Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
1103433
label
Social Services
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1103433
contentType
document
title
Social Services
collections
Bradley H. Patterson Files (Ford Administration)
Bradley Patterson's Native American Programs Files
subjects
Indians of North America
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1103433
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-11-01
month
11
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-09-01
month
9
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
46d4def38dae6764
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 5, folder "Social Services" of the Bradley H. Patterson Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 5 of the Bradley H. Patterson Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library MEMORANDUM OF CALL TO: Brad YOU WERE CALLED BY- YOU WERE VISITED BY-- Sonia Rivero OF (Organization) 245-6111 (Sec.Matthews of) PHONE NO. PLEASE CALL CODE/EXT. WILL CALL AGAIN IS WAITING TO SEE YOU RETURNED YOUR CALL WISHES AN APPOINTMENT MESSAGE Re: letter from Charles Tremble Netthy anything well Fral year RECEIVED BY DATE TIME STANDARD FORM 63 GPO : 1900-o48-16-80341-1 332-889 63-108 REVISED AUGUST 1967 GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6 ACTION SRS NATIONAL ¡NFO Blue Sp ONHP. CONGRESS OF SUITE 700, 1430 K STREET, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 (202) 347-9520 AMERICAN September 27, 1976 INDIANS- EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Honorable David Mathews PRESIDENT Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare Mel Tonasket 330 Independence Avenue, SW Colville Washington, D.C. 20201 GERALD a. FORD FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT Veronica Murdock Dear Mr. Secretary: Mohave TREASURER We would like to bring to your attention a matter of utmost Ray Goetting concern to the National Congress of American Indians. This Caddo concerns the granting of a contract to study Title XX and RECORDING SECRETARY the delivery of social services to Indian reservations. Ramona Bennett Puyallup On November 11, 1975, at the 32nd annual convention of the EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR National Congress of American Indians, a resolutions was Charles Trimble Oglala Sioux adopted by the convention to look into the utility and re- sponsiveness of Title XX in the delivery of services to Indian AREA VICE PRESIDENTS people on reservations. ABERDEEN AREA Joe Chase A subsequent meeting was held on January 23, 1976, which in- Mandan cluded a wide range of representatives from Indian country ALASKA AREA and from the various federal agencies serving Indian people. Gordon Jackson According to the report of the Social & Rehabilitative Service Tlinget (SRS), "Mr. McGavich announced that a grant in the amount of ANADARKO AREA $450,000 would be available to the National Congress of American Juanita Ahtone Indians to conduct the project," and that "the complete project Kiowa responsibility for this project is to be assumed by the NCAI." BILLINGS AREA The grant was to be funded, according to the agreement of the Ray Spang Northern Cheyenne federal representatives of that meeting, by SRS ($150,000), the GALLUP AREA Office of Native American Programs ($150,000), and the Bureau Victor Sarracino of Indian Affairs & Indian Health Service ($150,000 between them). Laguna BIA and IHS subsequently declined participation in the project. MINNEAPOLIS AREA Stanley Webster NCAI held a series of meetings with representatives of SRS and Oneida ONAP, and representatives of tribal organizations from throughout MUSKOGEE AREA the United States. In addition, NCAI submitted a number of Katharine Whitehorn proposals to secure the funding agreed to in the January 23 meeting. Osage Aside from periodic verbal criticisms of the proposals, NCAI did PHOENIX AREA not receive specific response from SRS. Irene Cuch Ute At a meeting on June 23, 1976, between NCAI staff, James Burr PORTLAND AREA and Sidney Netherly of SRS, and George Clarke of ONAP, NCAI Roger Jim Yakima was told that in order to improve its chances of getting the SACRAMENTO AREA grant for the study funded, it should secure the services, via Rachel Nabahe subcontract, of a university-based institute to do the technical Shoshone/Paiute preparation and conduct of the survey. That university-based SOUTHEAST AREA institute, we were informed, should be the Denver Research Jonathan Ed Taylor Institute of the University of Denver. Cherokee Honorable David Mathews Page two At first, NCAI objected to the imposition of a non-Indian organization to do the study since it had already been agreed that the study would be done by NCAI. We did reluctantly agree to meet with representatives of DRI and SRS to discuss the matter, however, since we were informed that DRI had done some exemplary studies in that area before. In the meeting with SRS, ONAP and Denver Research Institute representatives, which was held on July 8-9, 1976, in Denver, it was agreed that studies alone would not help change the abhorent. situation with Title XX and social services to Indian tribes, and that the role of NCAI in converting the studies into meaningful recommendations for change would be significant. It was agreed