S. Rept. 113-266 - AMENDING THE NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS ACT OF 1974 TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY AND REAUTHORIZATION TO ENSURE THE SURVIVAL AND CONTINUING VITALITY OF NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGES113th Congress (2013-2014)
PDF(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)Tip?
Calendar No. 541
113th Congress } { Report
2d Session } SENATE { 113-266
=======================================================================
AMENDING THE NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS ACT OF 1974 TO PROVIDE
FLEXIBILITY AND REAUTHORIZATION TO ENSURE THE SURVIVAL AND CONTINUING
VITALITY OF NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGES
_______
October 1, 2014.--Ordered to be printed
Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of September 18, 2014
_______
Mr. Tester, from the Committee on Indian Affairs,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2299]
The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the
bill (S. 2299) to amend the Native American Programs Act of
1974 to reauthorize a provision to ensure the survival and
continuing vitality of Native American languages, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and an amendment to the title and recommends that the
bill, as amended, do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 2299 is to provide additional flexibility
for and the reauthorization of the Esther Martinez Native
Languages Preservation Act grant program, which is administered
by the Administration for Native Americans in the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
History of key federal laws supporting Native American languages
In 1990 Congress passed the Native American Languages Act
(NALA), which recognizes the unique status of Native American
cultures and languages. According to the law, it is U.S.
federal policy to ``preserve, protect, and promote the rights
and freedom of Native Americans to use, practice, and develop
Native American languages.''\1\ Further, NALA declares U.S.
federal support for ``the use of Native American languages as a
medium of instruction''.\2\ Congress recognized a number of
reasons for encouraging instruction in Native languages,
including not only language survival and community pride, but
also improved educational opportunity and increased student
achievement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\(Native American Languages Act of 1990 [NALA], 25 U.S.C. 2903).
\2\(NALA, 25 U.S.C. 2903).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Esther Martinez Native American Languages Preservation
Act (NALPA), amended NALA, was signed into law in December
2006. Named after Ms. Esther Martinez, a Tewa teacher and
storyteller, NALPA bolsters Federal support for Native language
education by creating and funding the following programs:
Native American language nests are educational programs
that provide instruction and childcare to at least 10 children
under the age of 7 and offer Native language classes to
parents. Such programs use Native American language as the
primary language of instruction. Native language survival
schools are similar to language nests but have broader
objectives.
Located in regions with high numbers of Native Americans,
these schools provide a minimum of 500 hours of instruction in
at least one Native American language to at least 15 students.
These schools aim to achieve student fluency in a Native
American language alongside proficiency in mathematics,
science, and language arts. Moreover, survival schools provide
for teacher training and develop instructional courses and
materials to advance Native American language learning and
teaching.
Native language restoration programs operate one or more
Native American language programs. In addition to delivering
instruction in at least one Native American language, these
programs provide training to Native American language teachers
and develop instructional materials for Native American
language programs. Funds are given to restoration programs for
a variety of activities that increase proficiency in at least
one Native American language, such as language immersion
programs, culture camps, Native American language teacher
training programs, and the development of books and other
media.
During the 113th Congress, the Committee has held five
hearings on Indian education. At each hearing, the Committee
heard from witnesses on the importance of Native languages and
culture to academic and social success for Native students.
Competitive grants specifically authorized for Native
American language programs are awarded by the following Federal
agencies:
Administration for Native Americans (under
the Native American Languages Act of 1992);
Office of Bilingual Education and Minority
Languages Affairs (under Title VII, Improving America's
Schools Act);
National Park Service (Keepers of the
Treasures program);
National Endowment for the Humanities (as
well as humanities councils in various States).
PRESERVATION AND MAINTENANCE AND THE ESTHER MARTINEZ INITIATIVE GRANT
PROGRAM
The Native American Languages Act of 1992 established the
Preservation and Maintenance (P&M) grant program within the
Native American Programs Act of 1974 to ensure the survival of
Native American languages. The Native American languages grant
program was last reauthorized by Congress through the Esther
Martinez Native American Languages Preservation Act (Public Law
109-394) in 2006; the authorization expired in 2012. This Act
not only reauthorized the Native American language grant
program and expanded the program to also include the Esther
Martinez Initiative (EMI) to support and strengthen Native
American language immersion programs, including language nests,
language survival schools, and language restoration programs.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) houses
the Administration for Native Americans (ANA) which administers
grant funding under the Native American Programs Act of 1974.
Language maintenance grant funding provides opportunities for
grantees to assess, plan, develop, and implement projects to
ensure the survival and continuing vitality of native
languages. ANA has also formed a Native Languages Workgroup to
ensure the program is meeting ANA goals and providing technical
assistance to grantees and potential grantees.
