for nurses was a total
failure, 100 percent failure. The things that can be done at a
distance can be leveraged with certain types of collaborations.
We must beef up the faculty in those particular areas. I
know recruitment, hiring and retention is on the minds of
college presidents always, and we have people who can speak to
that. To the extent that we use our entire social capacity of
having collaborations, I think we can enhance the achievements
of students who do make it to tribal colleges and universities.
Mr. Merisotis. I would push back a little bit on your
question about dropouts, simply because the complex life
circumstances of so many students in the tribal colleges means
that they are going to be involved in what the economic
researchers called ``swirl,'' which is they come in, they go
out, they come in, they go back, they have child care, they
have family responsibilities, they have work, et cetera.
So when we say ``dropout,'' I am not sure what measure we
are really talking about. In terms of mainstream colleges, the
typical time that it takes to get a degree, certainly that is
true. But the tribal colleges, as I pointed out, are enormous
community-based resources. A lot of the individuals stay
connected to their communities through the tribal college.
Tribal colleges are providing GED training. They are providing
health care services, diabetes education, et cetera.
So there are a variety of things where the tribal colleges
are serving as community resources, and these students come in
and out. An awful lot of the tribal college students we have
learned through a project that AIHEC has called the American
Indian Measures of Success, are actually successful in many
other ways beyond that narrow definition of a dropout rate.
Senator Tester. You bring up a good point. I think we need
to keep in mind that you don't necessarily need to have a
degree to have a good job or be successful, family wise or
otherwise. So that is a good point.
Dr. Gipp. Senator, you mentioned the dropout rate. I think
about 80 percent to 90 percent of our population from pre-K
through 12 are in public school systems, by the way. That is
where the severe dropout rate is occurring, when we talk about
that. What happens, though, is that we take those young adults
that are coming out of those systems, sometimes dropping out,
and many of our tribal colleges are providing the adult
education programs so they can get the GED, so they can get
into the post-secondary system. That is where I think we come
in, at the points that Mr. Merisotis has pointed out, in terms
of providing those community services to support them so that
they can be successful.
The evidence shows that really when our students go through
a tribal college system, they are going to be far more
successful, not only graduating from our system, but also it
increases their ability to be successful in the mainstream
institutions that they graduate to in terms of other
universities or colleges that we referred to in terms of those
partnerships. So there is really the crux of what we do in
terms of turning that around. Unfortunately, it comes at the
later stage of life than those who initially drop out.
Senator Tester. Dr. Guy, did you want to respond?
Mr. Guy. Yes, Senator; I guess back home we call the
dropout rate sometimes ``step out.'' Sometimes they step out
and then they step back into the school. What we are doing is
we are looking at dual credit programs, to where we want to
enroll them while they are still in high school, and then we
give them credit when they come to our school, and then they
have already earned some college credits. Everything that we
are doing is we are training high school teachers in math and
science to use technology in their curriculum, and more
effectively use technology.
Senator Tester. That is good. I want to do whatever we can
do to help facilitate your success. I need to make that clear.
I think that when you look at the at-risk thing that I brought
up with Carl Artman, with Native American students, I don't
want to put too much pressure on you, but I think you are
really the key to stop that and to turn that around, and to
really help those students in K-12. I really firmly believe
that. I don't think a solution will come out of conventional
colleges, or it would have already.
The other issue that I don't want to saddle you with, but
it is the truth, and I think there is a tremendous opportunity
for tribal schools in reducing the unemployment rate.
Education, as we all know, is the key to economic development.
We just need to make sure that you folks have the ability to be
successful, to help turn that around. That would save us all
just a whole lot of heartache.
So yes, did you want to respond?
Dr. Gipp. I was just going to point out, too, along the
line that you are talking about, the issue of economic
development and infrastructure development in our tribal
communities. I really think that one of the major oversights by
the BIA in the past 25 years has been not looking at our human
resources and what our needs are. We really need to have a
major assessment, if you will, study where our human resources
are and what we can then do. That means some additional
research that needs to be invested in this area to do
successful things like economic development. There is no
question that the tribal colleges can and do play a very
important part where they are located on the issue of business
and economic development, and answering that question of
unemployment.
Because you look at Standing Rock where I am from, and you
have unemployment that ranges from a low of 50 percent or 55
percent, to a high of 97 percent unemployment. We need to do
something about that. I think that tribal colleges are a
wonderful example of that, Senator.
Senator Tester. Yes; absolutely.
With that, I want to thank the panel for being here today.
I think it was a very, very good hearing and very enlightening.
I appreciate your time.
With that, this Committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:55 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Hon. Kent Conrad, U.S. Senator from North Dakota
Thank you, Chairman Dorgan for holding this important hearing. I
want to also welcome Dr. David Gipp, President of United Tribes
Technical College here today.
I am a strong believer in the tribal colleges. The tribal colleges
bring hope and opportunity to thousands of Native Americans across the
country. Tribal colleges serve young people preparing to enter the job
market, dislocated workers learning new skills, and people seeking to
move off welfare.
I am particularly proud to serve as Co-Chair, along with Senator
Domenici, of the Senate Bipartisan Task Force on Tribal Colleges and
Universities. The task force works to raise awareness of the important
role the colleges play in their respective communities and advance
initiatives to help improve and expand the quality education they
provide.
Over the years, I have met with many tribal college students, and I
am always impressed by their commitment to their education, their
families and communities. I am a fighter for the tribal colleges
because I know how critical they are to progress and growth in Indian
country.
This year, the President proposed a budget that cuts funding for
tribal colleges. It also eliminates all funding for United Tribes
Technical College and Navajo Technical College. Tough budget choices
must be made, but I can think of no worse choice than cutting funding
for the tribal colleges.
While annual appropriations for tribal colleges have increased in
recent years, core operational funding levels are still only 75 percent
of the $6,000 authorized per Indian student count. Funding is not even
keeping pace with rising student enrollments. Since 1981, enrollments
have increased by more than 330 percent.
It is also not keeping pace with inflation. It would require $6,304
per Indian student, $300 more per student than the current authorized
level, for the tribal colleges to have the same buying power as they
had in 1981.
It is important for Congress to do all it can to support their
incredible work and look for opportunities to help them expand and
grow. Tribal colleges make a difference and deserve our support.
Again, thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing. I look
forward to the testimony of the witnesses.