DOCUMENT PRSUBE 02477 - A1872904] Review of American Indian Policy Review Commission. GGD-77-62; B-114868. June 29, 1977. 6 pp. + 7 enclosures (14 pp.). Report to Sen. J es Abourszk, Chairman, American Indian Policy Review Commission; by Elmer B. Staats, Comptroller General. Issue Area: Accounting and Financial Reporting (2800). Contact: General Government Div. Budget Function: General Government: Legislative Functions (801). Congressional Relevance: Congress: American Indian Policy Review. Authority: P.L. 93-580. P.L. 95-5. The audit of the American Indian Policy Review dnmission disclosed that the Commission's management and operations were generally conducted orderly and professionally, although in some cases inappropriate contracting procedures wre followed and some questionable disbursements were made. Findings/Conclusions: In accordance with existing legislation, the Commission approved a six-member Commission staff and established 1 task forces to gather facts and other necessary information for the comprehensive investigation and study of Indian affairs. At it- business meetings, the Commission acted on policy matters an reviewed the scope, plan of operations, and progress of the various investigative task forces. ach of the task forces submitted the required quarterly reports and final reports and recommendations to the Commission in a reasonably timely manner. The Commission prepared a tentative final report and a final report to the Congress in a timely manner. The Commission developed a budgeting, accounting, and financ. 1 reporting system to control its financial operations. Budgets were developed for each task force and the Commission staff. In three cases the Commission did not obtain the required approval for contracts or modification before proceeding with work. Questionable disbursements by the Commission involved double payments for air travel, payments for consultants' services, and travel expenses not required for official purposes. (SC) ~~- REPORT OF THE *:~ -COMPTROLLER GENERAL ,*"~tOF THE UNITED STATES Review Of American Indian Policy Review Commission United States Congess GGD-77-62 JUNE 29, 1977 COMPTROLLER GENERAL OP THE UNrIDO STAT WAHINCTON. D.C. e B-114868 The Bonorable James Abourezk, Chairman American Indian Policy Review Commission Congress of the United States Dear Mr. Abourezk: This report presents the results of our audit which was made in esponse to your August 5, 1976, letter requesting us to review the organization, operation, management, ac- counting, and control of the American Indian Policy Review Commission. Our audit was directed owa:d ascertaining whether the Commission carried out its activities in ac- cordance to the provisions of its authorizing legislation and whether these activities were properly managed and con- trolled. BACKGROUND The Commission was established on January 2, 1975, by Public Law 93-580, to conduct a comprehensive review of Indian affairs. The law specified (1) the Commission's or- ganizational structures, (2) areas of Indian affairs to be investigated, and (3) reporting requirements. The legisla- tion authorized $2.5 million for the Commission's activities and provided that the Commission would expire not later than June 30, 1977. Public Law 95-5, approved February 17, 1977, authorized an additional $00,000 for Commission activities. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT Commission structure The authorizing legislation prescribed an organizational structure for the Commission; six members of the Commission were appointed from the Congress--three each from the Senate and the House of Representatives--who selected five Indians to serve on the Commission. The Indians included three from Indian tribes recognized by the Government, one from a group not recognized by the Government, and one representing urban Indians. (See app. I.) B-114868 Commission staff In aordance with the law, the Commission approved a six-member Commission staff (core staff), which included a director, a general counsel, a professional staff member, and three clerical assistants. (See app. II.) Task forces The la- required the Commiss.on to establish task forces to gather facts and other necessary information for the comprehensive investigation and study of Irdian affairs. The Commission established 11 task forces to investigate the following subjects. 