In the FY 2014 Omnibus, the ANA was funded at $46,520,000,
and the President's Fiscal Year 2015 budget requested level
funding. In the Senate's Fiscal Year 2014 HHS budget report on
ANA programming, appropriators included language to have a set-
aside of $12 million for Native American language preservation
activities, including no less than $4 million for language
immersion programs. In fiscal year 2013, ANA awarded a total of
$13,361,440 of grant funding for Native American language--
$8,352,068 Preservation and Maintenance and $5,009,372 for the
Ester Martinez Initiative. Fifty-nine language programs
throughout Indian Country were funded in the last
reauthorization.
In the 2012 report on the Impact and Effectiveness of
Administration for Native American Projects, out of the 63
total language grantees, ANA evaluated 22 language projects
from across Indian Country. The 2012 impact data showed that
from these 22 projects a total of 178 language teachers were
trained in teaching native languages; 2,340 youth had increased
their ability to speak a Native language or achieved fluency;
and 2,586 adults had increased their ability to speak a Native
language or achieved fluency.
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CURRENT GRANT PROGRAM
Duration of grants
During a June 18, 2014, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
hearing, ANA stated that based on grantee interviews, there is
a general sentiment to increase the duration of language grants
up to a five-year basis. ANA testified that by expanding its
authority to increase the duration of awards, projects will
become more sustainable and yield increased results. P&M grants
are currently awarded on a one-, two-, and three-year basis and
EMI grants are awarded on a three-year basis. S. 2299 alters
Sec. 803C(e)(2) of the Native American Program Act of 1974 to
extend Native language grants up to a five-year basis.
The ANA has done preliminary analysis on the effects that
this change would have on the number of grant awards made each
year. ANA expects that there will not be a significant decrease
in total number of grants active each year, but there will be a
shift from new project awards to awards for continuing
projects. ANA awards, on average, 16 new P&M grants each year,
with about 40 total active at any given time. New P&M grant
awards would be expected to drop by 20-30 percent or by two to
five projects. ANA awards on average roughly six EMI grants per
year and has around 18 active EMI grants at any given time. New
EMI grant awards would be expected to drop 20-40 percent or
about one to three projects. ANA's analysis on project duration
found that as the duration of the project increased, the impact
of the project significantly increased. ANA believes that
increasing the duration of years will increase the number of
individuals achieving fluency, the number of teachers trained,
and the chances of a project's sustainability.
Language nests and survival school student minimums
During a June 18, 2014, Committee on Indian Affairs
hearing, the ANA stated that grantees have requested that the
criteria for student minimums be lowered. By lowering the
requirement for language nests from 10 to 5 students and for
survival schools from 15 to 10 students, the ANA testified that
more projects would be eligible in lower-populated and remote
areas. This bill would amend Sec. 803C(b)(7) of the Native
American Program Act of 1974 to lower the requirement for the
minimum number of children in language nests from 10 to 5
children and lower requirement for the minimum number of
children in survival schools from 15 to 10 children.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 2299 was introduced on May 7, 2014, by Senator Tim
Johnson (D-SD), along with Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mark
Begich (D-AK), Al Franken (D-MN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie
Hirono (D-HI), Angus King (I-ME), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jon
Tester (D-MT), and Tom Udall (D-NM) as original cosponsors.
Senator John Walsh (D-MT) later signed on as a cosponsor. The
bill was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. On June
18, 2014, committee held a hearing on the bill. On July 30,
2014, the committee met at a business meeting to consider the
bill. Two amendments were offered and adopted, and the bill, as
amended, was ordered to be favorably reported to the Senate by
voice vote.
There is a similar bill in the House of Representatives--
H.R. 726. The bill was introduced on February 14, 2013, by
Congressman Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), with Congressmen Colleen
Hanabusa (D-HI), Betty McCollum (D-MN), James Moran (D-VA),
Gloria Negrete McLeod (D-CA), Stevan Pearce (R-NM), Lucille
Roybal-Allard (D-CA) and Louise McIntosh Slaughter (D-NY) as
original cosponsors. Congressmen Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Ed
Pastor (D-AZ) and Raul Ruiz (D-CA) were later added as
cosponsors. The bill was referred to the Committee on Education
and the Workforce. It was later referred to the Subcommittee on
Higher Education and Workforce Training.
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT
Senator Johnson of South Dakota filed two amendments, which
were agreed to. The first was an amendment in the nature of a
substitute and made the following changes:
Duration of grants
During a June 18, 2014, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
hearing, the Administration for Native Americans (ANA) stated
that based on grantee interviews, there is a general sentiment
to increase the duration of language grants up to a five-year
basis. ANA testified that by expanding its authority to
increase the duration of awards, projects will become more
sustainable and yield increased results. Preservation and
Maintenance (P&M) grants are currently awarded on a one-, two-,
and 3-year basis and Esther Martinez Immersion (EMI) grants are
awarded on a three-year basis. This amendment altered
Sec. 803C(e)(2) of the Native American Program Act of 1974 to
permit grants a life of three, four or five years and would
eliminate the three-year requirement.
