	Background

BIE, formerly known as the Office of Indian Education Programs when it  was part of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), was renamed and  established as a separate bureau in 2006. Organizationally, BIE is under  the Office of the Assistant Secretary- Indian Affairs (Indian Affairs), and its  director reports to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs. The director is responsible for the direction and management of all  education functions, including the formation of policies and procedures,  supervision of all program activities, and approval of the expenditure of  funds for education functions. Similar to public  schools, BIE schools receive formula grants from Education. Currently, BIE’s administrative functions—human resources, budget  management, information technology, and acquisitions—are managed by  Indian Affairs’ Deputy Assistant Secretary for Management (DAS-M). However, in 2004, in response to the NAPA  study, its administrative functions were centralized under the DAS-M.
More recently, in 2011, Indian Affairs commissioned another study— known as the Bronner report—to evaluate the administrative support  structure for BIE and BIA. The report, issued in March 2012, found that  organizations within Indian Affairs, including DAS-M, BIA, and BIE, do not  coordinate effectively and communication among them is poor. Likewise, delays in contracting have occasionally affected BIE’s ability to  provide timely services for students with disabilities. Communication is especially difficult because of Indian Affairs’  fragmented administrative structure. Further, DAS-M staff may not have the requisite expertise needed for  working on BIE-related tasks. 2.) Preliminary results from our work also suggest that lack of consistent  leadership within DAS-M and BIE hinders collaboration between the two  offices. BIE’S Limited Governance of Schools Affects Reform Efforts

Although BIE’s responsibilities to operate Indian schools are in some  respects similar to those of state educational agencies (SEA), BIE’s  influence is limited because most schools are tribally operated. Like an  SEA, BIE administers, oversees, and provides technical support for a  number of programs funded by Education. Yet, in  contrast to states that can impose a range of reforms on schools, in  tribally operated schools, which form the majority of BIE schools, tribes  retain authority over key policies. For example, BIE  cannot require tribally-operated schools to adopt or develop their own  teacher and principal evaluation systems. Consequently, this has affected BIE’s ability to calculate  proficiency for its schools in a timely manner. According to BIE and Education officials, many of these  individual schools are small in size and lack the organizational capacity to  function as a school district. We have previously reported that smaller  school districts face challenges acquiring special education services or  providers because they lack the same capacity, resources, knowledge, or  experience necessary to provide those services as larger-sized school  districts. While BIE confronts several limitations  in its ability to govern schools, its mission remains to provide students  quality education opportunities. To this end, officials’ roles and  responsibilities must be clear, and sustained leadership is key.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2011, the federal government provided over $800 million to BIE schools that serve about 41,000 Indian students living on or near reservations. Within the Department of Interior, BIE is part of Indian Affairs, and BIEs director is responsible for the management of all education functions. BIEs mission is to provide quality education opportunities to Indian students. However, poor student outcomes raise questions about how well BIE is achieving its mission.
This testimony reports on ongoing GAO work about the Department of Interiors management of BIE schools. A full report will be issued later this year. Based on preliminary findings, todays testimony will focus on: (1) the key management challenges affecting BIE and (2) BIEs governance of schools.
For this work, GAO reviewed agency documents and relevant federal laws and regulations; interviewed agency officials; and conducted site visits to public and BIE schools.

What GAO Found

Management challenges within the Department of Interior's Office of the Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs (Indian Affairs), such as fragmented administrative structures and frequent turnover in leadership, continue to hamper efforts to improve Indian education. For example, incompatible procedures and lack of clear roles for the Bureau of Indian Education and the Indian Affairs' Deputy Assistant Secretary for Management (DAS-M), which provides administrative functions to BIE, such as human resources and acquisitions, contribute to delays in schools acquiring needed materials and resources. According to BIE officials, some DAS-M staff are not aware of the necessary procedures and timelines to meet schools' needs. For instance, delays in contracting have occasionally affected BIE's ability to provide services for students with disabilities in a timely manner. A study commissioned by Indian Affairs to evaluate the administrative support structure for BIE and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)--also under Indian Affairs--concluded that organizations within Indian Affairs, including DAS-M, BIA, and BIE, do not coordinate effectively and communication among them is poor. Similarly, preliminary results from GAO's work suggest that lack of consistent leadership within DAS-M and BIE hinders collaboration between the two offices.
Although BIE's responsibilities to operate Indian schools are in some respects similar to those of state educational agencies (SEAs), BIE's influence is limited because most schools are tribally-operated. Like an SEA, BIE administers, monitors, and provides technical support for a number of programs funded by the Department of Education. Yet, in contrast to states that can impose a range of reforms on schools, in most BIE schools tribes retain authority over key policies. For example, BIE cannot require most schools to adopt or develop their own teacher and principal evaluation systems. Further complicating reform efforts, many small individual BIE schools function as their own school districts. We have previously reported that smaller school districts may face challenges acquiring special education services or providers because they lack the same capacity, resources, knowledge, or experience necessary to provide those services as larger-sized school districts.