1. Trust responsibJlity and Federal-Indian relation- ship. 2. Tribal government. 3. Federal administration and structure of Indian af- fairs. 4. Federal, State, and tribal jurisdi:tion. 5. Indian education. 6. Indian health. 7. Reservation and resource development and protection. 8. Urban and rural nonreservation Indians. 9. Indian law revision, consolidation, and codification. 10. Terminated and nonfederally recognized tribes. 11. Alcohol and drug abuse. At its business meetings, the Commission acted on policy matters and reviewed the scope, plan of operations, and pro- gress of ace various investigative task forces. The law prescribed that each task force be composed of three persons, a majority of whom should be of Indian descent. The 33 original task force members appointed by the Commission consisted of 31 persons of Indian descent, representing 27 different tribes, and 2 non-Indians. (See app. III.) 2 B-i14868 Support staff Public Law 93-580 authorized the Commission addition to the six statutory positions, staff to to hire, in provide administrative and clerical support to the task forces. Pub- lic Law 93-580, as amended in August 1975, authorized the Commission to (1) accept voluntary contributions of services, (2) utilize the services, information, facilities, and per- sonnel of the Government's executive departments and agencies with or without reimbursement., and (3) procure the services of consultants, experts, or organizations on a temporary or intermittant basis. The Commission began operating in March 1975 when the Direct, r and General Counsel were hired; the other four statu- tory staff positions were filled in April and June 1975. Between June 1975 and December 31, 19,6, the Commission em- ployed 140 different persons to provide administrative and clerical support to the task forces; this support ranged from 5 persons in June 1975 to 76 in June 1976. In addition, through December 31, 1976, the Commission hired approximately 100 consultants on an intermittent basis. The Commission also benefited from volunteers, donated services and funds, and services of individuals furnished by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare n a non- reimbursable basis. (See apps. VI and VII.) In addition, the Committee on House Administration provided free office space, furnishings, equipment, and utilities to the Commis- sion. Reporting requirements Public Law 93-580 specified that each task force pro- vide quarterly progress reports to the Commission. In adi- tion, within 1 year from the appointment of task for.e mem- bers, each task force was to submit to the Commission ts final report of investigations and studies and its recommen- dations. The law, as amended, also required the Commission to submit its final report and recommendations to the Presi- dent of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representa- tives within 9 months after receiving the task force reports. The law made the director responsible for coordinating the independent efforts of the task forces to insure that the data in the final report and the Commission's recommendations correlated. In accordance with the time extension provided by Public Law 95-5, the Commission was to submit its final report to the Congress by May 18, 1977. 