then that NCAI would assume the major role and that DRI would subcontrac: with NCAI for the highly-technical parts of the study. It was agreed further that NCAI would submit a brief statement of understanding to DRI as to the roles of the two organizations in the study contract, and that DRI would prepare a proposal based on that understanding. The DRI proposal would then be sent to NCAI and NCAI would incorporate the technical proposal of DRI into the overall proposal and submit it to SRS. The proposal, it was agreed, would be done by August 30, 1976, in order to secure funding from the transitional fiscal period ending September 30, 1976. On August 18, 1976, NCAI received a draft proposal from DRI and, based on the understanding of the Denver meeting, and receiving no negative feedback from DRI on the letter of understanding of the roles of the two contractor organ- izations, we incorporated the DRI proposal into our final proposal and sub- mitted the proposal to SRS. In mid-September, NCAI received a report from a tribal chairman that he had been told that, due to the fact that NCAI had "plagiarized" the DRI proposal, the entire contract would go to DRI. This information, which is simply not true, had to come from either DRI or SRS. The Denver Research Institute then submitted a separate proposal to SRS for the Title XX study contract, and their proposal called for no involvement with NCAI. On September 18, 1976, NCAI received a letter from Mr. James Burr, Acting Director for Program Development of SRS, stating that he had received an independent proposal from the Denver Research Institute in addition to the one received from NCAI (which called for a substantial subcontract to DRI as agreed upon). Mr. Burr stated in his letter that he had understood that only ONE proposal was to be considered and, therefore, he was forced to base his decision on the merits and award to only one of the organizations. NCAI was shocked at this new development which was contrary to ALL agreements of the past. NCAI immediately expressed its concern to Mr. James Burr, Mr. Sidney Netherly, and Mr. George Clarke by telephone, and sent a letter on September 23, 1976, expressing our concern officially. This morning I was told by Mr. Sidney Netherly that SRS has decided to make its recommendation that the Denver Research Institute be awarded the contract. Honorable David Mathews Page 3 The National Congress of American Indians does not wish to hold up any further the study of Title XX, since it was held up for over nine months by indecision on the part of SRS and ONAP. We encourage SRS to grant the contract to begin the much needed studies. However, we request an official Departmental investigation into matters which we consider collusion, and possible conflict of interest. The following are our reasons for the re- quest for investigation: - Mr. Sidney Netherly is a graduate of the University of Denver and a former employee of the Denver Research Institute; - The Denver Research Institute was imposed upon NCAI as a major sub- contractor, or co-contractor, by SRS; - After securing the agreement of NCAI to include DRI in our proposal, Denver Research Institute was placed in the position of competing with NCAI for the contract (questionable sole-sourcing of a contract); - NCAI was blamed for not complying with the agreement (although we did include DRI in a substantial role in our proposal), and DRI will be awarded the contract (although, contrary to our agreement, they did not include NCAI in any substantial role). We request that members of Congress and the National Congress of American Indians be included in this investigation by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Sincerely yours, Chank, E. Jumble Charles E. Trimble Executive Director cc: Hon. Brad Patterson Hon. Robert Fulton Cong. Sidney Yates Cong. Pat Schroeder Sen. Floyd Haskell Sen. Gary Hart THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON (matt October 26 Bill - Much enjoyed seeing you at Nancy's soiree. Bill, just this morning this came in to my desk. It is precisely the subject I want to talk with you about X I ant to sit down with you and perhaps also (at your discretion) a few others from HEW and SRS like perhaps Julia Taft and George Bluespruce. I'll be glad to come over your way if you can set up a little socratic session. *- tho not limited to Arizona Back 18 INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL TRIBES of ARIZONA GOVERNING BOARD October 20, 1976 AK-CHIN COMMUNITY CAMP VERDE TRIBE COCOPAH TRIBE COLORADO RIVER TRIBES WHITE MT. APACHE TRIBE FORT McDOWELL TRIBE FORT MOHAVE GILA RIVER TRIBE HAVASUPAI TRIBE HOPI TRIBE Mr. Bradley Patterson HUALAPAI TRIBE KAIBAB-PAIUTE TRIBE Counsel to the President PAPAGO TRIBE PAYSON TONTO APACHE The White House QUECHAN TRIBE SALT RIVER TRIBE SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE Washington, D.C. YAVAPAI-PRESCOTT COMMUNITY Dear Mr. Patterson: The Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona has directed me to write to you concerning the failure of the Social Security Act Amendments of 1975 to deliver social ser- vices to Indian tribes in Arizona. The Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona consists of 18 tribes. Each tribe is an independent, self-governing dependent sovereign