ANA has done preliminary analysis on the effects that this
change would have on the number of grant awards made each year.
ANA expects that there will not be a significant decrease in
total number of grants active each year, but there will be a
shift from new project awards to awards for continuing
projects. ANA awards on average 16 new P&M grants each year,
with about 40 total active at any given time. New P&M grant
awards would be expected to drop by 20-30 percent, or by two to
five projects. ANA awards on average roughly six EMI grants per
year and has around 18 active EMI grants at any given time. New
EMI grant awards would be expected to drop 20-40 percent, or
about one to three projects. ANA's analysis on project duration
found that as the duration of the project increased, the impact
of the project significantly increased. ANA believes that
increasing the duration of years will increase the number of
individuals achieving fluency, the number of teachers trained,
and the chances of a project's sustainability.
Language nests and survival school student minimums
During a June 18, 2014, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
hearing, ANA stated that grantees have requested that the
criteria for student minimums be lowered. By lowering the
requirement for language nests from 10 to 5 students and for
survival schools from 15 to 10 students, ANA believes that more
projects would be eligible in lower populated and remote areas.
This amendment altered Sec. 803C(b)(7) of the Native American
Program Act of 1974 to lower the minimum number of children in
language nests from 10 to 5 children and lower the minimum
number of children in survival schools from 15 to 10 children.
The second amendment simply updated the title of the bill
to reflect the changes above. Amendments to the title must be
done separately from a substitute amendment.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF BILL AS ORDERED REPORTED
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 sets forth the short title of the bill as the
``Native American Languages Reauthorization Act of 2014.''
Section 2. Native American languages grant program
Section 2 changes the current requirement for the minimum
number of enrollees in the survival schools from 15 to 10
students and language nests from 10 to 5 students. It further
amends the length of the P&M grants from three years to
allowing the grant to be for three, four, and five year
durations as well as changing the duration of the EMI grants
from three years to three, four, and five years.
Section 3. Reauthorization of the Native American languages program
Section 3 reauthorizes Sec. 816(e) of the Native American
Programs Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2992d(e)) from 2015 to 2019.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following cost estimate, as provided by the
Congressional Budget Office, dated August 27, 2014, was
prepared for S. 2299.
August 27, 2014.
Hon. Jon Tester,
Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2299, the Native
American Languages Reauthorization Act of 2014.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Elizabeth
Cove Delisle.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf.
Enclosure.
S. 2299--Native American Languages Reauthorization Act of 2014
Summary: S. 2299 would authorize through 2019 a grant
program to preserve Native American languages. CBO estimates
that implementing the legislation would cost $17 million over
the 2015-2019 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary
amounts.
Pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to this legislation
because it would not affect direct spending or revenues.
S. 2299 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 2299 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 500
(education, training, employment, and social services).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------------
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level................................ 4 4 4 5 5 22
Estimated Outlays............................................ * 4 4 4 4 17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * = less than $500,000.
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S.
2299 will be enacted around the beginning of fiscal year 2015
and that the estimated amounts will be appropriated for each
fiscal year. Estimated outlays are based on historical spending
patterns for the Native languages program.
The legislation would authorize the Native American
Language Preservation and Maintenance grant program through
2019. Specifically, it would authorize the appropriation of
such sums as may be necessary to carry out the program and
would establish a period of availability for those grants of
five years. It also would allow grant recipients to serve fewer
children per grant than previously authorized.
The authorization of the Native languages program expired
at the end of fiscal year 2012. However, the Congress has
continued to appropriate funds including about $4 million in
2014 for grants under that program. Assuming continued
appropriations at that level and adjusting for anticipated
inflation, CBO estimates that implementing S. 2299 would cost
$17 million over the 2015-2019 period.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 2299
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments. Tribal agencies would benefit from grants
authorized in the bill for ensuring the survival and continuing
vitality of Native American languages.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Elizabeth Cove
Delisle; Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: J'nell
L. Blanco; Impact on the Private Sector: Tristan Hanon.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director
for Budget Analysis.
REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that each report accompanying a bill to
evaluate the regulatory and paperwork impact that would be
incurred in carrying out the bill. The Committee believes that
S. 2299 will have a minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork
requirements.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The Committee has received no communications from the
Executive Branch regarding S. 2299.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
On July 30, 2014, the Committee on Indian Affairs
unanimously approved a motion by Chairman Tester to waive the
Cordon rule. Thus, in the opinion of the Committee, it is
necessary to dispense with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate in order to expedite the business
of the Senate.