3 B-114868 Each of the task for-es submitted the required quarterl reports and its final report and roommendations to the Com- mission in a reasonably timely manner. The Commission prepared a tentative final report and distributed 1,000 copies to tribes, Indian interest organiza- tions, Federal ad State agein-is, Members of Congress, and others for review and comment. After considering the review comments the Commissin prepared and submitted its final re- port in May 1977 to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of ne House of Representatives. FINANCIAL OPERATIONS. ACCOUNTING AND CONTROL Public Law 93-580 authorized $2.5 million for the Com- mission's operations; it also provided that the Commission pay salaries and expenses from the 'enate contingency fund pending the appropriation of funds. Payments from the con- tingency fund wre to be charged against the authorization. Through December 31, 1976, appropriations to the Commission totaled $2,448,878, and the Commission reported expenditures from the Senate contingency fund of $51,084.32. This ac- counts for all but $37.68 of the initial authorization. (See app. IV.) In addition to providing the Commission with an exten- sion of time for submitting its final report to the Con- gress, Public Law 95-5 authorized an additional $100,000 for Commission expenses. The Commission developed a detailed budgeting, account- ing, and financial reporting system to control its financial operations. Budgets were developed for each task force and the Commission staff. Financial statements showing the status of task force and Commission activities were prepared monthly. In general, the aggregate expenses for the task forces and the core staff as of December 31, 1976, compared favorably with the established I)udgets. (See pp. V.) MANAGEMENT GENERALLY SATISFACTORY Our examination disclosed that the Commission's manage- ment and operations were generally conducted orderly and professionally. In some cases, however, inappropriate con- tracting procedures were followed and some questionable dis- bursements were made. 4 B-114868 Inappropriate contracting procedures In three cases the Cominission did not obtain the required approval for contracts or modification from the Senate Commit- tee on Rules and Administration before proceeding with work. The Commission staff explained to us that the counsel for the Committee on Rules and Administration had advised them that they could proceed pending formal approval by the Committee. In one instance, ',e noted that the terms of a contract were modified by a task force chairwoman to reduce the scope of work without the prior or subsequent approval of the hair- man of the Senate Co-:Amittee on Rules and Administration. This resulted in a dispute between the Commission staff and the contractor over the amount to be paid for his services. In two other instances, we noted that the Committee had not ap- proved proposed contracts until after the contractors began working. Although there had been no problems concerning these two contracts, the failure to obtain the required prior approval could have had an adverse effect on the Commission's activities. Questionable disbursements to be reviewed by staff Some payments made by the Commission, involving rela- tively minor amounts, were questionable including (1) double payments for air travel, (2) payments for ervices of part- time consultants, task force consultants, and members without proper upporting documentation, and (3) payments for travel costs of a task force specialist which were not required for official purposes. For example, our test of payments made fr Com;nission expenses showed that a travel agency was paid $213.46 for an airline ticket for a trip between Pendleton, Oregon, and Denver, Colorado, on August 3-6, 1976. The traveler was also reimbursed $213.11 on his voucher for an airline ticket cover- ing transportation costs between the same cities on the same dates. Also, our test showed that a task force member was paid $384.21 for 4-days work in September 1975. The support- ing time reports