under the Constitution of the United States. In this regard, none of the member tribes are subject to the jurisdiction of the State of Arizona or any political subdivision of the State. Arizona laws do not apply on the reservations. In the Spring of 1975, the Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona reviewed the amendments to the Social Security Act of 1975, hereinafter referred to cumulatively as Title XX. Those amendments provided Federal funds to the State of Arizona for the provision of certain mandatory and optional social services to the general population of the State. HEW drafted regulations implementing the above GERLOD FORD LIBERTY referenced amendments which improperly and illegally designated Indian tribes as political subdivisions of the State. Such regulations allow for the establishment of an Indian tribe or tribes as "authorities", which authorities may establish their own codes, regulations and standards concerning the administration of certain social services on the reservation. The regulations further allow tribes to contract with states to serve as such authorities. Mr. Bradley Patterson October 18, 1976 Page 2 In addition to the illegal designation of Indian tribes as political subdivisions of the State, the State would require an Indian tribe to demonstrate that its codes, regulations and standards are suitable to the State. In addition to the lack of cultural understanding, two problems exist in this regard. One, the State has no jurisdiction to judge such codes, regulations and standards; and two, the Title XX funds are unavailable for the development or updating of codes, regulations and standards where such are not presently in a condition to meet "State standards". Indian tribes would also be required to demonstrate that they presently have staff trained to administer such social ser- vices programs. Although not all tribes have sufficient staff to administer all such programs, the tribes could hire and train such personnel if Title XX funds could be used for this purpose. In many instances, the State and Federal standards to be observed, whether for housing, institutional care, education level for staff, or otherwise, fail to recognize the substantial cultural differences on reservations. On most reservations for instance, housing standards cannot be met; and although tribal members could be trained to administer such programs, they would not qualify under State or Federal educational standards. The Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona has been informed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Indian Health Service (IHS) that funds for Indian social services by those agencies will be considered "residual" and such funds will not be pro- vided where other funds are "otherwise available" through the State, such as Title XX. This interpretation by the BIA and IHS would result in a reduction of existing levels of social services to tribes. Further complicating this area is the requirement under Title XX that certain mandatory services be provided. When the portion of the funds available to Indian tribes are divided on the State formula, the total sum available to each tribe under Title XX for social services is minimal. In many instances, the total funds available are insufficient to run any given existing program on the reservation and obviously fall far short of funds sufficient to administer all mandatory programs on the reservation. The State's intention concerning one such program can be drawn from its letter to the Colorado River Tribal Council dated Mr. Bradley Patterson October 18, 1976 Page 3 October 27, 1975 as follows: "You are probably aware that Public Law 93-647 added part (d) child support and establishment of paternity- to Title IV of the Social Security Act. Also ARS 4101954. (c) was amended to re- quire this department to administer 'income maintenance services, which shall include child support collection services, establishment of paternity services 1 Thus our Statewide child support enforcement program becomes part of the national network of similar programs. "One of the Federal requirements levied upon the State at 45 CFR 302.34 is that the state will enter into written agreements for coopera- tive arrangements with appropriate courts and law enforcement officials. Such agreements may be entered into with a single official covering more than one court, official or agency, if such single official has the legal authority to enter into agreements on behalf of such courts, officials or agencies. ' " These paragraphs tend to indicate, without expressly stat- ing, that the Social Security Act Amendments give the State authority in the above described area and require the State to enter into written agreements with appropriate courts and law enforcement officials, while leaving open the possibility that such courts may be tribal courts. A pervasive problem exists where Federal regulations con- cerning "audit exception" require, if implemented, State control in monitoring of programs administered on Indian reservations where State control and jurisdiction is presently non-existent in Arizona. The problem is magnified by "audit exception" and the responsibility to "monitor" under the Federal regulations which gives the ultimate responsibility, and