show only 3 days worked. We discussed the questionable disbursements with the Commission staff who agreed to reexamine these types of dis- bursements and to pursue recovery action where circumstances warranted. B-114868 SCOPE OF EXAMINATION We made our examination n accordance with genera'ly ac- cepted auditing standards and included a review of the organi- zation, operation, management, accounting, and control of the Commission; a review of books and records and selected trans- actions; and such other auditing procedures as we considered appropriate. OPINION ON FINANCIAL-STATEMENTS We prepared the accompanying financial statements (schs. 1, 2, and 3) from the Commission's accounting records. These statements did not include the cost of certain benefits and services--such as space, utilities, and various admini- strative services--that were furnished to the Commission with- out ch.rge. In our opinion, schedules 1, 2, and 3, which were prepared in accordance with the financial arrangements described above, present fairly the financial position of the American Indian Policy Review Commission at December 31, 1976, and the costs incurred through that date. We are sending copies of this report to the Vice Chair- man and the other congressional members of the American In- dian Policy Review Commission. Si ly yours, Comptroller General of the United States 6 SCHEDULES 1 SCHEDULE 1 SCHEDULE 1 AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSTON BALANCE SHEET DECEMBER 31v 1976 ASSETS Petty cash: In bank $ 1.638.19 On hand 25.05 Outstanding advan.. 2,415.00 Unreimbursed expenditure receipts 441.76 $ 4,500.00 Unexpended appropriations 151,326.31 Unappropriated autL rization 37.68 Total $155,863.99 LIABILITIES AND UNAPPLIED AUTHORIZATION LIABILITIES: Petty cash advance from the Senate S 4,500.00 Accounts payable -55;506:46 Total $ 60,006.46 UNAPPLIED AUTHORIZATION: Available appropriations S95,819.85 Authorization not funded -- 3.7.68 95,857;53 Total liabilities and unLpplied authorization $155,863.99 2 SCHEDUL 2 SCHEDULE 2 .44 % ~ 400 Q~r hb~~O U % 0uaN ti%.. t4.. 4 f 4 oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~Nc 0~0 ~~~~~~ 400~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~% J., fn 0%qr r ll% " rl r-W P 4 - o - 4 i- ~~~ U10-4U'W N -4 .4 f'10 ~~~~~~~~~ I -4 N in to qn~ oo A- 00 .44% 0~~' .4 F -4- r in q1 0 CP% m r- w ,w o 9 Mrl o;: or C, C zt uC a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cn 000%4 -W x .4 Qr.) .2 ) CLr . 0 W fnW -I - % t - eVN 4 0 N =, v q 0 bu ) Q C C ;N 0; 0 % 0 0 - 0 ) ~i * . to . . . . . d).. CZw mc a ca 1 r Q. A. mI "'O 0 ~r -% Ln VI .= % ND 0 0 0 = r.-1 4N m mM- 0 ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ % ~ ~ - ~ h ~CrmCI VI* ~ ~ ~ ~0~ .dJ ~~ ~ - v, U CAJP ~ ~~ ~ f ix 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ct 40@) 1 3 O, or N- %N0t.IA ct .- 0Eeemu a - 'c -4.. O a 10 o I- a~~~~~~~~W. ms~~~~~nM w 10 In Cma %D 0 P*1 ~~0~440/~ 4j C M 0 0 a 01 C lir~% ct uh u a~~~~~~~~~~1 uI C'It C .09 YrWC~~ a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4C ~h~~rg 0 'y W S C a ?3re 4 I . 00C.CC It~~~~~~~~~~h.A nra toUC CO,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~aU 31~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~h~~~~O~~~~Q ~ a ~ N La C1 A V 0 a Y) U9 Zi· r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g 0ECC . C W- Z-CC4 Cf 1 ~t L (Y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I: U4 U, .qrC %0% 0m4, M L -- I- cm. - WO L4 .- 4 U0 C M U % M % EU C4 I- ~g· · · u t3~~~~~~~~~~ .1 % ~~NN~N~N -C rv S ~~~~~~~~~~n~~~~o~~erl f M NU r a B 0 0M .C - 4.'~~~~~~~~~~% O~~~~~~~" '..V O~0" SCHEDULE 3 SCHEDULE 3 AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SENATE CONTINGENT FUND EXPENDITURE MARCH-5, 1975; THROUGH JUNE 30; 1975 Compensation: Indian commissioners $ 4,795.35 Staff 27,370.78 Support to Commission 696.25 Consultants -5;293;59 $38,155.97 Travel: Indian commissioners 4,299.30 Staff 354.08 Consultants -3;159.63 Other expenses 7,813,01 -5,115.34 Total $51;084.32 4 SCHEDULE 4 SCHEDULE 4 AMERICAN INDIAN'POLICY REVIEW'COMMISSION STATEMENT OF FUNDS PROVIDED"AND APPLIED MARCH 5,;1975; THROUGE DECEMBER-31;'1976 Funds provided: Senate Contingent;Fund $ 51,084.32 Appropriations 2,448,878.00 Petty cash advance from the Senate 4,500;00 Total $2;504,462;32 Funds applied: Commission expenses Senate Contingent Fund (see sch. 3) $ 51,084.32 Appropriations (see sch. 2) 2;353;499;91 2,404,584.23 Cash available for expenditure 4,058.24 Available appropriations 95i819;85 Total $2;504;462;32 5~ ~ ~ .. APPENDIXES 6 APPENDIX I APPENDIX I AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION MEMBERS CONGRESSIONAL Senate: The Honorable James Abourezk, Chairman The Honorable Lee Metcalf The Honorable.Mark O. Hatfield House of Representatives: The Honorable Lloyd Meeds, Vice Chairman The Honorable Sidney R. Yates The Honorable Sam Steiger (note a) The Honorable Don Young (note b) INDIAN Tribes recognized by the Federal Government: Ada Deer--Menominee Jake Whitecrow--Quapaw-Seneca-Cayuga John Borbridge--Tlingit-Haida Tribe not recognized by the Federal Government: Dr. Adolph L. Dial--Lumbee Urban Indians: Louis R. Bruce--Mohawk-Sioux a/Through 94th Congress. b/Appointed in February 1977. 7 APPENDIX II APPENDIX II AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION BASIC STAFF Director: Ernest L. Stevens--Oneida General Counsel: K. Kirke Kickingbird--Kiowa (note a) Professional staff member: Max I. Richtman Clerical assistants: Ernestine E. Ducheneaux--Salish and Kootenai Rosemarie Cornelius--Sioux-Oneida (note b) Winona G. Jamieson--Seneca Carole Roop (note c) a/Sevices terminated in November' 1976. b/Services terminated in October 1976. c/Appointed in October 1976. APPENDIX III APPENDIX III AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION TASK FORCE STUDY AREAS AND MEMBERS Task forces: l--Trust responsibility and Federal-Indian relationship HanK Adams--Assiniboine-Sioux John Echohawk--Pawnee Douglas Nash--Nez Perce 2--Tribal government Wilbur Atcitty--Navajo Alan Parker--Chippewa-Cree Jerry Flute--Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux 3--Federal administration and the structure of Indian affairs Sam Deloria--Standing Rock Sioux Mel Tonasket--Colville Ray Goetting--Caddo 4--Federal, State, and tribal jurisdiction Sherwin Broadhead Judge William Roy Rhodes--Pima Matthew Calac--Rincon 5--Indian education Helen Schierbeck--Lumbee Abe Plummer--Navajo Earl Barlow-- Blackfeet (note a) Lorraine Misiaszek--Colville (note b) 6--Indian health Dr. Everett R. Rhoades--Kiowa Luana Reyes--Colville Lillian McGarvey--Aleut a/Resigned in January 1976. b/Appointed in February 1976. 9 APPENDIX III APPENDIX III Task forces: 7--Reservation and resource development and protection Peter MacDonald--Navajo Ken Smith--Warm Springs Philip Martin--Mississippi Choctaw 8--Urban and rural nonreservation Indians Al Elgin--Pomo Gail Thorpe--Sac and Fox Edward Mouss--Creek-Cherokee 9--Indian law revision, consolidation, and codification Peter Taylor Yvonne Knight--Ponca Browning Pipestem--Otoe-Missoura, Osage 10--Terminated and nonfeuerally recognized tribes Jo Jo Hunt--Lumbee John Stevens--Passamaquoddy Robert Bojorcas--Klamath 11--Alcohol and drug abuse Reuben Snake--Winnebago-Sioux Robert Morre--Seneca (note a) George Hawkins--Southern Cheyenne a/Resigned in January 1976. 10 APPENDIX IV APPENDIX IV AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATIONS DECEMBER 31; 1976 Total amount authorized (Public Law 93-580) $2,500,000.00 Amount paid from Senate Contingent Fund $ 51,084.32 fiscal year 1976 ap- priations (Public Law 94-59) 1,500,000.00 Transition period sn- priation (Public Law 34-59) a/300,000.00 Fiscal year 1976 supple- mental (Public Law 94-157) 385,1C8.00 Transition period supple- mental (Public Law 94-157) a/710.00 Fiscal year 197,' appropria- tion (Public Law 94-440) b/263,000.00 2,499,962.32 Unappropriated authorization c/. 