therefore the opportunity, for states to substitute their judgment in every area of Title XX administration. This letter has not attempted to discuss the many complex legal-jurisdictional problems which make it impossible for Arizona Indian tribes to enter into agreements to administer such programs under the jurisdiction and supervision of the State or to allow the State to administer such programs, in the absence of such agreement, on the reservation. The Inter-Tribal Mr. Bradley Patterson October 18, 1976 Page 4 Council does, however, have substantial research and information available which demonstrates the overwhelming impossibility of such arrangements. From early Spring 1975 until the present time, Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona has attempted to cooperate with HEW, IHS, BIA, NCAI, Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES), and other institutions responsible, interested or affected by the adminis- tration of Title XX. Our organization developed an early expertise and knowledge in this area and pursuant to directions from our members, has attempted to inform other organizations, including State and Federal agencies, of the requirement for Federal legislation to remedy the fatal defects in Title XX. To this date, we have met with continued failure and frustration in our efforts to gain the cooperation of many of the organizations listed above. In this regard, the Arizona tribes, consisting of nearly half of the reservation Indian population in the United States, still are receiving substantially no social service programs under Title XX. From the early inception, HEW has demonstrated a lack of understanding and appreciation of the special Federal relation- ship which Indian tribes in Non-Public Law 280 states have with the Federal Government. This lack of understanding has been manifest in HEW's representation that national studies were re- quired to document the Title XX problems with reference to Indian tribes. Although Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona was reluctant to incur the delay of such national studies, it con- sented to such national studies in November 1975, providing that it would be allowed a substantial role in such studies and that such studies be implemented immediately so that at a point no later than the opening of the Congressional Session in January of 1977, the failure of the Social Security Act Amend- ments of 1975 would be documented. For nearly a year, Inter-Tribal Council has worked with national organizations in an attempt to get such a study approved and implemented by HEW. Recently, on September 30, 1976, after months of delay by HEW, such a program was again thwarted by the efforts of persons who still fail to understand the exigency and needs of Arizona Indian tribes in the effort to receive social services under the Social Security Act Amend- ments of 1975. FORD GERALD Mr. Bradley Patterson October 18, 1976 Page 5 It appears to be the present intention of HEW to wait until the Spring of 1977 to advertise for contracts for a national study in this regard. This contracting period will, no doubt, take months to culminate an executed contract and then more than a year to complete. Such action by HEW demonstrates total dis- regard for the needs of the Arizona Indian tribes with reference to Title XX. This conduct will result in a delay of two more years in order to document the fact that Arizona tribes are not receiving Title XX social services. At that time, such informa- tion would theoretically be introduced to Congress and the legislative process would begin to examine the possible amendment to the existing law. This delay and this conduct is intolerable. Administration by the State of Arizona of Title XX would substantially interfere with the tribal right of self-government, the right to govern and administer the affairs of persons resid- ing within the exterior boundaries of the reservation and the jurisdiction of the tribes. The State of Arizona in the past and recently has suggested that "matching funds" under Title XX provided by the State of Arizona would be justification for imposing certain types of State taxes within the reservation boundaries, namely, lease- hold taxes, water taxes, personal property taxes and mineral severance taxes. Such taxation is an erosion of tribal sovereignty and directly interferes with the right of Indian tribes to impose their own tax and regulate the persons operat- ing and doing business within the exterior boundaries of the reservation. In this regard, Title XX allows for information obtained through the State administration of programs on the reservation to be made available to State officials. Such in- formation can be used as a direct tool by the State in its efforts to tax Indian tribes. We have authorized our attorneys to contact you and provide documentation which will illustrate specifically the areas dis- cussed in this letter, including a proposed form of amendment which we believe will remedy most of the problems enumerated. The members of the Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona desire to maintain a direct Federal relationship concerning the delivery of social services to persons dwelling within the exterior boundaries of the reservations. It is clearly impossible for that relationship to exist under the present status of the Social Security Act Amendments of 1975. Therefore, we are respectfully requesting that you immediately direct the Secretary of HEW to Mr. Bradley Patterson October 18, 1976 Page 6 implement a program, which substantially involves the Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, which would effectively deliver the informa- tion to Congress which is necessary to justify changes to the Social Security Act Amendments of 1975 when Congress reconvenes in January of 1977. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Yours very truly, INTER-TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA John Peuro John Lewis Executive Director jsm NATIONAL OF SUITE 700, 1430 K STREET, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 (202) 347-9520 AMERICAN November 23, 1976 -INDIANS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Honorable David Mathews PRESIDENT Secretary, U.S. Department Mel Tonasket Health, Education & Welfare Colville 330 Independence Avenue, S.W. FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT Washington, D.C. 20201 Veronica Murdock Mohave Dear Secretary Mathews: TREASURER Ray Goetting Caddo Thank you for your letter of November 4, 1976, in response RECORDING SECRETARY to our letter of September 27, 1976, in which we raised Ramona Bennett several issues concerning the funding of a study to look Puyallup into the utility and responsiveness of Title XX in the EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR delivery of services to Indian people living on reservations. Charles Trimble Oglala Sioux We find your response cursory inadequate and unacceptable. AREA VICE PRESIDENTS Unfortunately there seems to be no concern or realization on the part of the Department of. Health, Education & Welfare ABERDEEN AREA of the following facts: Joe Chase Mandan ALASKA AREA 1. National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) is the Gordon Jackson only organization in the country uniquely qualified Tlinget to conduct the proposed study. ANADARKO AREA Juanita Ahtone 2, NCAI is the only organization having the rapport with Kiowa tribes nationally through membership in the country BILLINGS AREA affected by Title XX Programs. Ray Spang Northern Cheyenne 3, On the basis of the initial committment of the Regional GALLUP AREA Committee of SRS, Mr, McGavich and Commissioner Young, Victor Sarracino NCAI and Indian tribes have spent countless hours meet- Laguna ing with various HEW representatives detailed in our MINNEAPOLIS AREA letter of September 27, 1976. Stanley Webster Oneida MUSKOGEE AREA 4. 124 Indian tribes have spent countless hours during the Katharine Whitehorn annual NCAI conventions in November 1975 and October Osage 1976, in the vain hope that the very least HEW could do PHOENIX AREA to address this problem was to commission a study, so Irene Cuch that the whole issue of social service delivery problem Ute to Indian people can be studied; and comprehensive recom- PORTLAND AREA mendations be made to HEW, that would have the complete Roger Jim input and support of Indian people. Yakima SACRAMENTO AREA 5, NCAI has the staff and support capability to carry out Rachel Nabahe Shoshone/Paiute the study effectively and efficiently. SOUTHEAST AREA Jonathan Ed Taylor Cherokee Hon, David Mathews Page 2 6. NCAI worked with the SRS and ONAP staff to rework its study design; to include the funding stipulations of both agencies only to then be told, first, that the contract would be awarded to the Denver Research Institute and when NCAI raised this concern in our letter of September 27, 1976; then to be told that SRS intends to have a competitive procurement by your letter of November 4. All this, unfortunately, is the lastest of the series of indicators that the federal government can twist, turn or ignore the wishes of Indian people almost at will, While HEW delays even the start of a study, thousands of Indian people go without basic social services, available to all Americans for years. It has been generally agreed upon that there is no other organization so uniquely qualified to do the proposed study as NCAI. It has also been agreed upon by the agencies involved and Indian people that this study is very neces- sary, Therefore, we again request that funds be released to NCAI, so that we can start immediately with the proposed study, which has been delayed for more than a year and has cost countless manhours of NCAI, Tribe's and HEW's time. We look forward to an early response. Sincerely, Charles E. Trimble Executive Director cc: Mr. Brad Patterson, White House Mr. Robert Fulton, SRS Mr. Dominic Mastrapasqua, ONAP Mr. Peter Bourne, M.D., Office of Pres, Elect FORD HALD Futton stapped the award 38UOH иот To the group. 5RS will respond FORD i LIBRARY GERALD to the letter. they will try D get a 0 NCAI did. good study (copy amay). Dancer group is on f child Harpis welfore. Fever comference. study. TO desirers THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON Bob Fulton HEW 245-6726 Freda Spencer 6446 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON SRS to stip have, never, withhold any growt, ofer A to a computer bidding. of your ad cil Yorder clark 5 good to talls a Trunble SRS developm vyurs to little GERALD R. FORD