37.68 a/The transition period was July 1, 1976, through Sept. 30, 1976. b/Public Law 94-440 pro,7ided that not to exceed $100,000 of the funds appropriated for the Commission for fiscal year 1976 and the transition period shall remain available until June 30, 1977. c/Public Law 95-5 provided he CommissAion with an additiona $100,000 authorization. 11 APPENDIX V APPENDIX V AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION COMPARISON OF BUDGETS AND EXPENSES FOR TASK FORCES AND CORE STAFF MARCH 5, 1975, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1976 Expenses MarL.) 5, 1975, Percent Classifi- through cation of Budget December 31, 1976 budget Balance Task forces: 1 $ 91,208 $ 88,327.30 96.8 $ 2,880.70 2 111,442 110,964.31 99.6 477.69 3 143,025 146,475.86 102.4 (3,450.86) 4 111,733 115,451.39 103.3 (3,718.39) 5 124,642 126,244.30 101.3 6 (1,602.30) 80,100 95,516.58 119.2 (15,416.58) 7 1L0,673 108,648.25 98.2 2,024.75 8 109,875 111,355.98 101.3 (1,480.98) 9 99,333 89,748.78 90.4 9,584.22 10 120,535- 126,185.21 104.7 (5,650.21) 11 73,325 72,450.84 98.8 874.16 Task force total (note a) 1,175,891 1,191,368.80 101.3 Core staff (15,477.80) (note b) 1,265,187 1,162,131.11 91.9 Total appro- 103,055.89 priated funds 2,441,078 2,353,499.91 96.4 Total core 87,578.09 staff (note b) contingent fund 75,385 51,084.32 67.8 24,300.68 Total $2,516,463 $2,404,584.23 95.6 $111,878.77 a/Includes expenses of task force members, specialists, and consultants only. researchers, b/Includes expenses of Commission members, general consultants, core staff members, and assistance to task forces. 12 APPENDIX VI APPENDIX VI C X ; cn*~~ @ _ SAPPENDIX V C I>C C 0 .C a O ).. : E. -, > U ; o v-U *^ X Cl) : : O: }* 0.X C. CW~l am ai ): = C t..0 0s . * W *dD0tl - GJ .O . 60 "S O u 0 0 J-P 0) V U U *q > 0 b) C w0 W .av6. 0 W m rW % a m U ' ' " > - - 0 4) O K · 0 ZG _t4 OD -4 vo 3- . o.,4 .V C -oD .C O U) " C w ec 0 E ZC C 0 0 0) a to) C W aL u% I 0 0 Q'C )A'- _u: OE uEC = to w M CC: > u% . r rV m trW Ca C to 0 O K ., Io - C -4 w U Lw m, m CL zo~~~~~~~v ~~~~~~~ v; z a) c r- l r- L o c X- - r C > X uXO ~ o' o-J O 0 0 0 0 0 0O 0 0 .-' - c' . Ox ON O - O * >4 Z <. wo 0) _ C.0 0' C o ~ o >a0 J 0 0) O O 0) · ) ) t 30 w LIz AJ E. uAi CI C~*~CH A.L)C ? .> r r. f C o O 2~ F- z 0 a) 0 C D C C to 'J co 0) m c m z a- - - W - - t c:: c)a ~>0 I i Ad triC U) )n C: C U) Z C ) j~ U)**C: " in to 0 D C 0 0 0 5- O -O VU r 0 U EI) Z c*l 0 4n t0 E 0 0 0o c Cl o Vn 10 0O rVC) U E) U) C) a.. -4 W - .-) 0J -.4-. En 0 U0 0 ~~~~ ~~~0 UO0E S be < x (V ) E E U) E U Oi) 0. 0 0 0 I U U E- U - Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0 0i. *- -' :E . _,0)-0 C 0 o n~lELCl CD 0 : X 1-.0, 0 4-j w--I .0 C z O CE0 O C to 0 * (u a :)t E oU) C c ; M @^ 0 Q .0 0 > fi w on to-1 = X 0 M C z m c to 0 0) E 0 0)L > i . Ca 0 0 -A.) .0*hi0 a. 0 . 0 W . 0 r-4 . ~ =4 C E * E O E C1 O On 0 Wen w >< -S13 APPENDIX VII APPENDIX VII AMERICAN NDTAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION EXAMPLES OF PRINTING AND OTHER DONATIONS Number of Furnished copies without cost to Printed material each Commission by: Task force reports no. 1 Government Printing through nc. 11 1,000 Office Bureau of Indian Affairs-- Management Study 1,000 do. Special Joint Task Report on Alaskan Native Issues 1,000 do. Interim Task Force Report 5,000 Union Carbide Cor- poration Summary Task Force Reports 5,000 do. Nations Wj-.hin a Nation 5,000. do. Estimated Other donations value Donors "Act Now"--narrative film Union Carbide Cor- describing Commission $50,000 poration Funding for questionnaires and interviews - Task force no. 2 50,000 Donner Foundation 14
Review of American Indian Policy Review Commission
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1977-06-29.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)